Patrick Leahy

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I have long fought to promote transparency and accountability in our Federal Government. From standing up to defend and strengthen the Freedom of Information Act, FOIA, to protecting government whistleblowers, promoting transparency and accountability are among my top priorities. This Congress, Senator Grassley and I joined together to introduce the FBI Whistleblower Protection Act. And today we have again worked together to advance legislation to support inspectors general and ensure accountability. I support the revised IG Empowerment Act and hope it can be signed into law before the end of the year. Inspectors general play a critical role in promoting government transparency and accountability. They help ensure that Federal agencies and their employees operate efficiently, effectively, and within the scope of the law. The goal of the IG Empowerment Act is to strengthen the Office of Inspectors General and increase their independence, and it is a goal I support. One very important provision would help clarify that IGs should have access to all documents they need to conduct their investigations, audits, and reviews. This is something I agree with. Senator Grassley and I held a bipartisan hearing on this issue and agreed to work together to find a solution to this problem. While we need to make sure that the IGs have the tools they need to do their job, the Fourth Amendment demands that we not grant administrative subpoena power lightly. Such power should be granted sparingly and be narrowly tailored to protect individuals' civil liberties. The bill we advance today strikes the right balance to support IGs without giving them a blank check to subpoena any individual outside of the government and compel them to testify in person. We have made good progress in advancing protransparency legislation this year. My bipartisan FOIA Improvement Act with Senator Cornyn was signed into law in July. And just this week, we learned that a dangerous FOIA-related provision in the defense bill was stripped from the conference report. This kind of progress can only be made through bipartisan work and good faith negotiating. I am glad we will make similar progress with the IG Empowerment Act that I hope all Senators will support today.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, it is becoming too common a theme that the U.S. Senate, in the closing days of session, rushes to consider a conferenced defense authorization bill. Earlier this year, we considered one of the largest defense authorization bills in history, and the Senate considered few amendments and was afforded a truncated debate period. Worse, the authorization threatened to bust a carefully balanced budget agreement, by misusing overseas contingency operations, OCO, funds for base spending. I opposed that bill. Now, in the closing hours of the Congress, we are faced with a vote on a conferenced version of that bill. It is far from perfect. However, like open government groups across the spectrum, I am pleased to see that a dangerous provision concerning the Freedom of Information Act, FOIA, that Senator Grassley and I strongly opposed has been removed from the final bill. This overbroad provision, which was part of the reason I opposed the Senate bill, could have categorically exempted a vast amount of Department of Defense information from public disclosure, including potentially the Pentagon's handling of sexual assault complaints, reports about defective equipment issued to soldiers in combat zones, and documented health hazards faced by military families living on bases abroad. Hiding such information from public scrutiny would directly undermine the transparency required to address threats to the safety and security of our troops. As the chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, the committee with jurisdiction over FOIA matters, Senator Grassley and I are glad that our concerns were taken seriously and addressed. Now that this provision has been struck, our Nation's premier transparency law can continue its critical mission of watching over the safety of those who risk it all to keep us safe. I am also grateful for the vital support this bill provides to our military personnel and their families and the augmentation of our preparedness to deter, or meet, future threats through a wise investment in technology and people. As the world becomes less stable, this bill includes a number of measures to reaffirm our long-standing commitments to our partners abroad who work with us to make the world safer. Nonetheless, I still have concerns with a number of ill-considered provisions in this bill. I am not yet satisfied that sufficient consideration has been given to how the caps on general officers affect the National Guard, where leadership often alternates between Army and Air Force officers. No one has accounted for why the vice chief of the National Guard Bureau is the only Vice Chief to not have a grade established by statute. And I remain concerned that this bill removes the requirement that the deputy commander of the U.S. Northern Command be drawn from the ranks of the National Guard. It is our National Guard leaders who are most capable of responding to domestic disasters. Regrettably, this year's defense authorization bill also misses an opportunity to provide the Obama administration with the flexibility it needs to finally close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay. Rather than putting an end to this shameful chapter in our Nation's history, the bill maintains the status quo by extending the unnecessary prohibition on constructing facilities within the United States to house Guantanamo detainees and continues the counterproductive ban on transferring detainees to the United States for detention and trial. Closing the detention facility at Guantanamo is in our national security interest. It is the right thing to do. I strongly oppose the needless barriers to doing that in this bill. In the end, I do believe this authorization bill more appropriately provides for the common defense. Nonetheless, Members of Congress, on either side of the aisle, should not tolerate this perennially constrained debate over the authorization of over half of our Nation's budget. Similarly, if Congress considers legislation next year about the important question of civilian control of the military, it should not do so under the abbreviated, restricted debate by which we will finally approve the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2017. It was my highest honor when Vermonters voted to send me back to the Senate this past November. In a time of uncertainty, they are looking for leaders. I am, too. I hope Senate leaders next year will insist on regular order and the deliberative process that has long been the hallmark of this body.

Mr. LEAHY

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

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, what is the parliamentary situation?

