Ron Johnson

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate then resume legislative session.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent that the bill be read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, April 20; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; further, that following leader remarks, the Senate resume consideration of S. 2012.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 2722 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. JOHNSON. I further ask unanimous consent that the bill be read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. JOHNSON

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Madam President, I was sitting in the chair and I was listening to----

Mr. JOHNSON. Very briefly, I was sitting in the chair and I was listening to the Senators from West Virginia and Virginia, and I am sure the Senator from Maine will also be talking about an area of agreement. The Senator from West Virginia talked about our mortgaging our children's future. That is the truth. I want to commend the Senators for highlighting this mortgaging of our children's future and the facts. I know a couple of Senators supported my amendment to the budget process, laying out the information. The only thing I want to chime in on is to lay out the truth of how severe this mortgaging of our children's future is. One of the things I did in the budget process was to lay out a 30-year deficit projection by CBO, putting it in dollar format. The fact of the matter is, according to CBO, over the next 30 years the projection deficit is $103 trillion--about $10 trillion over the next decade, $28 trillion in the second decade, and $65 trillion in the third decade. We got that in the budget process to lay it out over 30 years. In the budget process, we also asked CBO to put this in as a 1- page income statement, to lay out where that $103 trillion comes from. We have this 1-page income statement that lays out revenue and deficit. The first two lines are Social Security and Medicare. Over the next 30 years, there will be $14 trillion more in benefits paid out than is brought in by the payroll tax into Social Security. It is a $34 trillion deficit in Medicare. The remainder of that $103 trillion deficit is interest on the debt. I want to commend the Democratic colleagues here who are so concerned about the mortgage of our children's future and these added deficits from this tax extender package. It is a real concern. We have been trying to find the areas of agreement that unify us. This is certainly one of those things. We have to stop this process. I appreciate the Senator yielding time.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to pass S. 579, the Inspector General Empowerment Act of 2015. I want to thank Senator McCaskill for her hard work on this and her support and Senator Grassley for his many years as a real champion of this cause, as well as the other bipartisan cosponsors of this legislation and for the work their staff have done on this very important issue. In 1978 Congress created a crucial oversight partner for all of us-- inspectors general. They are independent watchdogs embedded in each agency, accountable only to Congress and the American people. That is crucial. They are the American people's eyes and ears, and they are our best partner in rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse. As an example, in fiscal year 2014 alone, inspectors general identified $45 billion in potential savings to the taxpayer. What this bill aims to do is to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse by increasing accountability and ensuring transparency. The bill exempts inspectors general from time-consuming and independence-threatening requirements such as the computer matching and paperwork reduction statutes. It allows inspectors general to compel the testimony of former agency employees or Federal contractors and grant recipients in some administrative misconduct or civil fraud cases. Too often we lose crucial information or have to end an investigation because the bad actor either leaves Federal employment or is a contractor or grantee and under current law cannot be subpoenaed. For example, the State Department inspector general oversees the $10.5 billion the agency obligates in grants every year yet cannot compel testimony of the grant recipients even in the event of suspected fraud or misconduct. He can only require current agency employees to speak to his team, which can result in an incomplete or one-sided investigation. If we care about oversight and accountability, inspectors general must be able to compel relevant testimony. In addition to these authorities, the bill requires inspectors general to publish reports within 3 days to ensure transparency and accountability. I want to spend a little bit of time on the transparency aspect of this. Like many places around the country, we have seen some real problems with the VA health care system. There was a scandal in the Tomah facility in Tomah, WI. The result of that tragedy was that people died. I will never forget a call that I made to the surviving daughter of Mr. Thomas Baer, a veteran who went to the Tomah facility seeking care with stroke-like symptoms. Thomas Baer sat in the waiting room for 2 or 3 hours. He suffered a couple of strokes and died. I talked to his surviving daughter, Candace Baer, and I will never forget the fact that she said to me: Senator, had I only known, had I only known there were problems with the Tomah VA health facility, I never would have taken my father there, and my father would be alive today. That is how important transparency and accountability is. That is what this bill restores to the inspectors general. Finally, the bill reiterates that inspectors general should have access to all agency documents necessary to do their job, unless Congress expressly denies that access by statute. The bill not only maintains current authorities for certain agency heads to keep inspector general work if it is necessary to preserve the country's national security interests, it actually enhances those authorities. In sum, this is a bipartisan commonsense cause. We all want inspectors general to be able to do their jobs well. That is why this bill was unanimously approved by my committee--the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. It is why it has 14 bipartisan cosponsors representing Committees of the Judiciary, Appropriations, Armed Services, Energy and Natural Resources, and the Senate Intelligence Committee. Even retired Senator John Glenn has asked my committee to take action to ensure inspectors general have access to documents. In the letter he wrote to my committee and to the House oversight committee, Senator Glenn says: ``The success of the IG Act is rooted in the principles on which the Act is grounded--independence, direct reporting to Congress, dedicated staff and resources, unrestricted access to agency records, subpoena power, special protections for agency employees who cooperate with the IG, and the ability to refer criminal matters to the Department of Justice without clearing such referrals through the agency.'' This is the heart of what the Inspector General Act asked for. This is what this bill restores. I cannot imagine anything controversial about wanting inspectors general to have access to the people and the documents they need to do their jobs. Americans deserve an accountable, transparent, and effective government. This is one tangible thing that we can do to help achieve that common goal. I urge my colleagues to pass S. 579 today. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record an excellent article that appeared in the New York Times, as well as the letter we received from Senator John Glenn.

