Patty Murray

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President--and it is a pleasure to say that. Some may know him as ``the guy in the aviators'' deboarding Air Force Two or the man in the 1967 Corvette in the viral Internet video, gleeful, as he had the rare opportunity to drive himself around in his favorite car. Mr. President, it is so clear that the American public has embraced this grinning, approachable, unstoppable life force known as Vice President Joe Biden, but little do many Americans know of the heart of our Vice President. They have caught glimpses of it in 1972, when his wife and daughter were killed in a terrible car accident and his two sons severely injured. It is hard to imagine that kind of devastation, and Joe picked himself up and was sworn in to his first term in the U.S. Senate from his son's hospital room. Maybe they saw it last year when Joe's son Beau, following in his father's footsteps to be an extraordinary public servant and, more importantly, a wonderful father, lost a long and hard-fought battle with cancer. I know as a mother and grandmother myself that I will never understand what Joe went through. Mr. President, again, Joe picked himself up and continued to serve our country as a strong, dedicated Vice President in the midst of a raucous election season when Americans needed him the most. Joe Biden's commitment to his family, his struggles, and his service encompass what it means to be not just Vice President and a brilliant husband and father but an American. Joe grew up in a middle-class family who worked hard for everything they had. He was just 29 years old when he ran for a seat in the United States Senate. Mr. President, you might have been young, but you already saw what divided people in Delaware. He also knew that people across the State also held the same hopes for themselves and their families, and he believed he could work through those disparities. In an upset victory, he won a seat in the Senate in November of 1972. Since his swearing in, Joe has worked every day on behalf of families in Delaware and for the entire country, especially the last 8 years. When Joe lost his son to cancer, he launched a Moonshot for this generation to end cancer as we know it today. He is now working on behalf of every family whoever lost a loved one to cancer to push forward on medical innovations and discoveries. I am so proud Joe's Moonshot is included in the final Cures bill we just voted on this afternoon and even more so that the Senate renamed the provisions to support cancer research in that bill to honor Beau in calling it the Beau Biden Cancer Moonshot. We will now use those investments to fight to cure cancer so we can look forward to a world where no family has to go through what the Bidens did and the devastation that millions of other Americans have experienced after being touched by cancer. Mr. President, back when I was serving with the Presiding Officer, Joe, my friend, in the Senate in 1994, I had the pleasure of working with him to pass the Violence Against Women Act, VAWA, as we know it. It was a landmark piece of legislation that changed the way our country responded to domestic violence and sexual assault. Joe has come out as a strong advocate for ending violence against women through his campaign, ``1is2Many,'' spreading awareness and working to help reduce dating violence and sexual assaults among students, teens, and young adults. And his ``It's On Us'' campaign has been a wake-up call to the epidemic of campus sexual assaults across the country. Women are safer today in America than they were 20 years ago due in part to Joe's fearless leadership on these issues that affect too many in our Nation. Despite everything he has been through or maybe because of everything he has been through, he gets back up and he fights on and he fights on behalf of every family in our country, and that is heart. That is heart, the way he always wants to make people happy, no matter what the circumstance. Last time he was in Seattle, he brought a little stuffed animal--a little dog--to give to my granddaughter. Now, she is very shy, but the second he smiled and handed her that little dog, she became his best friend ever, and she keeps it by her side, Joe. That is why he is going to be missed, by his colleagues and by the entire country, because of his humanity. That is the Joe Biden I know and I want everyone else to know that too. It has been an honor to call Joe a fellow Senator, Mr. Vice President, but mostly a great friend. I want to thank Joe for what he has taught me and all of our colleagues through his service and thank him for his extraordinary and inspiring leadership throughout his life in the best of times and in the worst. Joe--and his aviators--will be sorely missed. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I wish to start by expressing my appreciation to all of my colleagues who have worked so hard on the priorities in the 21st Century Cures bill, including investing in tackling our hardest to treat diseases, confronting the opioid epidemic, strengthening mental health care, and advancing medical innovation. The legislation that we will be voting on either really late tonight or tomorrow morning takes important steps to improve the care that patients receive. I am very grateful to every Senator and Member of Congress who worked across the aisle to make this legislation the best it could be for those whom we serve. In particular, I want to express my heartfelt thanks to Vice President Joe Biden. Not everyone has the strength to respond to profound personal tragedy by doing even more to protect and help others, but that is exactly what he has done. I know we are all grateful for and inspired by his leadership, and I am confident it has given a lot of families hope, knowing that Joe Biden is fighting for them and their loved ones. Of course, I want to acknowledge and thank the chairman of the HELP Committee, Senator Alexander, for his work and leadership on this bill, as well as the Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton, Ranking Member Frank Pallone, and Congresswoman Diana DeGette. I am proud of our country's history of lifesaving public health initiatives and world-changing medical innovation. From eradicating smallpox to mapping the human genome, we have risen to challenges and found ways to combat seemingly unbeatable diseases and public health threats. There is no question we are a strong country for that. The bill we are talking about today, while far from perfect, gives us the chance to build on that tradition of leadership and respond to some urgent health challenges we face right now. One of those is the opioid epidemic. Like many of my colleagues, I have heard from far too many families and local leaders in my home State about the ways that opioid use disorders are ruining lives and tearing families apart. My constituent Penny LeGate, whose daughter Marah died of an overdose at the age of 19, said that this crisis can happen anywhere and it is everywhere. That is the same thing I have heard from worried parents and sheriffs and community leaders across Washington State. I was glad that earlier this year, the Senate passed the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act to strengthen and improve programs that address opioid addiction. But, as Democrats made clear, improving policy wasn't enough. Tackling this crisis head-on requires putting new investments into these efforts as quickly as possible, and that is what this bill will do. It dedicates $1 billion over 2 years, above and beyond the budget caps, to help States and communities fight back. And critically, we were able to secure changes that ensure this money will go to States based on where it is needed the most. Many of my colleagues were closely involved with this effort, but in particular I wish to recognize Senators Whitehouse, Shaheen, Baldwin, Markey, Donnelly, and Manchin. I have also heard from people across Washington State and the country about what a broken mental health system means for them and their families. One constituent whose experience has really stuck with me is Jenny. Jenny is from Olympia, WA, and she was