Patrick Leahy

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, the reason I did that--and I rarely disagree with my good friend from Wyoming; we are, after all, the only two Irish Italians in this body. But people are hurting. It is hard enough going to college, and cutting the Pell grant awards just adds to it. The student debt today exceeds one-half trillion dollars, and that is because of the erosion of Federal support. I am stating my point of order, standing with the middle class in this country, so their children and their families can be educated, and I am ready to vote.

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, the Senate, and Congress as a whole, best serves the American people when we reach real, bipartisan solutions. Today, the Senate will pass its third bipartisan appropriations package, completing Senate consideration of 9 of the 12 appropriations bills reported by the Senate Appropriations Committee and accounting for 87 percent of all discretionary spending. We are proving that when we put partisan politics aside, we can do the work of the American people. This progress would not have been possible without my dear friend, the chair of the Appropriations Committee, Senator Richard Shelby. Senator Shelby and I made a commitment, along with Leader McConnell and Leader Schumer, to only move forward on appropriations bills that have bipartisan support, are at spending levels agreed to in the bipartisan budget deal, and that reject poison pill riders and controversial authorizing language. This allowed us to complete our bills committee and pass three appropriations packages on the Senate floor. I am disappointed that House Republicans have thus far rejected this reasonable path in favor of partisan grandstanding by producing bills that have no chance of passing the Senate, but I remain hopeful that once they return from their 5-week recess, they will be ready to work with the Senate on real solutions for the American people and to pass these bills before the end of the fiscal year. The Senate approach is what this bill represents: real, bipartisan solutions for the American people. We adopted 52 amendments in a bipartisan managers' package, allowing input on the floor from Members outside of the Appropriations Committee on matters that are important to them and to their constituents. We adhered to the bipartisan budget agreement and turned those priorities into policy solutions. We make good on our promise to families to invest in access to higher education and child care. We make a second major investment in addressing the opioid crisis. Everyone in this Chamber has experienced the opioid crisis firsthand. Whether it is a friend, a family member or a loved one, no one has escaped the grips of this scourge, and we put the force of the United States Government behind the search for cures to diseases like Alzheimer's, cancer, and diabetes by increasing funding for the National Institutes of Health. This bill invests in our military and their families, allowing the men and women in our Armed Forces to carry out their missions safely and effectively. By investing in both our immediate national security needs and our long-term domestic needs, like education and health care, this package recognizes the deep ties that run between defense and non- defense priorities. Ask any military leader, and he will tell you an investment in education is an investment in national security. By combining these bills in one package, we increase the certainty that they will be enacted into law, on time, avoiding the waste and inefficiency produced by long-term continuing resolutions. I urge our House counterparts to commit, as we have, to producing a conference report that contains both bills so we can move swiftly toward final passage and address the devastating consequences of sequestration on both sides of the ledger. I remain hopeful that we can continue the bipartisan momentum we have built in the Senate into our conference negotiations with the House. I want to thank Senators Blunt, Durbin, and Murray for their hard work on these bills and, of course, Senator Shelby. I also want to thank the Majority staff, Shannon Hines, David Adkins, and Jonathan Graffeo, as well as the Defense and Labor-HHS subcommittee staffs, for their hard work and cooperation on this bill. And I want to thank my staff for their long hours over the last few weeks, Charles Kieffer, Chanda Betourney, Jessica Berry, Erik Raven, and Alex Keenan and all of the Defense and Labor-HHS subcommittee staff. This package, which represents 65 percent of all discretionary spending, will improve lives in every State, and I urge an aye vote. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a list of all Appropriations Committee staff, whose hard work made this bill happen, be printed in the Record.

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I yield back my time.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, last week, on August 16, more than 300 newspapers across the Nation published editorials giving voice and testament to the vital role of a free press in our American democracy. It is such a crucial requisite of democracy that this role--this right of a free people--is embedded in our Constitution. The words, the actions, and the service of the free American press are a daily counterpoint to the vile charges by many that the press is ``the enemy of the people''--a smear that is commonly used by despots in societies that do not have the freedoms that our Constitution is intended to ensure and protect. It is all too clear today that each new generation must renew the Nation's dedication to our founding principles and ideals. The Senate, on August 16, unanimously passed a resolution reaffirming the vital and indispensable role of the free press. I was proud to cosponsor that resolution. It is regrettable that such a resolution was even needed--or even timely. I am proud that several news organizations in Vermont participated on August 16 in publishing editorials about the importance of a free press. I call to the Senate's attention one of these, written by Steven Pappas and published in the Times Argus of Barre, VT. I ask unanimous consent that this editorial be printed in the Record.