Heidi Heitkamp

Ms. HEITKAMP

Ms. HEITKAMP. Mr. President, before I depart the Senate, I want to again recognize my staff in my Washington, DC, and State offices for their hard work and service to North Dakota, the Senate, and the Nation. As I said in my farewell remarks, I have the best staff in the Senate, and I ask that their names be included in the Record: Tessa Gould, Abbie McDonough, Connor Joseph, Ian Jannetta, Jesse Overton, Jared Pfliger, Robert Chester, Beth Nielson, Tracee Sutton, Megan DesCamps, Craig Radcliffe, Matt Squeri, Libby Marking, Jared Henderson, Ryan Tvedt, Jon Cheatwood, Libby Schneider, Anna Diederich, Jacob Westlin, James Feinstein, Kevin George, Alec Buckley, Guneev Sharma, Santiago Gonzalez, Jeesue Lee, Virginia Hagerott, Prescott Robinson, Stacy Austad, Olivia Cox, Patrick Brende, Bryce Hample, Eric Bursch, Ashley Poling, Anthony Papian, Jared Lennon, Allison Tinsey, Dean Williams, Ross Keys, Jane Opdahl, Joanne Beckman, Megan Carranza, Shirley Meyer, Aimee Kittilson, Aaron Krauter, Chris VandeVenter, Gail Hand, Matthew Leiphon, Renae Aarfor, Justin Hanson, Amy Long, Megan Edwardson, Raechel Heuer, Laura Dronen, Norman McCloud, and Maggie Laducer.

Ms. HEITKAMP

Ms. HEITKAMP. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Jon Cheatwood and Allison Tinsey, both fellows in my office, and Dean Williams, detailee on my Homeland Subcommittee, be granted floor privileges for the duration of today's session of the Senate.