pregnant when her husband began having severe psychotic episodes. Jenny told me that she remembered how striking the differences were between the coordinated, thoughtful care she received as an expectant mother and the confusing patchwork that she and her husband had to navigate to try to help him get better. Jenny's husband cycled in and out of the hospital without effective treatment, and tragically he took his own life while Jenny was in the NICU with their newborn baby. Jenny's story is unfortunately one of many about families struggling to find quality mental health care for loved ones with mental illness. I am confident that everyone here today has heard these stories, and we know we have to do better. Our legislation will help expand access to quality care for mental illness and substance use disorders by making it easier for patients to get in touch with providers. It will strengthen coordination between local agencies that are engaged in crisis intervention, and it will make sure that resources are available to strengthen the mental health workforce. While we weren't able to resolve the IMD exclusion, which is a policy that makes it extremely difficult for States to provide inpatient care to those with mental illness and substance abuse disorders, this bill does change policy so that Federal funding will fully support the physical needs of children in psychiatric facilities. It also puts in place measures to strengthen our mental health parity law to make sure that health insurance will cover mental health and addiction services when it is needed. Chairman Alexander and I worked with Senators Murphy and Cassidy to move this legislation through our committee this year, and I wish to recognize their commitment and leadership on this issue in particular. In addition to investing in and tackling the opioid epidemic and putting in place desperately needed reforms to our mental health care system, this legislation makes real investments in tackling the hardest to treat diseases. According to the National Cancer Institute at NIH, 40 percent of men and women in the United States will be diagnosed with some form of cancer in their lives. Right now, more than 5 million people are living with Alzheimer's. These are truly staggering statistics, and they represent enormous hardship and suffering and loss in nearly every family and community. Now we have made enormous progress in understanding and treating cancer, and we know more about how the brain works and what diseases like Alzheimer's and Parkinson's and traumatic injuries do to human minds, but we can and must do more, and that is exactly what the investments in NIH in this bill will mean. While this is not the mandatory funding we had hoped for, I want to be very clear: This is real funding. So $4.8 billion is paid for within this bill, targeted to specific NIH initiatives, and available to appropriators above and beyond the budget caps. That means, as a result of this legislation--and thanks, in particular, to the leadership and vision of Vice President Biden--we will be able to invest billions right away in better understanding, preventing, and treating diseases that have impacted so many families. This bill also ensures that those investments in research will benefit all Americans, including women and children, LGBT individuals, and racial and ethnic minorities. This bill also puts $500 million above and beyond the budget cap toward helping the FDA meet the same high standards of patient and consumer safety in the face of increasing demands on the agency and new responsibilities under this legislation. As Democrats have made clear throughout this process, upholding the gold standard of FDA approval that patients and families across the country trust is a top priority. In light of the antibiotic-resistant infections linked to contaminated medical devices called duodenoscopes in Seattle and across the country, it was particularly important to me to make sure that this bill strengthened the FDA's authority to require that medical device manufacturers ensure their products will remain safe after they have gone into repeated uses at our hospitals. We also fought hard to move many of the other FDA reform policies that are included in this bill in the direction of greater patient and consumer safety. In particular, I was pleased that we were able to take out legislation that would have watered down transparency around drug and device industry payments to doctors, and I appreciate my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who were ultimately willing to work with us to make those changes. Now, looking ahead to next year, I plan to monitor implementation of this bill extremely closely, with a focus on making sure the incoming administration adheres to the policies laid out in this bill and upholds the FDA's responsibility to patients and families to ensure our medicines and treatments are safe and effective. This standard has been critical to fueling biomedical innovation in America for over half a century. And while I am disappointed that Republicans were unwilling to take action on this legislation to tackle the high cost of prescription drugs, I am very glad we were able to remove expensive provisions that could have driven up costs for consumers even more. While this bill is not what I would have written on my own, it is certainly not what my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would have written on their own, either. It locks in critical advancements ahead of the incoming administration and the partisan approach they are signaling they will take on health care, and it will make a real difference for patients and families across the country now and for years into the future. Before I wrap up, I want to acknowledge the extraordinary time and effort put in by all of our staffs. There have been a lot of late nights and weekends for our staffs, not just this year but last year as well on this bill, and I want to take just a minute to recognize their extra effort and sacrifice. On Senator Alexander's staff, I want to particularly acknowledge and thank his staff director, David Cleary, as well as Mary-Sumpter Lapinski and Grace Stuntz, his health and FDA policy leads, who worked very closely with my staff over many months. I also want to acknowledge and thank Margaret Coulter, Brett Meeks, Laura Pence, Melissa Pfaff, Kara Townshend, and Elizabeth Wroe for their efforts on this bill. In the House, I want to recognize and thank the staff of Congressman Pallone, including his staff director, Jeff Carroll, along with Tiffany Guarascio, his health policy lead. I thank the staff of Chairman Upton, particularly his staff director, Gary Andres, and Paul Edattel, his health policy lead. In addition, I thank the staff of my members on the HELP Committee, who worked so closely with my staff to make this a reality. In particular, I thank David Bonine and Joe Dunn with Senator Murphy. I want to acknowledge the assistance of Amy Rosenbaum, Jeanne Lambrew, Kate Mevis, and Dr. Francis Collins, among many others within the administration who helped make today possible. Finally, I want to close by thanking my staff. I can't say enough about my incredible staff, who have put their time and talents into this bill from the word ``go.'' In particular, I thank my staff director, Evan Schatz, and my health policy director, Nick Bath, for their extraordinary efforts on this legislation. Thank you. I would also like to acknowledge the hard work of Remy Brim, Julie Tierney, Andi Fristedt, Colin Goldfinch, Melanie Rainer, Madeleine Pannell, Megan Howard, Elizabeth Wagner, Wade Ackerman, Kalah Auchincloss, Jane Bigham, Helen Hare, Eli Zupnick, John Righter, Nick McLane, and my chief of staff, Mike Spahn. I want you to know that I noticed their long hours and unwavering commitment on this legislation. It means a lot. I urge my colleagues to join the House when we vote on this, which voted overwhelmingly in support of this bill--392 to 26--and to join us in sending this legislation to President Obama's desk. Thank you. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Megan Howard, a fellow with Senator Murray's HELP Committee staff, be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the 114th Congress.