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, earlier today we heard a moving speech by the Democratic leader and my longtime friend, Harry Reid. He spoke of his life and his time here. An amateur boxer turned police officer, turned lawyer, turned majority leader, that is the supercondensed outline of the life of Harry Reid. When the book closes on this 114th Congress, so too will it close on the congressional career of Senator Reid. He is a fighter and a champion. That is an understatement. He is a fellow country boy, but he had a much tougher upbringing in the isolated hamlet of Searchlight, NV. You can read about that in his book. That upbringing has bred traits that I have admired since he arrived in the Senate in 1987. His humble upbringing, raised in a shack with no indoor bathroom or hot water, sowed the seeds of a life in public service and of the perspective that has infused and driven his public service. He first came to Capitol Hill as a police officer, working nights to pay his way through George Washington University Law School. Little did he know he would end up being one of the longest serving majority leaders in the history of the U.S. Senate. He can point to so many of the things he has done, including steering the Affordable Care Act to Senate passage. But I want to thank Senator Reid for his strong support of justice bills that I have championed. An original cosponsor of the Violence Against Women Act Reauthorization that I introduced in recent years--to strengthen and renew the transformative and lifesaving work that is made possible under VAWA--he has always worked to combat the scourge of domestic violence, helping to shepherd the reauthorization of this vital legislation across the finish line. He has also supported vital grant programs to put more cops on the street in communities small and large and to keep them safe. His commitment to advancing our comprehensive immigration reform bill, we got it through the Senate by a large bipartisan majority. When the history books are written, one of the huge mistakes made was when that the House of Representatives did not take up that bill, even though they had the votes to pass it. These are all examples of how true leadership takes action--not merely talking points--no matter how difficult, to make a difference. Harry Reid was at the Edmund Pettus Bridge in 2015, commemorating the 50th anniversary of Bloody Sunday. I looked at him there with Congressman John Lewis and President Barack Obama--the first African American elected as President--as one of the towering figures in America. But the true measure of a man is revealed not when he pauses to remember past injustices, he works to prevent them from happening. From pay equity to restoring the Voting Rights Act, from the repeal of don't ask, don't tell, to the enactment of the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act, there can be no doubt that Senator Reid fights for every American, every day. And yet, no matter how large a national leader Senator Reid has become, he has never forgotten the people of Nevada. In him they have a tireless and effective champion of the highest caliber. Senator Reid's work on behalf of Nevada has been relentless. He has been our fighter. He has been our champion. And he has been a friend. He has faced and risen above personal adversity. He is a truly American story. And his presence here in the Senate will be missed next year. When Marcelle and I leave Washington for the last time, we will think of the special friends we have had. Harry Reid, Landra Reid--we will think of them. We wish them all the best as they begin their next chapter together.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I would like to briefly recognize the service of retiring Senator David Vitter. Senator Vitter has served the people of Louisiana in Congress since 1999, through the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, across three different administrations, and through countless debates. As he retires from the Congress after nearly two decades of service to Louisiana, I wish him, his wife, Wendy, their four children and his entire family all the best in the next chapter.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, for nearly 16 years, Senator Mark Kirk has given voice to his Illinois constituents here in Washington. His long record of service includes work as a congressional staffer, a 24-year career as a naval intelligence officer, a U.S. Congressman, and a U.S. Senator. Dedicated to several matters of national and international importance, Senator Kirk has supported a range of legislative efforts during his Senate tenure and has not shied from opposing his party's position. From supporting the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and efforts to repeal don't ask, don't tell, from his opposition to defunding Planned Parenthood and the blockade of President Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Senator Kirk has emerged as a conservative voice in support of some of the most critical civil rights protections debated today. When Senator Kirk returned to the Senate following his traumatic stroke in 2012, he showed his commitment to Illinois' voters. As Senator Kirk begins this new chapter, I wish him the very best.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, it is an honor for anyone to serve in the U.S. Senate. Giving voice to your constituents' views is a humbling responsibility. It is one thing to be called to serve; it is another to come back for a second tour of duty. Senator Dan Coats' life is one of public service, beginning with military service and culminating for now in his retirement this year from the Senate--his second tenure representing the people of Indiana. Senator Coats has championed a number of efforts during his terms in the Senate. I am particularly grateful for his support of the National Guard and his support for our efforts to empower the National Guard within the Pentagon. Senator Coats has been a watchdog of government spending, a supporter of critical home assistance programs for low- income families such as the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, and was a supporter of our most recent efforts to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act. Senator Coats has come a long way since his early days as a State staffer for then-Representative and future Vice President Dan Quayle. I am sure Hoosiers have not seen the last this public servant will offer. I wish him, his wife, Marsha, and their entire family the best in retirement.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, New England is in itself a small community. We Senators who represent these States band together to fight for our urban and rural communities, to protect our borders, and to preserve the rich heritage on which our country was founded. For the last 6 years, one of those partners has been New Hampshire Senator Kelly Ayotte. She has diligently sought to represent the Granite State. Senator Ayotte and I share a background in law enforcement; as New Hampshire's attorney general, she prosecuted many important cases. After her election to the U.S. Senate in 2011, Senator Ayotte was recognized as one of the most influential women in her party. She has taken a practical, New England-style approach in the Senate. Like many of us from New England, she has been persistent in her efforts to call national attention to the opioid epidemic ravaging our communities and particularly hitting hard rural communities in Vermont and New Hampshire. She was a partner as we sought to advance and ultimately pass the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act, which should provide much needed support for those facing this crippling addiction. Her attention to this public health crisis will surely be a cornerstone of her Senate legacy. I wish Senator Ayotte, her husband, Joseph, and their children well in their future endeavors. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, mountains, rivers, cities, and plains separate Vermont and California, two States as different as any in the country. But here in the U.S. Senate, we are on equal footing. It is one of the hallmarks of our Constitution and representative government. For over three decades, Barbara Boxer worked to advance the priorities of Californians. Thankfully, in many ways, those priorities, despite the diversity of our States, have mirrored those of Vermonters. A trailblazer in her own right, Senator Boxer rose to become the first woman to chair the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, where she fought to protect and preserve our environment, promote clean and safe drinking water, update our antiquated infrastructure, and improve public safety. Senator Boxer was an early and vocal supporter of our efforts to reauthorize and expand the important Violence Against Women Act. Her passionate pleas to Senators and Members of the House to approve this critical--and lifesaving--bill was essential to the Senate's debate. Of course, most important in Senator Boxer's life is her family. Like many, I was touched when she announced her retirement in an interview with her grandson. She has been a tireless advocate for her home State and for the country. And now, in retirement, I hope she enjoys even more time with Stewart and her wonderful family. Far from finished fighting, I know Barbara's voice will not be one soon forgotten in the U.S. Senate.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I have been here on the floor before, joined by Senator Grassley, to share my frustration with the EB-5 Regional Center Program. Senator Grassley and I have been working for years to improve this flawed program that is set to expire tomorrow, but, once again, unfortunately, the congressional leadership on the other side has rejected our bipartisan reforms and the program will be extended in the continuing resolution. We have done this in a way, as has been pointed out, as a Republican and as a Democrat--two of the most senior Members of this body--who have introduced real reforms, but time and again leadership has caved behind closed doors to narrow corporate interests. I believe that is a serious mistake. The EB-5 Program I once championed seems like a distant memory. The program was designed to bring jobs to underserved rural and distressed urban communities. For some time, it did just that. Communities in Vermont, like Warren and Vergennes, once used EB-5 to create and save jobs during difficult economic times, but that is EB-5 of yesterday. Today EB-5 is mired in fraud and abuse. It suffers from obvious and outrageous flaws. It is a magnet for fraud, security violations are rampant, and the incentives Congress created to promote investment and create jobs in rural and high unemployment areas--the sole reason I championed the program--have been rendered obsolete through economic gerrymandering. Only 3 percent of EB-5 investors now invest in rural areas--3 percent. The distinguished senior Senator from Iowa and I understand what a rural area is, and they are not being served. Less than 10 percent invest in true high unemployment areas. Almost every other EB-5 project uses gerrymandering to qualify as distressed, despite many being located in the most affluent areas of the country. The fact that a luxury hotel in Beverly Hills can use gerrymandering to claim it is located in a distressed community is troubling. Beverly Hills is not rural Iowa or rural Vermont, but the fact that this type of abuse now represents almost 90 percent of the entire EB-5 Program is appalling. Anyone who maintains that today's EB-5 Program is about creating jobs is either a lobbyist for the real estate industry or is simply not paying attention. An untold number of the luxury developments that now dominate EB-5 would be pursued even if you did not have EB-5 financing. Financing provided through EB-5 represents a small portion of the capital stack. To claim that EB-5 is responsible for all of these jobs is a farce. EB-5 merely allows developers to replace their conventional financing with dirt cheap capital subsidized by the sale of U.S. visas. It is not just exploited by wealthy American developers. Chinese developers, and even the Chinese Government itself, are now exploiting the EB-5 subsidy. That is beyond troubling when a foreign government is permitted to earn tens of millions of dollars through the sale of U.S. visas. The proposal I developed with Senator Grassley would address this. It would require background checks. It would require third-party oversight of funds. It would create protections for defrauded investors. It would ban foreign government ownership of an EB-5 company. It would end gerrymandering and provide modest incentives to direct a small portion of investment to underserved areas--just 15 percent to both rural and urban poor communities--but even this was too much for some developers and some lobbyists. Gluttonous, shortsighted corporate greed blocked these critical reforms, greed that was given a voice by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Unfortunately, the leadership has allowed a couple of powerful developers to exploit this program's flaws to derail critical reforms. I find it shameful that the worst abusers of this program have been given, by some in Congress, veto power over its reform. I commend Secretary Johnson and his efforts to improve EB-5. I commend his efforts to change the rules to address fraud, inadequate investment levels, and the abuse of development incentives. I will work with the chairmen of the Senate and House Judiciary Committees and the next Secretary of Homeland Security to get these reforms implemented and enforced, but the EB-5 regional Senate program no longer serves the American people's interests. It certainly does not serve the rural and urban poor communities as Congress intended. Next year, I will be the vice chairman of the Appropriations Committee, and I will continue to press for broad bipartisan reform. I know Senator Grassley and Senator Feinstein, the incoming ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, will not sit idly by either. If EB-5 cannot be reformed due to the paralysis of leadership, it is very simple. If it cannot be reformed, then let us end EB-5. I yield the floor.

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I was a little bit delayed getting to the floor this afternoon because I was in tears, literally, when I heard the news about John. I think of my last long conversation with him just a few weeks ago. I will speak more on the floor about him later. I came to the Senate with John Glenn. I enjoyed traveling with him, with the anonymity it gave me when people said: there is Colonel Glenn. It was not Senator Glenn, it was Colonel Glenn, even after having been sworn in. We traveled, he and Annie, Marcelle and I, all over the world, but the time I remember the most was the weekend we spent at our old farmhouse in Vermont because they wanted to see the foliage. We used a seaplane and went flying around, landing in little ponds; taking off, then landing in another one. We went to a trappers convention where everybody was saying, ``It is Colonel Glenn and some bald guy with him,'' and that was me, of course. We went there and then flew back to Montpelier where Marcelle and Annie had been traveling around. John landed the plane in a stiff crosswind. Of course, the pontoons did not help. He had to bring it in sideways. I did not worry. It was John Glenn. Then he turned to me with a big wink and said: I have never been so frightened flying anything in my life. I do not think John ever was frightened at anything, but my heart did stop. I will speak more about him on the floor, and I appreciate my friend from Iowa yielding so I could speak. John was one of the best people I ever served with. When I speak of what it was like coming here as a brand new Senator, every time I am asked about that, I talk about the fact that I came here and was sworn in with John Glenn.