Ms. HEITKAMP

Ms. HEITKAMP. In 2003, I was diagnosed with stage III breast cancer. After treatment, my oncologist told me I had a 28-percent chance of living more than 10 years. Think about that. I knew right away that I had a chance to use whatever time God gave me for good and noble purposes--to try and do the things I have always thought needed to be done in this country. It is an important lesson for all of you. The greatest gift you have is not your bank account. The greatest gift you have is the amount of time you have left on this Earth and what you do with that time. I chose, for good or bad, to come to the Senate. I think when we have a world of options and we make this choice, it is so important that we come here with purpose--not just to be named a Senator, not just for the trappings of office, but with purpose. The truth is, I am not supposed to be here. I am from Mantador, ND. It is a town of 90 people. When I was growing up, my family was one- tenth of the population. I just had to say that. My dad was a World War II veteran who loved education. He read the paper every day. He believed in this country. But he was never given a chance to go to high school. My family struggled to get by, and when you look at it, you think about this; you think about a country where somebody from my background could actually become a U.S. Senator. I am a Democrat from a very conservative State, but against all odds--in fact, the prediction was it was only 8 percent--I got elected to the Senate. The fact that I got to serve in the Senate for 6 years is an incredible American story. People always ask me: At what point did you think, wow, you came to the Senate? I have said that I was so busy after I got elected because no one thought I would ever get elected, so people who never wanted to see me during my campaign wanted to see me. I was busy taking meetings and busy putting together the office. I remember the day I came to that Chair and the pastor came and he gaveled in, and then I turned around to say the Pledge of Allegiance. I thought: Here I am from Mantador, ND, a girl, middle-aged, a pudgy Democrat from North Dakota, and I am standing in the well of the Senate where not even 2,000 people have come before. This is a great and good and noble country with great purpose, with great opportunity. I want every child out there to understand it doesn't matter. We represent a cross section of this great country, but we also aren't that special. We are not. Sometimes I think the American public think if you took 100 random people and put them in the chairs, they could do better than we could do. But the truth is, you all came here with that same noble purpose. You all came here to change America, to do the right thing. I don't care if you sit across there; I don't care if you sit here. You all came here for the right purpose. The fact that I got to serve in the Senate is part of a great American story, and that story happens only in this country. Don't ever forget that. If we lose that opportunity, we will become diminished as to who we are. Today, I want to offer a few comments. I hope they are not too preachy, but I want everyone to understand, especially my colleagues, that this has been the opportunity of a lifetime. Think about what we did to get here. This process we go through is brutal and, quite honestly, obscene. It is obscene what we do to get here. Having done all of that work, having taken those steps and walked that gauntlet of a campaign, we have an opportunity not just to achieve the title but to do great and good things for this country. My job here--the work I have done--has always been to remember who we are standing in this well for. Throughout the past 6 years, I have stood here for North Dakota, for the incredible people I serve. I have stood here for the families of disabled children who were terrified they would lose their healthcare. When I took that vote on the Affordable Care Act, in that vote, I remembered their faces; I remembered their tears. I have stood here for the men and women of our Armed Forces and our veterans in North Dakota, who believe they did a great thing and deserve to be treated respectfully, honorably, and, yes, get the benefits they have earned. Too often they are denied. Veterans should not have to come to a congressional office to get the benefits they have earned, yet too many have to. I have stood here for retirees whose pensions were threatened. I have asked a simple question: If we can spend billions bailing out the failed Wall Street bankers, can't we pay attention to the working men and women who are struggling, who are in crisis? Literally, the heartbreak of their stories, if heard across this Chamber--the reaction would be overwhelming. Many of them are veterans. Many of them worked hard and now are broken in the work they have done. I have stood here for farmers in rural communities, and I have stood here for Native people. Many times, as you know, I have tried to do my best to educate all of you on the challenges of our first Americans, our Native Americans. Mostly, I hope I have stood here for the children of America because, in spite of how we behave, they truly are our future. They are the people who make a difference for our future, and if we do not start respecting the challenge that we have to create a better world--a better world with more opportunity--we will not fix the problems of American long term. These are the people who drive me every day. They are whom we serve-- not a party, not an ideology. We serve Americans. I have spent my time standing and fighting for them, and, for me, that work will never stop. With all of that said, I stand here proud of what we have accomplished. When you look at the time and the opportunity to rise above partisanship and rancor, I have found so much common ground with so many Members of this body. I am incredibly proud of what we have been able to accomplish. I have advocated for Native American communities, and my bill to stand up for Native American children, which I did with Senator Murkowski, was the first bill I introduced. It was symbolic for me because we have to do better. I found great partnerships with Senator Murkowski, not just on this but on other issues. I know her heart, and I know that she cares. When you find people who care the way you care, you can do amazing things. My legislation with our colleague John McCain to create an Amber Alert in Indian Country became law. We are on our way to passing Savanna's Act, which is going to recognize for the first time the challenge and the tragedy of missing and murdered indigenous women. All of this so important. We have bipartisan legislation to help crack down on human trafficking online. We shut down backpage. We shut down people who were, in fact, selling children for sex. Think about that. That is a noble act. The challenge continues. Congress passed my bill to give first responders more training and resources to keep our communities strong and safe. I led a successful effort, again, with my colleague from Alaska, Senator Lisa Murkowski, to lift the age-old ban on exporting oil and pair it with renewables, which we did with my other colleagues on this side of the aisle when we looked at enhancing renewable energy. It was a flaming success on both sides. We are exporting, literally, millions of barrels of oil, resulting in energy independence and helping our allies, but we also are growing our renewable energy industry because of that effort. It didn't happen without colleagues working together. I secured a vet center in Grand Forks and a CBOC in Devils Lake. It might be small to this body, but it is huge to the veterans it serves. I got needed funds for flood protection across North Dakota--projects we need--by working with Senator Hoeven. I passed my bill to secure the northern border by working with Kelly Ayotte, who is no longer here but a great friend. I helped write legislation to provide relief to community banks with Senator Crapo, Senator Donnelly, Senator Tester, and Senator Warner, recognizing the challenges of small lenders and how we needed to address those challenges. No one thought we could get that done, but we did because we believed we could. Think about that. I worked with Republicans and Democrats--probably the crowning achievement together in terms of bipartisanship--to deal with carbon capture. It was the first major piece of carbon legislation that has been passed since I have been here. I can't speak to other pieces, but how did that happen? It happened when Senator Barrasso, Senator Capito, and I, and by the way, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse collaborated. We said: We can't agree on climate, but we will agree on development of technology that will change outcomes. This technology is absolutely essential to tackling the problems of carbon emissions in this country. Don't say it can't be done. If you can get Sheldon Whitehouse and Mitch McConnell on a bill that involves carbon and the coal industry, that is a good day here. That is a really good day here. I worked to help address the detrimental impact exposure to trauma can have on children and families. This is an issue I hope you all will become better educated on--childhood trauma and the effect that it has on so many of our children. I worked with great colleagues. Dick Durbin actually let me take the ball and run with it, for which I will always be grateful. I worked with Cory Booker from New Jersey doing incredible things for children. It is pivotal, if we are going to change outcomes for American families, that we begin to address why it is that we do everything we have always done and we expect a different result. We have to think differently about these issues. I helped to negotiate and pass two farm bills. Thank you, Pat, and thank you, Debbie, for believing in bipartisanship and believing in rural America. I have worked with incredible folks. I thank John Boozman, from Arkansas, and have a great story. A little known fact in the farm bill that we are all going to pass is that this is, maybe, the first piece of major legislation involving Cuba. In order to enhance export opportunities to the island of Cuba, we have lifted the ban of using the USDA programs. It is the first time we will have addressed Cuba in any piece of major legislation. I don't know if Senator Carper is here, but I care about the post office. You guys ought to, too, as we have ignored it for way too long. I am going to give you a shout-out, Tom, and get everybody else interested because I am not going to be your partner anymore on the post office. For those of you who care about politics, I want you to understand that when I made a post called ``Fix My Mail'' and thought I would get 20, 30 hits in the little State of North Dakota, I got over 500 complaints about what was happening with the rural postal delivery. If we can't run the post office, how can we run the country? You all need to ask yourselves that question. I am also incredibly proud of the stuff that I have done every day for North Dakotans. In 6 years, I have held over 3,500 meetings with North Dakotans both in Washington and in North Dakota. My office has provided responses to over 205,000 North Dakotans who have reached out to me about various issues, and my office has helped over 18,000 North Dakotans who have had issues with Federal agencies--getting their VA benefits, fixing issues with Social Security, helping to resolve immigration, and much, much more. People always ask me: What is your greatest achievement in the Senate? I can go through all of the things I just talked about, but I would like to talk about a Native American who is from Spirit Lake Nation. He is a pipe maker, which is a very ceremonial and honorable position within his culture. He is also a Korean war vet and was one of the first people on the peninsula. He was injured and captured, but he literally saved lives during what was called the Tiger Death March. He ended up serving in a prison camp for the entire Korean war. When he got out, no one knew who he was. There was no documentation of the fact that he had been in the prisoner of war camp, and there was no documentation that he had been injured. Senator Dorgan was able to get him his POW Medal. Guess what. He also didn't get his Purple Heart. That bothered him because he had served and had done incredible things during that service. In scouring the Earth, we were able to find someone in Texas who would sign an affidavit--who said: Yes, he had been injured. When we presented that Purple Heart to this veteran, who was 86 years old, he got out of his wheelchair, saluted the flag, and hugged his medal. You all have the power to do that. You all have the power to make just one little difference. Do that. It is a great thing even though it is not big legislation. In knowing that we are doing the work of the people and in knowing that so many North Dakotans have met with me and told me about the incredible challenges they have had and the incredible obstacles they have faced, you can make a difference. You can help put food on their tables. You can help them to remain as families. You can help to get them healthcare. You can do big things, but the little things matter, too--the little things that affect each one of their lives. Despite all of the progress we have made during some difficult times, we aren't done. Every day, I come to the floor and fight for rural America. There is a huge gap in productivity and a huge gap in economic viability. There is a huge gap. As we see the retreat of rural America, we become less in this country. As we see more and more wealth moving to urban areas, we have to address this issue. There are big clouds, I think, on the horizon that face this country and rural America. If Congress doesn't tackle them head-on, our children and grandchildren will suffer the consequences. This is an urgency that takes center stage for me. I wake up every morning and think: What am I going to do about rural America today? Do you know why? I am one of the few people here who does that, and it is because I represent a State that is still very rural. Even if you live in Fargo--it is not a big city to some, but it is a pretty big place to those of us in North Dakota--you are just one generation from Hillsboro or you are just one generation from Cooperstown. I also want to say that we cannot sustain a record debt and deficit. This is a bipartisan challenge. This is a challenge of historic proportion. We are the only generation in America and in our history that has inherited from the ``greatest generation''--our parents--and that is borrowing from our kids. Shame on us. Shame on what we are doing right now. The Congressional Budget Office has said that our country's debt is headed to its highest level since World War II. These actions will have serious consequences, including increasing the chances of there being a fiscal crisis, which we will not be able to ignore. I urge you to put fact before fantasy. Open your eyes. See this challenge. Several months ago, when I voted against the tax bill that has greatly contributed, I think, to the record deficits we now face, I ran into an older man after I had given a speech at the Veterans Day service. He came up to me--it was actually before the vote--and said: Senator Heitkamp. I said: Yes, sir. He said: I want a tax break. I said: I hear that a lot. He said: But not at the expense of my kids. He is still a patriot, that Vietnam veteran. He still knows what it means to sacrifice for the next generation. So the Federal Government needs to be responsible as to how it spends its money. I am grateful that my friend James Lankford is here because we toiled away at government efficiency. Many times, we toiled away in spite of our ideological differences. In spite of our world views on issues, we still believed that this government needed to be efficient, that it needed to be effective, and that it needed to spend money in the right way. We marveled that no one seemed to care about it any more than just to show up for an occasional meeting. That work can't stop. I hope you will find an equal and willing partner in your work, Senator Lankford. I know your heart, and I know that, for you, this is a moral imperative--to spend every dollar that gets sent here in the right way, in the most efficient way, and to do things right so that we can tell the American public that we are spending their dollars responsibly and that we are making the right choices. We will have many, many more options, and we will grow the reputation of not only the U.S. Government but of the U.S. Senate. Income disparity is at a crisis as more individuals and families get left behind. The top 1 percent of families in America make more than 25 times what families who are in the bottom 99 percent make. Think about that. Let me repeat that--more than 25 times what families in the bottom 99 percent make. Much of the recent economic prosperity we have seen in this country has been concentrated on the coasts, but it has left much of rural America behind. The administration's trade war is not something I have been shy in talking about, for it is causing an emergency in rural America, but I think it is going to cascade into a challenge and is going to domino into there being economic peril for this country. I am not saying that we don't need to address disparities and inequities in trade agreements. I am saying that you don't need a 17th century solution, which is called tariff, to deal with a 21st century problem. You all have to take responsibility. Think about this. Think about the White House's unilateral ability to impose a tax on the American people and then, even more remarkably, to create a system over at the Department of Commerce that, basically, waives those taxes. How many of you would let the President decide who he is going to tax if it were income taxes and then for whom they will be waived? None of you would. Take responsibility. Congress needs to take back responsibility for tariffs before it is too late. These markets took years to develop for agriculture. They are not going to come back at the snap of a finger. When you look at the net farm income, it will be 13 percent lower in 2018 with there being no promise of an increase in net farm income in the future, and this will cascade through rural America. I also want to sound the alarm and go to Senator Blunt, who, I think, did a wonderful job, and I couldn't agree with him more in my being the wife of a family physician who tells me every day that if he could only get his patients to be compliant with their hypertension and compliant with their diabetes. The single biggest factor is behavioral and mental health. That leads to challenges, and that challenge leads to despair, and that despair leads to a record rate of suicides. I don't know how many of you saw that the Economist magazine did a big story on suicides throughout the world, but in only one country of the developed nations is it increasing--the United States of America. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the rate of death by suicide jumped by 58 percent in North Dakota between 1999 and 2016. That is why, in my office, we have made it a priority to address the underpinning causes of death by suicide and the challenges that we confront in various pockets of our population whether it is of our veterans, whether it is of Native Americans, or whether it is of young people. Now there is a growing rate of suicide among the elderly. Congress has to take steps. There is bipartisan support for addressing mental and behavioral health and for looking at the comprehensive crisis of addiction. As long as I have this soap box and you are all listening to me, can we just quit talking about opioids? Can we start talking about methamphetamines? Can we start talking about alcohol? Can we start talking about a culture of addiction and not just focus on the opioid addiction? It is the bright, shiny object that we always run to, but it is the cover story for a much bigger problem that we are not addressing in this country. So, please, please, face the addiction challenge head- on and in a broader context. It also would not be like me if I didn't talk about Indian Country, which faces dire challenges with poverty, abuse, and addiction. Far too few Americans fully understand the challenges in Indian Country or the importance of Tribal sovereignty, treaty rights, and cultural heritage. I, along with my colleague Lisa, have worked to educate many in this Chamber about those challenges. With my colleague Susan Collins, I have also talked about the challenges of runaway and missing people. She has been a great partner on so many things that I have done. I think that when we find people of like heart and like commitment, we can do amazing and good things for the American public, but we all need to understand that the first people--our first Americans--should not be the last Americans. They should not be ignored when you have a unique position here given that your government, the U.S. Government, signs treaties on sovereignty rights. So, when you look at the disparities, you can't believe that we have done right by the treaties. Finally, I want to talk about the crisis of childhood trauma, which I have already addressed, but this will be just to give you some numbers. These may be things that you haven't thought about. According to a Justice Department study, 58 percent of all American children had witnessed or had been crime victims in 2014. Traumatic experiences like abuse, neglect, witnessing a crime, and parental conflict can lead to ongoing, severe mental and behavioral health complications. For Native American children, these health risks are that much more prevalent. When we look at the challenges ahead, there will be larger issues for Congress to confront. Members of Congress cannot just look for a quick win to talk about in their States without their taking into account the long-term consequences of their actions. We need to look up, and we need to look bigger so that Congress will be creating a solid future for our children and our grandchildren. If we do nothing else in this Chamber, that would be an important first step. All in Congress make their own decisions about how they want to use their time, which can come down to a few simple questions: Do you want to solve problems or not? Do you want to do right by your children and your grandchildren? That means all of our children and our grandchildren. Do you want to win a reelection no matter what the cost? Do you want to be able to look yourself in the mirror and say, ``I did good today''? I implore those who are still serving and all of those who are about to join this Chamber to seriously examine those questions. I hope that you will take up this mantle of the important, needed priorities. For many of you, all of those priorities are the same. In fact, I thought we should do an experiment. On one Tuesday--I challenge you--you should have the Democratic caucus, at its lunch, give a list of the 10 problems Americans confront that they want to solve. Then have the Republican conference do the same thing. I would bet that if you would match those two lists, they would look pretty similar. In fact, they would probably be identical. When the American public sees that you know the problems but that you can't find the will to solve the problems, then they become understandably discouraged. So my work isn't done. I will just continue to do this work from a different vantage point. As you soon start your work in the next Congress, with all of these challenges, please consider a few things. The Senate only works if we enable it to. That means each of us needs to do our job. We may not always agree, but I know Senators can work together--as I have--to get results. I know that gridlock and partisanship do not have to rule the day. I have seen it firsthand. I will ad-lib a little here. I also think that you, as Senators, need to take power back from leadership. Too often, leadership determines the agenda. We should determine the agenda. I have seen it firsthand. I have seen that we can come together and solve problems, such as when climate change advocates and climate deniers come together on a carbon bill. If that isn't an indicator that Congress can function, I don't know what is, but it took political courage on both sides, particularly from my colleague from Rhode Island. I don't believe this country or the caucus is as divided as it seems. All of us--those serving in Congress and across the country--want our people to get a good education. They want affordable, quality healthcare. They want a good job that puts food on the table and retirement security. They want all those things that build an economy. Our economy is the foundation and the bedrock of the might of this country. People will point to the military, but the military cannot exist without the economic strength of this country. I think that too often politicians create and profit from issues that divide us. It is the only profession where people are rewarded for blocking things from getting done. Think about that. It is no wonder the American public has such little faith. I had a novel idea since I joined this Chamber. I have been determined to get results and to put my State first, above political party. There are many around here, on both sides of the aisle, who know how to get results, too, and I encourage them to speak loudly, work clearly, seek compromise, and continue to do great and good works. I hope more Senators will join them. We also need more political courage in Congress. We need Members of Congress who are willing to take tough votes because it is the right thing to do, even if it puts their reelection in jeopardy. We need more Members who are not too scared to stand up when someone in their party uses fear and lies to win support. There is a fine line between representing those you serve and being representative of them. They don't always align. It is why we need to use facts and judgment--not polls--to make our decisions. Then it is up to each of us to explain those decisions. Simply put, sometimes leaders are needed to move public opinion to the right side of history. Remember that the decisions you are making, especially on big policy, will have consequences well beyond today. I want to tell you about a Native American principle. It is called ``seven generations.'' It urges decision making in any way to look at how the current decisions that are made in this generation will affect seven generations--the next seven--and to think about how you can look to a much broader purpose. I had a thing that I did in my office. When people would come in and they would have the issue of the day, I would say: Look up. What is on the horizon? Debt and deficit, a looming retirement crisis, a crisis in education, a crisis in addiction. Look up. What are we supposed to do? There is a crisis in infrastructure, in healthcare. Look up. What do we need to do today that seven generations later people will look back at? Don't worry about a public opinion poll because you are making decisions not just for those people today. You are making decisions for the next seven generations, and they have to be the right decisions. All of you know that you are better than the outcomes of Congress. You are nobler than the petty rhetoric that is bantered about here every day. Importantly, your reputation is tied to the reputation of every other Member because we have no power independent of each other. The greatest power that we have is the collective power of the U.S. Senate. The success of your colleagues is your success. When great and hard things are done, you share in the satisfaction of a job well done. It has been a true honor and a privilege to serve as a Member of this Chamber and to contribute to helping North Dakota and our country. I am grateful for that wonderful opportunity. Over the last 6 years, I have made amazing friendships with all of you that I can't talk about right now because it is too hard, but I want you to keep fighting for those shared dreams, for those dreams you shared with me, for those ideas that you had that will move this country forward. I want you to continue to dream and to continue to believe. When I came here, I once came to a Member, and I said: I have this really great idea. I told him about it, and he said: Yes, that is a really good idea. I said: Let's work on it. He said: It will never happen. I said: It is a good idea, right? Yes, it is a really good idea, but it will never happen. I said: We have to get out of the shared culture of failure, believing it can't happen. It can happen. We can do really big and great things when we believe we can, when we refuse to accept failure, and when we refuse to believe that we are somehow limited. No one is tying you. No one is limiting you. You are a U.S. Senator, and, collectively, you will make a difference. I want to also thank other people. The first is the Capitol Police. Jokingly--only it is not a joke--some of my best friends here are Capitol Police. Some of the nicest people you are going to meet serve you in the dining room. Some of the greatest people are painting the walls out there here. Say hello. Don't just walk by them. They serve you, and they are proud. They are proud of the work they do. They are wonderful people, and I want to thank them for their friendship. I want to thank so many more people who cared about this place. I also want to thank my staff, who are all here. Many of them are amazing people, and they are going to go on to do amazing things. When I sign things, I say: Go do great and good things. You can do great things, but they may not be good things. We have seen that throughout history. I say: Go do great and good things. And they will. They are amazing. They have given so much. I know you all think you have the best staff. Unfortunately, I do. A lot of them are available, I just want to say. I want them to take what they have learned into their future endeavors. I want to make sure that the legacy that we leave is a legacy of service, of whom we serve and whom we stand for. Finally, I want to thank my family: my husband Darwin, who is toiling in the clinic as we speak; my daughter Alethea, my son Nathan, and my six brothers and sisters, who are fairly famous all across North Dakota. I would like to just say that they have been my rock. Finally, I want to thank my mom and dad because they taught me and my siblings to stand up for what is right, to have our voices heard. I know they are watching me from above, and I want to thank them for raising a rowdy, boisterous, and determined crew who remain each other's best friends. My mother and my father made us strong, and I hope I have made them proud. I yield the floor. (Applause, Senators rising.)