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session and the Banking Committee be discharged from further consideration of PN1053, the nomination of John Mark McWatters, of Texas, to be a Member of the Board of Directors of the Export-Import Bank; that the Senate proceed to its consideration and vote without intervening action or debate; that if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I come to the floor this afternoon to join my colleagues who have already noted that we are now at an unbelievable, unprecedented 195 days--over 6 months--since the President nominated Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court. Do you know what else could have happened in this time period? We could have gone through the confirmation process for the last Republican-nominated Justice twice and still have 11 days leftover. We could have sailed around the world almost four times or flown to the moon and back 30 times, but Senate Republicans have refused to even hold one hearing for Judge Merrick Garland. By allowing this absurd political game to continue, Republicans are preventing the rest of us from upholding our constitutional duty to consider the Supreme Court nominee. Senate Republicans will not say that their historic obstruction is because they are opposed to Judge Garland; they are just refusing to consider him, even though many Republicans have met with him and admitted that Judge Garland's distinguished career and work history show that he is, without a doubt, someone who deserves fair consideration by all of us here in the U.S. Senate. He deserves a hearing and a vote. I should add that by refusing to do their jobs and by saying they want to leave it to the next President, Republicans are telling the American people they would rather save the seat for their Presidential nominee to fill than give a strong nominee a fair hearing and a vote. We all know what that means. This is far too important to the people of this country to hold off any longer. They have now seen the results of a short-handed Supreme Court with split decisions and continued uncertainty about important issues. The Court is now days away from beginning its October session. With every day that goes by and every Supreme Court decision that comes down without a full bench, the need for action is clearer and clearer. This gridlock and dysfunction that has dominated too much of our time and other work here in the Congress should be pushed aside right now. Republicans blocked the Zika emergency funding bill for 7 months, and the gridlock has once again brought us far too close to another manufacturing crisis--a government shutdown. I hope Republicans will realize how ridiculous this partisan gridlock is. After 195 days of being one Justice short on the Supreme Court of the United States, I urge our colleagues to fulfill our constitutional responsibility, hold a hearing for Judge Merrick Garland, and give him a vote. We owe that to the people we represent, and it is simply the right thing to do. Washington State families should have a voice. Families across America should have a voice. They have waited long enough--nearly 200 days--to have nine Justices serving on the highest Court in the land, and they deserve better. Shooting in Burlington, Washington Mr. President, while I have the floor, I want to bring another issue to my colleagues' attention, and that is the anguish of the people in a community in my home State of Washington, the city of Burlington. This is yet another community that is hurting after another senseless act of violence in a mall--a shooting that left five people dead. This is a headline that has become all too common in our country. I urge everyone listening today to keep the victims, their families, their friends, and their coworkers in their thoughts and prayers. I implore everyone in this Chamber to come together and address the scourge of gun violence that has devastated one too many communities once again. Enough is enough. I thank the Presiding Officer and yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, if the minority leader will yield for a moment.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I just want to add my congratulations to Tim for his tremendous work here. I have been here for 24 years, and every year I have been here, he has been a critical part of the work we do. Thank you, Tim, for the numerous issues you have helped us work our way through. For me, when I was chairing the Budget Committee, which we all know is a very chaotic, long, and tedious process, Tim was there to make sure we did it right, that we were in order, and that things moved smoothly. Tim, we could not have done it without you. Thank you for your 25 years of service and thank you to your family for allowing you to be here with us for 25 years of service, and I thank you for all you will continue to do in the future. Thank you.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I too want to thank the Senator from Florida for his strong effort to get this done. I thank my colleagues who are here speaking as well. There are just a few days left in this legislative session. I am so frustrated that instead of finally coming out of their partisan corner and getting to work to fight the Zika virus, Republican leaders, as we just saw, have doubled down on their politics-first approach. It has been more than 5 months since President Obama first put forward a strong emergency funding proposal to respond to Zika. Rather than giving that proposal a serious consideration, Republicans simply refused to even consider it. Instead, they found excuse after excuse, delay after delay, and refused to listen to public health experts and women and families who made it clear that Congress needed to act. They tried to jam a partisan, political bill through Congress on the way out of town on the Fourth of July. Now, look, as we just heard, it was a bill that included harmful, political provisions on everything from women's health to the Confederate flag to the environment. Now, as this Republican-controlled Congress is headed out of town again, Republicans are somehow trying to claim that they have done everything they need to do when it comes to Zika. They are saying that by putting forward now a partisan bill full of harmful and unnecessary policy riders, they can throw up their hands and go home. Well, that might be how Republicans in Congress want it to work, but the women and families I talk to could not disagree more. They are worried about what this virus could mean to their families. They want Congress to take action. Republicans should know that Democrats are going to keep pushing until that happens. It is especially frustrating that, despite all of the partisanship and tea party pandering we have seen from the other side of the aisle, Republicans and Democrats in this Senate did reach an agreement on Zika 2 months ago that got the support of every Democrat and nearly half of the Republicans--89 votes. It did not provide the full amount President Obama requested, but it would have been a strong down payment. It would have helped to accelerate the development of a vaccine. It would strengthen vector control in communities across the United States and the territories and critically expand access to desperately needed family planning and other health care services. Had Republicans been willing to stay the bipartisan course that we set and push aside the extreme members who insist on using women's health every time as a political football, that agreement would now have been signed into law, and it would be on its way to communities, as we speak. I am deeply frustrated that has not happened. This is truly urgent. In fact, just last week, the Puerto Rico Department of Health noted a 40-percent increase in the number of pregnant women with Zika on the island. So, frankly, it is appalling that given what we know about the impacts of this virus, Republicans would put an ideological, partisan bill in front of us and say: My way or the highway. That is why today Democrats are here giving Republicans another chance to do the right thing. We are urging