Amy Klobuchar

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I rise today to honor U.S. Air Force Maj. Adrianna Vorderbruggen, who was tragically killed in the line of duty 4 days before Christmas when a Taliban suicide bomber rammed his motorcycle carrying explosives into a joint NATO-Afghan patrol near Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan. She was the highest ranking military officer there who was killed. There were several others who tragically lost their lives as well. Today I had the honor of attending the major's funeral service at the Fort Myer Memorial Chapel. Senator Franken was also there. She was laid to rest with full military honors at the Arlington National Cemetery. She is survived by her wife Heather, her son Jacob, her father Joseph, and her brothers, Dan, John, and Chris. I will note that three of the four members of the family--since I was just talking about adoption--were, in fact, adopted. Adrianna was a native of my hometown of Plymouth, MN, where she attended my alma mater, Wayzata High School. She excelled in both academics and athletics and was a 3-year starter on the Wayzata High School women's soccer team. This is a very large suburban high school. The year she was a starter and captain, she led the team to the State championship. She was also the captain of the Wayzata High School hockey team. She went on to the U.S. Air Force Academy in Colorado and graduated in 2002. In her senior year, she led the women's rugby team to the national championship title. She was their cocaptain, so you can imagine. She was a starter on the soccer team and helped lead that team in high school to a State championship. She was the captain of the hockey team, which is a big deal in Minnesota, of a big high school, and she was also the cocaptain of the rugby team and helped lead that team to a national championship title in the Air Force. We can imagine the leadership Adrianna had shown through her life. She always loved sports--something that was talked about a lot today by her family. After graduating, she attended the Air Force Special Investigations Academy and was deployed to Iraq until 2005. In 2009 she was selected as an Air Force Institute of Technology student in forensic sciences and earned a master's degree in forensic sciences at George Washington University. In 2010 she became a special agent for the Air Force Office of Special Investigations, which investigates felony-level crimes committed by or against Air Force personnel in the United States and overseas. Major Vorderbruggen was also an outspoken opponent to the military's former don't ask, don't tell policy. She and Heather, an Air Force veteran, were among the first servicemembers to marry after the policy was rescinded in 2010. Adrianna chose to serve her country in spite of the military's policy and fought for reform rather than hiding her identity. As her older brother Chris said, ``She inspired us all, I think, by just being herself, and being proud to be who she was.'' Adrianna was known by her family and friends for her positive attitude and her infectious smile. At the service this morning, her dad remembered Adrianna's ability to remain upbeat even under challenging circumstances. And she loved their little boy, Jacob, who was there today with a loving family around him. Major Vorderbruggen will be remembered for the work she did in service to her country and the work she did to make sure all brave men and women in uniform receive the honor and the dignity they so rightfully deserve. I am proud to call Maj. Adrianna Vorderbruggen a daughter of Minnesota. She gave her life for a country she loves. Thank you. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

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

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Madam President, I rise today to call on the Senate and all of my colleagues to allow us to move forward on the nomination of Sam Heins of Minnesota to be the U.S. Ambassador to Norway. The U.S. Ambassador for Sweden has also been held up. Coming from the State of Iowa, which I believe is over 10 percent Scandinavian--over 300,000 people--I think the Presiding Officer understands the importance of our country actually having Ambassadors to these incredibly important allies and nations. It has now been 836 days since there was last a confirmed Ambassador to Norway, one of our most important European allies. Part of this situation was caused by a different nominee who has some issues with the committee and with other Senators. That person has now been replaced, and it has been 166 days since a new nominee went through the Foreign Relations Committee. Mr. Heins was approved by a voice vote, without any controversy, as was the Ambassador to Sweden. I thank Senators Corker and Cardin and Senators McConnell and Reid for their help in trying to get this through. Unfortunately, these nominations are now being held up by Senator Cruz. Based on my discussions with him, it is not because of the qualifications of these nominees; it is related to, I suppose, other issues. Yet, I note for those Scandinavians out there, Senator Cruz has allowed votes on Ambassadors to other countries. We have Ambassadors in France, in England, in nearly every European nation, but not these two Scandinavian countries. Perhaps people don't understand the importance of these nations because they just think these people wear sweaters all the time. I don't know what they think of Norway and Sweden, but, in fact, Senator Cruz should understand that they are two of our best allies. Norway is one of our country's strongest and most dependable allies. I will speak more about Sweden at another time. I plan to take to the floor repeatedly in the next month to talk about the importance of these allies and to ask Senator Cruz what he does not understand, that these are important allies. Norway was a founding member of the NATO Alliance, and its military has participated in operations with the United States in the Balkans and Afghanistan. Norwegians work alongside Americans in standing up to Russia's provocations in Ukraine, in countering ISIS and the spread of violent extremism, and in strengthening regional cooperation in the Arctic. Norway has been especially strong on the issue of the Ukraine and on the issue with Russia. I know the Presiding Officer, with her background in the military, understands how important that is, and certainly my colleagues across the aisle understand how important it is to have allies that will stand up to Russia. In addition, Norway is an important economic partner. In a letter sent this July by the American Chamber of Commerce in Norway, Norway ``represented the 5th fastest growing source of foreign direct investment in the United States between 2009-2013 and is the 12th largest source of foreign direct investment in the United States overall.'' Right now, the United States of America for over 700 days has said to one of the top investors in our country, one of our best allies in security, ``Sorry. You don't rate getting an ambassador.'' There are also over 300 American companies with a presence in Norway, including 3M of Minnesota, Eli Lilly, General Electric, IBM, McDonald's, and so many others. In October Norway reiterated its commitment to Lockheed Martin with the purchase of an additional 22 F-35s. These Lockheed Martin warplanes will be built at a facility in Fort Worth, TX. I have called this to Senator Cruz's attention. In fact, this is an enormous purchase, the biggest purchase made in the history of the country of Norway. These companies, however, are hindered without a strong ambassador to help facilitate and strengthen economic ties between our two countries. Norway is also playing an important role in addressing the Syrian refugee crisis. Norway has a proud history of providing support to those fleeing conflict. It expects to take in as many as 25,000 refugees this year and has already provided millions of dollars to Greece to help that country respond to the influx of refugees seeking a way to enter Europe. Norway is basically on the frontline of the refugee crisis. All of us on both sides of the aisle have talked about the importance of a strong Europe during this very difficult time. Yet, right now we have no Ambassadors in two of the countries on the frontline involved in these refugee crises, and those are Sweden and Norway. Norway deserves a U.S. Ambassador who