Ms. HEITKAMP

Ms. HEITKAMP. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for as much time as it takes me to finish this. I promise I will not keep you here until midnight.

Ms. HEITKAMP

Ms. HEITKAMP. Mr. President, I want to proudly applaud the work of YWCA USA as they celebrate an incredible milestone. For 160 years, they have been at the forefront of the Nation's most critical movements. They have led the charge in women's empowerment, the fight against racism and discrimination, and efforts to strengthen families and communities. From voting rights to civil rights, from affordable housing to pay equity, from violence prevention to healthcare reform, YWCA has been a force for progress for 160 years. With the help of 210 local associations, across 46 States and the District of Columbia, this organization continues to serve over 2 million women, girls, and their families each year. Being one of the largest networks for domestic violence and sexual assault services in the country, the YWCA reaches over half a million women and girls annually. Furthermore, community YWCA associations reach over 260,000 women with economic empowerment programs and over 160,000 people through their racial justice education and training programs. In my home State of North Dakota, the YWCA Cass Clay and the YWCA Minot have been a trusted place for women and children to turn as they escape violence, homelessness, and crisis. Through these services, they are fulfilling their mission to provide safety, security, and hope to those who need it most. When I came to the Senate, the Violence Against Women Act, or VAWA, was the first bill that I cosponsored, and I am proud that it worked to give victims of abuse the resources they need to seek justice and recover for the trauma they experienced. I am still working to prevent those programs from expiring, and I am proud that the North Dakota chapters of YWCA have helped protect women and children, especially in the continuing crisis of violence against women in tribal communities. I am grateful for my partnership with YWCA in advocating for children who have experienced trauma. Traumatic experiences, like abuse or a parent's substance use disorder, can lead to health and behavior complications later in life. Children and youth who have experienced four or more traumatic events are three times more at risk of heart disease or lung cancer, while those who have experienced six or more traumatic events are 30 times more likely to attempt suicide. The YWCA has promoted my Trauma Informed Care for Children and Families Act, which is a critical step to address childhood trauma in the United States. I will continue to stand in solidarity with the YWCA in North Dakota and the rest of the country in strong support of their mission to eliminate racism, empower women, stand up for social justice, help families, and strengthen communities. Congratulations to the YWCA on 160 years of improving the lives of women and girls all over the country.

Ms. HEITKAMP

Ms. HEITKAMP. Mr. President, I want to congratulate the students, faculty, and parents of Richland Elementary School, located in Abercrombie, ND, on being awarded the 2018 National Blue Ribbon School Award. Founded in 1982, the National Blue Ribbon Schools Program recognizes public and private elementary, middle, and high schools where students perform at very high levels or where significant improvements are being made in students' academic achievement. A National Blue Ribbon Schools flag overhead has become a mark of excellence in education recognized by everyone from parents to policymakers in thousands of communities. Since the program's founding, the U. S. Department of Education has bestowed this coveted award to more than 8,500 of America's best schools. Richland Elementary School serves roughly 152 students and was one of 3 schools in North Dakota to receive the honor of Exemplary High Performing School in 2018. Receiving recognition as a National Blue Ribbon School signifies the hard work and dedication of the educators, students and parents involved, and I have no doubt its students are on a path to success. To effectively bolster reading and writing skills, the school utilizes Sails Literacy which immerses students in oral, written, and visual language. The ability to personalize each student's learning plan helps ensure they are performing to the best of their abilities. Additionally, the school receives constant feedback from teachers on the Sails Literacy program, which allows for the program to be molded to fit new classes. The faculty, staff, and community of Abercrombie are leading the way on literary education in North Dakota, and this innovation serves as a model that all schools can look towards when finding new ways to promote student growth and development. The Richland #44 School District mission statement reads, ``Students will be taught the skills and gain the knowledge to experience success, positive self-worth, and become responsible citizens in society.'' Richland Elementary School has done an excellent job at providing a positive and enriching learning environment for their students. I wish the very best to the community of Abercrombie and congratulations to all engaged at Richland Elementary School for achieving this high honor. Thank you for your commitment to our children and leaders of tomorrow.

Ms. HEITKAMP

Ms. HEITKAMP. Mr. President, I want to congratulate the students, faculty, and parents of Freedom Elementary School, located in West Fargo, ND, on being awarded the 2018 National Blue Ribbon School Award. Founded in 1982, the National Blue Ribbon Schools Program recognizes public and private elementary, middle, and high schools where students perform at very high levels or where significant improvements are being made in students' academic achievement. A National Blue Ribbon Schools flag overhead has become a mark of excellence in education recognized by everyone from parents to policymakers in thousands of communities. Since the program's founding, the U.S. Department of Education has bestowed this coveted award to more than 8,500 of America's best schools. Freedom Elementary School serves nearly 495 students and was one of 3 schools in North Dakota to receive the honor of Exemplary High Performing School in 2018. Receiving recognition as a National Blue Ribbon School signifies the hard work and dedication of the educators, students, and parents involved, and I have no doubt the students at Freedom Elementary are on a path to success. The school's theme is RICK, which stands for respect, inclusion, compassion, and kindness, which helps ensure all students have the best possible learning environment and treat each other with dignity. They have been successful in developing caring, thoughtful, and respectful students through promoting the RICK philosophy and by incentivizing good behavior and promoting togetherness with various awards and competitions. The West Fargo Public Schools mission statement reads, ``Educating today's learners for tomorrow's world.'' This mission embodies all that Freedom Elementary is working to accomplish by providing a healthy and respectful learning environment that leads to success. I wish the very best to the community of West Fargo and congratulations to all engaged at Freedom Elementary for achieving this high honor. Thank you for your commitment to our children and leaders of tomorrow.

Ms. HEITKAMP

Ms. HEITKAMP. Mr. President, I want to congratulate the students, faculty, and parents of Central Valley School, located in Buxton, North Dakota, on being awarded the 2018 National Blue Ribbon School Award. Founded in 1982, the National Blue Ribbon Schools Program recognizes public and private elementary, middle, and high schools where students perform at very high levels or where significant improvements are being made in students' academic achievement. A National Blue Ribbon Schools flag overhead has become a mark of excellence in education recognized by everyone from parents to policymakers in thousands of communities. Since the program's founding, the U.S. Department of Education has bestowed this coveted award to more than 8,500 of America's best schools. Central Valley School serves roughly 196 students and was one of three schools in North Dakota to receive the honor of Exemplary High Performing School in 2018. Receiving recognition as a National Blue Ribbon School signifies the hard work and dedication of the educators, students and parents involved, and I have no doubt the students at Central Valley School are on a path to success. At Central Valley School, teachers focus on each individual student using their multi- tiered system of support. This personalized teaching can consist of one-on-one with students to focused instructional help from a web-based program. The faculty meets eight times a year to assess what certain students might need to be successful. Central Valley's innovative commitment to developing student potential has resulted in high student outcomes for which we can all be proud. Central Valley School holds true to its motto, ``A Commitment to Educational Excellence for Students, Staff, and Community: Achievement; Enhancement; Involvement,'' by constantly looking at the needs of each individual student. I wish the very best to the community of Buxton and congratulations to all engaged at Central Valley School for achieving this high honor. Thank you for your commitment to our children and leaders of tomorrow.

