Patty Murray

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, there are already nearly 900 cases of the Zika virus in the United States and its 3 territories, including actually 2 confirmed cases in my home State of Washington. A recent survey showed that 40 percent of adults in our country see this virus as a reason to delay starting families. Those are disturbing statistics. They make it clear that the Zika virus is a public health emergency, and there is no good reason for the delay we are seeing from our Republican colleagues in addressing this. Months ago, the administration put forward the strong proposal that Senator Reid introduced today. Republicans refused at the time to even consider it, and I am disappointed again this morning that they weighed in on the side of further delay rather than acting on this. As a result, we are getting closer to the summer and to mosquito season, but we still here in this body have not moved on emergency supplemental funding that would put much needed resources into preventing and treating this frightening virus. Too many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle still don't seem to see Zika as an emergency. Some Republicans are insisting we shouldn't give the administration a penny in additional funding to support the response we need to make. Others are saying that action on Zika can wait--wait for weeks or months. Republicans in Congress might be able to simply wait, but families across this country cannot. Addressing this Zika virus shouldn't be controversial. With women's and children's health and well-being on the line, it certainly should not be a place for partisanship. Democrats are at the table. We want to get this done as soon as possible. In fact, as recently as a few days ago I was hopeful Republicans were truly interested in working with us to get this done and to be able to find an actual path forward. We had some good conversations last week. But I am worried that in the last few days it has become clear once again that the extreme right, like the Heritage Foundation, is in control, and Republican leaders have been unable to demonstrate to this point a path on how we can get a bipartisan deal signed into law. This issue is far too important to have Republican infighting hold it up. So I urge my Republican colleagues to join us. We are ready to be at the table to work with them. We need to address this as an emergency. Then I hope we can move on to work on the other really critical issues before us: the opioid epidemic that so many have been here to talk about; the families in Flint who are suffering; ensuring our Supreme Court nominee gets a fair consideration--a hearing, even. There is so much work to be done. I am here to urge our colleagues on the other side of the aisle to recognize this is an emergency. It cannot wait. Families are waiting for us to act. We need to get the research. We need to have an understanding of what this disease is. We certainly need to put into place prevention, and we certainly need to work on the important path forward in making sure we have the right kinds of education out there as well as a solution to this problem that is rapidly becoming an American problem. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, will the Senator yield for just one moment before he goes into his second topic?

Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I just want to thank the Senator from Florida for joining the women of the Senate here today to bring attention to such a critical issue and to extend our hands. We want to work with the Senator. We believe this is an emergency, and we want to deal with it quickly. We appreciate his comments and his support this morning.

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

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I want to start by expressing my appreciation to all of my colleagues who are joining me on the floor today, and I thank them for all the work they do every day for women and their health care. As of last week, the CDC reported nearly 900 cases of Zika here in the United States and three U.S. territories, including actually two confirmed in my home State of Washington. A recent survey showed that 40 percent of adults in the United States see the Zika virus as the reason to delay starting a family. Like so many of my colleagues, I am hearing from women across my State who are very frightened about this virus. They want to know how to travel safely in light of Zika. They want to know whether they should wait to start their families. Tragically, I am hearing from expectant mothers who are concerned about what this virus could mean for the babies they have on the way. Women and families at home and abroad need Congress to take action against this virus, to help raise awareness about its impact, to expand access to contraception and family planning, to improve vector control, and to accelerate our efforts to find a vaccine. That is why for months Democrats have urged Republicans to come to the table and work with us on making sure we put the needed resources into this fight against Zika. The administration has put forward a strong proposal, but Republicans refused to even consider it. While some in the Republican Party indicated last week they wanted to work with us on emergency supplemental funding, it has become pretty clear that unfortunately they have been beaten back by the extreme rightwing who do not want to do anything at all. These extreme conservatives do not recognize that Zika is an emergency. They don't want to give the administration a penny more. As a result of that delay, we are behind the eight ball as mosquito season comes this summer. That is why we have come to the floor together today to send a very clear message to Republicans today: We need action now. Women simply cannot afford to wait, and they should not have to. Democrats are ready to get this done as soon as possible. And for families and communities who are looking to Congress for action, I hope Republicans join us now so that we can deliver what families are asking for in our country. Thank you. I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY

