Johnny Isakson

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss the fifth anniversary of the tragic murder of a Georgia citizen who volunteered for the Peace Corps, who traveled to West Africa to the nation of Benin and lost her life. She lost her life because she did the right thing-- she reported the abuse of children in a village school where she taught. The reason I have recently returned from Benin is that I have taken this case on as a personal passion, to see to it that justice and some closure comes to the family of this wonderful young lady. Her name was Kate Puzey. Kate Puzey was top of her class, valedictorian, outstanding student, and she wanted to go out and save the world, to help the world and fulfill the dream John Kennedy professed in 1961 when he created the Peace Corps. So Kate Puzey went to Benin and she found that one of the village natives in the village where she was teaching was abusing children in the school where she was teaching. In this very remote area, she took the only communication mechanism she had to report the violation of these children to the appropriate authorities in Cotonou, Benin. Unfortunately, because those communications were not secure, a relative of the person she reported notified the person she had reported that he had been reported. That night, in her hut in the Nation of Benin, her throat was cut and she died. She died because she did the right thing. This Senate, 2 years ago, joined me and Senator Boxer in passing the Peace Corps Protection Act, which is now named the Kate Puzey Peace Corps Volunteer Protection Act. This provides a mechanism and a way where Peace Corps volunteers can report violations or trauma of a sexual nature, gender-based violence, or any other type of violence against themselves or in any other place where they might be as a servant of the Peace Corps. Because of that, there are now ombudsmen and ways and mechanisms where our Peace Corps volunteers can safely report violations and damage and have the protection not only of the United States but of the nation where they serve. But back to the point of my trip to Benin, which took place this last week. This was my second visit to Benin, because what I want to see is a continuation of the investigation of the death of this young lady until there is a trial and closure available for her and her family, just as any of us would want were we the parent of a young lady who had lost her life on behalf of the United States of America. I rise to pay particular tribute first to Secretary Kerry; to the United Nations' Samantha Power; to the State Department of the United States of America; to Michael Raynor, the Ambassador in Benin; to Todd Whatley, the Deputy Chief of Mission; to Kevin Armstrong, the USAID Director; to Billy Alfano, to Marilyn Gayton, and to Robert Freedom-- Bob Friedman--the Peace Corps representative in Benin, all of whom have made the investigation and the fulfillment of bringing this case to a reality their top priority. Three years ago, when I went to Benin for the first time, it was to encourage President Yayi of Benin to allow the United States to come in and assist in the investigation and the prosecution of the case--a rare thing to happen in a French colony which is governed by French law. To our credit and to President Yayi's credit he allowed the United States and Jennifer Dent, the FBI agent in charge in Lagos, to come in to Benin and begin assisting the investigation. I went back last week during our break because it looked as though the case was dying. It looked as though the intensity of the interest was dying. And it was so important to me and for the family in my home State of Georgia to see to it we in some way finally bring closure, either right or wrong, for the terrible things that happened. I am happy to report the visit was successful. President Yayi spent over 4 hours with the family members and myself. He committed the judiciary and the investigatory body in the Nation of Benin to accept the assistance of the U.S. FBI and our technology. During the course of our visit, he removed and separated the prisoners, as had been requested by the FBI, to see to it those who are being held and thought to be guilty in this case could no longer communicate in the prisons where they were held. I don't know what the ultimate result will be, and I want justice to be done. I want the right person to be persecuted and prosecuted, and the right person to pay the price, but I want closure for this family. I want to thank the American Embassy, the State Department, and Samantha Power at the U.N. for the intensity they have put into this investigation, as well as the U.S. FBI, and in particular Victor Lloyd, special agent in Lagos, Nigeria, for all the time he has dedicated. We seem to be at a point where everything is coming together toward a prosecution and, ultimately, a trial. When that happens, it will happen primarily because the U.S. Government, the people of the United States of America, both President Bush and President Obama, and all in this Congress have dedicated themselves to the interest of one child's life--Kate Puzey. It is important the people of this country know that we as a body will come together behind any injured American, any loss of life, anybody who has deployed themselves on behalf of this country in the service of peace and prosperity. They deserve to know the U.S. Congress and this U.S. Senate are