them to support women and families instead of the tea party and Heritage Action and join us to get a strong bipartisan emergency funding package to communities at risk because of the Zika virus. This bill has already passed the Senate, as we know, with 89 votes. Democrats supported it. Most Republicans supported it. So we are here to urge Republican leaders: Don't waste another minute. Join us in moving a bipartisan bill forward. Women and families across the country have waited long enough for action on Zika. Let's not make them wait any longer. I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I want to start by saying how disappointed I was by the comments I heard from Republican leaders last night on Zika. It seems that after months and months of their delaying, after they rejected our bipartisan plan, kicked Democrats out of the negotiating room, and passed a partisan bill in the middle of the night, Republicans are now scrambling to blame anyone but themselves for their own inaction on Zika. It is absurd, it is irresponsible, and people across the country are not going to buy it. Republicans control Congress. They blocked action for months and months. They fought us at every step, and now that they finally realized that the American people aren't going to stand for inaction, they are desperately searching for excuses instead of honestly looking for solutions. But women and families aren't looking for Republicans to point fingers; they are looking for a serious response to Zika. We all know very well that Democrats and Republicans don't always see eye to eye, but one thing we should be able to agree on is that when there is a serious, national, and global public health threat, we should put our differences aside and work together to protect women, families, and communities. Unfortunately, when it comes to the Zika virus, Republicans are now doing the exact opposite. It has been 4 months since President Obama first put forward a strong emergency funding proposal. Even though we are in the midst of mosquito season, the House Republicans chose last week to double down on a partisan, pandering bill when it comes to this frightening virus. Instead of working with Democrats on a serious response to Zika, they voted to end the conference, pass an extremely partisan report in the middle of the night, and leave town. There is a lot to be concerned about in this legislation, but, critically, this proposal would impose politically motivated restrictions that limit women's access to contraception and health care with providers they rely on. It should go without saying, but in the midst of a public health emergency that impacts women and families, the last thing Republicans should be doing is playing politics with women's health and making it harder for them to get care when and where they need it. It is truly frustrating, especially since just weeks ago, Senate Democrats and Republicans agreed on a bipartisan downpayment on the President's proposal, and that bipartisan legislation could have already passed the House and Senate, could have been signed into law by the President, and started helping women and families in need by now. Today, ahead of the Senate's vote on this partisan political proposal that came out of the House in the middle of the night last week, we have a clear message for Republicans: Enough is enough--enough with the partisanship, enough with the poison pills, and enough with using women's health to pander to the tea party. We have a narrow window to get an effective response to this virus under way, and every infection that we prevent now is a potential tragedy averted for a family in the communities we serve. Democrats are ready to work together, just as we have been for months. I urge Republicans to come back to the negotiating table and work with us on a real response to a truly serious public health threat. Women and families are expecting us to act and have already waited long enough. I thank the Presiding Officer, and I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I want to start by thanking my colleague, Senator Mikulski, for her leadership in the fight for equal pay for equal work. It has been 50 years since the signing of the Equal Pay Act. But despite how far women have come, despite all the progress women have made and the ways women contribute across our economy, women still only make 79 cents on the dollar. The gap is even wider for women of color: for African-American women, 60 cents on the dollar; for Native American women, 59 cents on the dollar; and for Hispanic women, 55 cents on the dollar. This status quo is not only deeply unfair to women, but it is also bad for families and it is bad for our economy because today 60 percent of working families rely on wages from two earners. We have to do better. That is why I was so pleased when earlier this year the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission took a very important step in the right direction with a modest proposal to collect pay data on a form that employers already submit in order to accomplish one goal--making sure that we have solid information about how employers pay their male and female workers. This proposal is pretty straightforward. It brings new and much needed transparency to workplaces and might even help businesses address pay gaps that they weren't even aware existed. It would also make enforcement of pay discrimination laws more effective and efficient. Especially when it comes to an issue like wage discrimination, I would like to think it would be hard to argue against more transparency and more effective enforcement because when women are not getting equal pay for equal work, we should be able to find out about it and we should be able to fix it. It is disappointing that Republicans in both the House and the Senate are opposing that proposal. That is absolutely the wrong approach. What makes this even more surprising is that just weeks ago I was very proud to stand right here to introduce a resolution in the Senate calling for equal pay for equal work for the U.S. women's national soccer team. It was a resolution that recognized the impact of the wage gap on women and the need to fix it, and it passed by voice vote. Given that the Senate was able to agree on the seriousness of this problem, I would like to give all my colleagues an opportunity today to take another step forward--not backward--on equal pay for equal work. I have filed an amendment that would provide much needed new resources to ensure this important proposal can be implemented and finalized as quickly as possible. I urge our colleagues to support the amendment and oppose efforts by some in the Republican Party to stand in the way of better information and enforcement on pay equity. It should go without saying, but if a woman still isn't getting equal pay in the 21st century, she deserves to know and she deserves action. This rule would take critical steps in the right direction for women, families, and our country as a whole, and I hope that our Republican colleagues will not stand in its way. I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I am on the floor to focus on some very frightening news we got late last week about the Zika virus, news that shows just how important it is that we get emergency funding to the President's desk right away. Last week, three babies were born in the United States with birth defects linked to Zika. Three other pregnancies didn't make it to term as a result of this virus. As a mother and grandmother, my heart goes out to these families, and as a U.S. Senator, I am extremely frustrated that 4 months since President Obama first asked for a strong emergency funding package to respond to this frightening virus, Congress still has not sent anything to the President's desk because, unfortunately, the longer we wait to act, the more those numbers are going to grow. In fact, Tom Frieden, Director of the CDC, has said in Puerto Rico alone, hundreds of babies could be born with birth defects related to Zika. There are already nearly 2,200 reported cases of Zika in the United States and the territories, and more than 400 expecting mothers are being monitored for