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Texas for his remarks. I do appreciate the encouragement he has given both Senator Shelby and me in getting the appropriations bills through. He has been here long enough. He knows this is the way the Senate should work. We have done it in a bipartisan way, and we are way ahead of where we have been at any time in the past 2 years. I also want to applaud the senior Senator from Maine. She sits on the Appropriations Committee. We have served together there throughout our careers, and she is a valuable member of that committee. She is one who has helped put together, with her Democratic counterpart, good legislation that is included. In fact, there was nearly a unanimous vote in the Appropriations Committee. Most of this has been either unanimous or virtually unanimous. I say that because some have felt that, in the Senate lately, you could not get a majority vote even to say the Sun rises in the East. But here we have been doing majority votes on things that involve everywhere from Alaska to Vermont. I am pleased with it. Nomination of Brett Kavanaugh Mr. President, I take the floor in my role as vice chairman of Appropriations in managing this bill, but I am going to digress, as others have, for a few minutes and speak about something else. We are now less than 2 weeks away from Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee. We are 2 weeks away, and according to the National Archives, the committee has received only 6 percent of his total White House records. This is virtually unprecedented--6 percent of his records and not a single one of the records we have received has been provided by the National Archives. That is because the Archives will not complete its review of the limited number of records requested by Chairman Grassley until October, which is a month after the majority leader intends to hold a final vote on Judge Kavanaugh. Actually, to date, every single record that we have received from the Judiciary Committee has been hand selected by a political lawyer representing President George W. Bush. He is a partisan lawyer who reported directly to Judge Kavanaugh in the Bush White House, a lawyer who also represents White House Counsel Don McGahn, Steve Bannon, and Reince Priebus in the Russia investigation. I mention this because he has been very selective in the very few things we have been allowed to see. I mention this because this is in stark contrast to past precedent. Let me talk about the vetting of Justice Kagan, who, like Judge Kavanaugh, had served in the White House prior to her nomination. I was chairman of the Judiciary Committee at that time. I worked hand in hand with then-Ranking Member Jeff Sessions to ensure that we received every document of interest to the committee. Certainly, on behalf of the Republicans, Senator Sessions demanded an awful lot of records, and I worked with him to get them. In fact, when we were 12 days away from Justice Kagan's hearing, we had already received a full 99 percent of her White House records--99 percent. I mention that because now, at the same time with Judge Kavanaugh, we are at 6 percent. The Republicans have allowed 6 percent, and the Democrats allowed 99 percent. Does this make the confirmation hearing a partisan joke? In fact, every single one of Justice Kagan's records was provided by the nonpartisan National Archives. The 6 percent of Judge Kavanaugh's records has been provided by a political, partisan, hyperconflicted attorney. I mean that just on the face of it, it does not pass the giggle test. The Democrats provided from the nonpartisan National Archives 99 percent of Justice Kagan's records. Here we are getting only 6 percent of Judge Kavanaugh's records, and they have been picked by a political, partisan attorney with hyperconflicts. The superficial vetting of Judge Kavanaugh is all the more troubling because there are still serious concerns about the last time he testified before the Senate. During his 2006 nomination hearing for the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, Judge Kavanaugh minimized his work on highly controversial issues in the Bush White House, including on detainee treatment and warrantless wiretapping. It is now clear that we will only know the full truth if we get his full record. With anything less, we will be, simply, rushing to a verdict before the trial. Based on the very limited documents they have allowed us to see, there is an additional reason to be concerned. The committee has received new evidence that sheds light on whether Judge Kavanaugh was truthful while under oath in 2006. Unfortunately, I cannot even describe these documents because they have kept them in a classified or confidential forum, and the American people cannot see them. That is because nearly two-thirds of the documents the Judiciary Committee has received have been designated as ``committee confidential'' by Chairman Grassley, following the request of the partisan attorney on whom the Senate is relying to do the job of the nonpartisan National Archives. To date, that means that two percent of Judge Kavanaugh's White House records have been made available to the American people--2 percent-- compared to 99 percent for Justice Kagan, and they have selected what that 2 percent is. Golly, what is in the other 98 percent they don't want us to see? I have served in this body for 44 years. I have been here for every Supreme Court nomination since John Paul Stevens. I have voted for a lot of Republicans and Democrats on the Supreme Court. For 20 years, I served as the chairman or as the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. In those 44 years, I can tell you, frankly, that the vetting of Judge Kavanaugh has been the most incomplete, most partisan, and least transparent of any Supreme Court nominee I have ever seen of either a Democratic or a Republican President. It has not been even close. I have taken the experience I have had here with Democrats and Republicans as President. In 44 years, I have never seen such incomplete, partisan, or nontransparent vetting. Yesterday, I met with Judge Kavanaugh--a very pleasant man. I had the opportunity to ask him about many issues, including about his work in the Bush White House. Following our meeting, I believe even more strongly that the documents he authored or contributed to during his 3 years as White House Staff Secretary should be released and made public now. What he wrote is far more important than what his personality might be. Let's find out what he wrote. That will tell us what kind of a Supreme Court Justice he would be apt to be. A vigilant review of the Supreme Court nominee's full record isn't an optional matter. It shouldn't be dependent upon which party controls the White House or the Senate. Again, in 44 years, I have seen very vigilant reviews of Supreme Court nominees by both Republicans and Democrats. That is the way it should be, and I have agreed with that every single time. Yet never, never have I seen something like this. Never, never have I seen one's record hidden the way this one has been. It is undeniable that documents of clear public interest are being hidden from the American people--documents that will shed light on both his views and on his fitness to serve on our Nation's highest Court. Wearing blinders in this moment is fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional obligation to provide advice and informed consent. The Senate is supposed to be the conscience of the Nation. It is a sad conscience. The Federal judiciary stands alone. Unlike in any other branch of our government, the Justices, for good reason, never face the scrutiny of the electorate. Once a Supreme