standing ready to help. But I am here in particular to pay tribute to the Embassy of Benin, to FBI Special Agent Victor Lloyd, and to all those who have helped and assisted in seeing to it the prosecution of the case in the murder of Kate Puzey comes to a final conclusion. I am grateful for their service to America, grateful for what they have done for the Puzey family in Georgia, and grateful that I live in a country that protects and loves those who have represented our interests wherever it may be, on whatever shore it may be, and in whatever country it may be. May God bless America, may God bless the Peace Corps, and may God bless the family of Kate Puzey. I yield back, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. I am going to be very brief in the interest of time. I wish to thank Senator Menendez for his leadership, Senator Landrieu for her leadership. Without their work this would not happen. Let me tell you what this does. This bill corrects the unintended consequence of denying liquidity to coastal Americans in their housing and causing the unintended consequence of people not buying insurance and putting themselves and this country at greater risk in those areas that are prone to floods. It aggressively addresses the need we have to make this system more solvent and make it work better. The Senate today will be solving a greater problem for coastal American residents and those in flood areas. They will be doing the right thing at the right time to correct an unintended consequence of an action of the Congress. I am honored to be a part of it. I commend Senator Menendez and Senator Landrieu and thank them for their effort. I yield back my time.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I am delighted the Senate is talking about our veterans. I am disappointed the bill before us did not go through the entire committee process. I am grateful that Senator Burr, the ranking member, has brought forward a side-by-side bill which I wish to discuss for a moment. I am particularly glad the Burr bill brings up the Iran sanctions issue. I know the administration has kind of backed away from the sanctions because of some things that have happened recently and does not want a sanctions bill to pass the Senate. I have followed closely what has happened in the Middle East. I recall back to 1979 when Georgians were held hostage in the American Embassy in Tehran for 444 days. I have a lot of experience with that part of the world and I think there are some things of which we should be reminded. This bill, the Burr bill that includes the veterans' benefits, also includes nuclear weapons sanctions on Iran and most of the provisions of the Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act. In particular, three things included are important to note. No. 1, it reimposes existing sanctions suspended under the interim agreement if Iran cheats on its commitment, drags its feet in negotiations, or threatens the West with long-range missiles or terrorism. No. 2, it ensures the final agreement must require Iran to dismantle its illicit nuclear infrastructure to prevent Iran from being able to produce nuclear weapons. No. 3, it threatens to impose additional economic sanctions in the future should Iran cheat on its commitment or fail to agree to the final deal that dismantles its nuclear infrastructure. I have watched the television set. I have seen the international reports. I have listened to what the Iranians are saying since we have had this interim agreement, and here is what it says: Iranian President Hassan Rouhani pledged that under no circumstances--and that is a direct quote--would Iran agree to dismantle a single centrifuge in a final nuclear agreement. This is what he is saying now and we are talking about getting to a final agreement months from now. Second, during Iran's national day celebrations in which American flags were burned, Rouhani declared: ``We will permanently continue to progress our nuclear technology.'' Third, former Iranian top nuclear negotiator Hossein Mousavian told Iranian media in a recent interview that the Islamic Republic will never--I underscore never--agree to dismantle portions of its nuclear infrastructure. Iran nuclear negotiator Majid Takhte Ravanchi reiterated Iran would not accept the closure of ``any of its nuclear sites.'' Next, an Iran official on February 12 set aside the idea of potentially altering a nuclear reactor so that other nations would fear the production of atomic bomb fuel. Finally, Iran will determine its needs regarding uranium enrichment on its own, the country's chief nuclear scientist said on February 25, and will not--and I underscore not--accept foreign powers dictating its enrichment policy. Iran is advancing its nuclear ballistics testing system and it has fired nuclear missiles to test its capability. Iran has deployed two ships in the Atlantic as a show of force on the United States of America. They continue in every way possible to be a surrogate fighter in Syria, empowering the Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza, and they continue to cause the disturbances throughout the Middle East. Why should we not as a Congress of the United States, in talking about our veterans, include within that talk a clear shot across the bow to the Iranians that America will not stand for them laughing at us or poking their finger in our face when we talk about a nuclear-free Iran? We do not need