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. JOHNSON. Will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. JOHNSON. Madam President, I want to rise and voice my disappointment. This is a very commonsense piece of legislation that has strong bipartisan support. Senator Grassley has worked tirelessly on this and certainly our committee has as well. We cannot get a simple, commonsense bipartisan piece of legislation passed by the Senate--and then the insult of not even hearing what the objection is. What is the objection to giving the inspectors general the tools they need to provide the accountability and the transparency to safeguard American taxpayer money? I cited my example of the Potomac Healthcare system, the Potomac VA health care system, where because an inspector general was not transparent because the VA inspector general held 140 reports on inspections and investigations, the family of Thomas Baer did not realize there were problems. They took their father to that health care facility and their father died of a stroke because of neglect. That is how important this is. Yet we cannot even hear the reason behind the objection as to why they would not allow this very commonsense piece of legislation to pass. This is very disappointing. With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, on June 15, 2009, President Obama went to the American Medical Association to sell his health care plan to the doctors and to the American people. President Obama addressed the doctors, and he said: I know that there are millions of Americans who are content with their health care coverage--they like their plan and, most importantly, they value their relationship with their doctor. They trust you. And that means no matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take that away, no matter what. Now, Mr. President, we all know, unfortunately, that promise has been broken. So many people who supported the bill made that similar promise. But PolitiFact called it something else; they called it 2013's ``Lie of the Year.'' My amendment would restore that promise. My amendment would keep that promise to the American people. I urge my colleagues, particularly those who made that promise--you have the opportunity to restore and convert that lie into a promise.

Mr. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendment in order to call up my amendment No. 2875.