understands the country and is deeply committed to the relationship. I believe Mr. Heins is the right person for the job. No one has seriously questioned his qualifications for the job. As a Senator from the State that is home to more people--more than 800,000--of Norwegian heritage than anywhere except Norway itself, I think it is only fitting that the nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to Norway hail from Minnesota. Of course, there is much more to Sam Heins than his Minnesota heritage. In addition to being an accomplished lawyer, he has demonstrated his devotion to and leadership in the cause of advancing human rights. He founded, organized, and served as the first board chair for the Minnesota Advocates for Human Rights, which monitors and responds to human rights abuses throughout the world. He also cofounded the Center for Victims of Torture, which provides services, research, and advocacy for victims of torture around the world, and continues to serve as a board member. This record of accomplishment is particularly appropriate for someone nominated to be our Ambassador to Norway. Norway has long been an international leader on human rights issues. Mr. Heins' extensive work on human rights and with nongovernmental organizations that support human rights will be extremely helpful in sustaining and building on the strong U.S.-Norweigian partnership in this area. Last year, as we know, Congress was able to find common ground on so many issues. We passed a budget bill, we passed a transportation bill, a historic amount of funding, an increase in funding. We got the bill done on sex trafficking that Senator Cornyn and I worked on so hard. I can go through a list of the work we did together across the aisle. When it comes to foreign relations, our country has always believed that a united front is most important on the world stage. We have a united front when it comes to the countries of Norway and Sweden. We understand they are our true allies. We have a united front on these two Ambassador nominees. They were noncontroversial. They went through the Foreign Relations Committee. Senator Corker and Senator Cardin have worked together to make sure they get to the floor, but right now Senator Cruz is holding up these nominees for reasons that are completely outside of the qualifications of the nominees. I can say this is not the way we should be conducting world business. I am focusing today on Norway. I will focus on Sweden in the future as I continue to give these speeches. I don't think we can take these countries lightly just because it is cold there and darker in the winter. These are incredibly important allies and trading partners. They deserve to be treated like other European nations. They deserve to have an ambassador from the United States of America. It is time to end this delay and do the work the Senate is supposed to do. Let's move ahead and work to confirm these qualified nominees to represent us abroad. One is a country in Europe that just bought 22 fighter planes from Lockheed Martin. If they had bought 22 fighter planes from the Presiding Officer's State, I believe the Presiding Officer would have looked at the fact that if it is a noncontroversial nominee to a country that invests in the United States of America, that is an ambassador we need to get confirmed, and we would get this done. I ask my colleagues to work with Senator Cruz. The hope is that given that we have seen no other opposition of any significance to these two nominees, we will be able to get this done. He has said to me personally that this is not about the qualifications of the nominees, it is simply other issues that I hope he can resolve within the Republican caucus and with us so we can move forward and so they are not held up any longer. Norway and Sweden deserve Ambassadors.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, when I was a prosecutor, we had one straightforward goal: Convict the guilty and protect the innocent. To me, that simple mission still holds true. We must make our world safer by rooting out evil in our midst, while still protecting the rights of people who mean no harm. Those 14 people in San Bernardino, that American aid worker killed in Mali, those innocent families whose plane exploded over Egypt, and those young people killed and maimed in Paris deserve nothing less. That means, of course, taking out evil at its roots, increasing our efforts, and leading an international coalition against ISIS, and it means keeping our homeland safe. Part of that is tightening the Visa Waiver Program, and some of it is the work that must be done on encryption. But there is one commonsense way to get at this terror that I join my colleagues in supporting today--commonsense action to close a dangerous loophole that allows suspected terrorists to illegally buy guns in the United States. Incredibly, current U.S. law does not prevent individuals who are on terror watch lists from purchasing guns. A total of 2,233 people on the watch list tried to buy guns in our country between 2004 and 2014, and more than 2,000--or 91 percent of them--cleared a background check according to the information from the Government Accountability Office. I am a cosponsor--and have been before these tragic events of the last few weeks--of Senator Feinstein's bill to close this loophole. During last week's budget debate, I joined 25 of my Senate colleagues in offering an amendment that would also have stopped these dangerous individuals from buying firearms and explosives. Passing legislation to ensure that suspected terrorists cannot buy guns has bipartisan support in the House of Representatives, where Republican Congressman Peter King of New York has long advocated for this change. As we work to fight terrorists abroad, as we work to stop the recruitment in our own country--which I know well from my own State of Minnesota, where we have over a dozen cases and indictments against those who were trying to go to fight with ISIS and others who were going to fight with al-Shabaab--we have been very aggressive in going after those cases as well as working to prevent recruitment from occurring in the first place. This is all a piece of a very difficult puzzle, but to close our eyes and say that people on a terror watch list can go out and buy a gun is wrong. We need to do everything we can to ensure that those suspected of terrorist activities cannot buy guns in the United States. I am hopeful the Senate can come together to advance this commonsense national security measure to keep lethal weapons out of the wrong hands. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 7 minutes. I understand that wasn't in the original request.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. OK, good. I wanted to get that on the record because I know he wanted to come to North Dakota, which is everyone's dream, and so Senator Blunt asked for some advice from me to go to the great State of North Dakota. Your child whom you adopted is Russian, and we have so many issues with some of these countries, from Russia to the Congo. I know families in Minnesota who have adopted children from Russia, and they were just ready to adopt the sibling. They met the brother or sister--and of course the kids know the brother or sister--and then the curtain was brought down, and those kids were literally pawns in a political game when Russia stopped all adoptions. Senator Blunt is hosting a meeting with the people involved in adoptions in the Congo. We have had a similar situation where the visas were pulled and the parents who visited these kids and are ready to adopt these kids haven't been able to do that. I wondered if Senator Blunt could comment on the situation with these countries and what the Senator thinks we can do.