a nuclear armed Iran in the Middle East for a plethora of reasons. Most importantly, if they get one, there will be a nuclear arms race in a very unstable part of the world. It is the home of terrorism. It is the home of the biggest fear the United States of America has, and our best ally, Israel, lies in the path of Iranian resistance. So it is important the sanctions be reinstated and that we have conditions on the Iranians so that if they violate their promises or they look the other way on their commitments or they do what they are saying on their own national television networks today, they understand there will be a consequence to their actions. I remember 1979. I remember when ``Nightline'' became a television show because for 444 days Americans were held hostage in Tehran. I remember that just the day before President Reagan was sworn in as President of the United States, President Carter finally negotiated a release of the hostages in Iran, for one simple reason: Iran knew that once President Carter was out of office and President Reagan came into office, he would follow through on what he said, and that is he would do whatever it took to free the hostages. There is only one thing the Iranians understand. They understand someone who will fight and stand up to them, someone who will take them on, and somebody who will not settle for their looking the other way on the agreement they made. It is critical and important the Senate of the United States send a clear message to the Iranians that we will not be lied to, we will not be misled, and we expect them to live up to the commitments they have promised to live up to. If they don't, there will be consequences for their actions. The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund are already pointing out that the economy of Iran is now improving, with the interim agreement we currently have. We have no certainty on a final agreement that is coming in the next few months. We have no certainty the Iranians are going to do what they say they are going to do anyway. If we sit here passively saying it will be all right, if we don't let them know there will be conditions if they violate the sanctions, if we don't let them know we mean business, then America will have turned its back on the most dangerous enemy we have, and that is the enemy of terrorism and the Islamic Republic of Iran. I appreciate our veterans and the sacrifice they have made to try and free us from terrorism. I appreciate the volunteers who have sacrificed their sacred treasure and their families and their own personal blood and their own personal life trying to defend America and liberate the people of Iraq and the people of Afghanistan. I don't want us to turn and leave the Middle East. I want to let the Middle East know, and its biggest ogre, the Nation of Iran, that we will not stand for a nuclear weapon in Iran. If they continue to try and progress toward that, there will be sanctions that will be crippling. America will not turn its back on Iran; we will stand toe to toe with them and say this will not stand. I commend Senator Burr for his leadership in including that in this portion of the veterans bill, as well as those members of the Foreign Relations Committee and the other 57 Members of the Senate who have signed the Iran sanctions bill. It is my hope and plea that sometime in the weeks ahead, before the Iranians think we have no teeth left at all, that we will do the right thing on the floor of the U.S. Senate and enhance the conditions of sanctions against the Nation of Iran if they lie to us or fail to keep the promises they have made in the interim agreement and the ultimate permanent agreement we make. Mr. President, I yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, as we leave Washington for about 10 days, I wish to leave some suggestions in President Obama's suggestion box. There has been a lot of commentary about income inequality, needing to raise the minimum wage, needing to create more jobs, and the President talked about doing these things with the stroke of a pen in his office because of an uncooperative legislative branch. I want to suggest four things the President himself could do to immediately initiate job creation, opportunity, and a more robust economy for the United States of America. First, trade promotion authority. The President said in his remarks in his State of the Union speech he was for trade promotion authority. We need him to get with the Democratic majority in the Senate to bring TPA to the floor of the Senate. A history lesson: In the 1990s, a Republican Congress gave Democratic President Bill Clinton trade promotion authority for fast track. America's exports and imports grew exponentially, jobs were created, and America became a robust trading partner around the world with countries all over the world. That has expired. We need to give it to President Obama. We have three pending opportunities: The Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, and the African Growth and Opportunity Act, all of which are pending negotiations between now and 2015, and all of which will generate jobs, trade, and opportunity for the United States of America. Please, Mr. President, demand from the Senate that you get TPA and you get it now. Secondly is Keystone. We have all heard a lot about Keystone, but I want to reiterate, now that the State Department has for the fifth time signed off on the Keystone