Ms. HEITKAMP

Ms. HEITKAMP. Mr. President, I want to recognize a Federal employee I have had the privilege of working with for the past 5 and a half years, Judy DesHarnais, deputy for programs and project management with the St. Paul District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Quite simply put, she is one of the finest and most dedicated public servants I have had the opportunity to work with in my time in the Senate. Judy joined the district in 1985 as one of the first female engineers. In 2001, she was promoted to be the district's and the Corps' first female deputy district engineer for programs and project management. Throughout her time with the St. Paul District, Judy has stood out as an individual who could tackle complex, sensitive water resource issues. With top leadership in the district changing every 3 years, Judy has been the one steady hand that has remained constant, guiding the district through preparation and response to historic floods to helping communities secure permanent flood protection. To community leaders in North Dakota, Judy is a trusted public servant and an important partner. She has been on the frontlines with us on so many flood fights, helping to coordinate emergency response measures to protect families and businesses. She has also led efforts to help communities get critical flood protection projects that have saved lives and prevented more than a billion dollars in property damage. No matter what the challenge, Judy has always been able to meet or exceed it, and the positive impact of her work can be seen across the State in Grand Forks, Wahpeton, Devils Lake, Minot, and so many other communities. Judy's contributions to the Corps of Engineers are numerous, but one that will always be recognized is her efforts to make the agency truly responsive to the needs of the communities it serves. After a distinguished career in public service that has spanned more than 30 years, I want to thank Judy for her service to the Corps of Engineers and the State of North Dakota. She will be greatly missed, remembered for her professionalism, and honored for the positive change she brought to the Corps, and I wish her all the best in her retirement.

Ms. HEITKAMP

Ms. HEITKAMP. Mr. President, I was necessarily absent for yesterday's votes on S.A. 3705 and S.A. 3706 to H.R. 6157 so I could join the Secretary of the Air Force during her visit to Grand Forks Air Force Base in my home State. Had I been present, I would have voted yea on the amendments.

Ms. HEITKAMP

Ms. HEITKAMP. Mr. President, I come to the floor this afternoon to talk about the Nation's first line of defense against hunger--the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. Since day one in the Senate, I have fought to pass a farm bill that stands up for North Dakota's farmers, ranchers, and low-income families. In 2014 we passed a strong farm bill, which I helped to write, negotiate, and pass. Since then, I have been working on the next farm bill. Now the Senate is incredibly close to passing the next farm bill, which we crafted with strong support from Democrats and Republicans. This important bill shows that the Senate can work to find compromise and support the American people. A key component of any farm bill is the safety net for farmers and ranchers during tough times, like crop insurance. It also includes a safety net for families who fall on hard times. Our Nation is one of the most prosperous nations in the world. Yet, despite our great wealth, more than one out of seven Americans live below the poverty line. SNAP provides the critical safety net for these Americans who are food-insecure. In my own State of North Dakota, about 54,000 North Dakotans participate in SNAP on any given day. SNAP plays a critical role in helping these families put food on the table in what is oftentimes one of the most stressful periods in a person's life. Of those 54,000 North Dakotans, 43 percent are children, 28 percent are seniors, and about 4 percent are veterans. Families can find themselves needing this assistance for a number of reasons. First, their hours may have been reduced at work, they may have been laid off, their places of employment may have gone out of business, or an individual may be unable to work due to a disability or serious illness. Additionally, nearly 9 percent of seniors live below the poverty level. SNAP helps those seniors with their basic needs, many of whom live on fixed incomes. Not one of us can predict when an unexpected life event will happen to us. Thankfully, SNAP is available to provide at-risk families with the safety net they need. Other than those with disabilities, the elderly, or others who cannot work, very few people stay on SNAP for more than 3 months in a 36-month period. Half of those new to the SNAP program will leave it within 9 months once they become financially stable. Yesterday, I stood here to talk about the critical, bipartisan work of the chairman and ranking member on the Senate Ag Committee and what they have done for ranchers and farmers. This bipartisan farm bill includes a number of provisions that work to improve employment and job-training opportunities and programs that help parents find new jobs or obtain new skills so that they can qualify for higher paying jobs. This includes expanding SNAP employment and training demonstration pilots that were authorized under the 2014 farm bill. These pilot programs create more opportunities to build evidence on what works best in helping SNAP participants secure and retain jobs and advance in the labor market. Additionally, the Senate farm bill encourages States to create new public-private partnerships around job training and leverage existing private sector job-training programs for SNAP participants. During consideration of the 2014 farm bill, the Senate Ag Committee, on which I proudly sit, also worked to responsibly cut $4 billion of waste, fraud, and abuse from the program, while protecting low-income families who rely on this lifesaving program during times of need. The Senate bill continues to improve SNAP's integrity by preventing dual participation by enabling States to check whether applicants have already enrolled in other States. In other words, the SNAP program as laid out in the farm bill that we will be considering is a program that has the necessary reforms and the necessary balance. No one--no one--in this body wants someone who is unworthy to receive SNAP benefits, but we also do not want families who need that critical benefit to find it onerous or impossible to access food for their children, food for their grandchildren, or food for our veterans. A week ago, the House of Representatives narrowly passed its version of the farm bill by two votes, which would drastically cut SNAP. This partisan bill was even opposed by 20 Republican Members. As ranking member of the House Agriculture Committee, Collin Peterson said the following about the vote: The partisan approach of the Majority has produced a bill that simply doesn't do enough for the people it's supposed to serve. It still leaves farmers and ranchers vulnerable, it worsens hunger, and it fails rural communities. This approach makes reckless cuts to the nutrition safety net and in so doing significantly jeopardizes our chances of passing a farm bill. Any effort to separate farm programs from nutrition programs threatens the urban-rural coalition that has kept the farm bill a bipartisan effort for years. Simply put, the House bill threatens these critical lifelines for struggling families, seniors, and Americans with disabilities. There is no place for politics when it comes to protecting these vulnerable members of our society. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the House farm bill would cause more than 2 million individuals in more than 1 million households to lose their benefits. This simply will not impact single adults, but when a parent loses their food assistance, there isn't enough money to buy for the whole household, including children. The House farm bill would pull the rug out from underneath low-income families by expanding the already rigid work requirements in SNAP. This includes working parents, children, seniors, veterans, and disabled Americans. A quarter of a million children would lose their access to school lunch. Last Saturday, I was asked to participate in a discussion with the faith-based community in my State regarding their concerns about the SNAP program. At that time, we were told a couple of stories that I think are significant for review here in the Senate. I want to start off by telling you about Kim. Kim is a woman, a single mom with two beautiful children. She lives in Bismarck, ND. She works as an accounting assistant, and when she doesn't have full-time hours, she works as a substitute at area daycares. Since her divorce 3 years ago, her family has been eligible for SNAP benefits. Kim said: ``We do what we can, but usually we are eating ramen by the end of the month--don't want to eat cheap food, but there's never enough money to buy healthy foods.'' To stretch their food budget, Kim tries to get the children to The Banquet, which is a local feeding ministry, for meals two to three times a week. They also visit the local food pantry. She told us: I can only speak for myself, but I'm grateful for this program every single day. I'm working hard. If I don't have enough to eat, I can't work. If I'm not healthy, I'll need even more support. This is an incredibly common theme among SNAP families. I think it is worth mentioning that the average meal benefit in North Dakota--I want to repeat this--the average benefit per meal in North Dakota is $1.32. You can't even get a bowl of Senate bean soup for $1.32. Next, there is Ricky. Ricky was born in Minot, ND, where he grew up in poverty, and his family spent the majority of their lives on what was then known as food stamps. Ricky has since moved to Fargo, and a number of years ago, Ricky suffered an unfortunate accident in his workplace. So Ricky was working. He got injured, and he woke up from a coma 3 weeks later. He was later diagnosed with epilepsy, and he no longer can drive or work. Like Ricky, his parents are also disabled, and the program has offered them a consistent safety net during their difficult times. From his childhood, Ricky recalled that his family rarely had money for food. He said: If it wasn't for food stamps, we could have starved easily. There were times when my family couldn't even celebrate birthdays because we didn't have anything. Now in his late twenties and living on his own in Fargo, unfortunately the difficult times surrounding hunger are still a concern for Ricky, for reasons outside of his control. Understanding his difficult situation and all that the SNAP program has meant to him and his family, Ricky is passionate about stopping lawmakers from making unnecessary cuts to this program. For Ricky and his family, the SNAP benefits they have received are more than just a benefit; they are a way of life and a lifeline. For individuals who are homeless or trying to get back on the right track, SNAP can play an invaluable role in providing a bit of security. Folks who have benefited from the helping hand SNAP provides are all around us. They could be our neighbors. They could be our friends. They could even be a rural pastor. Many years ago--about 6 years ago--when I was traveling the State, I had an opportunity to have a discussion in a rural community. That discussion went something like this: Many people raised concerns about people taking government benefits when they didn't need them. I sympathized. I don't think that we should. I think we need to stop waste, fraud, and abuse. But we know those government programs are there for a purpose. After there was a long discussion about SNAP, or food stamps, the room cleared, and a young pastor came up to me. His wife was with him, holding their latest child, who looked to be about a 2-year-old toddler. He said: I didn't want to say this in front of the community. I didn't want to tell you about this in front of the community, but I want you to know that I am on SNAP. My family is on SNAP. We still can't buy milk. We still buy powdered milk to feed our children. If I want to do my rural ministry, I am not paid enough to support and feed my family, so I am working, and I am on SNAP. I can't afford food as a rural pastor. I think many times we don't realize those around us who are struggling, those who contribute as teachers, as teachers' aides, CNAs. People are working hard. They may be tripped up by some of the onerous standards and onerous bureaucratic requirements in the farm bill that was passed by the House. I think it is critically important that we understand that there are very, very few people in America who are abusers of this program. There are very, very few people in America who would take a handout unless they absolutely needed it. They need a hand up. They need job training. They need sympathy for their disabilities. And they need to know that we live in a country that cares for the hungry around us. As we consider the farm bill, it is important to remind ourselves about those who are not as fortunate as we are, those who struggle to put food on the table for their families or who might not be able to put food on the table because they were laid off or their hours were reduced at their minimum wage jobs. The chairman and ranking member have worked diligently to find ways to continue to improve SNAP's integrity and operations. I hope the Senate votes on and passes this strong bipartisan farm bill in the next few days. I hope the House decides to keep working through August, just as the Senate will do, to reach an agreement and pass a strong farm bill before it expires and jeopardizes SNAP further. The farm bill gives farmers the certainty they need to get through tough times, and it is important that it also maintain a strong safety net to give certainty to our Nation's families that they can get the support and food they need at the same time. I urge all of my colleagues to stand with the ranking member and the chairman and all of the Senate Agriculture Committee in supporting this farm bill and supporting the nutrition title of this bill. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. HEITKAMP

Ms. HEITKAMP. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Alexis Young, an intern in my office, be granted floor privileges for the duration of today's session of the Senate.