Court Justice is confirmed, he or she will serve for life. Barring impeachment, which has happened just once in our Nation's history, they essentially serve with no oversight. The Senate has no second chance when it comes to vetting a nominee. We have to get this right. We can't have a vote now and 2 months from now get the records and say: Oh, golly gee, if we had known this, we would have voted differently. We have to have all of the records now and then vote. There is time to do so. The Senate should not be focused on getting Judge Kavanaugh confirmed by October 1--some artificial deadline. Instead, the Senate should be focused on doing its job. That requires allowing the National Archives to complete its review of Judge Kavanaugh's record as required by the Presidential Records Act. At a time when the President is facing unprecedented legal jeopardy, it would be an extraordinary disservice to the American people to break all precedence and confirm his selection to the Supreme Court without there being an actual review. Have the review. Then, every Senator--he or she--can make up his mind on how he is going to vote. Don't vote blindly without having all of the material. The fact that Judge Kavanaugh has a longer record than prior Supreme Court nominees--something the President was keenly aware of when he selected him--does not excuse the Senate from doing its job, because, if confirmed, he is going to shape the lives of all Americans for generations to come. If, when the National Archives completes its review in October we learn that we did not get it right, it will fall squarely on the shoulders of this body. If the Senators rush this and find out later that there was material there they should have seen, they will have absolutely no excuse whatsoever because they will have concurred in the rushing. We should set this partisan vetting aside. We should work together, as we have in the past, to actually vet Judge Kavanaugh's record in a way that honors our constitutional obligation--the job the American people sent us here to do. I feel honored to be here as a U.S. Senator from the State of Vermont. I do strongly believe, as I did when I first came here, that this body can be the conscience of the Nation. We aren't following our conscience if we don't do the real work to find out what we are voting on. We have voted on a lot of things. Some have been routine. This is not. This is to vote for a person who will serve on the U.S. Supreme Court long after most of us will have left this body. We owe it to all Americans--I don't care what their politics are or where they are from--to get it right. That is what our oath calls for. That is why we are here. I have voted more than all but three or four people in the history of this country. Every time I vote, I am hoping I am doing it right, and I try to do it in an informed way. I know we are going to go back now to the appropriations bills, but here is a case in which I think we have done things right. Senator Shelby is the chairman, and I am the vice chairman. It is one of only three committees that has a vice chairman. We have worked very closely together, and we have done it in a way to get bills through in a bipartisan fashion. We actually work the way the Senate did when I first came here, which is the way the Senate has worked under great leaders on the Democratic side, like Mike Mansfield, or on the Republican side, like Howard Baker, and we have gotten things done. I am proud of the Appropriations Committee, but I am concerned about the Judiciary Committee. I have had the privilege of serving on it for over 40 years and have had the privilege of being chairman and ranking member. Yet I have to say that it is not doing its job if it is not requiring all of the material to be here. On the Appropriations Committee, Senator Shelby and I work to make sure that everybody is heard and everybody has the material. We should be doing the same thing on the Judiciary Committee. I see the chairman of the committee is on the floor, and I have spoken on the matter on which I wanted to speak. I yield the floor.

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

Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, there have been a number of headline- grabbing days during the first 18 months of the Trump administration, and I think yesterday is going to rank among the most extraordinary. But for this Senator from Vermont, it has been the most troubling. The President of the United States was effectively identified by his long-time lawyer and confidant as an unindicted co-conspirator in their efforts to commit criminal campaign finance violations. If what they are saying is true, what his confidant is pleading guilty to is that then-Candidate Trump arranged payments to two women he had affairs with, in violation of Federal law, in order to keep those affairs hidden from the American people at a most critical time, days before the election. Further, last night, the lawyer for Mr. Cohen claimed that his client also has information relevant to whether President Trump had advance knowledge--and even supported--the hacking of Democratic electronic files. We know that he gave a speech at one point saying that if Russia is listening, they should hack. That crime, which we know was committed at the direction of Russian President Vladimir Putin, serves as a basis for Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation. Also yesterday, within minutes of Mr. Cohen's entering his guilty plea, a jury found the President's former campaign manager guilty of numerous tax and bank fraud charges. Paul Manafort will now face a separate trial concerning his work for a Putin-connected oligarch both in Ukraine and here at home. In this second trial, scheduled to begin next month, Mr. Manafort has been charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States, failing to register as a foreign agent, and money laundering, among other charges. The clouds of criminal conduct surrounding those close to the President are darkening. Directly or indirectly, his campaign manager, personal attorney, and multiple aides have now been swept up in the Special Counsel's investigation. This probe has resulted in numerous guilty pleas and 34 criminal indictments. And it is not complete. I have watched, both as a Senator and as a former prosecutor, and it is so troubling. I know one thing; it is crucial that the special counsel be permitted to complete his investigation and to do so without the daily--often hourly--interference from the President. During my four decades in the Senate, I have never before seen an investigation led by career, apolitical law enforcement officials so personally and publicly maligned by a politician--let alone by the President of the United States. No one is above the law, and the President should stop acting as though he is. I would also urge the Majority Leader to immediately bring the bipartisan legislation to protect the Special Counsel to the