Pipeline, why are we denying America the oil and petroleum it needs and instead acceding ourselves to the nation of China? America has the opportunity to become the most independent energy country in the world. It is critical the Keystone Pipeline be built to create jobs and to see that we continue to control the generation of petroleum and energy in our country and become a net seller rather than a gross importer, which we have been for many years in the past. The Keystone Pipeline makes sense for the unions, makes sense for business, makes sense to America, and America does a better job environmentally of treating petroleum and refining it than any country in the world, particularly China. It ought to come to America, and the President can do that with the stroke of a pen. Third, GSE reform. Our government-sponsored entities Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae continue to do business, but they languish from a lack of attention. We need to reform those two entities so we can have a robust housing market for a middle America. If you have enough money to pay cash for a house in America today, you can do that. If you are on the low end and want an FHA loan, you can get that. But if you are in middle America--if you are one of those Americans we all talk about wanting to help--there is not enough mortgage money available because there is no government-sponsored entity to guarantee the paper to guarantee the capital to flow into America. If you want to get the unemployment rate down from 6.4 to 5 percent, which all of us want, there is one way to do it; that is, bring back a robust housing market, which still does not exist in the United States today. Fourth, talk to Patty Murray and Tom Harkin. Tom Harkin is the chairman of our Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. Patty Murray is the chairman of the subcommittee I serve on in terms of labor, and let's get the Workforce Investment Act, which for 6 years has languished in terms of continuation and renewal, renewed and reauthorized. Let's get it done. The work is done. We are this close. We just need an impetus from the White House to tell the Congress to go ahead and get it done and send it. I appreciate what the President said he is going to do with Joe Biden. I think Joe Biden is a tremendous Vice President and he does a great job, but we don't need to recreate the wheel. Congress has done the work on WIA. It is time to pass it and it is time for the President to sign it. Tribute to Bobby Cox

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I want to pay tribute to a great Georgian, a personal friend of mine, and a great baseball player in the history of our country: Bobby Cox, No. 6, former third baseman for the New York Yankees, third baseman for the Atlanta Braves, manager of Toronto's Blue Jays when they won a World Series, and for 14 consecutive seasons he took the Atlanta Braves to a playoff. Five of those seasons he took them to the National League Championship and one of those seasons he took them to win the World Series against the Cleveland Indians. Bobby Cox was voted into Baseball's Hall of Fame and will be sworn in at Cooperstown, NY, on June 27 of this year. Bobby Cox is an icon in baseball and a greet human being. He set many records, such as the following: 2,085 victories with the Atlanta Braves, best in Braves history; overall record of 2,413 wins and 1,930 losses. The Braves won more games with Cox, 1,725 in a 19-season span, than any other team in baseball; 15 divisional crowns, 5 pennants, and he holds the record for the most ejections of any manager in the history of baseball. The reason that is a positive story is this: Bobby Cox fought for his players. He knew how to motivate a crowd, he knew how to get on an umpire's back, and he knew how to turn the team bench around. His 132nd ejection took place in November of 2007 during one of the playoff games when he went out and argued a third called strike against his star player Chipper Jones. Two innings later the Braves came back and rallied and won. In large measure, it was Bobby's fighting for his players that made the difference. But Bobby Cox also fights for Georgia. His work with the Dreams of Recovery Foundation, which Cindy Donald founded for those who are paraplegic and quadriplegic in Georgia, has been a miracle. Bobby gives his time and effort all the time to help those who are less fortunate. He also continues to help the Atlanta Braves, who will soon be moving from downtown Atlanta to my home county of Cobb County, in Marietta, GA. I pay tribute and give thanks to Bobby Cox for all he has given to our State and recognize him for the achievement of being sworn into Baseball's Hall of Fame in Cooperstown. Best of luck, Bobby, for many more years to come. I yield the floor.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Madam President, I will be brief in our 1 minute just to express my thanks to Senator Menendez from New Jersey, as well as Senator Landrieu and Senator Vitter and all of those who came together to put together a great bill for the people of the United States of America for Federal flood insurance. It was a team effort, a bipartisan effort, an equally divided effort between Republicans and Democrats. I urge everybody to vote for the bill, and I again thank the Senator from New Jersey for his cooperation.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be recognized for 1 minute.