possible infection. Without question, this is a public health emergency. What makes it all the more frustrating is we have an agreement that could go to the President to be signed into law right away. While it shouldn't have taken so long, Senate Republicans did finally agree to work with us on a downpayment on the President's emergency funding proposal. The agreement we have reached would give communities more resources for vector control. It would help accelerate development of a vaccine and, critically, provide much needed preventive health care, including family planning services, such as contraception, to families who ask for it. This package has support from both sides of the aisle. All Senate Democrats and nearly half of Senate Republicans voted for it. It has now been a full month since that agreement passed in the Senate. Unfortunately, instead of acting on it, House Republicans chose to move to conference with their own underfunded, irresponsible proposal that offers just one-third of what is needed to combat this virus and drains much needed resources from the ongoing Ebola response effort. With the health and well-being of women and babies on the line, now is not the time for nickel-and-diming. It is not the time for debates about taking from one health care priority to support another. This is the time to act because every infection prevented is a potential tragedy prevented, and there is no good reason why we cannot get a strong emergency funding proposal to the President's desk this week. Families are looking to Congress for action on Zika. It is well past time that we delivered, and I hope we can get this done without any further delay. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. MURRAY

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

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield for a question, first of all, I thank the Senator for bringing attention to this critical issue and for everything that he is doing to fight for more than just thoughts and prayers but actually for action. Few Senators have a better firsthand understanding of this issue and the impact it has on our families and our communities and the urgent need to address it. As we mourn for the victims and families who were impacted by the horrific violence and terror against LGBT and Latino Americans in Orlando on Sunday, we are once again reminded that no one is safe from the horrific epidemic of gun violence in our country--not even in our schools, which should be safe havens for our students. I know the Senator knows this all too well. My home State of Washington is no stranger to this as well. In 2014, a man walked into an academic hall at Seattle Pacific University in Seattle, shooting three students and taking the life of a freshman. Later that very same year, a 15-year-old boy shot five other students, killing four, at Marysville Pilchuck High School in Marysville, with his dad's gun. Those shootings were devastating to parents, siblings, friends, and teachers--to our entire community. Those are just two examples in my home State. In Newtown, and across the country, there are too many shootings in schools to even name. According to a report from Everytown, from 2013 to 2016, we had 188 shootings at schools across the country. Not all were mass murders; some just a gun going off in the air, other students were wounded, others were attempts at self-harm. That is terrifying in a school when a shotgun goes off; that noise, what happens to the kids around it, and it is frightening to me that this is not letting up. It sickens me actually that in America today parents have to wonder if their children will be safe when they send them off to school or when they go to a movie theater or a mall or even on a street in their own neighborhood. Every time there is a new mass shooting, I get the same question from the people I represent in Washington State: What is Congress going to do to stop this? It is frustrating to me that every time I come back with the same answer, ``We have been blocked from doing anything,'' in response to my constituents and the people across the country. People are asking and begging for us to do something--anything--to stop this scourge of gun violence that has once again been splashed across the front pages of our newspapers and on our TV screens. I say to Senator Murphy, I know you are talking about a number of issues around gun violence today. We all so appreciate it, but I wanted to come here today to specifically ask you: Can you talk a little bit-- because you have seen it firsthand--about how this impacts our students in particular?

Mrs. MURRAY. I appreciate the Senator's response because, to me, there are multiple layers, but certainly if we are not doing anything to provide that safety for our young kids in this country, we are not living up to our responsibility as adults today. It is horrific for a parent to get that text home saying there has been a school lockdown. It is even worse if the consequences are real. It seems to me, the Senator is right to be out here today discussing and bringing attention to it and doing more than just saying, ``Let's do something,'' but really forcing us to make sure we are doing something, and I thank the Senator.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I thank the Chairman of the HELP Committee, Senator Alexander, for his comments. I share his concerns that section 578 of the National Defense Authorization Act bill is not the right way to ensure students can learn in safe and secure school environments, and will impose unfair and unreasonable requirements on more than 1,200 schools districts across the country. Criminal background checks are a critically important means to ensure that students are safe in our schools, and that is why they are required in 46 States. But the language of section 578 will force the 1,225 school districts that receive Impact Aid funds--and which are in almost every State--to have two separate criminal background check systems for different schools and different employees within a single school district. It is costly, duplicative, poorly conceived, and should not be part of a Defense authorization bill. In my State of Washington 628 schools, about a quarter of our public schools, receive Impact Aid funds and would be subject to a separate expensive set of background checks that differs from the background checks already conducted. In the chairman's State, 571 schools receive Impact Aid funds and would be subject to this different standard. It is fundamentally unfair and not beneficial to students to ask our schools and our school districts to assume the costs of these checks, which are similar to but not exactly the same as those already conducted in our States. Our highest priority is making sure students in schools across the country are protected. But I agree with the chairman that section 578 of the National Defense Authorization Act, NDAA, is not the right way to help schools effectively protect their students. As the Chairman already noted, the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act that occurred less than a year ago took a major step forward in protecting unsuspecting students and families from school employees suspected of abuse in previous positions. We incentivized schools and districts to report cases of suspected abuse to law enforcement and made it far more difficult for schools to quietly allow suspected abusers to seek employment in another State or school district. The amendment that provided those protections was adopted by a vote of 98-0. While this was an important step forward, I continue to look for ways to build on it and continue our work making sure students are being protected most effectively. Unfortunately, rather than taking the important step of extending similar protections for students to schools operated by the Department of Defense, the bill instead overrides a comprehensive Department of Defense criminal background check regulation that provides strong new protections to students and is less than a year old. NDAA section 578 imposes a background check system with serious problems on DOD schools and then further extends that problematic background check system to non-Department of Defense schools all over the country. Section 578 imposes a system of criminal background checks that prohibits people from working in any capacity in these schools if they have committed low-level offenses having nothing to do with violence or children. Unlike the laws in 29 States, as well as the new Department of Defense regulation, section 578 of the NDAA offers employees no way to demonstrate mitigating circumstances and requires that employees are terminated while appealing a finding, even though these records are often inaccurate or incomplete. Section 578 is unnecessary, expensive, unfairly creates competing background check systems in States across the county and, most importantly, is not the right way to ensure our schools are safe. This provision is not within the jurisdiction of the Armed Services Committee, and I join the chairman in his position that it should not be included in the final bill. Mr. President, I thank the Senator for engaging in the colloquy.