Ms. HEITKAMP

Ms. HEITKAMP. Madam President, first, I want to acknowledge and thank Chairman Pat Roberts and Ranking Member Debbie Stabenow for their incredible hard work and commitment to draft such a strong bipartisan farm bill. We would not be here today if it weren't for their tenacity. I think, more importantly, we would not be here today if it weren't for their love of agriculture and their love of rural America. Knowing these are challenging times in rural America, the one thing we can do here is to take this important policy and enact it into law so that we can give a 5-year window of certainty to American farmers and farmers in my State. Over 90 percent of the land in North Dakota is engaged in the production of agriculture, whether it is farming or ranching. It is the bedrock of what we do in North Dakota. In fact, it is who we are. In every given year, 30,000 farmers and ranchers lead the Nation in the production of over 10 different commodities. These agriculture products are sold in every State and exported to every corner of the globe. At a time when farm income is down and commodity prices have declined, it is so important that we, as members of the Senate, work together in a bipartisan way to provide our Nation's farmers and ranchers with a strong farm bill. With disruptions in trade weighing heavily on our agricultural producers, the single most important job right now is to provide certainty to farmers and ranchers by passing this farm bill and reauthorizing it beyond September 30, 2018. In fact, it is important to note that net farm income since 2013 has been literally cut in half. When people say: Why do we need a farm bill? Why should we care? I would suggest that if we want food security in this country and if we want to make sure that we have farmers in this country, we need to care. How many American families could really support or weather a 50- percent reduction in their income? When I first came to the Senate, I was fortunate enough to receive a committee assignment on the Senate Agricultural Committee, which for North Dakota is, quite honestly, the highest and most important committee assignment. Passing a strong, bipartisan farm bill has been my highest priority since coming to the Senate. I helped to write, negotiate, and pass the 2014 farm bill, and as a member of the Ag Committee, I have been working with farmers and ranchers to make sure that the 2018 farm bill is as strong as possible for North Dakota. Since 2014, when the farm bill was signed into law, I have heard from countless farmers and ranchers about what programs worked and what didn't work and how we can build a stronger rural America. While the 2014 farm bill addressed a number of key priorities needed to ensure an effective safety net for farmers and ranchers, there were challenges with aspects of the law. Understanding these concerns, I am pleased that members of the committee, the current administration, the chair, and ranking member have been willing partners in addressing these important challenges. In particular, I am excited that this bipartisan farm bill includes language from our ARC-CO Improvement Act, a bill I introduced with Senator Ernst last October. It works to strengthen and improve the Agricultural Risk Coverage-County Program. This language would direct the Farm Service Agency to use more widely available data from the Risk Management Agency as the first choice in calculating yields so that county level data is more accurate and updated. This would calculate safety net payments to reflect what is owed to producers in the physical county where their farms are located and not where their farmstead is. This bill succeeds in protecting and improving the safety net that allows farmers and ranchers to weather the most difficult times and thrive during favorable conditions. This bill extends and makes improvements to the commodity programs passed in the 2014 farm bill and maintains the farm safety net that is crop insurance. I do want to give a shout out to my colleague Senator Roberts. Every time there was testimony on the farm bill, he started with crop insurance, crop insurance, crop insurance; and that is a sentiment that is shared by almost every producer in my State. From those provisions passed in 2014, this bill extends the livestock disaster programs, which played a valuable role in North Dakota last year as we experienced one of the worst droughts in our recent history. Additionally, this farm bill includes a number of provisions that work to improve access for beginning farmers and ranchers. Included in the bipartisan bill is part of the Next Generation in Agriculture Act, which I introduced with my colleague Senator Collins. It provides baseline funding for the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program, and it would codify positions at the USDA to coordinate beginning farmer and rancher programs and to provide youth organization outreach. The average age of farmers in our State and across the country is way too old. If we are going to help to build that next generation of farmers, we are going to have to pay attention to those risks and respond to those risks in a way that will make a difference for our future production. I am also excited that this legislation includes a number of provisions that work to raise the profile of Indian Tribes within the farm bill, and it includes a provision from the Tribal Food and Housing Security Act, which I introduced earlier this year. Specifically, the provision included from my bill would waive the majority, if not all, of the administrative costs required to run the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations, which Tribes use to provide healthy, affordable food options to low-income individuals and families. It also would establish a permanent Rural Development Tribal Technical Assistance Office at USDA to provide rural development support for Native American communities and to offer greater certainty for the current Tribal Promise Zone designees. As we consider the farm bill, I wanted to make sure that Indian Country had a seat at the table, which is why I introduced this legislation. Indian Country faces a unique set of challenges, many of which can be addressed in the farm bill. I think sometimes we forget that the fundamental occupation of many of the Tribal members in my State is farming and ranching. I think we also sometimes forget that they suffer not only historic challenges to economic development but, as we are experiencing in all of rural America, challenges in economic development that are not only from the reservation but also from being rural. Checkoff programs are vitally important for our ag commodities, as they provide beneficial research, promotion, and education services to the producers they represent. It is critical that these programs function as intended in order to be preserved and protected from unnecessary scrutiny. The beef checkoff program has not, for some time, represented the majority view of beef producers and hasn't been functioning as intended. As such, I strongly encourage my colleagues to examine with a critical eye the Beef Promotion and Research Act of 1985 to ensure that the checkoff functions as a truly independent organization, representing the needs and viewpoints of the majority of our Nation's beef producers. The farm bill also makes important investments in ag research and enhances trade. I strongly believe that we need to increase our investment in research. I am pleased to see a robust level of support for our land-grant universities, and the inclusion of the Pollinator Health Task Force and funding is maintained in this bill. But I agree that more should be done in order to enhance agriculture so we may continue to be competitive on the global stage. With that said, we also have to improve market access and develop new export opportunities for our agricultural products. In North Dakota, we export soybeans to China, beans to Cuba, and barley to Mexico. And the list goes on. Building upon these successes will play a critical role in the improvement of the economic health of rural America. During consideration of the farm bill, we must also work to protect programs that are vitally important to farmers in my State who provide and produce American-grown sugar. Last week, I had the opportunity to deliver to each Senator a simple Hershey's candy bar with a sticker labeling the cost of the sugar included. First, I am going to thank Curt Knutson, a sugar beet farmer in the Red River Valley, who took time to put these candy bars together for me. In fact, he said he saw a rainy day, and he quickly put the stickers on. I think you will hear a lot about the sugar program. People have probably been down here telling you how it burdens the confectionary industry and how this will, in fact, increase their costs. I think it is absolutely critical that you know that in this candy bar--not this big one, but a normal size one--there is only 2 cents' worth of sugar. Did you know that in 1980, a candy bar like this cost 35 cents and had 2 pennies' worth of sugar in it? Today, this same candy bar costs $1.49, but still contains just 2 cents of sugar. Don't let anyone tell you that we have a crisis as it relates to the sugar program. The beet farmers and the sugar cane farmers guarantee a steady supply of sugar in this country, and we know that we need to maintain that industry in our State. I would encourage everyone to keep that in mind as they are being asked to roll back the sugar policy in the farm bill. Each year, our sugar industry employs nearly 142,000 Americans in 22 States and generates over $20 billion in economic activity. The policy that makes it all possible--listen to this--is at a zero cost to taxpayers. Given the economic importance of this industry to our Nation, it is critical that we maintain the sugar program to protect the many jobs in this industry and so that we can continue to enjoy American-grown sugar. The chairman and ranking member really deserve incredible praise for the work they have done collaboratively, not just with members of our committee but, as you see in the back here, working with Members who aren't on the Ag Committee to listen to their response. This farm bill works to improve programs that were authorized by the 2014 farm bill and to provide much needed certainty to farmers and ranchers. I want to make a general observation. When all of us go home, we are asked: Why can't you get anything done? Why can't you work together to solve America's problems? I think it would be a wonderful way to exit for the Fourth of July if we were allowed an opportunity to say in a bipartisan way, after a robust discussion about amendments: We passed a farm bill. I know the Presiding Officer knows how important the farm bill is to her State of Mississippi. She comes with that as her top priority. Let's get this done. Let's work together. Let's try and overcome any hurdles that we have right now. Let's tell the American people that, when it comes to producing their food and having them access their food, this food bill is possible in a time of great division in this country. I am proud to have been a member of the Ag Committee. I am proud to say I played a role in improving this farm bill. I look forward to not only passing it but seeing what comes out of the conference committee. I yield the floor.

Ms. HEITKAMP

Ms. HEITKAMP. Mr. President, I was deeply saddened to learn of the loss last week of Christopher T. Bacon, a beloved husband, father, resident of my State of North Dakota, and an agent with the Customs and Border Protection, CBP, Office of Intelligence. Chris was a wonderful person. His career and service make it clear that he was a man who was guided by strong values and commitment to service. Through his actions, he embodied our Nation's tradition of serving others, dedicating his energy to protecting families all across our Nation. He was born in San Antonio, TX, and traveled all over our Nation and world. He started his service in the Army and joined CBP in 1995 as a border patrol agent. He advanced through the ranks during his 22 years with the agency. His final posting was as an intelligence collection operations manager, stationed at the National Air Security Operations Center in Grand Forks, ND. Our Nation, my State, and his family were all fortunate to have him in our midst. He raised a great family and will always be remembered by his colleagues, friends, and neighbors. Through his courage, skill, and commitment, he has left his community and Nation a better and safer place for all who follow. My heart goes out to his wife, Rhonda, and his children, Kristen, Christopher, Jr., Jake, and Jasmine, in this time of grief. On behalf of my own family and the State of North Dakota, I extend my sincere condolences to Chris's family, friends, and colleagues. I pray that all who knew him can find comfort in their memories of Chris and the positive impact he had on so many lives.