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I have visited Egypt many times, and I have voted for billions of dollars in U.S. assistance for Egypt to support economic and security programs in that country. I have recognized positive developments in Egypt when they occur, such as the recent decision by the government to undertake economic reforms, including by reducing some subsidies. I also recognize the security challenges Egypt faces from instability and violence in Libya and in the Sinai. The U.S. has an interest in helping Egypt confront these challenges by addressing the underlying causes in a manner that is consistent with international law. Today I want to speak briefly about the Egyptian Parliament's recent passage of a restrictive new law on nongovernmental organizations, NGOs, that would effectively cripple Egypt's civil society for years to come. Rather than sign this legislation, I hope President Sisi calls for a new version to be drafted in cooperation with independent NGOs. If President Sisi does sign this law, it will be yet another step in the wrong direction by a government that professes to be making progress on civil and human rights when the facts indicate otherwise. Such a development would be further evidence of the need to strengthen existing democratic and human rights conditions on U.S. aid for Egypt. According to information I have received, the law passed by parliament on November 29 would place all NGOs in Egypt, both local and foreign, under the supervision and control of a committee that would be dominated by representatives of the Defense, Interior, and Justice Ministries, as well as the General Intelligence Service, the country's top spy agency. Among other things, the law would criminalize work that harms ``national security, national unity, public morals or public order'' but leaves those terms undefined, allowing the authorities to bring such charges against any group they choose. Anyone convicted of violating the law would face sentences of up to 5 years in prison and a fine of up to $56,000. The proposed law comes at a time when independent voices in Egypt are facing an existential crisis. Instead of passing a new NGO law that would allow both domestic and international groups to operate without burdensome restrictions, the Egyptian authorities have escalated their crackdown on independent NGOs, particularly against groups that focus on human rights, the rule of law, and democratic norms. Over the past year, a court has frozen the assets of human rights groups and the personal assets of human rights defenders. At least 15 NGO founders, leaders, or staff--many from prominent groups--have been banned from leaving the country. An investigation into the foreign funding of dozens of local NGOs could result in criminal charges carrying sentences of up to 25 years in prison. This pattern of harassment and arrests is not a new phenomenon. It has been happening for years, and, contrary to representations of Egyptian officials, it is getting worse. I urge the Egyptian authorities to adhere to their constitution, and the pledges they have made in international fora such as the United Nations Human Rights Council, by guaranteeing freedom of expression and association. I urge President Sisi to reject this draconian legislation. I also want to reiterate what I said in this chamber on September 27, 2016, when I spoke about Aya Hijazi, a young Egyptian American social worker currently being detained in Egypt. Ms. Hijazi, along with her Egyptian husband and five employees of their NGO Belady, has been accused of salacious crimes--accusations that the government has yet to corroborate with credible evidence in a court of law. Ms. Hijazi has been jailed and denied due process since May 21, 2014. She and the other defendants should be released immediately or provided a fair, public trial so they can defend themselves.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, Henry and Gloria Jarecki are two of my longest and best friends. I speak, of course, both because of our personal friendship, but also of their efforts with the important Scholar Rescue Fund, a program designed to provide fellowships for scholars whose are persecuted or threatened at home for the important work they do. This commitment is especially poignant, when considering that, as a child, Henry fled the Holocaust in Germany, ultimately settling in the United States. Both Henry and Gloria have worked to bring about recognition and understanding of people of different races, religions, and cultures. To me, Henry has been more than just a friend. He has been a mentor and a confidant. Some of the happiest times for Marcelle and me have been with Henry and Gloria. Dr. Henry Jarecki recently received the Order of Merit, Officer's Cross, in Heidelberg, Germany. The Order of Merit is the only federal decoration in the Federal Republic of Germany. This high honor is befitting not only of Henry's history, but of his long dedication to promoting the simple but sometimes difficult principles of freedom and liberty. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of Dr. Henry Jarecki's moving remarks upon receiving this prestigious honor be printed in the Record.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, Vermont is saddened by the death of the poet David Budbill, whose poetry celebrated the simple pleasures of life in Vermont and highlighted the lives of working Vermonters. He died on Sept 25, at the age of 76. In the State that gave the world Robert Frost, Vermonters know and love our authentic poets. Through David Budbill's 10 books of poetry, 7 plays, an opera libretto, 2 children's books, and many public performances and readings, he became the most widely known and loved Vermont poet since Robert Frost. He was born in Cleveland, OH, in 1940, and after attending Union Theological Seminary in New York City and teaching at Lincoln University in Pennsylvania, he moved to Vermont--to Wolcott--in 1969. He then learned to use a chainsaw and worked in the woods to make a living, while also writing poems about the people he met and about his experiences there. His first book of poems, ``The Chain Saw Dance,'' was published in 1976. Other poems and books of poems followed, and David gradually created a fictionalized version of his own community, which he called Judevine--a place where rough-hewn loggers, sawyers, farm wives, gas station attendants, and shattered Vietnam veterans struggled to make a living amid the rugged beauty of rural Vermont. That material was later shaped into a play, also entitled Judevine, which was widely produced, both in Vermont and nationally. Then in the 1990s, Budbill's focus deepened. He began writing poems about his own life in Walcott, thinly disguising himself as ``Judevine Mountain,'' an old Chinese sage, who somehow was settled on a nearby Vermont hillside. He wrote with the spareness, directness and clarity of the ancient Asian poets he admired. One short example is ``What Issa Heard.'' Issa is an 18th century Japanese haiku poet. Here is what David wrote: ``What Issa Heard'' Two hundred years ago Issa heard the morning birds singing sutras to this suffering world. I heard them too, this morning, which must mean, since we will always have a suffering world, we must also always have a song. David wrote poetry and plays that tapped into and expressed the essence of northern Vermont, and he plumbed these subjects so deeply that they became universal through his pen. His rural characters, Antoine, Grace, Tommy, and others, are quintessential Vermonters, but they are also vivid human beings with the same sorts of hopes, fears, triumphs, and disappointments that we all experience. Similarly, his ``Judevine Mountain'' poems were expressions of his own life, but they continue to resonate deeply with the lives of everyone who has read and loved his poems. In short, David Budbill's poetry and plays accurately, meaningfully and profoundly depict rural Vermont--his place, that is also our place. They have a universality that have and will enrich lives in Vermont and in the larger world forever.