Floor. We passed this legislation out of the Senate Judiciary Committee with a bipartisan vote. Anyone who says that the President can be trusted not to undermine the Special Counsel has clearly not been paying attention. Think of all of the tweets he sent as the Manafort trial was going on. Do you think those weren't seen directly or indirectly by those involved in the trial? We know that the judge made clear his opposition to the prosecution, and the jury also had to listen to the President's tweets. Just think of what that does. It is equally critical that the Senate reassert its oversight responsibility over the Executive Branch--something for which we have advocated. If these were normal times, the Senate Judiciary Committee would immediately pursue an investigation. Indeed, the Judiciary Committee is uniquely situated to investigate the allegation raised by Mr. Cohen. The Committee has jurisdiction over our criminal laws, including our campaign finance laws. Mr. Cohen's lawyer has indicated that he is willing to testify before Congress without being granted immunity--pretty extraordinary. It is difficult to reconcile the Judiciary Committee's inaction here with one of the most critical constitutional crises we have seen-- certainly since I have been in the Senate, and I have been here for 44 years. It is difficult to reconcile the Judiciary Committee's inaction with its race to confirm President Trump's nominee to the Supreme Court. In fact, the timeline the Republicans are pursuing to consider Judge Kavanaugh is so aggressive that it will sideline the nonpartisan review of the nominee's record performed by the National Archives. That has occurred for every Supreme Court nominee since Watergate, whether Republican or Democratic. I mentioned earlier today that when I was chairman, Justice Kagan was up, and the Republicans asked for her records. We got 99 percent of them. I went to the Archives. I joined with the senior Republican, Jeff Sessions, on the Committee to request them. We got 99 percent of those records before the hearing. We have 6 percent of Judge Kavanaugh's records. And those were handpicked by a lawyer whose clients include, among others, Stephen Bannon and other very partisan clients. The Russia investigation is the most pressing national security investigation of our time. Here we have a powerful country--Russia-- that is working against us. We know it. We can just pick up the paper. Without going to any of the classified hearings that most of us have been to, we can read what is in the paper about the hacking Russia has done and the billions of dollars it has cost people and the hacking that continues to this moment against the United States. This is the Russia that the President publicly called upon during a campaign rally to hack his opponent's computers. We know from what we have seen and what our intelligence community has told us that they did try to influence the last election, and we do know they intend to try to influence the elections this year, not only in our country but in other countries. This is a major problem, and it is being ignored. I think history is going to judge all of us in the U.S. Senate very harshly if we collectively shrug our shoulders and disregard our constitutional responsibility to oversee the Executive Branch in this moment. We represent a coequal branch of government. It is time to act like it. Mr. President, I was going to suggest the absence of a quorum, but I see one of my distinguished colleagues on the floor, so I will simply yield the floor.

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, when Justice Kagan was up for nomination, I was chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. I, along with then Ranking Member Jeff Sessions, sent a letter saying that we needed all of her White House records. We received 99 percent of those records. Now for Judge Kavanaugh's nomination we are told, after being carefully selected, that we can only have 3 percent of his records. It is an interesting standard. Republicans want all of it when there is a Democratic President, for a woman who was nominated by a Democrat. Now, when the Republicans nominate this man, they say: We will selectively give you 3 percent. It is an interesting double standard. It makes me wonder what there is to hide in there. Why not take the time to see it all? If I am going to vote on a lifetime appointment--I voted for a lot of Republican nominees for the Supreme Court and other courts--I want to see the whole record. I don't want, a month after I voted, more to come out in the record and to think: Whoops, who knew about that? We had this happen with one judge already after they were confirmed to a lifetime appointment. The final records came out, and we found out what they did with issues of torture and other things. It was bad. Amendment No. 3993 to Amendment No. 3699 Mr. President, I have an amendment at the desk, and I ask unanimous consent that it be reported by number.

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, earlier I talked about what has happened on the Manafort and Cohen matters yesterday. I understand the great amount of consternation there is at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue. Having been a prosecutor, I can understand why there is consternation. I note for my colleagues that we passed in the Senate Judiciary Committee a bipartisan bill--Republican and Democrats voted for the bill--to protect the special prosecutor. There are those of us who are old enough to remember when Richard Nixon fired the special prosecutor in the Watergate matter and the great constitutional problems that followed. It was something the country suffered over for years, and we want to make sure we don't have another firing like we did in the Watergate matter. So we wrote this bill. Again, Republicans and Democrats voted for it. It could be brought up anytime by the leadership, if they wished. I am hoping that it will be brought up. I am hoping we can bring it to the floor and we can have a vote. I know we had a good debate--again, Republicans and Democrats--in the Judiciary Committee, and I would like to see it voted on. I notice we are at the hour of 3:30, and I know the Presiding Officer has a ruling to make, so I will withhold.