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, at a townhall meeting in Green Bay, WI, on June 11, 2009, President Obama was trying to sell his health care law, and this is the claim he made. This is the quote, and this is the promise he made to the American public. He said: No matter how we reform health care, I intend to keep this promise: If you like your doctor, you'll be able to keep your doctor; if you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan. Less than a week later, in remarks to the American Medical Association, the Nation's largest association of medical doctors, the President said: I know that there are millions of Americans who are content with their health care coverage--they like their plan and, most importantly, they value the relationship with their doctor. They trust you. And that means that no matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take that away, no matter what. Now, a number of years have passed since President Obama made that promise. It wasn't just those two times that President Obama made that promise either. I think it has been documented that he made that promise to the American people over 30 times. Other supporters of the bill repeated that promise. It was a promise. It was a promise to the American public. It was a promise he knew would not be kept. It was a promise about which the supporters of the bill knew there was no way under ObamaCare that people would be able to keep their health care plan, that they would become able to keep and maintain the relationship with the doctor they trusted, knew, and had faith in. President Obama called it a promise. PolitiFact had another name for it. PolitiFact, in 2013, termed that promise its ``Lie of the Year.'' Think of that. The President of the United States was trying to sell a massive restructuring of a health care system--and that is what he was trying to do. He was trying to sell it. He was marketing a bill, a law, a concept, and in order to market that concept, President Obama and other supporters of the bill repeatedly made a promise that PolitiFact termed the ``Lie of the Year'' of 2013. I come from the private sector. It is incumbent on people in the private sector, when they are selling products to consumers, to tell the truth about the product. If you don't, you will be accused of consumer fraud. You can be sued. You can probably be sued out of existence. Imagine how the trial bar would treat a businessperson who tried to sell a product by making a promise that turned out to be 2013's ``Lie of the Year.'' I don't believe that business would be in business today. ObamaCare, at its heart, is a massive consumer fraud--a massive consumer fraud. So the purpose of my amendment has the purpose of a piece of legislation I introduced in 2013--the same thing. It is designed to honor the promise that President Obama made and that he did not keep--the promise that was made under ObamaCare that was not kept. The bill I introduced in 2013 was simply titled ``If You Like Your Health Care Plan, You Can Keep it Act.'' What is rather unique about my piece of legislation is that it used the exact same wording of ObamaCare. ObamaCare actually did have a section in it called a grandfather clause that purported to allow people to keep their health care and allowed them to maintain their relationship with their doctor if they liked their health care plan and their doctor. The problem is it was a grandfather clause that allowed you to keep your plan as long as you completely changed it. So what my bill in 2013 did was it just said: Listen, you can actually keep your health care plan and you don't have to change it. That is what my amendment does today. It restores that promise--the promise of President Obama and the supporters of ObamaCare. Let me use the real name: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Of the Orwellian-named laws that have been passed through this Chamber, this is probably the most Orwellian because the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act did neither, because that promise was not kept. It was a lie. Patients weren't protected. They lost their health care plan. We have all received letters from constituents, often heartbreaking letters. There was a couple in Wisconsin, they both had cancer. He is recovering from prostate cancer. She had stage IV lung cancer. They had health care in the State high-risk pool. They could afford it. It worked for them. They lost it because of ObamaCare. They called our office panicked--panicked--because they couldn't log on to healthcare.gov. They tried almost 40 times. They lost their health care plan. That promise was broken. I don't hear supporters of the law pointing to those individuals. So my amendment would restore the promise that if you had health care that you liked in 2013, insurance companies can offer those same plans again. They were far more affordable--far more affordable. As I just stated with that one little example, patient protection in the Affordable Care Act didn't protect patients, and it certainly hasn't been more affordable. We have also received hundreds of letters from people whose premiums have doubled, their out-of-pocket maximum has doubled and tripled. They can't even afford to use the health care they were able to secure because it has become so expensive. The reality of ObamaCare is it has been a miserable failure, and the promises made under it literally were abject lies. That is the reality. That is the very sad fact. I encourage all my colleagues to unanimously support the promise President Obama and the law's supporters made and vote for my amendment, which would allow Americans, if they like their health care plan, if they like their doctor, they actually will be able to keep it. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. JOHNSON. Madam President, I was listening to the good Senator from California use a couple words, obviously, calling the health care law the ``Affordable Care Act.'' To use the full name, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is a real Orwellian name. She used the word ``amazing'' about the act. She also accused Republicans of attacking women. Let me read an email I received from a 60-year-old woman in Spooner, WI, who describes an attack on her by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The email reads: I am a 60-year-old married female and have maintained an individual health insurance policy since retiring from teaching in June of 2012. Prior to the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, my monthly premium was $276.16 a month. On December 1, 2014, the premium increased by 23 percent to $339.68 to comply with the coverages of the Public Health Service act. That is a 23 percent increase. In August 2015, I received notification that my insurance plan was no longer available, and in order to comply with the Affordable Care Act I would have to have new coverage effective December 1, 2015, with an annual premium of $661.94, a 95 percent increase. Let me just review that. Prior to the Affordable Care Act, this 60- year-old woman in Spooner, WI, a retired teacher, was paying $276 per month for her health care, and she lost her health care plan. She could no longer buy that plan. Another plan was going to cost $661.94--a 95- percent increase in 1 year. Today, October 31, 2015, I received notification that the ACA requires all coverage to renew on January 1st of every year, and that effective January 1, 2016, the premium would be $786.68, an increase over the December premium which would be in effect for only 1 month of 19 percent. So she summarizes: The increase in my premium between November 2014 and January 2016 is $510, a 185 percent increase. She asked the very legitimate question of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. She asked: ``How is this affordable?'' Of course, the answer is, it is not, and she was not protected. She goes on: I have worked since I was age 16, and I have maintained my own health insurance either through my employer or individually. Now at age 60 I find that I can no longer afford the $9,440 annual premium for my health insurance. My husband and I are not wealthy. We have always lived modestly and saved as much as possible so we could live comfortably in our retirement. Now we are penalized for that savings, because our combined incomes, my husband is on Social Security and has income from a 401(k), we do not qualify for any financial assistance. She ends with a pretty simple sentence, a pretty simple request--a request that I am going to try to honor today. She says: ``Please work to repeal this unfair act.'' Let me review this one more time--again, the results, the attacks, the assault on our freedom caused by ObamaCare, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. This 60-year-old woman from Spooner, WI, prior to ObamaCare was paying $276 per month for her insurance. She could afford it. She liked her health care plan. She probably liked her doctors. Next year, she will be paying $786 per month, a 185-percent increase--actually 2.3 times higher than what she was paying prior to the Affordable Care Act. Again, she lost coverage she liked. That has been the result of ObamaCare for far too many Americans. So having listened to the Senator from California talk about how Republicans are attacking women, I think this email from a real person who has been damaged, harmed by ObamaCare in Spooner, WI--I would say the attack on women has come from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Earlier this morning I offered my amendment, and I would like to thank Senator Cory Gardner from Colorado for helping me offer it. It is a pretty simple amendment. It was modeled under the bill I introduced in 2013, the If You Like Your Health Plan, You Can Keep it Act. We have a similar type of amendment. It is designed to protect women who are under attack by ObamaCare, such as this 60-year-old woman from Spooner, WI, to restore their freedom--their choice--to be able to buy the health care they could afford, that suited their needs, that paid for medicine and health care with the doctor they trusted. That is what ObamaCare has taken away from the American public, from this 60-year-old woman from Spooner, WI. It has taken away that freedom. It has taken away that choice. It has cost her dearly. It has been an attack on that woman from Spooner, WI. That is the reality. I don't care how much lipstick you try to put on the pig we call ObamaCare, the reality of the situation is it has done great harm to real people, and it is past time--well past time--that we repeal it. I will be pleased to vote yes in honor of her request to please work to repair or to repeal this unfair act. I yield the floor.