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, Robert Paquin is retiring after 40 years working as a dedicated public servant in Vermont and on Capitol Hill in Washington. Bob has committed his entire career to making the Federal Government a positive force in the lives of individuals and communities. He has accomplished much, particularly on behalf of our State of Vermont. Bob, as Marcelle and I have always known him, was my longest serving staff member and is among the longest serving personal staff members in U.S. Senate history. He began in my Washington office in 1977 and then moved to Vermont to serve as one of my outstanding field representatives. He ended his congressional staff service 32 years later, in 2009, to take a leadership role at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, USDA, in the Obama administration. On my staff in Washington, Bob worked on defense, foreign policy, and appropriations, and in Vermont, he supported my work on agriculture, conservation, energy, and environmental protection. He also helped to manage my Vermont offices and provided constituent services to countless Vermonters. Bob brought Vermont values on conservation, sustainable and organic agriculture, dairy, and rural development to my work on many farm bills, affecting national agricultural practices, policy, and economics to this day. Bob also helped to develop the Lake Champlain Special Designation Act of 1990, worked on its reauthorization in 2001, and supported my efforts every year to maintain sufficient Federal support for the Lake Champlain cleanup efforts. He worked day in and day out to nurture and grow important partner organizations in Vermont, including the Lake Champlain Basin Program, Lake Champlain Sea Grant, the Leahy Center for Lake Champlain, the Lake Champlain sea lamprey control program, and many more that have helped to leverage Federal investments in conservation and the cleanup of Lake Champlain. I strongly believe that land conservation is an important part of the heritage of every Vermonter. Bob worked on the ground to help establish the Marsh-Billings-Rockefeller National Historical Park, the Nulhegan/ Conte National Wildlife Refuge and the Upper Missisquoi and Trout National Wild and Scenic Rivers. He also helped me as I fought for the addition of more than 100,000 acres to the Green Mountain National Forest, protection of the Appalachian National Scenic Trail, and establishment and expansion of eight Federal wilderness areas in Vermont. He also worked on the delivery of Capitol Christmas trees from Vermont's Green Mountain National Forest to Washington, DC. Time does not allow me to catalogue all of Bob's accomplishments while on my staff, but his greatest impact may have been his simple and honest interactions in helping thousands of Vermont constituents with problems and requests over so many years. Bob is known for his troubleshooting and advocacy for Vermonters in every corner of the State. In 2009, I gave my highest recommendation to the incoming administration of President Obama for Bob to be appointed as executive director of the Farm Service Agency in Vermont. Bob has distinguished himself in that role--helping Vermont farmers recovering from Tropical Storm Irene, implementing new programs under the 2014 farm bill, assisting new Americans from the refugee community to start farms, supporting our dairy farmers through tough times, and nurturing his dedicated USDA staff across Vermont. Robert Paquin has been a truly exceptional and dedicated public servant for Vermont and the Nation for four decades. I will continue to seek his advice, and Marcelle and I wish him and his wife, Theresa, all the best in the future.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, today, the Senate will vote on significant legislation--a bill that aims to make it easier for innovative medical treatments to be approved, while investing over $6 billion in medical research and combating the opioid crisis. The bill also takes an important step toward improving our mental health system, specifically by strengthening our parity laws to ensure mental health treatments are covered by insurance companies. Medical research holds tremendous promise, but our commitment to this funding has not kept pace with what is needed to make more breakthroughs with diseases like cancer and Alzheimer's. In recent years, Congress has supported increased funds for medical research, but these increases have come at the expense of other important domestic programs. We can and should do more. In October, Vice President Biden joined me in Vermont to discuss the future of cancer treatment. We learned that we are on the cusp of so many developments in fighting the disease, but that more research is needed to get there. This bill contains $1.8 billion dedicated to Vice President Biden's cancer moonshot and another $1.4 billion in precision medicine to help target treatments to individual patients. It also includes $1.5 billion for President Obama's BRAIN Initiative, to expand brain mapping technologies that help scientists understand brain disorders and diseases affecting the central nervous system. Since the BRAIN Initiative was established in 2013, it has already made significant advances in medical knowledge, including improving artificial limb technologies and discovering more links between brain chemical functions and depression. I am also pleased that this bill finally fulfills our commitment to fund efforts to combat the opioid crisis. This is especially critical since Congress failed to include necessary funding resources when the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act passed earlier this year. This bill contains $1 billion to combat the opioid crisis, with the first half of the funding to be dedicated this fiscal year. Each day, 129 people die from drug overdoses in this country. Vermont and many other predominately rural States have been hit particularly hard by this epidemic. I suspect that almost every Vermonter knows someone who has been impacted by addiction. It is something I hear about regularly when I am home in Vermont. This is not the future we want for our children, for our grandchildren, or for our communities. I am hopeful that the funding included in this bill will help States move people into treatment to eventually stop the tragic cycle of abuse. While I strongly support this funding, in addition to the bill's expansion of medical research and mental health parity, this bill is far from perfect. Whereas the bill contains $6.3 billion in upfront cuts to offset funding for its many efforts, these funds are not in fact guaranteed each year. Rather, the Appropriations Committee must act each year to ``unlock'' the funding. Republican leaders assure us that this funding will go out the door, and as the incoming vice chairman of the Appropriations Committee, I intend to hold them to that promise. I am also concerned that the bill includes provisions to fast-track prescription drug approval through the Food and Drug Administration, FDA. We all want to ensure that patients have access to medications, but we must also be sure those treatments are both safe and effective. I have concerns that this bill may weaken the standards by which the FDA can review certain medications, for example, by allowing the agency to use existing data from different drug trials to prove the safety of new medications that include similar drug compounds. Furthermore, while the bill makes it easier in many cases to get drugs approved, it does nothing to address the unreasonable price hikes we have seen in some prescription drugs. I filed an amendment with Senators Grassley, Klobuchar, and Lee that would address some of the anticompetitive behavior many drug companies are engaging in to help drive up the cost of their drugs. For example, in order to delay approval of generic drugs entering the market, some drug companies withhold drug samples or refuse to enter into shared safety agreements with generic manufacturers--both of which are necessary for FDA approval. Our amendment, which mirrors our CREATES Act, would close this loophole and help generic drugs come to the market faster. Unfortunately, the Senate will not have the opportunity to consider this improvement to the bill or any others before we vote on the bill's passage. I am frustrated that a bill of this enormity--that has never been considered by the full Senate--is being placed on the calendar at the end of a session with no opportunity for amendments. I hope the Senate leadership will promptly schedule floor debates on this and other improvements to this package early next year. Nevertheless, improvements were made to this bill before it was considered by the House last week. For example, the bill no longer includes a provision that would weaken the disclosure requirements for physicians receiving gifts. The bill also now clearly directs opioid funding to States that have been hit hardest by the crisis. Lastly, more of the funding for medical research is set to go out this fiscal year, which will have an immediate impact on improving the important work of the NIH and our overall medical research community. On balance, this is an important piece of legislation that offers a great promise to move the bar forward on medical research, while also providing critical relief to families suffering from opioid addiction. I believe these strong investments will benefit us for generations to come, and I will support the passage of this bill.