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, several of the warring parties in the South Sudanese civil war, including President Kiir and the leader of the main opposition party, Riek Machar, recently signed a power-sharing deal to ostensibly bring to an end a conflict that has resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths and the largest refugee crisis in Africa. Today in South Sudan, there are nearly 200,000 people sheltering at UN peacekeeping bases, 4.5 million people have been forcibly displaced, and an estimated 7 million people are in need of humanitarian aid. Several ceasefires have been negotiated and broken by both sides since the conflict began in December 2013, and the United States has invested well over $3 billion in humanitarian aid to help the people of South Sudan who have been largely abandoned by their political leaders. Unfortunately, the viability of the recent power-sharing deal and the prospects for a broader peace agreement remain in question. What we do know is that decades of corruption, marginalization, political manipulation, and human rights atrocities led to the most recent iteration of catastrophic violence in South Sudan, and it will take decades for the country to fully recover, but there is at least one action that President Kiir should take today that would have immediate benefits: the release of all political prisoners, journalists, academics, and others who have been detained as a result of peacefully exercising their right to free expression. One such individual is Peter Biar Ajak. Mr. Ajak was resettled in Philadelphia in January 2001 as a teenage refugee of the Sudanese civil war and one of the 40,000 ``Lost Boys'' left homeless by that conflict. Remarkably, he went on to earn a master's degree from Harvard and is now a doctoral candidate at Cambridge. Mr. Ajak has been a courageous and vocal critic of the failed peace process in South Sudan, particularly the role of President Kiir and opposition leader Machar, who for years have put amassing wealth and power for themselves far above the welfare and rights of the South Sudanese people. It is this criticism that his supporters believe led to his arrest and imprisonment on July 28 by the South Sudan National Security Service, NSS. While the charges against him have not been publicly confirmed, Mr. Ajak is allegedly being charged with treason and other crimes against the state and has reportedly been denied access to a lawyer. Reports suggest he is one of several dozen detainees being held by the NSS at the infamous Blue House prison in Juba. Mr. Ajak's detention is consistent with a pattern of abuses by the NSS, which has been implicated in the arbitrary arrest and detention of journalists, national staff of the United Nations, academics, civil society activists, and young business leaders like Kerbino Wol; the forced disappearance of human rights lawyers and members of the political opposition, such as Dong Samuel Luak and Aggrey Idri, respectively; and other human rights violations and denials of due process. Although President Kiir has previously announced that he would release all political prisoners and his government has committed under a recent deal to release detainees, human rights monitors continue to report that dozens of people remain detained without charge at the Blue House and other detention sites in the capital. No matter what documents are signed to move the country beyond its civil war, true peace and stability will not be achieved if the government continues to repress free speech and arrest, detain, and forcibly disappear journalists, politicians, academics, and members of civil society. If and when the U.S. government is again called on to support the government of South Sudan and to help rebuild its security services, their actions in this conflict--and their treatment of people like Peter Biar Ajak--will not be forgotten. I urge all Senators to join me in calling for the immediate release of Mr. Ajak and other prisoners of conscience and accountability for the perpetrators of such abuses.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, on behalf of all Vermonters, I would like to honor Bob Foster of Middlebury, VT, who this month will be inducted into the Vermont Agricultural Hall of Fame in recognition of more than 30 years of outstanding service to Vermont agriculture. For as long as I have served in this body and especially in my work on the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, I have often looked to Bob for input and advice. In addition being a partner in an iconic fifth-generation Vermont dairy, Bob's leadership in Vermont has been extraordinary. During his 37 years of service on the Agri-Mark Dairy Cooperative Board, the co-op has become a critical resource for many Vermont dairy farms and a mainstay of the Vermont economy. Bob is an innovator, taking risks and leading the way in Vermont for bio- digesters and sustainable value-added products and working nationally on renewable energy as an adviser to the 25X25 effort. The extent of his service on local, State, and national leadership teams is exceptional and is further described in his well-deserved nomination to the Vermont Agricultural Hall of Fame, I ask unanimous consent that the nomination be printed in the Record.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, on behalf of all Vermonters, I want to honor Beth Kennett of Rochester, VT, who this month will be inducted into the Vermont Agricultural Hall of Fame in recognition of her multifaceted leadership of agriculture in the Green Mountain State. Beth, with her husband, Bob, and their family, have for many years run a multigenerational diversified dairy farm in the White River Valley. I have often looked to Beth for her advice and insights into Vermont agriculture. She has been a strong leader on many fronts, including serving on the USDA Farm Service Agency State Committee, as founding member of the Connecticut River Watershed Farmers Alliance, as founding member of the White River Partnership, and especially as a leader in agritourism in Vermont, nationally and internationally. Beth's induction into the Vermont Agricultural Hall of Fame is well earned, and I ask unanimous consent that her nomination for this honor be printed in the Record.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, on behalf of all Vermonters, I want to honor Clara Ayer of East Montpelier, VT, who will this month be inducted into the Vermont Agricultural Hall of Fame, in recognition of her status as an emerging leader in the Vermont agriculture community. Clara is a proud 2010 alumna of Cornell University with a degree dairy science who, after graduation, went to work for Yankee Farm Credit. She began working full time at Fairmount Farm, a third-generation dairy farm, alongside her brother Ricky in 2014. Clara is married to Dana Ayer, and the couple has a little boy, Carson. She is a well-respected advocate for agriculture, both in Montpelier and Washington, DC. In addition to her membership in several dairy-related organizations, Clara also promotes dairy to young people, through a ``Life on the Farm'' summer camp, through educational field trips by the local elementary school, and through the formation of a Dairy 4-H Club. As Clara has provided exceptional service to the Vermont dairy community, further described in her well-deserved nomination to the Vermont Agricultural Hall of Fame, I ask unanimous consent that the citation of her nomination be printed in the Record.