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Thank you. This is also very important in my State. As I mentioned, we have the highest rate of international adoptions in the country. We have families who have opened their hearts and their homes to kids from every country, including Vietnam, Guatemala, Nepal, and Haiti. In my background as county attorney, for 8 years I oversaw the lawyers who worked with foster care and adoptions. We made it a huge priority to try to speed up the process for kids to be adopted from foster care. Right now in our country nearly 400,000 children are living without permanent families in the foster care system. Over 100,000 of these children are eligible for adoption, but too many of them will languish for years in foster care--oftentimes with very good families for them, but obviously a permanent home is what you want. We talked about international adoptions around the world. There are estimated to be nearly 18 million orphans who have lost both parents and are living in orphanages or on the streets who want, again, a permanent home. Senator Blunt talked about some examples from his own State. One example is the Hatch family. Emerson Hatch was one of these orphaned children. They started the process to adopt her from India in 2000. Emerson was one of 300 kids living in an orphanage built to house 34 children. The Indian Government refused to release her, and the family had to endure a 2-year wait, an earthquake, and a contested election in India before they were finally able to get her out of India with 1 minute to spare before her passport expired. She was malnourished, 2 years old but only weighed 14 pounds and was in poor health. But with a lot of love and the help of the Adoption Medicine Clinic at the University of Minnesota, Emerson and the Hatch family are thriving. She is in high school, and the family is passionate about giving orphans permanent, loving homes. There are many things that this Senate can do. The first, as Senator Blunt explained, is leading efforts when countries put up barriers for no good reason. Obviously, sometimes you will have legal issues in countries with corruption or other reasons why there is a pause in adoptions. But when countries are putting up barriers for no good reasons and for reasons that are fairly transparent, we must lead and work with other Senators across the aisle to get this done. The second is legislation. We have had a number of successful bills passed in the Senate. The bill I am probably proudest of is something that I did with Senator Sessions and Senator Inhofe, which was to allow older siblings to come in internationally when a younger sibling had been adopted. What was happening is kids would turn 17 after holding the family together as the oldest sibling, and then they would no longer be eligible for adoption. We had a family out of the Philippines with nine children, and the oldest two kids helped hold them together in an orphanage and then they turned too old to be adopted. That family I will never forget. The Merkourises came to me and said: Well, we have these choices. We can adopt the seven kids and leave the two behind--it was like a ``Sophie's Choice''--or we can leave them all there because we want them to stay together or you can change the law. That was the discussion. So I worked with my colleagues. I will never forget. The Merkourises came with pictures of these children on their iPads and went around to the offices of House Members and Senators who were holding up the bill and showed them to their staff members. The staff members would call our staff crying and said: OK, well, we won't hold it up anymore. And we were able to get that passed. To Senator Blunt, I was able to be with that family in their home, a farmhouse that they have expanded. It was like a Philippine version of ``The Sound of Music.'' They are an incredible family. I just talked to them a few months ago, and they are doing very well. This is, I would argue to our colleagues, a bipartisan area in Congress. It is something we can do across the aisle, but it is also something where we can make significant difference--not just in one family's life but in many, many families' lives. I thank the Senator for his work and his continued leadership in this area.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Thank you. As you know, our work is never done. We have a number of bills out there for which we have bipartisan support and that we are going to work on. I think my last statement would be that our kids deserve so much more than just a roof over their heads and a bed to sleep in. Each and every child deserves a loving home, a nurturing family, and a brighter future. That is what National Adoption Month is all about, and that is why Senator Blunt and I are on the floor today. That is why all of us have a responsibility to carry on this torch and to keep fighting for these children. I thank Senator Blunt. I yield the floor.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I actually would have a question, first, of Senator Blunt, because I know he is the parent of an adopted child from Russia. I heard a rumor they are traveling to every State in the Union; is that correct?

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I ask to speak on one other subject briefly for 2 minutes.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I rise today to express my concern that the Department of Veterans Affairs chose to issue performance bonuses to senior executives, including the director of the St. Paul Regional Office of the Veterans Benefits Administration, despite recent revelations of improper and dishonest conduct. According to a report released by the VA's Office of the Inspector General in September, two VBA executives used their positions to assign themselves to different jobs that involve fewer responsibilities while maintaining their higher salaries. They actually assigned themselves to a different job where they had to work less and then kept their high salaries. One of them was a woman named Kim Graves, the director of the Veterans Benefits Administration St. Paul Regional Office since October 2014. The inspector general found that Ms. Graves used her influence as director of the VBA's Eastern Area Office to compel the relocation of the previous St. Paul office director. So she moved that person and then moved herself into the job. She then proceeded to submit her own name for consideration and fill the vacancy that she had just created. Taking on the job of directing the St. Paul Regional Office was actually a step down in responsibility for Ms. Graves. In the inspector general's words, she ``went from being responsible for oversight of 16 [regional offices] to being responsible for only 1 [regional office],'' but she kept her Senior Executive Service salary of $173,949 per year. She also received over $129,000 in relocation expenses. In spite of this behavior, Ms. Graves received an $8,687 performance bonus this year. The St. Cloud VA health care system chief of staff, Susan Markstrom, received a performance bonus as well the same year she was reported with some mismanagement issues. A chief of staff collecting bonuses while running off nurses and doctors and a senior executive using her position to push out one of her colleagues and give herself a plum assignment with fewer responsibilities but the same high salary are the kinds of actions that create a breach of trust. I am generally proud of Veterans Affairs. We obviously have issues in our health system with backlogs and other problems, but there are a lot of hard-working people who work in Veterans Affairs who should be lauded for that work because our veterans deserve nothing but the best. But in this case, I thank the inspector general for being willing to look into this difficult case and shedding light on what has been happening. The conduct is unacceptable and further erodes trust. It is commendable that the VA inspector general took action by referring these two cases to the U.S. attorney for possible criminal prosecution. The VA needs to do right by our veterans and taxpayers by holding bad actors accountable and implementing reforms to prevent exploitation such as this from ever happening again. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I rise today to join all of our Senate colleagues in sending our deepest condolences to the families and loved ones of the victims in the attacks in Paris. Our hearts go out to the people of France. The United States stands firmly and united in solidarity with France, just as France--our Nation's oldest ally--has stood in solidarity with us. We must work to find those responsible for those attacks and bring them to justice. We remain steadfast as a country, and talking to people in my own State, I know this. We remain steadfast in our resolve to defeat ISIS, to root out this evil. From those planning these attacks in Belgium to those training camps in Syria, our military--our strong and mighty U.S. military--has already provided critical leadership with France in escalating the airstrikes in Syria and Iraq, and we must continue to do that. In the coming months we must focus on building this international coalition against ISIS, as well as providing critical intelligence in going after these perpetrators. Just yesterday Russia announced that it was in fact a bomb that brought down the plane over Egypt. Not all the facts are known yet, but ISIS has claimed responsibility. There is no limit to what these people will do. That plane was filled with innocent families and children coming back from vacation, just as the concert hall in France was filled with young people there for the music. They now lie maimed in hospitals all over Paris or, worse, their families are burying them in the ground. What can our country do? First, we must have a unified agenda to keep America safe and to stand by our allies. We must do all we can to build this coalition and to fight this evil at its root with resolve. We have unprecedented technology that should allow us to fight this fight. We have biometrics. We have ways that we can assist other countries. Secondly, we must do all we can to enhance our own security. We know our first responders throughout the last decade have done amazing work in thwarting attacks. We must continue to support them. If we do more in terms of legislation, we must make sure that we are doing something that will actually make a difference. We are having a security briefing with all Senators tomorrow, and we must listen to our security and intelligence experts to make sure that what we are proposing will make a difference. Third, we must give our first responders and our military on the frontline the resources they need. I know Senators Shelby and Mikulski are working hard, with their counterparts in the House of Representatives, to craft a budget bill. We must take up that bill as soon as it is completed. Of course, we have had some positive success in reaching a budget that didn't make deep cuts into our military or our homeland security capabilities. That was positive. Now we must bring it home with the budget. The fourth and final action I will mention today as part of this unified agenda to keep our country safe and to support our allies is to make sure we have our own frontline positions filled. As was mentioned earlier, this includes the Treasury Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Crimes, a position that must be filled, and military positions, including positions within our own Army. We have a judiciary that has to take on these terrorism cases. I can't comment about what is going on in every jurisdiction in the country, but I know Minnesota has one of the highest caseloads. We have a well-qualified applicant named Wilhelmina Wright, a former prosecutor, who passed through the Judiciary Committee without dissent, thanks to the good work of the chair of this committee, Senator Grassley, and Senator Leahy. Her name is one that is coming up before the Senate. Given that we have 15 indictments out of Minnesota alone--and that number growing--against ISIS, home-grown terrorists, and people who were trying to fight for ISIS abroad and given that our great law enforcement in Minnesota on the Federal and the local level were able to track them down and our aggressive U.S. attorney's office was able to make the cases, we need judges to handle those cases. We have one of the highest caseloads already in the country. I appreciate the work of the Judiciary Committee, on a bipartisan basis, in bringing this nomination to the floor. It is one of several that need to get done. Again, these are frontline positions--frontline positions dealing directly with the terrorism that we are talking about. Finally, we have to fill the State Department positions that are open--USAID, which provides critical assistance to our allies and our friends that are taking on these fights. The fact that we don't have anyone confirmed in that position is very disturbing. We have someone I know Senator Corker is supporting that we would like to get through and we must get through--Ms. Smith. We also have open ambassador positions--again, noncontroversial nominees--in the European continent, in countries that have not had an ambassador for years. I bring up one nominee from the State of Minnesota, and that is for the country of Norway, which has been a critical ally. Norway is one of our country's strongest and most dependable international allies. It was a founding member of the NATO alliance, an ally we will be relying on heavily as we look at fighting ISIS. Its military has participated in operations with the United States in the Balkans and in Afghanistan. Norwegians have worked alongside Americans in standing up the Ukraine, and they have worked with us in countering ISIS. Yet we have not had an ambassador for over 2 years. I recognize part of this is because the initial nominee ended up withdrawing--someone put forward by this administration. That happened. Now we have a noncontroversial nominee, along with a nominee for the country of Sweden. The nominee for Norway, Sam Heins, from the State of Minnesota, has gotten through the Foreign Relations Committee and was approved by voice vote. No one raised any questions about the qualifications of Mr. Heins for this position. Given that Europe is on the frontline of these ISIS attacks, we must join with Europe and make sure that we not only have our military positions filled, our State Department positions filled, our USAID positions filled, and our judiciary at home with the nominees before the Senate so that we can have a strong, united front, but we also have to make sure we fill the positions for these ambassadors. Again, I am not pushing controversial nominees. These are people who will be serving in these positions for the remaining year. But I ask that the Senate take up these nominations, as well as get the budget done, which we are well on our way to do, as well as come together on commonsense solutions for our own security, as well as making sure that we put together and lead, in America and with our allies, an international coalition to root out ISIS. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, today I celebrate the 100th anniversary of Boy Scout Troop 283 of Wayzata, MN, which occurred on November 15, 2015. Troop 283 is the oldest continually chartered troop in the State and has counted thousands of Scouts as its members since its inception. The development of character, physical fitness, and civic engagement have always been central tenants of the Boy Scouts. The Scouts of Troop 283 epitomize these values and continue to learn the skills necessary to be compassionate, tolerant, and dynamic leaders. In fact, to date, 151 of Troop 283's Scouts have earned the rank of Eagle Scout, the highest rank attainable within the Boy Scouts. Each aspiring Eagle Scout must complete a demanding Eagle project that showcases their ability and willingness to serve their community. These Eagle projects, along with a myriad of other service projects completed by the Scouts of Troop 283, have demonstrated their positive impact to Wayzata and the surrounding community. I am confident that Troop 283 will continue to be a positive influence well into the future. I recognize Troop 283 for its 100 years of service to Wayzata and the great State of Minnesota. To the Scouts of Troop 283 and the family and friends that support them, thank you and congratulations on your 100th anniversary.