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I want to start by offering my condolences to the families and loved ones of the victims of Sunday's heinous attack in the city of Orlando and to everyone who was affected by this terrible tragedy and act of terror. While our hearts are with the families and the communities right now, in the coming days we should have a robust debate about how we can all come together to do everything possible to prevent tragedies like that from happening again. Madam President, I want to turn to the bill we are considering today, the National Defense Authorization Act, which has been described as one that will modernize the military health system and give the men and women of our military better quality care, better access, and a better experience. It has been described as upholding commitments to our servicemembers. I wish I could stand here and say that I agree with that 100 percent, but there is a glaring problem in this bill. It is a problem that really cuts against the idea that our country should be there for the men and women of our military, who risk so much on our behalf, no matter what. Go to page 1,455 of this massive bill. Buried in a funding chart, there is one line that would zero out a new program intended to help men and women in our military who suffer catastrophic injuries while fighting on our behalf. I don't know how this line got in there. I don't know who thought it was a good idea. I don't know why, but I do know what this is: It is absolutely wrong, and we ought to fix it. That is why I have come to the Senate floor repeatedly over the past week to urge my colleagues to correct this shameful change, and with the clock running down on this bill, now is the time to act. Let me give this some context. Six months ago the Pentagon announced a pilot program to offer our servicemembers who are getting ready to deploy an opportunity at cryopreservation; in other words, freezing their eggs or sperm. It gave deploying servicemembers not just the ability to have reproductive options in the event they are grievously injured but some deserved peace of mind. It meant they don't have to worry about choosing between defending their country or a chance at having a family someday. This new program was met with widespread praise and relief. It reflected a basic level of respect for servicemembers who are willing to risk suffering catastrophic injuries on our behalf. I was hoping this new program was a step we could build on, a move in the right direction, an important part of our larger work to help our warriors who have sustained grievous injuries achieve their dream of starting a family. That is why I was so disturbed when I learned this bill would move us in the other way. Despite what some of my colleagues have been saying, my amendment very deliberately states that it will not divert money from any other important health programs. I am here again today to ask unanimous consent to have a vote on my amendment that would restore this pilot program. It is hard to imagine any of my colleagues standing up to say that men and women who are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice for their country and for all of us should be denied a shot at their dream of a family. I am hopeful we can have a vote on this, and I encourage my colleagues to support it and step away from what would be a truly shameful mistake. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order to offer amendment No. 4490, relating to fertility treatments, and that the Senate vote in relation to the amendment, with no second-degree amendments in order prior to the vote.

Mrs. MURRAY. Is there objection to my request?

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I came to the floor yesterday to talk about a truly shameful change that is buried away in this bill. It is a change that would put us on a path to go back on a promise that we made to our servicemembers just 6 months ago and a change, if left unfixed, that will pull the rug out for men and women in the Armed Forces who are prepared to make the highest sacrifice for the country they love. In case any of my colleagues are unaware, a single line in this massive Defense bill on page 1,455, buried in the funding chart, would zero out a new program that is intended to help men and women in our military realize their dream of having a family even if they go on to suffer catastrophic injuries when they are fighting on our behalf. I don't know how this line got in there, I don't know who thought it was a good idea, and I don't know why, but what I do know is this: It is wrong and it has to be fixed. I just want to tell my colleagues that 6 months ago the Pentagon announced a pilot program that would offer servicemembers who are getting ready to deploy an opportunity at cryopreservation--in other words, freezing their eggs or sperm. This new program gave our deploying servicemembers not just the ability to have reproductive options in the event they are grievously injured but some deserved peace of mind. It took us a step forward in the promise we have made to our servicemembers to support them when they sacrifice so much for us, and it meant they wouldn't have to worry about choosing between defending their country or a chance of having a family some day. This new program was met with widespread praise and relief. Men and women who were getting ready to deploy--many of whom were thinking about exploring cryopreservation, using their own money if they could afford it--were assured that their country had their back. While the pilot program was not groundbreaking, these services have long been available in the private sector, and, in fact, fertility preservation techniques have been used by the British Armed Forces for years. It reflected a basic level of respect for servicemembers who are willing to risk suffering catastrophic injuries on our behalf, and it sent a clear message that no matter what happens to them on the battlefield, we will be ready to stand with them with whatever they need. I was hoping this new program was a step we could build on, a move in the right direction, an important part of our larger work to help our warriors who sustained grievous injuries achieve their dream of starting a family, which is why I was so upset when I learned this bill would move us the other way. It would take this promise we just made to our warriors and toss it in the trash. It would be a slap in the face to the men and women who serve us proudly and heroically. And honestly, it is the wrong thing to do. Many people here in the Senate are quick to honor our military with their words, but for the men and women who signed up to fight on our behalf and are looking ahead to potentially massive sacrifices, we owe them so much more than that. We owe them action, respect, and a shot at their dream of having a family. We need to fix this bill. We owe them that much. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order to offer Murray amendment No. 4490 relating to fertility treatments and that the Senate vote in relation to this amendment with no second-degree amendments in order prior to the vote.