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, on behalf of all Vermonters, I would like to honor Enid Wonnacott of Huntington, VT, who this month will be inducted into the Vermont Agricultural Hall of Fame in recognition of her more than 30 years of agricultural leadership in Vermont and the Nation. Enid became the executive director of the Northeast Organic Farming Association of Vermont, NOFA-VT, in 1987, the same year that I became chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. Enid has been a national leader in advancing the importance of organic agriculture. She provided important technical and advocacy support as I worked on the National Organic Standards Act as part of the 1990 farm bill--which has in turn resulted in making organic agriculture a $60 billion annual industry--with Vermont as a leader. Thirty years later, Enid continues to provide advice on organic agriculture and nutrition issues. Enid Wonnacott's many accomplishments are presented in detail in her much deserved nomination to the Vermont Agricultural Hall of Fame. I ask unanimous consent to have the nomination printed in the Record.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, it is my honor to recognize a true friend of Vermont, State Senator Dick Sears of Bennington, who has been named by FiscalNote as the sixth most productive State senator in the United States. Senator Sears, who was first elected in 1992, and as cited by FiscalNote, has sponsored 314 bills and has a 60 percent bill passage success rate. This recognition of Senator Sears' effectiveness comes as no surprise in Vermont, where he is respected and is a fixture on the nightly news during the legislative session. In the Vermont Senate Judiciary Committee, where Senator Sears serves as chair, he has acted courageously on issues including civil rights, marriage equality, human trafficking, and adoption. He himself highlights his work on corrections and criminal justice reform, as well as his successful involvement in the 2010 rewrite of sex offender laws, as major accomplishments; yet he also attributes his success in these important issue areas to teamwork. In addition to chairing the judiciary committee, Senator Sears also serves on the appropriations committee, the joint fiscal committee, is vice chair of the joint legislative child protection oversight committee, is vice chair of the joint legislative justice committee, and is a member of the legislative committee on judicial rules and the legislative council committee. Clearly, Senator Sears is a legislator who deserves recognition, yet doesn't seek recognition. In honor of Senator Sears' outstanding accomplishments, I ask that the article by Christie Wisniewski from the July 31 edition of the Bennington Banner, ``Sears ranked 6th in productivity for U.S. state senators,'' be printed into the Record.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, an unrelenting government crackdown on the women's rights movement is taking place in Saudi Arabia. This is the subject of a Senate resolution, of which I am an original cosponsor, introduced today by Senator Merkley. It is widely known that Saudi Arabia has a long history of subjugating and discriminating against women and girls. Today, despite talk of reform, Saudi authorities continue to arbitrarily arrest and detail women's rights activists and supporters, including Samar Badawi, recipient of the 2012 International Women of Courage Award; Nassima al- Sadah, an Eastern Province activist, and Nouf Abdelaziz, an activist and writer, among others. The latest crackdown, which began in May, has resulted in the arrest of more than a dozen women's rights activists, with many more also barred from traveling abroad. Many people erroneously equate the recent lifting of the ban on female drivers in Saudi Arabia as indicative of increased government support for women's rights in the country. To the contrary, the government has arrested some of the same women activists who campaigned for the right to drive only a short time ago. We and others often deplore the arbitrary arrests, denial of fundamental rights and liberties, and execution of prisoners in Iran for ``crimes'' that would be protected speech under international law; yet, we see similar abuses in Saudi Arabia and the systematic persecution of women by Saudi authorities without a commensurate level of international outcry. Arbitrary arrests of peaceful activists, regardless of cause or country, is not acceptable. Freedom of speech and peaceful dissent are critical underpinnings of human rights activism around the globe and must be consistently defended. Women's rights are human rights. I urge all Senators to stand up against attacks of fundamental rights and liberties, in all countries and for all people, including those fighting for the rights of women in Saudi Arabia.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I just wanted to applaud what the Senator from Missouri just said. He has had a lot of experience in the other body and here in the Senate. He and I have been here since a time when we actually voted on these bills and got them done. I note that he has been a tremendous help in getting us this far. For Senator Murray, because of a very necessary absence, I will manage her part of this bill when it is up. She has worked very hard on it. As the Senator from Missouri just said, regarding the vote we had in the Appropriations Committee, keep in mind that appropriations goes across the political spectrum of both parties, and we reported this bill out of the committee with broad bipartisan support. I commend Senator Shelby too. We are opposed to authorizing legislation on the right or the left, unless there is total agreement with everybody, because we want to get these bills done. We still have to go to conference with the House when they come back in a few weeks. We want to have a solid vote here. So I thank the Senator from Missouri for the work he has done. We are getting somewhere, and as someone who has been here for a long time, I am rather happy to see that. I yield the floor. I thank the Senator for yielding.