Mr. JOHNSON. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. JOHNSON. The Senator mentioned my daughter, who, by the way, just blessed us with a granddaughter just 3 weeks ago. It is a very short story, if the Senator doesn't mind me telling it. It did motivate me to run. I think it illustrates how damaging ObamaCare has been and could be in the future. Our daughter Carey was born 32 years ago with a very serious congenital heart defect. Her aorta and pulmonary artery were reversed. The first day of life, there was an incredibly dedicated, incredibly skilled medical professional--a doctor who President Obama just weeks before had accused of looking to fee schedules--not that individual doctor but doctors in general--to see what they would be willing to charge to take out a set of tonsils or amputate a foot to make a few more bucks. That charge is so offensive on so many levels because those doctors came in on her first day of life at 1:30 in the morning and saved Carey's life. Then, 8 months later, when her heart was the size of a small plum, and with 7 hours of open-heart surgery, a team of incredibly dedicated medical professionals in 7 hours of open-heart surgery rebaffled the upper chamber of her heart. Her heart operates backwards today, but she is 32 years old. She is actually a nurse practitioner, practicing in the same hospital where her life was saved. Now she is a new mom, and she made me a new granddad. Our health care system wasn't perfect prior to ObamaCare, but it was still a marvel. I am so concerned about the loss of freedom. My wife and I just went to renew our health insurance policy. We are buying it in Wisconsin. We can't buy a policy that will pay for care outside of the network. Our freedoms are being restricted. If I had that health care today, would I be able to go to the specialist outside of our network and get that first-class care that saved my daughter's life? I am not so sure. That is why it is vital that we repeal ObamaCare and, at a minimum, vote for this amendment so that if you actually do like your health care plan, this amendment allows you to keep it. I appreciate the Senator for yielding and allowing me to tell that story.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Madam President, I rise today to pay tribute and to honor two great Americans, two wonderful people--Bart and Cherry Starr--for their numerous personal, professional, and charitable contributions to the Nation and the great State of Wisconsin. We are all aware of Bart's extraordinary contributions on the football field as quarterback for the Green Bay Packers. Drafted in the 17th round in 1956, Bart proceeded to win 5 world championships, including victories in the first 2 Super Bowls. He was named the Super Bowl's Most Valuable Player for both games, but ever humble, Bart gave full credit to his teammates and to legendary coach Vince Lombardi for the team's historic success. Over the years, Bart has received many honors. He was selected as a Pro Bowl Player four times and was named the NFL's Most Valuable Player in 1966. He was recognized in 1970 with the Gladiator of the Year Award for best exemplifying the character attributes of a citizen-athlete. And he has been inducted into multiple Halls of Fame: The Alabama Sports Hall of Fame in 1976, the Pro Football Hall of Fame in 1977, and the Wisconsin Athletic Hall of Fame in 1981. Bart's football legacy goes beyond technical skill. His excellence in leadership and strength of character earned him the respect of his coaches, teammates, and fans worldwide. He continues to be lauded as an example throughout the NFL. Every year, the Bart Starr Award is presented to an NFL player who demonstrates leadership and integrity on the field and in his community. Bart considers his wife Cherry to be the most important member of the Starr family team. Cherry supported and inspired her husband as they raised their children, Bart Junior and Bret, and devoted herself to numerous charitable causes throughout their life together. Their gifts of time, financial support, and celebrity continue to be a part of a lifelong mission benefiting many charities and causes. At the height of his career with the Packers, Bart and Cherry cofounded Rawhide Boys Ranch, a home for at-risk boys. Over the years, the Rawhide Boys Ranch has grown into a campus comprised of seven boys homes, a state-of-the-art high school named in honor of Bart and Cherry Starr, and numerous work experience facilities that expose youth to a variety of trades. Bart and Cherry also served as honorary chairpersons for the Vince Lombardi Cancer Foundation for more than 44 years. Their work behind the scenes was central to raising more than $16 million for cancer research. In addition, Bart and Cherry have been longtime supporters of Cornerstone Schools of Alabama. Cornerstone offers a Christ-centered education committed to academic excellence for Birmingham's inner city children whose families have limited school choice. Finally, Cherry's passion for animals fuels their generous support over many years for the Greater Birmingham Humane Society. Bart and Cherry are very proud of their children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren, but the accomplishment they value most, that they cherish most, is their 60 years of loving marriage. I am honored to recognize Bart and Cherry Starr for their exemplary lives. May their humble leadership, sacrifice, and love for others serve as an inspiration for all of us. Madam President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. JOHNSON