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I enjoy calling you by that title. I hope you do, too--because you know that you could easily hold that title as President of this body or President of the United States--you have shown your qualifications for either one. But let me speak about your role as President of the Senate. It makes you a Member of this body, a body that can be, and on some occasions has been, the conscience of the Nation. You have served longer in this body than any other member here. The fact is you came here 2 years before I did, so as the other longest serving member, I look at you as my senior Senator, and I am delighted to be your junior. I think back to some of the things we did together, Mr. President. I remember when I was running for the Senate in Vermont in 1974, and people told me I was far too young to get elected to the Senate at 34 years old. My predecessor was somebody who had been elected here when I was born and served there until I arrived. You put your arm around me and you said, it would be nice to have an older person that I could look up to. I believe you were 32, and I was 34. But that helped. Of course, little did I know until I came here how closely we would work together. We served on the Judiciary Committee throughout that time. We worked on such duties as Supreme Court nominations, civil rights, and the criminal justice system. Then, when you were chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, and bringing the rest of the world American values--which happened to be Joe Biden values--how I enjoyed traveling with you. I think of the time, Mr. President, when you and I, and our wives, Jill and Marcelle traveled together. We had been good friends throughout all of that time. I will take the liberty of telling one story. When the four of us were in Paris, we had gone out to dinner. It was a cold, winter night. We were coming back. I think Marcelle mentioned that the Eiffel Tower lights up on the hour. You and Jill stood on a bench and were hugging each other, the Eiffel Tower behind you. I snapped a picture. Now, we had a close friendship. We never lied to each other, but that was one time I lied to you because you asked me, ``Where is the picture?'' I said, I think I lost it. I apologize. We were conspiring to print out that picture, and I know your wonderful wife gave it to you for a wedding anniversary present with words to the effect that you ``light up her life.'' Well, you lit up many, many lives. I think of our Irish bond of friendship, stories I can't tell. Some of those closed-door sessions with other Irish-Americans, such as Pat Moynihan, Chris Dodd, and Ted Kennedy, when we would have some holy water together. Somehow it came from Ireland. It was usually at least 12 years old. And we would tell Irish stories. And after 42 years here, I know the rules well enough, I can't repeat any of those stories here. But they were good ones because it was a friendship and we worked together. We learned how to bring in others from both parties. And, Mr. President, I remember you and others showing all of us how to find common ground, and we did things together. And I respect you so much for that. I must admit, I learned something else on the Judiciary Committee. I learned the Amtrak schedule because, if we had a meeting that was going on a little bit long, we were reminded what time the train was going to Delaware. I know you kept in good shape because you could run to the station in 3 minutes and get on the train, where you would go home to Beau and Hunter and, later, Jill and Ashley--because even though you were a leader in the United States Senate, and later Vice President, you were, first and foremost, a father and a husband. You and I and Marcelle talked about that this summer, when you came to Vermont for the Cancer Moonshot. I told you what an important part of our lives you have been. You have gone through tragedy and glory, but you have remained yourself throughout all of it. And the memories of those evenings when you let this Irish-Italian boy come in and sit as a member of the Irish--we would speak of our values, we would speak of America, we would speak of friendship. That is why I admire you, Mr. President, and I am glad to be here on the floor with you. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, history is dotted with the stories of trailblazers. People who shape the public discourse at a pivotal moment in time or change the direction of the debate. One of those trailblazers is Barbara Mikulskim, the longest serving woman in Senate history, the first woman to represent Maryland in the U.S. Senate, and the first woman to chair the Senate's Appropriations Committee. She is tough. She is direct. She is dedicated. She is a fighter. She is a leader. Barbara Mikulski has always fought for our families and our children. From her roots as a social worker and community activist to the levels of leadership in the Senate, she has held firm to her adage that she is not just the Senator from Maryland, she is the Senator for Maryland. From her first years in the Senate until now, she has promoted education, nutrition, healthcare, and gender equality in the Senate. She led our historic efforts to pass the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act--shouting from the rooftops the simple principle that women deserve equal pay for equal work. She continued that legacy with the Paycheck Fairness Act. Wouldn't it be a fitting tribute if the Senate considered and approved that commonsense legislation before she retires? Like others in this Chamber, she was a vocal and steadfast supporter of Violence Against Women Act and our most recent efforts to reauthorized and expand those lifesaving programs. She led the efforts to ensure that the Affordable Care Act made clear that no one should be discriminated against in preventive care. Who can forget her fierce advocacy to make the letter of the law clear that being a woman is not a preexisting condition? And when Barbara assumed the mantle chairing the Appropriations Committee, she brought with her the tough but fair grit that has been her hallmark in the Senate. When asked about earmarks, her retort was simple: ``I've told senators that if you're opposed to earmarks, I'll honor that and won't include any for your state.'' You always know where you stand with Barbara Mikulski. Thirty years ago, when she first came to the Senate, women filled just two seats in this body. When the Senate convenes next year, there will be 21. I hope it won't be another 30 years for the Senate to be truly representative of the country we serve. A lifelong Baltimore resident, ``Senator Barb'' has never forgotten her roots, probably because she never left. She remains a Marylander through and through, dedicated to her State and never forgetting that listening to your constituents is the most important job of all. When Senator Mikulski announced her retirement, she told her constituents that the question came down to whether she wanted to spend her time ``raising money or raising hell to meet your day-to-day needs?'' That is Barbara. This rang through in her farewell speech today to the Senate. We often talk of the lions of the Senate. Barbara Mikulski ranks among them. I will miss her fierce advocacy, her counsel, her commitment, her tenacity, and her grit. I value her friendship, and we will miss her.