Mrs. MURRAY

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

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I am on the floor this afternoon, along with my good friend and colleague, the senior Senator from Connecticut. He is going to be here shortly to speak as well, and I thank him for his leadership throughout the NDAA process. We are here because we strongly believe that in Congress we should be working on ways to boost economic security for more families and help our economy grow from the middle out, not from the top down. A fundamental part of that is making sure our companies pay workers fairly and provide them with safe workplaces and treat them with respect. Unfortunately, Senator Blumenthal and I have come to the floor to speak against a provision that would seriously undermine the spirit of bipartisanship we have cultivated thus far. As it stands, this bill contains a provision that would help shield defense contractors that steal money out of their workers' paychecks or refuse to pay the minimum wage. It would help protect the companies that violate workplace safety laws while receiving taxpayer dollars, and it would allow companies with a history of discriminating against women, people of color, and individuals with disabilities to continue receiving defense contracts, and to me that is unacceptable. For too long, the Federal Government has awarded billions of taxpayer dollars to companies that rob workers of their paychecks and fail to maintain safe working conditions. To help right those wrongs, President Obama issued the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Executive order, and I was very proud to support him. Under the new proposed guidelines, when a company applies for a Federal contract, they will need to be upfront about their safety, health, and labor violations over the past 3 years. That way, government agencies can consider an employer's record of providing workers with a safe workplace and paying workers what they have earned before granting or renewing Federal contracts. To be clear, the new rules do not prevent these companies from winning Federal contracts. The new protections will just improve transparency so government agencies are aware of the company's violations and can help them come into compliance with the law. These are worker protection laws that are already on the books, including laws that affect our veterans, such as the Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974. This will have some major benefits for our workers and taxpayers. First of all, it will help hold Federal contractors accountable. American taxpayers should have the basic guarantee that their dollars are going to responsible contractors that will not steal from their workers or expose their workers to safety hazards. This will help protect basic worker rights and that in turn will help expand economic security for more working families and, finally, this new protection will help level the playing field for businesses that follow our laws. These businesses should not have to compete with corporations that cut corners and put their workers' safety at risk or cheat workers on their paychecks. It will also have another benefit. Some of these same irresponsible companies that exploit their workers are also irresponsible when it comes to staying on schedule and on budget. One report found that among the companies that had the most egregious workplace violations between 2005 and 2009, one-quarter of them also had significant performance problems like cost overruns and schedule delays. So these new rules will help the Federal Government choose contractors that are actually efficient and effective, which in return will help save taxpayer dollars. Rewarding efficient and effective contractors should be a bipartisan goal, but unfortunately some of my colleagues want to give defense contractors a special carve-out from these crucial accountability measures and, to me, that is unacceptable. It is time to stop rewarding Federal contractors that have a history of violating workers' rights. That is why I support the amendment of my colleague from Connecticut, which will make sure the Defense Department considers all companies' full record before granting or renewing their Federal contracts. Like many of our colleagues, I am focused on leveling the playing field for companies that do the right thing by their workers, protect American taxpayers, and boost economic security for our workers. That is why I remain strongly opposed to the damaging provision in the underlying bill, and I do hope our colleagues will join us in supporting our amendment to undo the carve-out and allow these critical protections for our workers to be implemented as they were intended. I thank the Presiding Officer. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, when we ask the men and women of this country to go to war on our behalf, we make a solemn promise to take care of them, to support them while they are abroad, and take care of them when they come home. As a daughter of a World War II veteran, this is a promise I take very seriously, and I know that my colleagues do too. One aspect of this promise that I have been proud to fight for is the idea that we should help warriors who have sustained grievous injuries achieve their dream of starting families. This is something that is hard for many people to think about, but it is a reality for far too many men and women, people like Tyler Wilson. He is a veteran I met who is paralyzed and nearly died in a firefight in Afghanistan. After years of surgeries and rehab and learning an entirely new way of living, he met Crystal, the woman he wanted to spend the rest of his life with. Together, they wanted to start a family. I believe we have an obligation as a nation to help them. That is why I have been fighting to expand VA care to pay for IVF treatments for people like Tyler. It is why I was so encouraged that 6 months ago the Pentagon announced a pilot program to allow servicemembers who are getting ready to deploy--the very men and women who are willing to put their lives on the line in defense of our country--an opportunity at cryopreservation. That is a practice already widely used among the general population. It gives our deploying members not only the ability to have options for family planning in the event they are injured on the battlefield, but it gives them peace of mind. It says they don't have to worry about choosing between defending their country or a chance at a family someday. As Secretary Ash Carter said himself, this was a move that ``honors the desire of our men and women to commit themselves completely to their careers, or to serve courageously in combat, while preserving their ability to have children in the future.'' I couldn't agree with that sentiment more. While the pilot program was not groundbreaking and, in fact, has been used by the British Armed Forces for years, I believe the Pentagon's announcement spoke volumes about having respect for servicemembers who are willing to risk suffering catastrophic injuries on our behalf to tell them: No matter what happens on the battlefield, your country will be there for you with the best care available. I applaud Secretary Ash Carter for his leadership. It is the right thing to do for our young men and women who have big plans after their service is complete. That is why I was so shocked by one line in this massive NDAA bill before us, a line that brings me to the floor today. Blink and you will miss it. On page 1,455 of the 1,600-page bill, in one line in a funding chart, you will find an attempt to roll back access to the care members of our military earned in their service to our country. That line--that simple little line--will zero out the very program that helps men and women in our military realize their dreams of having a family, even if they go on to suffer catastrophic injuries while fighting on our behalf. The very program that Secretary Carter got off the ground just 6 months ago, the promise the Pentagon made, this bill throws in the trash. Taking away that dream is wrong. It is not what our country is about. While I don't know how or why that line got into this bill, I am here today to shine a light on it in the hopes that we can get this fixed before it is too late. In the past day, I have talked to both the chair and ranking member, and I am hopeful that we can change course. We simply cannot allow this provision or others like it to slip through the cracks and continue to chip away at the care that these servicemembers deserve. That is not what this country is about. Many of my colleagues are so quick to honor our military members with their words, but our servicemembers need to see that same commitment with their actions. That is why I am here today urging my colleagues to keep this vital service intact for members of our military. We can take action that truly shows our servicemembers and our veterans that we understand this service is a cost of war and it is a cost that we, as a country, are willing to take on. I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I am here today to support the strong statement from the Senator from North Dakota and the strong support for a fully functioning Export-Import Bank because it creates American