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I know that Senator Shelby has spoken before and is going to speak again. I also know we are coming up on the time for some votes. Let me speak in my capacity as vice chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. Today, as you know, the Senate begins consideration of the Defense and Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies minibus appropriations bill. This will actually be the third appropriations package brought to the Senate floor this year. Once we complete action, the Senate will have passed 9 of the 12 committee- reported appropriations bills for the fiscal year 2019. It is certainly much faster than has been done in years. I want to thank Chairman Shelby for his commitment to a bipartisan process. That and the fact we have been friends for decades have made this progress possible. I also want to thank Senators Blunt, Murray, and Durbin for their work on these bills--again, a bipartisan effort. I think the bipartisan progress is due to the Shelby-Leahy-McConnell- Schumer commitment to move forward on appropriations bills that have bipartisan support, are at spending levels agreed to in the bipartisan budget deal, and reject poison pill riders and controversial authorizing language. The two bills in this package meet this test. The minibus before us represents 65 percent of all discretionary spending, but it also demonstrates the importance of the bipartisan budget agreement reached earlier this year. In this package, we see the priorities outlined in that agreement made into real policy to improve the lives of Americans. It is no secret that the Budget Control Act of 2011 and the resulting sequestration cuts damaged our military readiness, resulting in canceled deployments and deferred maintenance. It was in July of last year, I remind my fellow Senators, that Secretary Mattis testified before the Senate Appropriations Committee, and he said that ``for all the heartache caused by the loss of our troops during these wars, no enemy in the field has done more to harm the readiness of our military than sequestration.'' But damage to our military readiness was not the only consequence of the Budget Control Act. Sequestration has led to schools that fail to prepare students for a challenging world, a steep decline in Federal investment for job training and employment services, healthcare crises left unaddressed, and childcare services eroded. In fact, when thinking of the defense budget, it was reported in 2017 that 7 out of 10 people--7 out of 10--ages 17 to 24 in America would not qualify for military service because of reasons related to their physical health or education. That means that 24 million out of 34 million young adults are ineligible due to obesity and other health problems or criminal backgrounds or lack of education. Now, if you want to talk about national security, that strikes at it. This statistic should make it alarmingly clear that investments in our domestic priorities, such as healthcare and education, are also national security investments, and the military agrees with that. That is why we fought so hard for a budget deal to reverse the cuts on both defense and nondefense programs. But now we have reached a bipartisan budget deal, and because of it, the defense appropriations bill before us gives the men and women of our Armed Services the resources they need to carry out the missions effectively and safely. That is a goal that both Republicans and Democrats have shared throughout this process. The LHHS bill makes important new investments in healthcare and education. It increases funding for the National Institutes of Health by $5 billion over fiscal year 2017 so they can aggressively pursue cures for diseases like cancer, diabetes, and Alzheimer's. It backs our commitment to increase access to higher education by increasing college affordability spending by $2.3 billion over fiscal year 2017. By increasing access to childcare by $3.2 billion over fiscal year 2017, it supports working families and communities in every part of our country. In doing this, we have rejected the President's shortsighted budget proposals, which would have cut important programs in the LHHS bill by $12.5 billion from fiscal year 2018 funding level. Now, we take into consideration our immediate national security needs, but you can't just stop there, you have to think about the future of the country. The deep ties that run between defense and nondefense priorities make it fitting that we take up these two bills together, and I applaud the chairman for doing that. By combining these bills into one package, we increase the certainty that they will be enacted into law on time and will avoid the devastating effect of long- term continuing resolutions. I urge our House counterparts, when they come back to Washington, to commit, as we have, to producing a conference report that contains both bills so that we can move swiftly toward final passage. Finally, I wish to highlight the new funding in this bill that helps our country address the scourge of opioids. Every Member in this Chamber has seen the toll this epidemic has taken on their States. In 2017, 72,000 people--a 10-percent increase over 2016--lost their lives to drug overdoses in the opioid epidemic. In that 1 year, more lives were lost than in the entirety of the Vietnam War. Just think of that: 72,000 people in the opioid scourge. Now, I know Marcelle and I hear frequently from Vermonters recovering from opioid abuse, but we also hear in the grocery stores, at our church, or on the streets of Vermont from families talking about a member who did not recover and talking about their funeral. Marcelle is a nurse, and I am a former prosecutor. Some of these tales have brought us to tears because these are men and women with the same hopes and dreams shared by all Americans. That is why I say that mothers and fathers see us and say: We want to talk to you. They have tears streaming from their eyes. We know what we are going to hear--that they have lost children to this epidemic. This has touched the lives of every American: Black, White, rich, poor, urban, and rural. It is an American problem. It affects all of us. This package represents a second installment in investing in serious solutions. We invest $3 billion in new resources over fiscal year 2017 to address this crisis. This is on top of roughly $500 million in additional funding contained in other appropriations bills and similar funding levels in the fiscal year 2018 omnibus. But it is because of the bipartisan budget deal that these new investments will surpass $6 billion over 2 years. Of course there is more we can do to help those Americans who are trying to pull themselves out of addiction and turn their lives around or to keep their children alive, but this is a good start. I think it is a start the American people can be proud of. It is not a Democratic plan, and it is not a Republican plan. It is an American plan, and that should unite us all. Mr. President, I see my dear friend from Alabama, the distinguished chairman, on the floor, and I yield to him.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, we yield back all time.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, Senator Shelby and I both worked hard through this process to keep out poison pill riders. This amendment is a partisan poison pill. We talk about repealing the Federal mandate, but of course, by doing that, we saw a direct premium increase as a result of that repeal. The District of Columbia and States like Vermont passed their own mandates to keep premiums down. Just like Vermont, DC should have the authority to make its own laws. Instead of telling all of those people who claim we must have States' rights, here we are telling the District of Columbia: We will tell you what to do. That is not democracy. So I move to table the amendment, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. LEAHY. I yield to the Senator from Alabama.

Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I thank the senior Senator from Alabama for his kind words. I also thank our two leaders for their kind words. Senator Shelby and I met with Senator McConnell and Senator Schumer earlier this year, and we said that we want to get the Senate back to what it should be and what it has been. What better way than to do it on the appropriations bills. I have served here longer than anybody in this body. I have seen it when it has worked and when it hasn't worked. Senator Shelby and I felt we could do it. I urge an ``aye'' vote on this final passage, second minibus package. Each of these were reported by the Appropriations Committee unanimously, Republicans and Democrats voting together. Some of us said we couldn't agree on the Sun rising in the East, but we agreed. Incidentally, my dear friend, the Senator from Alabama--I wish to note that the tie I am wearing is one that he and Dr. Shelby gave me for my birthday this year. I thought that might be a good touch. I thank what both Senators McConnell and Schumer said. They worked very hard with us. The Agriculture bill continues strong support for our country's farmers. It abandons the Trump budget's proposal to leave rural communities behind and instead invests in rural development and housing programs. The Financial Services bill supports regulatory agencies that the American people rely on to protect them from unfair, unsafe or fraudulent business practices. The Interior bill rejects the anti-science know-nothing agenda proposed by the Trump administration by protecting the Environmental Protection Agency from the President's proposed reckless and slashing cuts. It preserves investments that ensure our children and grandchildren will enjoy clean air and water. It supports our National Parks, which are treasures that must be protected for future generations. Finally, thanks to the bipartisan budget agreement, the Transportation bill contains $10 billion in new funding compared to fiscal year 2017 to invest in our Nation's housing and infrastructure. Every Member in this body knows of the urgent need to address the crumbling infrastructure that plagues each of our States. This is a good first step. We are here today because Chairman Shelby and I, along with the subcommittee chairs and ranking members, worked hard to produce bipartisan bills with input from both Republicans and Democrats. Over the past 2 weeks, the Senate voted on 11 amendments, and agreed to a manager's package that contained 46 amendments important to our Members. This is the way the Senate is supposed to work: regular order. Our bipartisan success is due to the Shelby, Leahy, McConnell, Schumer commitment to move through this process with bipartisan support, at spending levels agreed to in the bipartisan budget deal, and reject poison pill riders and controversial authorizing language. The House, unfortunately, is pursuing a different path. They are taking up partisan bills filled with poison pill riders that cannot and will not pass the Senate. If our progress is to continue, the bills that come out of conference must be bills that can pass the Senate, which means they must be free of poison pills. I am disappointed my election security grant amendment was rejected by the Senate. The integrity of our elections, which are the foundation of our democracy, should not be a partisan issue. It is unfortunate that the Senate voted down funding our States need to help upgrade their election infrastructure and secure our elections from interference by Russia and other foreign adversaries ahead of the 2018 midterms. We need to heed the warnings of our intelligence agencies, of the lights blinking red, of the appeals from the attorneys general, the secretaries of State, and the State and local election officials who are sounding the alarm. This duty has fallen to us, and we must not later be found to have been asleep at the switch, with so much at stake. But this minibus is the result of hard work and compromise on the part of the chair and ranking member of each subcommittee. While it is not perfect, it will touch the lives of the American people in every State from improving roads to protecting our forests, and I urge that Senators vote ``aye'' on final passage. If we pass this bill today, we will have passed seven appropriations bills out of the Senate and have a firm commitment to take up two more in the coming weeks. It wouldn't have worked if the chairman had not committed himself to what the rest of us did but also the chairs and the ranking members of the subcommittees we have here--Senators Hoeven, Merkley, Murkowski, Udall, Collins, Reed, Lankford, and Coons. I also want to thank the majority staff: Shannon Hines, David Adkins, and Jonathan Graffeo, as well as their subcommittee staff. I often say that Senators are merely constitutional impediments to their staff. I know my staff has worked long hours. I might get home on a Saturday or Sunday, and they are still working, people like Charles Kieffer, Chanda Betourney, Jessica Berry, Rachael Taylor, Dianne Nellor, Dabney Hegg, Ellen Murray, and all of the subcommittee staff. Finally, I wish to thank Jessica Shulkin, who is going to be leaving the Appropriations Committee in August after nearly 18 years for the Agriculture Subcommittee. Her expertise, her hard work, and her working in a bipartisan and professional way has advanced our Nation's agricultural policy, helped our rural communities, and has kept USDA and the FDA answerable to Congress. I wish Jessica all the best. She has been a pleasure to work with. In conclusion, I have a list of all the staff, and I ask unanimous consent that it be printed in the Record.

Mr. LEAHY. In conclusion, I thank Senator Shelby, Senator McConnell, and Senator Schumer. We worked together. It is kind of nice when something works out. I yield the floor. Amendment No. 3400 Withdrawn

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, Vermont is special in large part because of the dedication and kindness that Vermonters show to neighbors and strangers alike. I would like to recognize a few Vermonters in particular who went out of their way to do what needed to be done to save the lives of others. On July 6, a number of boaters became stranded on the water near the Colchester Causeway Bike Ferry while enjoying themselves on Lake Champlain. Luckily for those in distress, the crew of the Bike Ferry was nearby, and sprang into action. After quickly rescuing four people, Captain Brian Costello, deckhand and former coastguardsman Frank Malaki, and captain-in-training Richard Schattman were told that there were more people who needed assistance. Before long, all those who had been stranded were safe and sound, with warm clothes, water, and shelter, thanks to the ferry's crew. Anyone who has enjoyed the beauty of our great Lake Champlain knows that, in bad weather, its calm, rolling waves can quickly turn treacherous. We have always been lucky to have the protection of the Coast Guard on the water in times of emergency, but it should hearten many to hear that there are also professional, courageous, and selfless Vermonters like Captain Costello, Mr. Malaki, and captain-in-training Schattman nearby to lend a hand. I share the pride of the Coast Guard in this lifesaving effort. I ask unanimous consent that the July 19, 2018, article from ``My Champlain Valley'' entitled ``Bike-ferry crew recognized by Coast Guard for heroic rescue,'' which commemorates the bravery of these men, be printed in the Record.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. What is the parliamentary situation? Are we in morning business?