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

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I rise today to urge passage of S. 579, the Inspector General Empowerment Act of 2015. I want to thank my friend, Senator Grassley, who just spoke, for his work on this bill and for his longstanding commitment and dedicated promotion of accountability and transparency for efficient government. It is an unfortunate reality that the executive branch today is more powerful, more expansive, and less transparent than it has ever been. Senator Grassley and I are privileged to be the chairmen of committees that have expansive authorities and responsibilities to oversee the executive branch and all of its programs. But we need help in our efforts. We are fortunate that Congress in 1978 created crucial partners for us: independent watchdogs embedded in each agency, accountable only to Congress and the American people. They are the American people's eyes and ears, and they are our best partner in rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse of taxpayers' hard-earned money. This bill is about increasing agency accountability and transparency. It exempts IGs from time-consuming and independence-threatening requirements such as the computer matching and paperwork reduction statutes. The bill also allows inspectors general, in limited circumstances, to compel the testimony of former agency employees or Federal contractors whose information they need to pursue cases of fraud and abuse. But the bill also ensures that inspectors general are made accountable to the public and to Congress. Earlier this year, I issued a subpoena to the inspector general of the Department of Veterans Affairs, in part to produce the over 100 reports the inspector general had completed but not made public. One report that the VA inspector general kept from the public was a report on dangerous overprescription of opiates at the Tomah VA Medical Center in Tomah, WI--practices that resulted in the death of at least one Wisconsin veteran. This is how important transparency is. The daughter of the Wisconsin veteran who died from substandard care at that facility told me that had she known about the practices at the facility--in other words, if the report had been made public--she never would have taken her father there, and he could be alive today. I want that to sink in. The bottom line is transparency and accountability in government can literally be a matter of life and death. The VA inspector general is not the only offender. In 2013 the Department of Interior Office of Inspector General closed over 400 investigations but released only 3 of those to the public. This should not happen. The public deserves transparency and accountability. An amendment that I offered in committee, and that was accepted unanimously, requires inspectors general to publicly post their work on their Web site within 3 days of providing the final report to the agency. So this bill will ensure that findings of misconduct, waste, and fraud are exposed to the public and to Congress. The public also deserves an inspector general that is independent. One of the greatest threats to inspector general independence is when the President fails to nominate a permanent inspector general and leaves an acting IG in place who wants the permanent job. In 2014, when I was ranking member of the Financial and Contracting Oversight Subcommittee, we found that the former acting inspector general for the Department of Homeland Security, Charles Edwards, was compromised because of his desire to curry favor with the administration to get the permanent inspector general's job. We found he changed and delayed findings of reports to protect senior officials. That type of behavior is completely unacceptable. In addition to using our powers as Members of Congress to call upon the President to nominate permanent inspectors general, as I have done for the Veterans Administration, this bill requires an independent study of problems with acting IGs and recommends ways to address them. We know that many agencies are not in the business of transparency, and they often try to restrict their inspector general's work. As Senator Grassley already explained so well, we shouldn't have to clarify what was meant when we said IGs shall have access to all their agency's documents so they can do their work. Nonetheless, this bill will make it even clearer that ``all'' really does mean all. This is a bipartisan cause. We want all inspectors general to be able to do their jobs well. That is why the substitute amendment I filed in September has 11 bipartisan cosponsors, spanning members of my committee, the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, the Judiciary Committee, the Armed Services Committee, and the Intelligence Committee. I want to thank my ranking member, Senator Tom Carper, for his support and the other cosponsors for their assistance in getting this bill passed. I urge my colleagues to support S. 579 and to support the work our IG partners do every day to try to keep our Nation safe, our agencies accountable, and our taxpayer dollars spent efficiently. I yield the floor.

Mr. JOHNSON

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to pay tribute to one of the finest among us, a young man from Wisconsin whose service to his country was cut short by tragedy in Afghanistan. SrA Quinn Lamar Johnson-Harris, a 21-year-old from Milwaukee, was among six airmen and five civilian passengers who lost their lives when a C-130 crashed on takeoff from Jalalabad Airfield in Afghanistan earlier this month. Every one of those individuals was a grave loss to our country. Every one deserves to be remembered and revered before the Senate. Today it is my solemn duty and particular honor to tell you about Airman Johnson-Harris. Quinn graduated from Homestead High School in Mequon, WI, in 2012. The very next year, he joined the Air Force. It was a foregone conclusion that he would serve his country long before that, however. His grandfather served in Vietnam. His oldest brother, Jeremy, is a proud marine. His other older brother, Lamar, graduated from West Point just last spring and is now proudly serving in the Army. His mother told the story about how her three sons--Quinn was only 2 years old at the time--saluted at the grave of their grandfather and vowed to serve their country. For men such as these, our Nation is eternally grateful. Quinn went to rebuild houses in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina while he was still in school. Later one of his comrades, a sergeant who served with him in the Air Force, said he was: ``the heart of the squadron'' and that ``He was the best of us.'' For 239 years, our service men and women have guarded our freedom, more than 42 million of them. Since the Revolutionary War, more than 1 million of those heroes have given their lives, including more than 27,000 sons and daughters of Wisconsin. Now Airman Johnson-Harris has been added to that terrible toll. His brothers, his sister Fatia, his parents Yvette and LaMar, and all his family and friends grieve their loss. Our hearts go out to them, and we pray that they will find comfort and peace. I saw the grief of Airman Johnson-Harris's family this past weekend during his funeral service at Christian Faith Fellowship Church in Milwaukee. I saw the respect they had for him and the honor granted him by a family who knows the meaning of earned honor. Quinn swore to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, to put his life on the line for the liberties we all enjoy. We must never take that type of dedication for granted. We owe him the honor of taking our own corresponding oath of duty as seriously as he took his. May God bless Airman Johnson-Harris's loved ones, may He guard all of those in our Armed Forces who defend our Nation's liberty, and may God bless America. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.