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Iowa for allowing me to jump in front of him. I commend the Senator from Louisiana and confirm everything she said. The vote tonight on the motion to proceed is important. This is an important debate not just for coastal States and not just for the coastline but for the entire United States, because the unintended consequences of Biggert-Waters as it goes into place are less insurance coverage for less and less Americans and more damage in case of another terrible storm such as Sandy or Katrina. I commend the distinguished Senator from Louisiana and the coalition she has worked with to bring this issue forward. I hope all of our colleagues will vote yes on the motion to proceed this evening. I yield the floor.

Mr. ISAKSON

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

Mr. ISAKSON. Madam President, I just had a conversation with the distinguished Senator from Louisiana with regard to the flood control bill. I am the Republican sponsor of that bill and am very adamantly in support of that bill passing. Senator Menendez is the principal sponsor from the Democratic Party. Senator Landrieu, myself, and Senators all over this country who have coastlines and rivers and flood issues are all very concerned. I want, as much as anybody in the world, to expedite that bill going from where it is now to the floor, so we can expedite its processing. I have been working with some who have objections to the bill or objections with part of the bill to get an agreement on amendments with the leadership on the Democratic side, so when we do that debate, we have a fair number of amendments that are equally divided in terms of the time and the vote threshold is at 51 votes. I am close to getting there, but I am not there yet. So if a unanimous consent were propounded right now, there would be an objection, maybe even from me to let everyone know I am for this bill. I want this bill to pass. But I want to make sure that those I have been working with to lift their holds are accommodated in terms of their opportunity to debate a germane amendment to the flood bill that is relevant to flood control. So I come to the floor for only the purpose of education, to let everybody know that I am the Republican sponsor and am deeply involved and engaged in the passage of this bill. I also have respect in regard to those who have differences of opinion or have some technical corrections they want to make. I want to work to get those incorporated into an agreement before we get a UC, so when we have the UC, we know what the amendments are, we know what we are going through, and we can expedite the handling of this legislation and deal with the problem that is affecting many homeowners all over the United States of America in flood map areas. I yield the floor.

Mr. ISAKSON. The Senator is correct. In fact, to be precise, there were seven concerns about the legislation when the first UC was propounded on our side, five of which involve potential amendments that need to be made to the bill or in their opinion need to be made. In the case of two of those, in working with the leadership on the Democratic side, they are acceptable and would be included in the base bill. There are three that would be allowed to be debated with the time equally divided on the floor. They have asked for a 51-vote threshold. There is the potential, as we all know, for a point of order. But amendments and points of order would be the only issues that I am aware of in all of those conversations. I continue to work at this very moment to get a final agreement so we can get a UC. But we are just not there quite yet. I am going to continue to try to work toward that goal.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, before I make my remarks, I commend the Senator from South Dakota and underscore what the Senator said regarding the SKILLS Act passed by the House of Representatives. I am the ranking member of the labor subcommittee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Six years ago the Workforce Investment Act expired in its authorization, and for 6 years it has languished in the bowels and in the heart of the Senate and the House of Representatives, going unauthorized. During that same 6-year period of time between 2008 and today, America has experienced terrible unemployment, terrible job loss, terrible increases in unemployment, and extensions of that unemployment. The Senator from South Dakota is exactly correct: If we were doing our job and reauthorizing programs in the law today--such as the Workforce Investment Act--and training people for the skills of the 21st century and the jobs of the 21st century, we wouldn't be talking about unemployment compensation, we wouldn't be talking about the great tragedies of America. We would be talking about America's greatest prosperity. So I commend the Senator from South Dakota for pointing out what is critically important for us to recognize as Members of the U.S. Congress. I come to the floor, though, to talk about the Affordable Care Act, I will tell a couple real-life stories which came to me by email. But before I do, my job is to do what the people of Georgia want me to do. I have office hours when I am home. I answer my own phone calls. I try to respond to the concerns they have. I try to see that people get referred to the right place. Since January 1, I have dealt with almost nothing but the Affordable Care Act--or ObamaCare--and the consequences of that act, and what effect it is having on the American people and the people of Georgia-- and, in particular, on the two great promises used on the floor of this Senate to sell that legislation to the American people: One, if you like your policy, you can keep it; and, if you like your doctor, you can keep him or her. Both were clear, unequivocal promises. I will tell two stories today that came to my attention which illustrate how it was not true. And these are just two of many stories. The first is from Jane. Congressman, This is not my story but my friend's story, Steve. . . . He has suffered with multiple myeloma for more than 10 years. This is a disease that usually kills within 5 years of being diagnosed. But with the excellent health care he has been able to receive through his health care program he has had access to the Mayo Clinic and a myriad of drugs. Now he has been told that his plan will be cancelled since the plan does not meet the minimum standards set forth in the

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. I yield back all time on the Republican side.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. ISAKSON. I ask unanimous consent to address the Senate as in morning business.