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of reauthorizing the Ex-Im Bank. I know some of my colleagues were here earlier, and I wanted to join them, but I was at a hearing over in commerce. I do want to thank Senators Cantwell and Kirk for their leadership on this issue. I also want to thank my colleagues, Senators Heitkamp, Shaheen, Mikulski, and Boxer, who were on the floor today voicing their strong and continued support for the Ex-Im Bank. Yesterday, the House voted 313 to 118 to reauthorize the Export- Import Bank. That is a strong bipartisan vote that included a majority of Republicans. It included seven of the eight Members of the congressional delegation from the State of Minnesota, including several Republicans. The Ex-Im Bank also has bipartisan support here in the Senate, which has voted twice this year to reauthorize the Ex-Im Bank, both times with more than 60 votes. Now it is time for the Senate to take up this bill and vote to reauthorize the Ex-Im Bank with no further delay. This year, the Senate has been in the lead on this. We have shown the kind of bipartisan support that helped the House to get the numbers they needed, and now we must simply pass the bill. The Ex-Im Bank has been reauthorized 16 times in its 81-year history, every time with a broad bipartisan majority. As yesterday's House vote and previous votes in the Senate show, the Ex-Im Bank still has the support of a broad bipartisan majority. Since coming to the Senate, I have been working to boost America's ability to compete in the global economy. I serve on the President's Export Council. I believe America needs to be a country that once again thinks, invents things, and exports to the world. We like our financial industry--we have the sixth biggest bank in the country out of Minnesota--but we all know we can't simply rely on the financial industry to keep the economy going. The economy has to be a bread-and- butter economy, and that means making things, and that means exports. When 95 percent of the world's customers live outside of our borders, there is literally a world of opportunity out there for U.S. businesses. U.S. exports have helped expand our economy over the past 4 years, reaching an alltime high of $2.3 trillion, an increase of 34 percent since 2009 after inflation. We know there are about 85 credit export agencies in 60 other countries, including every exporting country in the world. Our businesses are competing against these foreign businesses, which are backed by their own countries' credit export programs and often receive other government subsidies. Why would we want to make it harder for our own companies to compete in a world where all the other exporting nations have an export-type bank financing authority? When our companies are competing against overseas companies for contracts, they need the Ex-Im Bank. In 2014, the Ex-Im Bank provided support for $27 billion worth of U.S. exports. This sounds like a lot, but in the same year China financed more than double that amount--$58 billion compared to $27 billion--and South Korea and Germany also provided more support for their exports. If we don't get this done, Mr. President, China will eat our lunch. If we want a level playing field for our businesses, we need to have the U.S. Ex-Im Bank open and running. Do you know what our companies find out right now? Well, the charter has lapsed. When these U.S. companies or our foreign competitors go to the Ex-Im Bank Web site, do you know what they see on the Web site? I will tell you. I went to the Web site and saw it myself. It says this: ``Due to a lapse in EXIM Bank's authority, as of July 1, 2015, the Bank is unable to process applications or engage in new business or other prohibited activities.'' Every one of our foreign competitors knows this is up on our own U.S. Web site. To me, this is about jobs. As the ranking member of the Joint Economic Committee, I know that in 2014 the Ex-Im Bank provided $20.5 billion in financing. That supported 164,000 jobs. I know there are hundreds of companies in Minnesota--I think the exact number is 170-- that use financing authority. The vast majority of them are small companies. These small business owners, like many small business owners all across the country, know it is essential for their ability to export. They can't have a full-time bank person in their small companies. They can't have a full-time expert on trade with various countries--Kazakhstan, you name it--all around the world. They need the help of the Ex-Im Bank to know how to get this financing. I visit all 87 counties in my State every year, and a lot of that time is spent visiting these small businesses. Even when I don't mean to find an Ex-Im-type business, I find one. I heard from Fastenal and Miller Ingenuity, both from Winona. I have heard from EJ Ajax Metalforming, a leader in workforce policies. So everywhere from Fastenal to PERMAC, an award-winning women-run manufacturer in Burnsville, I have found that Minnesota businesses get help from Ex-Im Bank. The time is here. We can't put it off any longer. Our colleagues in the House, despite the fact that they didn't even know if they had a Speaker for a number of weeks, were able to pass this bill. Now it is our turn. Let's get this done. I yield the floor.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Madam President, I rise today to join my colleagues in calling for commonsense action to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people who should not have guns, including domestic abusers, and to close loopholes in existing laws that are now being exploited by criminals who are prohibited by law from possessing guns. Like the Presiding Officer's State, my State is a big hunting State. We are proud of that tradition, so whenever I look at any of these proposals, I think: Would this somehow hurt my Uncle Dick in his deer stand? Would it do anything to take away the rights of those who hunt, the rights of legal gun owners? That is how I look at each proposal, and the proposals we are talking about today would not do that. I wouldn't be supporting them if I thought they did. We know that no single policy can prevent every tragedy that has been caused by gun violence, but there is one area--what I call the silent victims--the women and the children who are killed in their homes every single day due to acts of domestic violence. According to domestic violence experts, more than three women per day lose their lives to their partners. More than half of those are killed--are shot--with a gun. This means that thousands of women-- thousands and thousands of women in the United States--were murdered by an intimate partner using a gun between 2001 and 2012 alone. These crimes don't discriminate. They impact people across all backgrounds, ethnicities, and income levels. They are serious crimes, and the numbers tell the story of the work left to do. I am a former prosecutor. Before I came to the Senate, I spent 8 years running an office of 400 people. We made prosecuting felons in possession of guns one of our major priorities, and I am proud of the work we did. I will say that some of the disturbing cases that were murders, that were shootings, did not always involve felons, but they involved criminals. They involved people who, over a series of crimes, had racked up a number of convictions, maybe in the misdemeanor area, maybe for restraining orders and other things. I remember one case where a woman was shot to death by her boyfriend. He killed her and then killed himself while both of their children were still in the house. It was ultimately his 12-year-old daughter who went to the neighbors for help. The worst part of the story: It could have been prevented. In the 2 years leading up to the murder-suicide, the police had been called at least five times to resolve domestic disputes. Yet somehow this man managed to have a gun in his hands that day and kill his girlfriend. Consider the police officer who was called to a domestic scene. The guy there had mental health problems.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. The man there shot the police officer in the head-- shot him in the head. I was at that scene, and what I will never forget are the three little kids, including the little girl with a blue dress with stars all over it, going down the aisle of that church after being in that church a week before for a nativity play with her father. That is what we are talking about, and we are very glad that this proposal will be in the package of proposals along with the background check. I yield the floor.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. I ask unanimous consent for 30 more seconds.