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Presiding Officer, the Senator from Kansas. An editorial this morning in the New York Times is entitled: ``Why Does Donald Trump Lie About Voting Fraud?'' This is the editorial of which I speak. That is a question that many of us who have been fighting for the right to vote have been asking for decades. In a bipartisan fashion, this Congress reauthorized the Voting Rights Act 10 years ago. During the course of many, many, many Senate and House Judiciary Committee hearings, we fought against the false narrative that in-person voting fraud was at all common in our country. The evidence clearly and irrefutably shows that it is not, but, of course, the evidence does not stop those who are determined to make it harder for Americans to cast their votes. Right after five Justices on the Supreme Court gutted the core protection of the bipartisan Voting Rights Act, several States led by Republican majorities enacted voting restrictions that made it harder for many Americans to vote. It is most troubling that our President-elect has decided to make an unfounded charge of widespread voting fraud. I can imagine that he is disappointed in the fact that he got 2.5 million less votes than his opponent and did not win the support of a majority of Americans who voted last month. We should all hope that when our next President is presented with unfavorable realities, he will not resort to spreading information that has no basis in fact. That cannot and should never be the standard of American leadership. In an article published in the Valley News of West Lebanon, NH, and reprinted this morning in VTDigger, researchers at Dartmouth explored President-Elect Trump's allegation of widespread voting fraud, and they found nothing to support his claim, noting ``voter fraud concerns fomented and espoused by the Trump campaign are not grounded in any observable features of the 2016 Presidential election.'' Many other analyses have also made this crystal clear. In a report to Congress, the Government Accountability Office concluded that ``no apparent cases of in-person voter impersonation [were] charged by DOJ's Criminal Division or by U.S. Attorney's offices anywhere in the United States from 2004 through July 3, 2014.'' That is the reality. The President-elect should not continue to peddle lies about voter fraud. I say that because this year we have seen a dangerous uptick in what some call ``fake news.'' These articles have no basis of reality or factual evidence, but they are broadly circulated because they affirm a particular ideology or because they are a proven way to make a quick buck by drawing the attention of unsuspecting online readers. Fake news stories get attention and clicks. We saw what happened when a man walks into a pizza place in the District of Columbia where children often congregate and fires a rifle because of one of these fake news stories he had read. Some consider this despicable propaganda to be harmless, but it is certainly not without its victims. We know that the spread of lies through fake news can have real-world consequences, even for the public's faith in the Republic itself. There is no doubt that this is the way Russia sees it. In conclusion, it should not be too much to ask our elected officials to operate on facts and reality. We will have many debates over policy in the years to come, as we should, but Americans deserve leaders who refuse to peddle in lies for political gain. I call on leaders from both sides of the political aisle to no longer defend the indefensible. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the New York Times editorial be printed in the Record.

Mr. LEAHY. I yield the floor and thank my colleague.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished senior Senator from Texas. Senator Cornyn and I have had the privilege of being prosecutors, he as an attorney general and I served as the State's attorney. I think you get a special view of what is needed. I have enjoyed working with the Senator because we do not have to paint a great picture for each other; we both understand the mistakes that can be made and why we do not want them. For more than 6 years, I have championed the reauthorization of the Justice for All Act. I want to ensure that our criminal justice system lives up to our national pledge of liberty and justice for all. Having served as a prosecutor--and most former prosecutors--I am committed to ensuring that our criminal justice system has the integrity and confidence of the public it serves. I should not just say former prosecutors; current prosecutors feel that way. From my time on the frontlines as a State's attorney in Chittenden County, VT, to the more than 15 years I have served as either chairman or ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, it has become clear to me that our system is deeply flawed. There is not always justice for all. I have met many innocent people wrongly convicted of crimes they did not commit. I shared the story of Kirk Bloodsworth. He was falsely convicted. He was sentenced to death for the rape and murder of a 9-year-old girl--a horrible crime, but he maintained his innocence. In 1993, he became the first death row inmate to be exonerated by DNA, and they were finally able to charge the man who did commit the horrible crime. The irony there is that some have said: Boy, don't they look alike? That is what happened. We know our system gets it wrong. We have a responsibility to improve our criminal justice system. That is why I joined with Kirk Bloodsworth years ago to introduce and enact the Post-Conviction DNA Testing Grant Program. It was originally part of the Innocence Protection Act, which was enacted in 2004. It gives defendants like Kirk a chance to prove their innocence. To ensure our justice system gets it right from the beginning, the bill provides a means to improve the quality of indigent defense. Ensuring good representation for those accused of crimes means fewer innocent people will be behind bars. It is an outrage if an innocent person is wrongly punished, but then that injustice is exacerbated because it means the person who committed the crime is still out there, and oftentimes, as my friend from Texas knows, they will commit the crime again. The American people deserve a system that gets it right the first time. Many Senators in this Chamber know the story of my friend Debbie Smith, also a friend of the senior Senator from Texas. She has become a champion for victims of sexual assault. She waited 6 years after being attacked before her rape kit was tested and a culprit was caught. Think about that. During those 6 years, she had to live in terror that the person who did this heinous crime might come back and do it again. No one should have to live in fear while an attacker remains free to victimize someone else or them. This legislation not only provides important resources to improve the quality and efficiency of forensic testing, but it also expands it to underserved populations, such as those in rural areas, which is much of my State. Actually, every one of us has rural areas in our States. I have worked with Senators on both sides of the aisle to craft solutions to some of the most significant issues of our time. That is why I am proud to partner with Senator Cornyn on this important legislation. I hope we will continue to work together in the next Congress. We have to continue to protect all victims. We have to create fairness in our criminal justice system. We have to make sure we get it right the first time. I call on those who have worked with me on this important legislation to continue to support our efforts. We can correct costly mistakes in our criminal justice system; we will be a better country for it. We will have a lot more respect for our criminal justice system, and we will do what the best of our prosecutors and police want to do--get it right. I yield the floor.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I appreciate the work of my colleague, and I am glad to work with him on this.