Ms. HEITKAMP

Ms. HEITKAMP. Mr. President, I come to the floor this afternoon to honor the incredible men and women of our Nation's law enforcement agencies and to recognize the ultimate sacrifice of one of North Dakota's peace officers. Each year, peace officers from all over the country and from countries all over the world come to Washington, DC, to celebrate and to honor the lives of their colleagues who have lost their lives in the line of duty. I want first to recognize several law enforcement officers that lost their lives in the line of duty last year who do not always get the recognition or the honor they deserve, and those are our Federal and Tribal peace officers. They protect our homeland, they protect our borders and, in the case of Tribal police, they provide safety and security in Indian Country in some of the most remote and difficult places in the Nation. This year, eight Federal law enforcement officers' names were again etched in the wall: Rickey O'Donald, Federal Bureau of Investigation; Isaac Morales, U.S. Customs and Border Protection; Rogelio Martinez, U.S. Customs and Border Protection; David John Hoefler, U.S. Department of Transportation; Kenneth Doyle, U.S. Marshals Service; Houston James Largo, Navajo Nation; Uga'Shon Curtis Wayne Blackbird, Omaha Nation; and Nathan Bradford Graves, Sac and Fox Nation. To these Federal and Tribal officers whom we lost last year in the line of duty, may God bless you and may God bless your families. The men and women who serve as peace officers in our Tribal, Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies selflessly put the lives of those they have taken an oath to protect and serve before their own lives. I am here not only to remember those peace officers whom we have lost but to thank each and every peace officer who puts on that uniform or badge every day to protect our communities. I wish to recognize briefly a few law enforcement officers I have come to know well during my time in the Senate: the southwest border sheriffs--in particular, Cochise County, AZ, sheriff Mark Dannels and Yuma County sheriff Leon Wilmot--and Macon County, IL, sheriff Howard Buffet. They are not only outstanding law enforcement officials, but they have become great friends, great mentors, and a great source of advice and consent on how we can work better here in Washington, DC, not only on the border but across agencies in law enforcement. As a former North Dakota attorney general, I have always had a special relationship and appreciation for law enforcement. Serving as the top law enforcement officer in my State will always be one of the most meaningful moments of my professional career. North Dakota has the finest collection of peace officers in the country, and I could not be more proud than to continue to work alongside them as their U.S. Senator. I am here to thank each and every one of the peace officers who selflessly serve in communities throughout North Dakota and to let you know that I just don't appreciate you during police week. I appreciate you 24/7 because I know you are protecting the people of my great State, and you are doing it at great risk to you and at great sacrifice to your families. So today I come with a heavy heart. This is now the second police week in a row that I have attended where I am memorializing a North Dakota peace officer. Today, I am speaking of a North Dakota peace officer who was killed in the line of duty--Rolette County deputy Colt Allery. He lost his life on January 18, 2017, during a high-speed chase that Colt was engaged in with several of his fellow officers that evening after a report and identification of a stolen vehicle. As the stolen vehicle was coming to a forced stop, shots were fired from the car and fired at Colt as he approached. Colt fell, and he never got back up that evening, succumbing to his injuries not far from the small community where he grew up. He leaves behind five beautiful young children, including a stepdaughter, his fiancee Alexandria, the grandparents who raised him, family, friends, and a community that misses him and still grieves at the loss. Growing up in St. John, ND, and as an enrolled member of the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians, Colt never strayed too far from home. He made a commitment to do more than just be part of his community. He decided to serve his community as a peace officer. Colt started out as a corrections officer for Rolette County. After graduating from the North Dakota Law Enforcement Training Academy, he started working as an officer with the Rolla Police Department. He then went to work serving his fellow Tribal members as a Tribal police officer on Turtle Mountain before he recently moved back to the Rolette County Sheriff's Office. The loss of this fine young peace officer and young dad was felt across the entire State of North Dakota. The impacts are still felt by his family, the Rolette County Sheriff's Office, and his Tribal community of Turtle Mountain. Colt made the ultimate sacrifice in service to his State and to Rolette County. He lost his life to a gunshot wound inflicted by an individual prepared to take even more lives. The brave action of this peace officer that night prevented that from happening. Deputy Colt Allery's name is now etched on the wall of the peace officers memorial here in Washington, DC. He is no longer just a North Dakota fallen hero. He is a national fallen hero, as he is recognized with all of his fallen brothers and officers. Colt Allery's name will now serve as an example, not just to North Dakotans but to people from all over the country and all over the world who visit that memorial every year. He is an example of the best that our State and our country has to offer. He is an example of what it means to have lived and died so that others may be safe. Quite simply, he is an example for everyone of what it means to be an everyday hero. We must also remember the families of our peace officers, who sacrifice so much, not knowing if their loved ones will return each time they walk out the door. You have sacrificed and lost so much, and no words today will replace the pain of losing a loved one. We have a proud history in North Dakota of peace officers like Colt serving their State and local communities with distinction. I have had the extreme privilege over the years to work with law enforcement officials in my State who span the spectrum from highway patrol to State and local peace officers, various Federal officers, and certainly our Tribal police. Let me tell you again that these are some of the finest men and women I have ever met or worked with. These are men and women just like Colt who could have chosen a different path. They could have chosen a path that didn't involve putting themselves in harm's way. Instead they chose to take the oath to protect and serve. They chose to selflessly put themselves in harm's way so they could make North Dakota a safer place for each and every person that lives in our great State or even those who may be passing through. They chose to put the needs of others before their own. They chose a more difficult path to tread than most of us would ever be willing to follow. So I stand here this evening not only to celebrate the life of Colt Allery but to celebrate and thank each and every peace officer working in my great State of North Dakota, working across the country, and, yes, across the world. To all of our peace officers, especially those back home in North Dakota, I want to say thank you from the bottom of my heart for your sacrifice for your communities and the State of North Dakota. I beg you to stay safe. I beg you to take care of yourselves. Take care of your families. And God bless all of you. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. HEITKAMP

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

Ms. HEITKAMP

Ms. HEITKAMP. Mr. President, this is such an important issue, and those of us who have spent time with any of the workers and those of us who have spent time with small business owners who are deeply concerned about the viability of their business under a ``last man standing'' kind of rule completely understand the level of grave concern these Americans are experiencing as a result of the problem with multiemployer pension funds like Central States. It is clear to me that if we fail to act, workers and retirees could, and probably will, see their retirement security disappear. Small businesses across the country could, and probably will, face bankruptcy, and taxpayers would still be left on the hook. Today we are here to tell the stories and give the voice to the workers, small businesses, and retirees who are most at-risk for losing their pensions after years of hard work and playing by the rules. Today I rise to give a voice to thousands of North Dakota workers and retirees who are at risk of losing their retirement security because of the financial instability of our multiemployer pension system. The only way to prevent these workers and retirees from losing their pensions is for Congress to act. These men and women did everything right, and they live not just in North Dakota but in almost every State. They played by the rules. They worked for years, if not decades, often in labor-intensive jobs, like coal miners or as workers in the trucking industry, such as UPS package delivery and grocery supply stores. They acted responsibly when they negotiated for and started putting money away in their pensions, taking wage reductions to guarantee that their family had a future. I also want to point out that when I asked how many of the pensioners who come to my meetings served their country by putting on a uniform to stand up, usually it is about a third to a half of the room. So let's not forget that these are veterans who returned home. They started working in their communities. They took off that uniform and continued to build our communities, and now they are struggling to understand how a government and how a society could be leaving them in this level of uncertainty regarding their economic future. I want to tell a couple stories of some of the people that I have met. I want you to know that on Saturday, I had a meeting with over 140 workers in Fargo. They came from all over, and their stories were heartbreaking. They couldn't understand, if they did everything right, how in the United States of America they would have their financial viability at risk. I had one man stand up who was 80 years old who told me that he went back to work when he knew there was going to be a problem, and he worked in the oil fields. He said: I am worn out; there is nothing more I can do. I want to talk about Donna Matson and her husband Mike, who worked as a UPS driver for 30 years in Fargo, a job that had an impact on his time with his family and his health. In 2013 he was diagnosed with a progressive supranuclear palsy, a degenerative disease that requires regular and expensive speech, physical, and occupational therapies. That pension he put money into was supposed to be there to support his family after Mike's decades of labor. Now, when he needs it most and when his wife Donna needs it most, that pension could be ripped away. Tina Kramer, from Mandan, was a member of the Teamsters, working as a secretary for the local union for 25 years, through which she earned a pension. Her husband was a member of the Steelworkers and worked for Bobcat for about 30 years as a forklift driver, and he earned a pension. Several years ago, both of them retired. Soon after, Tina's husband suddenly passed away. Tina lost her husband's pension and now relies solely on her pension. Tina has just a little bit of savings, and she has already had to dip into that each month to pay her bills for groceries and property taxes. Should the Central States Fund go bankrupt, it is only going to get worse. Mark Rothschiller, from Bismarck, gave up a lot to work many long hours as a UPS driver for 27 years. When we say ``gave up a lot,'' he gave up going to his kids' plays and sports games because he often worked late. Because of the intensive labor of his work, he has had five back surgeries and another rotator cuff surgery, which forced him to retire early. If Congress doesn't act to fix the Central States Pension Fund, he doesn't know if he will be able to pay his healthcare bills. Mark Lundeby, from Grand Forks, never thought he would be in the position where after 36\1/2\ years of driving a semi, putting in 14- hour days, with extensive stretches away from home, he no longer may have his retirement savings. That is the reality. He followed the rules and paid into his pensions throughout his entire career. He tells me that if we don't move legislation to protect his pension soon, he will have to sell his house. I invite any of our colleagues in this body to call a meeting of the people who have been affected. I serve on the Select Committee on Pensions. At our first meeting, we had a lot of discussion about how difficult solving this problem will be. There was a lot of talk about the math and how we could make the math work and how we could bring this fund back into solvency. I said: That is right. We need to fix the economics of the pension fund, but we cannot ignore our moral imperative. That moral imperative is to do the right thing, to make sure that, as we are standing there, we realize that for very, very many--in fact, for hundreds of thousands of citizens of our State--this is life or death. This is the difference between having dignity in retirement and being completely dependent on someone else to help them through. This is at a time that they did nothing wrong, other than to plan for a pension that would work for them, other than to bargain for a pension that would work for them. We cannot ignore the moral imperative. Yes, we need to fix this, and we need to fix it soon because time is wasting. The longer we wait, the more difficult it is going to be. I invite all of our colleagues who aren't familiar with this issue to call a meeting or to come to one of our meetings and to look these veterans in the face, look these hardworking people in the face, look at the active folks who don't know if their benefits are already going to be given and available to them, look them in the face and say: It is simply a math problem. Your problem is a math problem. No, their problem is an American problem. It is a congressional problem. It is an administration problem, and it needs to be fixed. We need to make a commitment to making sure that the people who have worked hard all their lives--the people we talk about every day on this floor--are kept whole and moving in securing their pensions. It is an American imperative.