Mr. ISAKSON. Merry Christmas to the Presiding Officer and to all those who might be watching C-SPAN. We are getting close to the big holiday, and it is a time when I come to the well to pay tribute to a great newsman in Georgia who is retiring after 40 years in television on the Georgia beat: Paul Yates, with WAGA-TV, Fox 5, in Atlanta. He has served for 35 consecutive years at the same station. In fact, when I ran for Governor in Georgia in 1990 he covered that race. He has covered all of my Senate races, and he covered all of my legislative races. When we were in the legislature and in session, he covered every day of the Georgia legislature and has for over three decades. He has made a tremendous contribution to our State and the level, quality, and respect for the very best that journalism can expect. As Paul Yates retires from his service after years of service to the people of Georgia at WAGA-TV, and as one who he has covered--both good and bad--I wish to pay tribute to a great journalist, a great friend, and a man who has done a great service to the people of my State of Georgia. I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. ISAKSON

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

Mr. ISAKSON. I wish to thank the Senator from Washington for all of her hard work as chairman of the Budget Committee and on this bipartisan compromise on the Budget Act. I want to thank my colleague, Senator Chambliss of Georgia, for joining me to support the chairman in this effort. I support the bipartisan Budget Act because, while I believe the reforms included in the agreement are modest, they will move America in the right direction. One of the most essential components of the deal between Senators Murray and Ryan is the avoidance of another devastating round of sequestration aimed squarely at the national defense capabilities of our country. This agreement will help us avoid cuts that would have caused long-lasting damage to the readiness of our military and will help us provide the best support and tools possible for our men and women in uniform. While avoiding defense sequestration was key to gaining my support for this deal, I was concerned to learn that at the last minute disabled retirees and survivors were mistakenly included in the provision slowing the growth rate in terms of COLAs in the coming years. I believe this mistake must be corrected, and my continued support for the budget agreement is predicated on the Chairman's commitment to correcting this mistake. I publicly thank the chairman this morning for making that commitment in this colloquy. I know from my travels through the many military installations in Georgia with Senator Chambliss, and through my work on the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee with Senator Murray, that both Senators share my concern, and I look forward to working with the two of them to address this most important issue.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senator Chambliss in this sense-of-the-Senate resolution. It is absolutely important that we not disproportionately burden those who have served us and who have saved us, and our veterans have done both. As we deal with the difficult decisions in the years ahead on getting our debt and our deficit in order, it is important that we all share part of the burden, that we all put our shoulder to the yoke and we make sure we don't disproportionately put it on our veterans or on any segment of our society. We are all in this together. But, most importantly, we are all here today because of the sacrifice of our men and women in harm's way, and we cannot single them out for disproportionate savings in terms of the budget and the deficit. I commend Senator Chambliss on his leadership, and I am happy to join him in this resolution.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I see the distinguished Senator from Washington on the floor who I assume wishes to speak; if not, I ask to be recognized for up to 5 minutes and then I will yield to the distinguished Senator from Washington.