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I rise today to express my concern and disgust at recent revelations of improper and dishonest conduct by senior executives at the Department of Veterans Affairs, including the director of the St. Paul office of the Veterans Benefits Administration. According to a report released by the VA's Office of the Inspector General this week, two Veterans Benefits Administration executives used their positions to assign themselves to different jobs that involved fewer responsibilities while maintaining their high salaries. One of them has been the director of the VBA St. Paul regional office since October of 2014. The inspector general found that the St. Paul VBA director used her influence as director of the VBA Eastern Area Office to compel the relocation of the previous St. Paul office director. She then proceeded to submit her own name for consideration to fill the vacancy she herself had created. Taking on the job of directing the St. Paul regional office was actually a step down in responsibility for this administrator. In the inspector general's words, she ``went from being responsible for oversight of 16 [regional offices] to being responsible for only 1 [regional office].'' But she kept her previous senior executive service salary of $173,949 per year. She also received over $129,000 in relocation expenses. So look at this: She had a responsible job managing 16 regional offices. She created an opening by transferring the person under her. She took that opening and went from supervising 16 regional offices to supervising 1. Then she kept the same salary, going from 16 offices to 1 office, and then took $129,000 in relocation expenses. This is the kind of action that has created the breach of trust between our veterans and the departments that exist to serve their needs. There are so many people who have such good will who work at the Veterans' Administration, including in Minnesota, and there are so many deserving veterans who deserve their help. But to make this truly work, we have to show that the people at the top are accountable. What this director did was not responsible, it was not a good use of taxpayer money, and it certainly was not fair to our veterans. This is a senior executive who is supposed to be focused on ensuring that veterans are being served the way they deserve and who instead used her position to push out one of her colleagues and get herself a plum assignment where she would have fewer responsibilities but at the same time keep the same salary. This conduct is unacceptable. It erodes the public's trust in the VA. It is commendable that the VA inspector general took action by referring these two cases to the U.S. attorney for possible criminal prosecution. The VA needs to do right by our veterans and our taxpayers by holding bad actors accountable and implementing reforms to prevent exploitation such as this from ever happening again. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

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

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Madam President, I rise to speak about recent revelations that Volkswagen woefully deceived regulators and the general public to artificially lower emissions of its 2009 to 2015 Volkswagen and Audi diesel vehicles. These actions raise significant consumer, environmental, and public health concerns. According to the EPA's Notice of Violation of the Clean Air Act, Volkswagen used a sophisticated software algorithm on certain vehicles that detected when vehicles were undergoing emissions testing. This software--referred to as a ``defeat device''--allows vehicles to meet emissions standards during testing, but under normal driving situations, these same vehicles emit nitrogen oxides up to 40 times the allowable emissions standards. This is unbelievable. I think we can imagine that such technology exists, but I don't think we ever thought that one of our major international car companies would be alleged to have used it. So far approximately 482,000 diesel vehicles sold in the United States and 11 million cars worldwide have been affected. A deliberate attempt like this by a company to mislead regulators and the general public is completely unacceptable. This raises serious questions that need answers: Why did Volkswagen, for more than a year, claim that the discrepancies in the emissions tests and the levels on the road were a technical error? Who at Volkswagen signed off on the defeat device? Did executives at Volkswagen know these actions were put into place to deliberately deceive regulators and the general public? Does the EPA have the necessary testing systems in place to detect such devices that trick the software? Have other auto manufacturers of clean diesel vehicles been tampering with their software to get around emissions standards? How do we ensure that this never happens again? This is a matter of public trust. Consumers were lied to and sold a product under false pretenses. Those consumers who brought certain Volkswagen Jettas, Beetles, Passats, and certain Audis with 2-liter diesel engines believed they were purchasing a vehicle that would provide premium fuel economy and performance while also meeting strict emissions standards. Who wouldn't be enticed by these vehicles after they were named the ``Green Car of the Year'' and ``Eco-Friendly Car of the Year'' by national publications? We now know these consumers were duped and that they will now have to bring their vehicles under compliance to meet Federal emissions standards. Volkswagen will likely pay for the repairs but what about the costs of reduced fuel economy and lower resale values? Congress intentionally included strong enforceability elements into the Clean Air Act statute. Regulations promulgated under the Clean Air Act aimed to protect human health and the environment by reducing nitrogen oxide and other pollutants. Motor vehicles are the primary source of nitrogen oxide pollution from transportation. These highly reactive gases play a major role in atmospheric reactions that produce smog. That smog accelerates climate change and exacerbates respiratory diseases that harm human health, including asthma, which affects 23 million Americans, including 6 million children. That is why we have emissions standards. It is not just some far-off number that is put into place; it is to protect children from getting asthma; it is to protect the world from heating up; it is to ensure that we protect our environment for generations to come. The Clean Air Act requires automakers to certify to the EPA that their vehicles will meet applicable Federal emissions standards to control air pollution. Through this process, Volkswagen deceived regulators into believing these vehicles produced low emissions. Vehicles with the defeat device emit anywhere from 5 to 40 times more nitrogen oxide than allowed by law while on the road. If we pick a number in the middle of the range--let's say 20 times as much--it would mean that Volkswagen's fleet in the U.S. produces 46,657 more tons of harmful smog. Changes to the EPA's emissions standards testing process are needed as well. I have written to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy to express that concern. The EPA needs to explain why their systems did not detect this deceptive software and what changes the Agency will be making with their testing processes. I strongly urge the EPA to establish robust safeguards to prevent automakers from gaming the system and prevent this from happening again. There must also be a full investigation into Volkswagen's actions. The Department of Justice is conducting a criminal investigation into the company's actions, and I urge DOJ to leave no stone unturned in its investigation to determine how a company could have willfully deceived Federal regulators and the general public. Volkswagen must conduct a thorough and comprehensive public education campaign to ensure that all owners of these vehicles are made aware of the defect and are informed about where and when they can go to get their vehicle fixed. The Department of Transportation, which has expertise with vehicle recalls, should also play an active role. If we learned anything from the General Motors and Takata airbag recalls, it is that recalls need to be broad enough from the outset and cover affected vehicle models and years, the general public needs to know how and where to get their vehicle repaired, and automakers must have a system in place to make timely repairs with replacement parts that truly fix the problem. Other agencies, such as the Federal Trade Commission, should also take a serious look at how they can help in this process. As a member of both the Senate Commerce Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee, I believe that consumers must be protected. I also believe Volkswagen's competitors that actually follow the law should be able to play on an even playing field. Other car companies that follow the law did the right thing. They put the right systems in place, and they should not be penalized because one car company did this. They should have been able to play on an even playing field. If there is an uneven playing field, it hurts American employees, it hurts American companies, and mostly it hurts American consumers. The actions by Volkswagen to deliberately deceive consumers around the world about the emissions levels in their cars is fundamentally about a breach in trust. Consumers thought they were getting the same product that was being advertised, when what they were getting was a product that met those standards only when it was tested, only for 1 day, and only for the time of the emissions testing. As Federal agencies move forward with their investigation, it is critical that we get to the bottom of this to figure out how this happened, what the extent was, and if it is happening with any other automakers to ensure that what happened never happens again. Thank you, Madam President. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Madam President, I rise today to talk about a critical issue that I think the Pope's arrival today in Washington really highlights, and I am hopeful we will be addressing it in this Chamber. I wanted to join Senator Whitehouse yesterday. He has been an unwavering voice on the need for Congress to take legislative action to address climate change. He hit a milestone in May of this year by giving his 100th speech on the floor calling on his colleagues to act on climate change. He has also brought together a group of Senators to form a climate action task force, and I am proud to be a member of the group. I believe we need a strong energy agenda for America, one that recognizes the challenges of climate change and that empowers people to be part of the solution. The Pope has called climate change ``one of the principal challenges facing humanity in our day.'' He has gained international attention for his commitment to protecting our world and serving those in need. Thursday, when we have the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to hear from the Pope as he addresses Congress, I anticipate he will call on all Americans to come together to tackle many challenges, but among them is climate change. During my time in the Senate, we have made some progress on this issue. In 2008 we took action to raise gas mileage standards for cars for the first time in decades. We have also made energy efficiency improvements for consumer goods and have maintained tax credits for energy-efficient products and renewable sources. We passed farm bills in 2008 and again in 2014 with a large number of conservation, environment, and energy groups strongly supporting them. As a member of the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, I have ensured that the energy title promoted investment in the next generation of biofuels crops, which are important renewable sources of energy. Earlier this year, we passed the Energy Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015, bipartisan legislation sponsored by Senators Portman and Shaheen. It included the Water Heater Efficiency Act, which I worked on with Senator Hoeven. This bipartisan measure enabled rural electric co-ops to optimize their energy management through continued use of energy- efficient water heaters. It also included measures to encourage energy efficiency practices in office spaces. These achievements are thanks to a combination of many factors. It continues to be the case that we need bipartisanship to move sound energy policy forward. And while we have taken some action, there is so much more to be done. This summer, the Energy and Natural Resources Committee passed a bipartisan, comprehensive energy bill. I commend Chairwoman Murkowski for her tireless efforts and Senator Cantwell for her introduction today of the Energy bill--a bill I am a sponsor of--which sets a bar on comprehensive energy policy reform that would aggressively move our country forward in addressing climate change. Both of these pieces of legislation include the bill I have with Senator Hoeven, the Nonprofit Energy Efficiency Act, which would allow the nonprofit community to save energy and money through a retrofit program. During my time in the Senate, I have worked to find innovative solutions that move us forward. One example is this bill. Our bill empowers the nonprofit and faith communities to make energy efficiency improvements. It would help both our environment and our local communities by ensuring nonprofit organizations can benefit from policies that promote greater energy savings and efficiencies. Whether feeding the hungry, helping the sick, or mentoring youth, my State's nearly 7,000 nonprofit organizations work hard every day to make a difference in people's lives. Nonprofit organizations are at the heart of our country and serve millions of Americans every day. Houses of worship, hospitals, schools, youth centers, and other not-for-profit entities provide critical services and assistance to communities across the country, but like businesses they must count their pennies and operate on a budget. Right now, nonprofit organizations--which, by the way, are often in very old buildings, including churches, synagogues, mosques--cannot benefit from any of the energy efficiency programs available to regular businesses because these programs are provided in the form of tax credits, and because nonprofits are tax exempt they can't get these credits. That often leaves nonprofits with a difficult choice. They can either invest in energy efficiency projects or they can dedicate their very scarce resources to providing valuable resources to the community, but we know investing in energy efficiency improvements today can lead to savings over time that go beyond the cost of the initial investment. So our nonprofits find themselves asking this question: Should we help fewer people for a year or two in order to replace our heating system and then use the long-term savings to serve our community well into the future? That is not a choice they should have to make. Our bill provides $10 million each year for the next 5 years to create a pilot program at the U.S. Department of Energy that would help local nonprofit organizations make their buildings more energy efficient. The grants would promote energy efficiency in savings by helping to upgrade and retrofit old buildings as well as installing renewable energy generators and heaters. We worked to ensure that the grants will achieve a significant amount of energy savings and are done in a cost-effective manner. The grants would require a 50-percent match so that there is complete buy-in from nonprofits. This will be especially valuable to the many nonprofit organizations that work from older, less energy-efficient buildings. We are taking a fiscally responsible approach. Our amendment is fully offset. We have support from both sides of the aisle with not just Senator Hoeven and myself but Senators Stabenow, Risch, Schatz, Blunt, Mikulski, Whitehouse, and Udall. I am proud to say we have the support of many religious organizations and nonprofits, including the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops that has been a leading supporter of our efforts. They say the bill would enable them to reduce their operating costs, lessen impact on their environment, and bolster America's energy independence. The bill is now part of both the Energy Policy Modernization Act that recently passed in a bipartisan manner out of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, and it is also part of the bill Senator Cantwell introduced this morning. Although Senators may differ on the specific details of these two energy plans, I believe we can find broad agreement that energy efficiency must be a part of any energy plan. Energy efficiency is an issue we should be able to find common ground on. It is good for the economy, good for consumers, and good for the environment. I urge my fellow Senators to work together to keep taking real steps forward on meaningful energy legislation that does something about climate change. As we prepare to welcome Pope Francis to this Congress, it is time to pass legislation that will help nonprofits continue to serve our communities and conserve our natural resources for generations to come. I yield the floor.