Ms. HEITKAMP

Ms. HEITKAMP. Thank you, Mr. President.

Ms. HEITKAMP. Yes.

Ms. HEITKAMP. Mr. President, I am here representing a special interest group called the workers of America.

Ms. HEITKAMP

Ms. HEITKAMP. Madam President, I am so proud to stand here with my five colleagues, but I also have to acknowledge the one who is not here; that is, Senator John McCain, who has been an absolute champion, along with his wife, on attacking this problem. Five years ago when I met Cindy McCain, one of the first things she said was, what can we do about this? Working within the Homeland Security Committee, where so much of this work got done--both in the Homeland Security Committee and the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations--I can't say enough about the commitment of that committee but more importantly the commitment of the leadership of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, both Senator Portman and Senator McCaskill, who worked in tandem, who engaged their very capable staff, who did the investigations that led to the exposure of the issues and led to a bipartisan commitment to develop and pass this bill. I do want to say that I know that John and Cindy are with us today in spirit. I know that Cindy is probably watching because she is very, very excited that finally we are going to get this done. This is such an important tool. This is such an important piece of stopping human trafficking, which has been her lifelong objective and passion. Today, we stand not just with our colleagues who are here on the floor but also with our great friend, Senator John McCain, and his beautiful, active, and wonderful wife, Cindy McCain. The other reason I am very proud is that this is why I came to the Senate--to work across the aisle to address major issues and challenges, to make a difference in the lives of some of the most vulnerable human beings in our country. We are here today on the cusp of passing a bill that will provide victims a real opportunity to seek justice and recover damages from websites that profited from their pain of being sold for sex, while also providing new tools to prosecutors, including my former colleagues, the State attorneys general, to go after these sites and their owners. Again, I thank Senator Portman and Senator Blumenthal for their tireless work in trying to fashion the right mix of understanding the importance of the Communications Decency Act to the development of this tool we call the internet but also making sure this is not used as a tool for incredibly bad actors who would prey on the most vulnerable among us. Driving this bill and forging a compromise was not easy. This was not easy. No one should think that this came together easily or that we didn't have many moments where we did our own soul-searching, those of us who are committed to the First Amendment and those of us who are committed to free access of means to express our opinions and do our business. What I will tell you is that this is a big thing. This isn't a little thing. This is a big thing--not only because we are doing it in a bipartisan way but also because we are speaking on behalf of the most vulnerable human beings in this country. I can't imagine a more heinous act than the sale of human beings on the internet for sex. It is happening in all of our communities. It is happening in our States each and every day. When I began my journey to the U.S. Senate, I engaged and started visiting with my old friends in North Dakota law enforcement. As I have said many times, I am a former attorney general from the great State of North Dakota and have great friends in law enforcement. Their message was simple. They were seeing a lot more drugs. Obviously, North Dakota was experiencing an oil boom, and that was creating some social upheaval, additional crime, additional concern about crime. They then told me something I didn't expect: We are seeing this incredible rate and increase in prostitution. I thought about that. I thought, well, what does that mean, and how do we investigate it? So many people would argue that this is a victimless crime and not a priority, and we started looking behind this. My colleagues in law enforcement in North Dakota started doing stings. They did something that peace officers all across the country do: They sat down with the women they were arresting, and they started listening to their stories. The stories were heartbreaking--stories of being preyed on as young girls, either in their home or as they were running away, the stories of how they got in the life. Many of my colleagues in law enforcement began to say: These women are not criminals; they are victims. We began to look at what led to this huge explosion, and we started examining all the websites, all the places where, with the tweak of a word or with the opportunity to be anonymous--in the old days, you would have to stand out perhaps on the street corner, but now you can be anonymous, and that gave those perpetrators, those evil human beings, yet another avenue. That is when we started looking at backpage.com and other sites like it that sell human beings for sex. That occurs in every corner of our country--in the small and big States and in the small and big counties and in oil counties and out east in farming communities. So no one should believe that they are immune or somehow limited because it is going to happen there but not here. One thing we have learned is that it is happening everywhere. Today, we are saying: No more. The Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act would crack down on these horrific crimes online and provide justice for victims. Today, it is going to pass the Senate with broad bipartisan support and head to the President's desk to be signed into law. In many instances, websites help traffickers skirt law enforcement through online advertising and continue to do so without penalty by claiming their First Amendment rights. I remember when we in the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations subpoenaed and had a chance to question the witnesses from backpage.com, and they started talking about their First Amendment rights. I pointed out to them that nothing this body can do can affect someone's First Amendment rights. They were not alleging or saying they were protected by the First Amendment. They knew that wouldn't fly. They said they were protected by the terms of the Communications Decency Act. Like Senator Blumenthal, I never believed that the Communications Decency Act protected them from prosecution or protected them from civil penalty if they were complicit and, in fact, abetted these crimes. I never believed that, but there were judges in America who did. We met and saw a lot of those judges and read a lot of those opinions and said: We cannot let a law of the U.S. Congress--a law on the books in our country--allow perpetrators who sell children for sex to absolutely avoid any civil or criminal penalty. We cannot allow that to happen--not a law of this country. We don't have the ability to restrict or modify the First Amendment in this body, but we do have the ability to amend a law that is being used inappropriately to protect the most hideous criminals in America. No law should put anyone above liability if they are actively involved and complicit in selling children for sex. As we stand here today, we know we are doing something that we hope will happen more often in the Senate. We are standing for those victims, those parents, those children, those women who are still in the struggle of human trafficking, those children who are still in the struggle of human trafficking. We are standing with them today to say: No more. People who will illegally profit from selling children for sex are going to be held accountable. So the message needs to go from this body, it needs to go from the signature on this bill, that that protection you have been alleging--inappropriately hiding behind the Communications Decency Act--ends, and it ends with the passage of this bill. I couldn't be prouder of the work my colleagues Senator McCaskill and Senator Portman did on the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. You exposed the facts that led to the argument that led to the passage of this bill. I am proud to stand with you. I am proud to work to make sure that this bill is appropriately implemented. I look forward to the first prosecution of someone who sells children for sex on the internet, profiting from the web page they created. With that, Senator Portman, thank you so much for your excellent work. Senator McCaskill, thank you for your excellent work. I stand proud with you today and know that we are making a difference today. Today, the U.S. Senate will make a difference for the most vulnerable human beings in our country. I yield the floor.