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, last Friday I left this Chamber with a folder containing most of the information from the Ryan-Murray comprehensive agreement on the budget. I left with the ringing of suggestions in my ear from some colleagues on the floor that it wasn't enough, it didn't do enough, and that we didn't need to pass it. But inside me I had that little voice of conscience all of us get from time to time that said the time was right to do what was right. So on the airplane back to Atlanta, I read the entire agreement. Then, when I spent the weekend at home while doing Christmas shopping, going out with grandchildren and talking to my wife, I also listened to the people of Georgia. I listened to what they said, and there were some remarkable things that happened this weekend. At church on Sunday following a cantata--and usually I am accosted at church by people who have all kinds of various suggestions about what I should or should not be doing--but I was remarkably surprised by how many people came up to me and said: Thank goodness you all have finally found an agreement with predictability on the spending in our Federal budget. I received not one negative comment. I left church, went to lunch, and then went shopping at the mall where I was stopped three or four times by people--some Democrats, some Republicans; some I knew, some I did not--again, the same comment: Finally, you guys have gotten your act together and you have gotten a bipartisan agreement on the budget. I went to a dinner party with a lot of partisan activists Sunday night. Although there was some grumbling about not getting this or that, there was some relief that we weren't going to go through what we went through on October 1 and the threats we have gone through in the past about government shutdowns and the failure of our government to function. Then I got on the plane to fly back to Washington yesterday morning and, once again, members of the military, people I did not know, people I do know; some with the bureaucracy, some not, all stopped and generally said the same thing: Finally, it is about time. So when I voted earlier today to shut off the debate or end the debate and bring to a final vote a vote on the bipartisan budget agreement, I voted in favor of it because it is the right thing to do at the right time. When the final vote comes in the next 30 hours, I will vote for it again. I want to give three precise reasons why. No. 1, I have been the voice of a biennial budget in this Congress for the last 15 years and in this Chamber for the last 9. I have talked about how we need to bring more predictability and more continuity to the budget process. I have spoken about how we can't continue to pass CR after CR after CR which, on its face, is an admission we cannot do our job. Jeanne Shaheen, the distinguished Democratic Senator from New Hampshire, and I have coauthored the biennial budget proposal. This is a biennial budget taking us through 2015, giving us predictability. That is something we need to take advantage of and build on into the future and replicate over and over as we bring more continuity to the budget process. No. 2, yes, I know there are a couple of pension tweaks and, yes, I know there are some savings in a couple of pension tweaks. But we are going to have to do a lot of tweaking in terms of long-term entitlements over the next few years if we are ever going to rein in the spending. Our biggest problem is not nearly as much as what we spend in discretionary spending in 1 year as the obligation and the mortgage we are accumulating over decades. This particular proposal will save $22.6 billion over the next decade but $100 billion over the decade to follow because it accumulates and it compounds and those savings on entitlement programs can make a tremendous difference. No. 3, and most important, we stumbled and fell last October when we decided to shut down the government rather than do our job. I commend Senator Murray and I commend Paul Ryan. I want to refer to my colleagues a conversation Paul Ryan and I had on Saturday via cell phone. I was at Mount Bethel Methodist Church in the gymnasium watching my 8-year-old granddaughter play basketball. He was in Wisconsin watching his daughter play basketball as well. He called me on my cell phone and we talked for about 15 minutes, not as much about the budget proposal as about my granddaughter and his daughter, recognizing that if we fulfill our responsibility as representatives of the American people in this Congress this year, if we begin the process of predictability in appropriations and budgeting, and if we can begin the process of recognizing our entitlements are running away from us and that our debt and deficit will kill us, maybe--just maybe--instead of being the first generation of American politicians to leave our children and grandchildren worse off, we will be the first generation of American politicians who returned to the sanity of fiscal soundness, biennial budgeting, and accountability in the way we do our business. I vote for that, and I will vote for the Ryan-Murray budget tomorrow when it comes to the floor of the Senate. I yield back the remainder of my time and defer to the Senator from Washington.