jobs and helps our businesses, large and small, and, in fact, reduces our national debt. But right now, political posturing has handicapped the Ex-Im Bank, one of our countries most reliable tools to increase America's economic competitiveness in our global economy. In my home State of Washington, there are nearly 100 businesses, the majority of them small or medium-sized, that used the Bank's services last year to help sell their products overseas. We are talking about everything from apples to airplane parts, beer, wine, software, medical training supplies, and beyond. The reality is that people in other countries want American-made products. That is a great thing because these businesses support tens of thousands of jobs in our country and keep our economy moving. The Export-Import Bank is the right kind of investment because it expands the access of American businesses to emerging foreign markets that create jobs right here at home. Do you know what it costs taxpayers? Not a single penny. In fact, the Ex-Im Bank reduces our national debt. So here is the bottom line. The Bank creates jobs. It strengthens our businesses. It helps our economy grow from the middle out, not just the top down. So it is time for my colleagues to put ideology aside, to allow this proven program to operate at its full capacity, and to allow a vote that we were denied today to get the Ex-Im Board operating again because it is critical that the Bank continue to receive the strong bipartisan support we have seen in the past as we work to build on its success. I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I come to the floor this afternoon to talk against an amendment that would undermine the spirit of bipartisanship we have cultivated with the last several budget deals without fully addressing our national security and domestic needs and to speak in support of an alternative that would do so much more to protect our families, improve our national security, and build on our bipartisan budget deal in a truly fair and responsible way. As I will go into a bit more, for an amendment to a bill focused on ensuring our Nation is prepared to meet future challenges here at home and across the world, the Republican amendment ignores too many priorities in the nondefense world that are critical to our Nation's security. It only supplements defense priorities, leaving by the wayside domestic challenges, such as the Flint water crisis, the Zika outbreak, the opioid crisis, and domestic law enforcement agencies like the FBI, to say nothing of investments that we also know improve national security in the long run, such as education, health care, a strong economy, and more. It casts aside the principles we laid down in our bipartisan budget deal that we should be building on, not tearing down. I want to spend a minute or two on that last point, since it is a very important one. As many of us have said before, a budget is far more than simply numbers on a page. A budget truly is a statement of values, of priorities, of the kind of nation we are, and the kind of nation we want to be. That is why I am so proud that following the tea party government shutdown back in 2013, Democrats and Republicans were finally able to come together, break through the gridlock, and reach a bipartisan budget deal. Our deal wasn't perfect. It wasn't what any of us would have written on our own, but it was a critical step in the right direction. It restored investments in health care and education, in research, and defense jobs. It halted the constant lurching from one crisis to the next, and it showed the American people that we in Congress can make things work when we work together. We were able to get a bipartisan deal because we kept to a core principle, which was rolling back the cuts evenly across defense and nondefense investments. That wasn't the only hurdle, but it was a big one. Both sides agreed that we may not agree on everything, but we had to solve the problem in a fair and balanced way and one that addressed all of our budget challenges here at home and throughout the world. Establishing this principle and then sticking to it in our 2015 deal is what helped us make the progress we have made and build a foundation for continued work. I believe it is a principle we need to stick to if we want that good work to continue. We reached a 2-year bipartisan budget agreement just last fall. If the Senate is about to open that bipartisan budget agreement on this bill, then we should be doing it in a thoughtful and productive manner that allows us to build on the 2-year deal and address a fuller range of security issues. Unfortunately, the amendment we are going to vote on either later tonight or tomorrow would move us in the wrong direction when it comes to this productive bipartisan work. Instead of building on our deal, it tries to circumvent it. Instead of working together to truly restore investments, it uses a gimmick to pretend to restore investments, and instead of working with Democrats to restore cuts on the domestic side that support our national security as well, it only supports the defense side and leaves far too much behind. I don't think that is right, and I think we can actually do better. If Republicans truly want to work with us to build on our budget deal in this bill in a way that truly prepares us to respond to domestic and foreign challenges facing our country, we have an alternative. Our amendment, the Democratic alternative, would restore investments that help workers, the middle class, veterans, and families all across our country at an equal level to the defense priorities. It would invest in critical priorities that clearly keep our country safe, including supporting the operations of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and supplying the Transportation Security Administration with the tools they need to keep our airports and other transit hubs safe that have become a target for terrorist attacks and allow us to tackle the opioid crisis that is devastating communities in my home State of Washington and across the country. It would provide the resources for us to respond to the water and lead issues in Flint and many communities in our Nation, and provide resources to help us address so many of the challenges facing our workers, our families, our communities, and our middle class and do it in the fair and balanced way that we all know works by building on the bipartisan budget deal and treating defense and nondefense equitably and fairly. I urge my colleagues to support the Democratic amendment so we can restore these investments in critical defense and nondefense programs and invest in priorities that keep us safe and strengthen our communities and the middle class. Having a powerful military is important to our country's safety but so is access to safe drinking water and so are TSA agents protecting our transit hubs, Zika research to prevent further spread of this disease, and so much more. I hope we can work together to build on our bipartisan progress, stick to our bipartisan principles, and keep our country moving in the right direction. I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I want to start by thanking Senator Durbin, Senator Cochran, and all my colleagues here today for their work to support critical investments in medical research at the Department of Defense. I am proud to stand with them, but frankly, I am also really disappointed that we have to be here. For decades, investments in medical research by the Department of Defense have advanced improvements in the treatment of some of our toughest diseases. DOD medical research funding has led to the development of new risk assessment tools that help evaluate the likelihood of breast cancer recurrence, as well as new tests to determine the potential spread of a primary tumor. It has helped advance research that could lead to treatment for the debilitating and, to-date, incurable disease ALS. It is supporting ongoing research into improvements in cognitive therapy and access to treatment for children with autism. And I could go on. DOD medical research programs have had such an impact on the lives of tens of millions of servicemembers and their families, as well as patients across the country. These programs certainly don't deserve to be on the chopping block, so it is very concerning to me that the defense authorization bill we are currently debating would severely restrict the scope of DOD research and undermine critical DOD support for research efforts on everything from breast cancer, to MS, to lung cancer, and much more. If you are serving your country and have a child struggling with autism or if you are a veteran with severe hearing loss or if you are one of the many patients across the country waiting and hoping for a treatment or cure that hasn't been discovered yet, I am sure you would want to know that your government is doing everything it can to support research that could make all the difference. I am proud to be supporting the amendment that we are discussing today, which would ensure that groundbreaking, and in some cases lifesaving, medical research at the Department of Defense can continue, and I urge all of my colleagues to join us. Thank you.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.