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, on another subject, each morning in this Chamber, we pledge allegiance to our flag. We end by declaring that we are ``one Nation under God with liberty and justice for all.'' I believe in those words, but it is not enough just to say the words. It is our obligation to bring meaning to this promise. Today I hope that Congress will finally take an important step forward by passing the bipartisan Justice for All Reauthorization Act. I have long championed the Justice for All Act to make our justice system more fair. Our bill will strengthen indigent defense and expand the rights of crime victims. It will improve the use of forensic evidence, including rape kits, to provide justice swiftly. It will help protect the innocent by increasing access to postconviction DNA testing. The Senate passed this bipartisan legislation in June, and the House approved a slightly modified version earlier this week. I am disappointed the House decreased authorizations for many programs I support. Still, the bill makes important changes and will improve the lives of many of our most vulnerable citizens. I urge my fellow Senators to consent to its immediate passage. As a former prosecutor, I am dedicated to ensuring that our criminal justice system has integrity and the confidence of the public it serves. I started out on the front lines as State's attorney in Chittenden County, VT. And for the past 20 years, I have served as chairman or ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. During that time, it has become clear to me that our system is deeply flawed-- there is not always justice for all. I have met many people who were wrongly convicted of crimes they did not commit. Kirk Bloodsworth--let me tell you a story about Kirk Bloodsworth, who is one such young man. He was just out of the Marines in 1984 when he was falsely convicted and sentenced to death for the rape and murder of a 9-year-old girl. He always declared his innocence, but he was nearly executed, until DNA evidence proved he was innocent in 1993 and helped law enforcement find the person who actually committed the crime. He became the first death row inmate in the United States exonerated by DNA evidence. I have always been impressed with his courage, but he was not the last. There were 149 innocent people exonerated just last year--in 1 year, 149--the highest number on record. Our justice system failed not only these innocent people, but also the victims of crime. Those of us who have been prosecutors know what it means if you convict the wrong person, aside from the injustice to the person who was convicted. It means that somebody who committed the crime is still out there free and has not been arrested and has not been convicted. Our justice system failed not only these innocent people but also the victims of crime. We can and we must do more to fix this injustice. I believe we should eliminate the death penalty entirely because I know the system gets it wrong. But until we do away with the death penalty, we must improve the integrity of our criminal justice system. That is why I joined with Kirk years ago to enact the Post-Conviction DNA Testing Grant Program. This was originally part of the Innocence Protection Act enacted in 2000, and it gives defendants like Kirk a chance to prove their innocence. That should not be too much to ask. We can and we must do more to fix this injustice. We must do more to ensure that our justice system gets it right from the beginning. That means improving the quality of indigent defense. Our system too often fails to provide a lawyer for every person accused of a crime, even if they cannot afford one. Our Founding Fathers recognized that no system could be fair if accusations by a king or a government went unchallenged. Without a vigorous defense, it is impossible to determine who is actually guilty and who has been wrongly accused. This legislation requires the Department of Justice to provide technical assistance to States to improve their indigent defense systems, and it ensures that public defenders will have a seat at the table when States determine how to use their Byrne JAG criminal justice funding. Improving systems of indigent defense will mean fewer innocent people behind bars. It is an outrage when an innocent person is wrongly punished. Of course, this injustice is compounded when the true perpetrator remains on the streets, able to commit more crimes. We lock up the wrong person, and the person who committed the crime is still out there to commit more crimes. My brave friend Debbie Smith, a champion for victims of sexual assault, waited 6 years after being attacked before her rape kit was tested and the perpetrator, the criminal, was caught. Survivors like Debbie should not have to live in anguish, knowing their attacker remains free. Our bill provides resources for forensic testing. Specifically, it creates a new tracking system so testing can be done more efficiently. It will also expand access to forensic exams in rural areas and for underserved populations. Coming from a State like Vermont, I know how important that will be in rural areas. Sexual assaults must be prevented wherever they occur, including in our Nation's prisons. That is why I strongly supported the Prison Rape Elimination Act when it was enacted in 2003. This bill imposes true accountability by withholding Federal funds from States who do not implement protections to prevent sexual assaults in our prisons. It also protects grants designed to provide services for survivors of domestic and sexual violence. Our legislation also builds on the landmark protections provided for victims of domestic violence in the 2013 Leahy-Crapo Violence Against Women Act. Imagine a woman living with an abusive partner in public housing, but her name is not on the lease. One night he beats her. She calls the police. The man is arrested. The women believes she is finally safe. But then the landlord says she has to leave immediately because the man is being evicted and she has no right to stay. The Justice for All Act will allow this woman time to remain there while she either finds another place to live or she can demonstrate she is eligible to remain under her own name. No person should be forced to choose between abuse and a place to live. And finally, our bill expands rights for victims of all crime. It builds upon the success of the Crime Victims' Rights Act by making it easier for crime victims to have an interpreter present during court proceedings and to obtain court-ordered restitution. It has been my great honor to serve as the most senior Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee since 1997. During that time, I have worked with Senators from both sides of the aisle to craft solutions to some of the most important problems of our time. I am proud to join with my good friend the Senator from Texas, Mr. Cornyn, on this legislation and the many advocates who have helped guide our work. I especially appreciate the work of the Innocence Project, the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network, the National Domestic Violence Hotline, the Consortium of Forensic Science Organizations, Just Detention International, the National Criminal Justice Association, the National District Attorneys Association, Legal Aid DC, the National Network to End Domestic Violence, the Joyful Heart Foundation, the ACLU, the National Juvenile Justice Network, and the National Center for Victims of Crime. Senator Cornyn and I have proved this is not a Republican or Democratic issue; this is a justice for all issue. That is why so many in both parties have joined, along with so many people around the country. As we consider legislation next Congress, we must remember that we have an obligation to look out for all victims and to create fairness in our criminal justice system. While we made some improvements this year, including passing the bipartisan Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act and the Sexual Assault Survivors' Rights Act, I am disappointed the Republican-led Congress failed to even allow a vote on bipartisan criminal justice reform legislation despite its strong support. As we look to the new Congress, I hope those who worked with me on this important issue will continue to support efforts to correct the costly mistakes of mandatory minimum sentences. I hope we can again build the same kind of broad bipartisan consensus in support of all victims of sexual assault and domestic violence as we did last Congress when we passed the Leahy-Crapo Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act through the Senate. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I see the distinguished Senator from Arkansas on the floor. I suggest we go to him next, but I ask unanimous consent that I be recognized when he finishes his comments.