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, the Affordable Care Act promised accessibility, affordability, and choice. As we heard from the stories told here tonight, it delivered on none of the above. I join Senator Lee, Senator Johnson, and the others to call on Congress to come together. Let's fix this flawed program before it is too late and before we destroy health care in the United States of America. I get constant communication from my State about the problems that are there. This one that I want to read from Beth Hatfield demonstrates the fear, confusion, and lack of accessibility the health care plan has at this time. I have tried many times over the past few weeks to purchase a health insurance plan for myself on the healthcare Web site. I finally was able to complete an application, but have not been able to choose a plan yet. Twice I asked questions on the ``live chat'' option, but they were not able to answer my questions, instead they [told me to make a long distance call to the help desk. I did, but I couldn't get an answer there either]. I was disappointed to find out that in order to ``compare plans'' you first needed to enroll. In what other shopping experience do you have to sign up before you actually shop? Now I saw on the news that my personal information may be compromised from the Web site. This makes me angry, especially since it seems they knew all along [this problem existed]. Is anyone going to be able to do anything about protecting my information? I need health insurance. I am not working and my COBRA policy is expensive [and runs out soon]. I need someone to help me, and I need them to help me now. Thank you for the opportunity to be heard. I yield.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. I thank the chairman, and I look forward to working with him. Access to Compounded Drugs

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I wish to thank Mr. Alexander for his work on this legislation. I am happy to see that all sides have been able to reach an agreement on clarifying the oversight of large compounding facilities, while also ensuring that patients continue to have access to customized medicines at their local pharmacy. I am grateful to the chairman and ranking member for clarifying that the intent of this legislation is to maintain current law with respect to patients' and physicians' access to drugs compounded for office use. I am also very encouraged that we are finally moving forward on creating a uniform national standard for the pharmaceutical supply chain, which will allow patients to have more confidence in the safety of the drugs they receive while also ensuring that national distributors and third- party logistics providers do not face the burden of dealing with a confusing and inconsistent patchwork of State-by-State rules. I would like to take a moment to discuss an issue that is not directly addressed in the bill before us. I have heard from my constituents that there are serious problems, similar to the ones we are seeking to address today, with the inappropriate compounding of animal drugs. As with human drugs, mass production of compounded animal drugs with inadequate safety standards has resulted in suffering and death. While the compounding of animal drugs according to a prescription from a veterinarian for an individual patient is legal, necessary, and appropriate, it is important to draw a line between compounding and manufacturing. I am especially troubled by reports that some entities characterizing themselves as ``compounding pharmacies'' are producing large quantities of animal drugs that are essentially copies of FDA- approved products. They are then mass-marketed as cheap alternatives to approved products, without being subject to any of the safety requirements and quality controls that manufacturers must comply with. As with human drugs, the FDA has had mixed success in taking enforcement action against questionable or abusive animal drug compounding practices. While I understand that animal drug compounding raises complicated issues that the bill before us does not address, I want to make it clear that the absence of animal drug provisions in this legislation does not constitute an endorsement of the status quo. I hope that in the months ahead, Congress can begin to investigate the issues surrounding animal drug compounding in more depth, with an eye toward spurring the FDA to make this a higher enforcement priority.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, we all know that over 5 million Americans have lost their health care and can't keep the health care they wanted. The untold tragedy is the millions and millions more who are being priced out of the market because of the increases in costs caused by ObamaCare. I will read an email from Rob and Jessica in Georgia that I think depicts exactly what that tragedy is. My husband lost a job in the recession. He could not find work, so we started our own business and have grown it over the last 3 years so that we are supporting ourselves with a modest income. We lost all of our savings, in the process of the recession, but we are proud from where we've come. We are in our 40's, healthy and self-insured. We just received a letter from our insurance company that our insurance will be going up 244 percent, from $203 a month to $495 a month. We can't believe that our government has made a decision that is costing us, and everyone we talk to, thousands of dollars. It is truly unbelievable. We have worked so hard to get where we are. We cannot afford this increase. ObamaCare is pricing the average American out of health care. I yield the floor.