Ms. HEITKAMP

Ms. HEITKAMP. Mr. President, I am here to discuss the merits of S. 2155, a bill that I have been working on since coming to the Senate in 2013. It is a bill that addresses the concerns of rural financial institutions, particularly those in our rural communities. It is a bill that was drafted to address access to capital concerns and the consolidation of small banks in areas where I live, which is in the State of North Dakota. It is a bill that I am incredibly proud of. I know that there have been a lot of statements made about this bill in the last week, and I am here to set a lot of those straight. Before I start, I wish to talk about what it is like in rural communities where I grew up. I find it interesting when I hear that this bill is about Wall Street banks and big bank bailouts. The last time I checked, Lincoln State Bank, which is my small community bank in the community where I went to high school, in Hankinson, ND, is not on the Fortune 500. It is not on the Fortune 100. It is a small community bank that has been operating and has been available to consumers in my community to help them achieve their family goals, achieve their farming goals, and achieve their needs for capital going forward. I don't recognize the bill that is being debated here in the U.S. Senate because it is not the bill that has been written, and it is not the bill that is hopefully going to pass the Senate. I don't think that it is any mistake, when you look at the five primary sponsors of this bill--the five of us who wrote this bill--that most of us are from predominantly rural States. I think we understand the needs of those living in our States and the needs of those living in our rural communities. When you look at an opportunity to fix regulation and to respond to concerns that people have, one of the constant arguments that I get when I go home is this: There is no longer any common sense in Washington, DC. They don't understand where we live. They don't understand who we are. They don't understand that we live in communities and that we support and protect each other. Instead, they write one regulation that is supposed to be one-size-fits-all. That is certainly not what this is. This is an attempt to write a bill that would give direction to the Federal regulators so that small banks could be treated as small banks and so that large banks could continue to be regulated and treated as the large, systemically significant institutions that they are. I will give just a few statistics that I think everybody should understand. Thirty years ago, there were approximately 14,000 banks in the United States. Today, there are approximately 5,000. Since the passage of Dodd-Frank, the United States has lost about 14 percent of its smallest banks. Meanwhile, the small banks' share of U.S. domestic deposits and banking assets has decreased, and the five largest U.S. banks, which don't benefit from our bill, appear to have absorbed much of this market share. What I have said consistently is that Dodd-Frank was supposed to have stopped too big to fail, but the net result has been too small to succeed. The big banks have gotten bigger since the passage of Dodd- Frank, and the small banks have disappeared. They have retreated from their traditional role of relationship lending, first out of fear for regulation in that they might be doing something wrong and then out of fear of the cost of regulation if they are going to work towards compliance. I will make one simple point. This bill was not written by Wall Street bankers, and it was not written by Wall Street lobbyists. If it had been, it would have been a completely different bill in that it would actually provide relief to Wall Street banks and Wall Street bankers, but it does exactly the opposite. It will give relief to those institutions, whether they be regional banks or small community banks, that can be effective competition for the largest institutions in this country. It is absolutely essential that we set the record straight that this bill is to get our relationship institutions--whether they be credit unions or banks or our regional institutions that are not doing anything more sophisticated than the work that is being done in our small community banks--the regulatory relief that they need to effectively compete against the biggest banks in this country and to tailor our regulations, to set our regulations, in a way that reflects the common sense of American citizens. I will take a minute because I think a lot of things that have been said about this bill have been incredibly reckless. These inaccurate claims, if left unchallenged and undiscussed, will create the legislative history of this bill, which could, in fact, then be used by many of the same institutions that we believe are not affected by this bill to argue that they are entitled to some sort of protection. We can't let that happen. First, let me start by saying this is not a giveaway to Wall Street. It is not a giveaway to the largest institutions. Our bipartisan bill makes targeted, commonsense fixes so as to provide tangible relief to community banks and credit unions so that they can lend to borrowers in rural America and support rural communities. It leaves in place rules and regulations that hold Wall Street accountable. In fact, the big banks aren't necessarily happy with this bill because it doesn't benefit them much. When we asked the current regulators, such as Fed Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell--he basically said that he believes the bill gives the regulators the tools they need to continue to protect and prevent against financial collapse. Let me say how the bill doesn't help the largest institutions. It will not make any significant changes to the regulations that face the largest Wall Street banks. They will continue to be reined in from causing havoc to the financial system like they did during the financial crisis. It will not make any structural changes to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. It will be allowed to continue to protect consumers. It will do nothing to weaken or repeal the Volcker rule. The only institutions that will be given any relief from the Volcker rule will be those banks that have under $10 billion in assets. That is not JPMorgan; that is not Citibank; that is not Goldman Sachs; that is not the largest of institutions. Those institutions of $10 billion or less are the only institutions that will get relief from the Volcker rule. It also does not change the way the Federal Reserve regulates foreign banks. Second, this bill will not lead to another mortgage lending crisis. Let's just go back and examine what happened in 2008. We had a significant number of liar loans--subprime lending--which drove the mortgage market. That was troublesome and problematic in and of itself, but the real problem came when those mortgages were securitized and sold into the secondary market. That is where the trouble began. It was trouble enough that they were putting institutions in jeopardy, but they were passing along that risk to the public through these securitized products--derivatives. Guess what. When the whole thing collapsed, we looked behind, and we saw these risky mortgage loans. We saw what actually created some of the problems on the front end before it was securitized. Nothing in this bill changes qualified mortgage standards. Nothing in this bill removes the protections that Dodd-Frank has provided to the secondary market. The only thing this bill does as it relates to mortgages is to say to those small institutions, which are the small community banks that I am familiar with, that they can make mortgages without worrying about the qualified mortgage standards. They can go ahead and do that. The one thing they can't do is sell those mortgages into the secondary market. They have to keep those mortgages on the books. When you have a requirement that they keep them on the books, do you really, honestly believe that these institutions are going to take unnecessary risks? The answer is no. Guess what. They didn't take unnecessary risks before 2008. They did not cause this problem, but they are incurring the bulk of the expenses to fix this problem. To suggest that we are, in fact, risking the financial security of this country--of our institutions--because we gave a small, discrete break on mortgages to the smallest of institutions, which have to keep these mortgages in portfolio, is absurd. If you don't believe me, let's look at what Congressman Barney Frank, one of the architects of Dodd- Frank, said yesterday. He said, ``Nothing in this bill in any way weakens the prohibition about making shaky loans to people with weak credit and then packaging them into a security.'' Our bill restores the balance for small community banks in the mortgage business without opening the door to excesses and predatory lending standards that led to the financial crisis. To suggest otherwise is disingenuous and simply not true. We have to push back against this idea that somehow we are rolling back the clock. In fact, in this same interview, Congressman Barney Frank said that about 95 percent of Dodd-Frank, as it is written, will remain intact after this bill passes--95 percent. You would not believe that to listen to the dialogue and the diatribe we have heard on the floor. The third misstatement is that we will somehow scrap the rules for the largest Wall Street banks and allow regional banks with up to $250 billion in assets to follow the same rules and regulations as the tiny community banks. Again, this is not true. Far from scrapping the rules, our bill simply provides that the Federal Reserve has the ability to tailor one piece of Dodd-Frank, and that is the section 165 regulations. For certain regional lenders, that means that if they do not pose systemic risk, they will not be subject to the requirements of section 165. Yet, if the Fed determines that they could, as in the case, as you have heard, of Countrywide--if there is another Countrywide out there and the Fed discovers another Countrywide--it can, in fact, include that institution in section 165. So let's not exaggerate the impact of this bill. Let's talk about how we have moved the assumption from $50 billion or $100 billion to $250 billion in terms of what is systemically risky, knowing that the Fed can always go back and include smaller institutions if they, in fact, see the challenges. The other thing that we need to point out about the Dodd-Frank regulations and consistent regulations in moving forward is that our bill still requires very rigorous stress testing for these regional institutions. Regional institutions would have to have the ability to meet those stress tests. At his confirmation hearing, Chairman Powell called the framework of this bill a sensible one, and he affirmed that he would like to continue meaningful and frequent stress tests on banks between $100 billion and $250 billion, as provided for in this bill, while he confirmed that it is not necessary to stress test the smaller banks. I think that this position is supported, again, by Janet Yellen, who said, ``I do think it's appropriate to tailor regulations to the system footprint of the financial organization'' and called our bipartisan Senate bill ``a move in a direction that we think would be good.'' Moreover, our bill does not change the risk-based capital and leverage regime for these regional institutions under the Basel III reforms. Relatedly, our bill does not change the fact that the comprehensive capital analysis and review--what we call CCAR--applies to these regional banks. Of course, the Fed has said it will continue to implement enhanced prudential standards. In addition to stress tests that are required under this bill for some banks over $100 billion, we have all of these other requirements and the requirement that they continue to meet qualified mortgage standards. They can sell these mortgages into the secondary market if they meet those standards. It is critically important that we be very clear about what this bill does and does not do for our midsized or regional institutions. The fourth and probably the most hurtful of the claims that have been made is that those of us who care deeply about preventing and eliminating discrimination in lending have somehow opened the door to allow for discrimination in lending by changing the HMDA standards. That is an outrageous claim and particularly hurtful for the Members of this body who have spent their lives fighting discrimination. I want to talk about the facts. Our bill continues to require that all lenders, no matter the size, collect the traditional HMDA data, which includes information on race, gender, and ethnicity. Contrary to what some have said, our bill only relaxes the new, additional data requirements for some of the smallest lenders in the country--those that make less than 500 loans a year. This data only makes up 3.5 percent of all of the data collected under HMDA. Think about that. We are claiming that people are discriminating and allowing for discrimination because we are relaxing the standards for the smallest institutions, and it only amounts to 3.5 percent of the total data collected--3.5 percent. This is an outrageous statement, and it is needs to be corrected on the record. You might ask, why even change the 3.5? For those small institutions, the 44 pages of data that they are required to collect--it may, in fact, be that they no longer are interested in doing those kinds of mortgages. So it is very important that we correct the record. In fact, I asked Chairman Powell during a recent Banking Committee hearing to clarify whether he believed the change in S. 2155 would result in or lead to additional discrimination in lending. He said that he did not believe that it in any way would affect their ability to enforce the fair lending laws in this country. Fifth, some have inaccurately alleged that the change from ``may'' to ``shall'' in the tailoring is a dangerous provision that empowers big banks to secure more favorable treatment from the government. I think that claim does not stand up to scrutiny. First, it is common sense that we should tailor Federal regulations so they are implemented in a practical and effective way. Second, in our bill, we retain the broad rule of construction under section 165, which provides the Federal Reserve with wide latitude to tailor prudential standards to any company or category of companies based on any risk the Fed deems appropriate--pretty broad authority on the part of the Federal Government. Third, in the event of a lawsuit, the Fed would be given strong deference by the courts to interpret what might apply to section 165. Sixth, our bill would not open up targeted reforms to the supplementary leverage ratio beyond the three custody banks. Under the plain reading of this bill, the three custody banks are the only three institutions that are predominantly engaged in the custody business. Of course, the regulators retain the discretion to make appropriate adjustments to SLR. To be clear, there is broad agreement among regulators that the unique business model of custody banks warrants tailored treatment of the SLR provision. That is why a substantially similar bill passed the House Financial Services Committee--no lighthearted people there on the minority side--by a vote of 60 to 0. Finally, our bill will not gut oversight of foreign megabanks operating in the United States such as Barclays and Deutsche Bank. These three institutions, all of which have over $250 billion in assets, will be subject to section 165 of Dodd-Frank. That means foreign banks will still be subject to foreign bank stress test requirements, liquidity stress testing, and strict Basel III capital requirements. Our bill does not change the Fed's requirement that large foreign banks establish an intermediate holding company in the United States, which subjects foreign banks' U.S. operations to requirements similar to those imposed on U.S. banks. Chairman Powell at the March Senate Banking Committee hearing was asked about this, and he said he did not believe this bill would exempt foreign banks from tough oversight under Dodd-Frank. Additionally, the substitute amendment for this bill has affirmed that large foreign banks do not escape Dodd-Frank supervision. I think it is really important that we debate the actual merits of this bill and not the ``boogeyman'' merits--the statements that this bill will somehow lead to a catastrophic downfall of our financial system. As I said, even Barney Frank disagrees with that evaluation of this bill. It is important we set the record straight on what this bill does and does not do and that we make sure that when a court is reviewing this provision--if, in fact, there is ever litigation--that the court has a record to go to on the floor of the Senate and in the committee which corrects misstatements and refocuses the bill on what the actual intended outcome is and how the bill was actually written. So with that, I will yield the floor, but I will say I intend to submit a document for the Record in the next discussion, which, hopefully, will provide a written document outlining the myth versus the facts of this bill so we can have an actual record that the courts can look to that documents the intent and the purpose of this legislation beyond the hyperbole and overstatement that we have heard. Thank you. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Ms. HEITKAMP

Ms. HEITKAMP. The Senator from Idaho can borrow it at any time. I have no pride of authorship, and there is no copyright on here. He may pass it around.

Ms. HEITKAMP. Yes.