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I rise to speak today on another topic, and that is the reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank. Senator Cantwell is going to be here shortly, and I thank her for her strong leadership. We will also be hearing at some point from Senator McCaskill and Senator Heitkamp. This has been a bipartisan effort. I thank the other Senators who have joined in this fight--Senator Graham and Senator Kirk. The reason I am here today is to say that America needs to be a country that exports, a country that thinks, that invents, that builds things, and that exports to the world. When 95 percent of the world's customers live outside of our borders, there is literally a world of opportunity out there for U.S. businesses. We simply can't afford to pass this up. We know there are about 85 credit export agencies in over 60 other countries. So all of these other countries, over 60 countries--major developed nations--have an Ex-Im type bank. Our businesses in the United States are competing against companies in those countries, so when they are bidding against each other for a contract, the companies in the other countries can say: Well, I may not be a huge business, I am a small business, but I know I can get financing from my country's bank--whether they are in Germany or whether they are in China. Do you know what our companies have to say right now? Well, the Ex-Im Bank's charter has lapsed. We can't get financing. And if you don't think their competitors know this--their competitors know it. We have already heard that they have lost contracts because of this shortsightedness of letting the Ex-Im Bank lapse. So they are competing against these foreign businesses that are backed by other countries' credit export programs, and they often also receive government subsidies. So why, I ask, would we want to make it harder for our own companies to compete across the globe and create jobs right here at home? In 2014, the Ex-Im Bank provided support for $27 billion worth of U.S. exports. That sounds like a lot, but in the same year--are you ready for this?--China financed more than double that amount, $58 billion. So their Ex-Im type bank financed $58 billion, ours only did $27 billion, and now we are not doing anything. South Korea and Germany have already provided more support for their exports than we have in the United States of America. So if we don't get this done and reauthorize the Ex-Im Bank, countries like China are going to eat our lunch. That is why I am urging my colleagues to include the reauthorization of the Ex-Im Bank in the spending bills we must pass to keep the government open and running. If we want to level the playing field for our businesses, we need to have the U.S. Ex-Im Bank open and running too. This is about jobs. In June I led a meeting of the Steering and Outreach Committee on the importance of the Ex-Im Bank. Several of my colleagues were at that meeting, too, and I will tell you what we heard. We heard from small business owners from all over the country. They did not mince words. Frankly, they were furious and frustrated after watching some Members of Congress throw up roadblock after roadblock and refuse to do the commonsense thing--reauthorize the Ex-Im Bank. These small business owners, like the many small business owners I have met in my State, told me the Ex-Im Bank is essential for their ability to export. Many of these smaller businesses don't have an expert on every country in the world. They rely on the Ex-Im Bank to help them with that expertise, to get the financing. And what do they get now? This is what they get. This is what is on the Web site right now of the Ex-Im Bank: Due to a lapse in EXIM Bank's authority, as of July 1, 2015, the Bank is unable to process applications or engage in new business or other activities. For more information, please click here. Then you click here, and it says: To Customers and Stakeholders of the Export-Import Bank of the United States:-- This is the United States of America. It says-- Due to a lapse in our authority, as of midnight on June 30th the Export-Import Bank of the United States ceased processing new applications or engaging in new business. Last week, Congress adjourned for their August recess without reauthorizing EXIM. Both the Senate and the House of Representatives return to Washington on September 8th. This means that EXIM will focus on the management of our $107 billion portfolio . . . But they cannot do anything new. Guess who else is reading that. Our foreign competitors, companies and countries all over the world. They are able to show the people for whom they are bidding: Look what happens when you go to the Ex-Im type financing site in the United States. Guess what it says. It says: Sorry, we are lapsed; we can't do anything. That is what these companies from other countries are seeing. We heard from Boyle Energy Services in New Hampshire, Air Tractor in Texas, the Orbital Sciences Corporation in Virginia, and FirmGreen in California. Most were headed up by Republican CEOs. They all said the same thing--that Ex-Im Bank has been critical in building their businesses and supporting their ability to export all over the world. Many of them told us they would lose business, not be able to enter into contracts, and may even have to lay off workers if they lose the support of the Ex-Im Bank. And now it is not just the possibility of having to lay off workers; that is actually happening in our country due to this problem with the Ex-Im Bank. At the end of June when the Ex-Im Bank expired, there were nearly 200 transactions totaling over $9 billion in financing pending. Letting the Ex-Im Bank's charter lapse meant lost contracts and layoffs. It means European and Chinese workers will be doing the jobs Americans are now doing. My colleagues, I don't think we can wait any longer. I will put in the Record the evidence from my own State and what it has meant in my own State. Every year I visit all 87 counties in Minnesota and I meet with all kinds of small business owners. One thing that I find over and over is that these small businesses are exporting and many are using the Ex-Im Bank to provide them with the expertise they need to enter new markets all over the world and the vital loans, loan guarantees or credit insurance they need to access these markets. The list of Minnesota companies that have told me of their strong support for the Ex-Im Bank is long. Let me share a few examples. I have met with the people at Balzer--an agricultural equipment manufacturer based in Mountain Lake--a town of 2,000. They told me that they have grown their exports to about 15 percent of total sales with the help of the Ex-Im Bank. They export from Canada to Kazakhstan--from Japan to Australia--and now South Africa too. With the help of the Ex-Im Bank, Superior Industries in Morris has been able to export to Canada, Australia, Russia, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, and Brazil. I have heard from the Trade Acceptance Group in Edina which provides credit insurance to businesses that export. They rely on the Ex-Im Bank. I heard from Fastenal and Miller Ingenuity, both from Winona. They told me how the Ex-Im Bank helped them reach new markets in Mexico, Indonesia, and Africa. And the list goes on. The Ex-Im Bank was helping these small businesses from all over Minnesota and all over the country compete and export globally. These are success stories and we need more of them. There are success stories like this in every State. And these are the stories we want to hear-- not stories about losing jobs and business opportunities to Europe and China. I have given speeches on this before. We cannot wait any longer. We need to reauthorize the Ex-Im Bank now. I will end with this, as I see Senator Cantwell, our great leader on this, is in the Chamber. The Ex-Im Bank has been reauthorized 16 times in its 81-year history, every time with broad bipartisan majorities, and Ex-Im has the support this year. The Senate has voted twice with bipartisan support to reauthorize the Ex-Im Bank, and over 250 House Members have cosponsored bills supporting the Ex-Im Bank. The time is here. It is time to stop playing procedural games, get this reauthorized so our great U.S. companies no longer have to go to a Web site that says: Due to a lapse of authority, the Export-Import Bank of the United States is unable to process applications or engage in new business. We are all about new business in this country. That is what we have always been all about. So it is time to change that Web site, and we do it by reauthorizing Ex-Im. I yield the floor.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. No objection.