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

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

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I actually come to the Senate floor to talk about the urgent need to help make college more affordable for American families. Earlier this year, I launched a comment form on my Web site encouraging people to share their struggles to afford college and how their student debt is affecting them. Since then, I have heard from so many students and families from my home State of Washington and across the country. By sharing these stories, I hope we can all come together to work on ways to bring down college costs and make sure students can graduate from college without the crushing burden of student debt. I recently heard from a young woman named Katy. She is a junior studying psychology at Gonzaga University in Spokane, WA. Katy said she always knew that attending college was going to be financially difficult, although it never occurred to her to let that stand in her way. Because her parents were not in a position to help her out financially, and because she couldn't afford to make regular tuition payments, she has had to take on a large amount of student loans, and she wasn't able to live with her parents, so she has also had to plan and pay for room and board for all 4 years. Now, here is a typical workweek for Katy. Katy works 12 hours a week as part of the Gonzaga Student Body Association. At least 2 nights a week, and usually on weekends, she makes hundreds of calls on behalf of the Gonzaga Telefund. On most weekend nights, she is not out with her friends and family. Instead, she is babysitting for some extra cash to put toward her textbooks. On top of all that, she is also a math tutor, which, until recently, was a paid position before the department's budget was cut, but she has kept tutoring anyway as her way to give back. That is just who she is. Of course, that is all on top of being a full-time student as well. Let me be clear. Katy is very glad to be investing in herself and her future. She knows it is tough work and she appreciates that, but she, like millions of other students, is just looking for a little relief. In her own words, she admits ``it's a constant stressor thinking of how to pay for life while at college, and how I'm going to pay for all of this after I graduate.'' Students like Katy aren't alone. Across the country, the yearly cost of tuition and room and board at a public 4-year institution is 5\1/2\ times what it was in the early 1980s, and to afford those skyrocketing pricetags, people are turning to student loans to cover the cost. Today, Americans across the country hold a total of $1.3 trillion in outstanding student loan debt. In my home State of Washington, the average college student owes more than $24,000 in student debt. Think about what that debt means for our students. These students are doing everything right. They are investing in their futures. Many of them are the first in their families to go to college, but when it is time to look for that first job, just starting out, they are already in the red. I have been so glad to work with other Senate Democrats on legislation actually called ``In the Red'' that would help students like Katy. Our bill would give students the chance to attend community college tuition-free. It would make sure the amount of Pell grants keeps up with the rising cost of college, and it would let borrowers refinance their student debt to today's lower rates. Our bill is fully paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes that only serve to benefit the biggest corporations and the wealthiest few. This issue for me is personal. When I was young, my dad was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. Within a few short years, he couldn't work any longer. Without warning, my family had fallen on hard times. I have six brothers and sisters, and thankfully all of us were able to go to college with help from what is now called Pell grants, and my mom was able to get the skills she needed to get a job. She had been a stay-at- home mom. She needed to go to work, and she got that job through a worker training program at Lake Washington Vocational School with government help. Even through those hard times, our family never lost hope that with a good education, we would be able to find our footing and earn our way to a stable, middle-class life. This country has never turned its back on my family, and today we can't turn our backs on the millions of families just like mine who need a path forward to afford college and pay back their student debt. I hope we can pass this bill and pave the way for lower college costs and less student debt. I hope we can work together to give students and families some much needed relief. Let's make sure they know we will never let up and that we will always have their backs. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I come to the Senate floor to once again urge my Republican colleagues to do what they are elected to do: listen to their constituents and give Judge Garland the fair consideration he deserves. As some of my colleagues have already noted, today marks 21 years since the Oklahoma City bombing, an attack that shocked the world and took 168 innocent lives. I had the honor of meeting with an individual last week who was not only involved in the immediate aftermath of this terrible attack but who went above and beyond to make sure justice was served on behalf of those who lost their lives. Judge Merrick Garland, the President's nominee for the Supreme Court, was at the scene of the bombing within 2 days. With debris from the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building still smoldering in the streets, Judge Garland was helping first responders and working with local law enforcement. As a top official in the Justice Department, he led a massive investigation of the bombing and supervised the prosecution of Timothy McVeigh. He did all of that, even if it meant more work and more time away from his family, with incredible delicacy and thoroughness. He called his work for the Justice Department following the Oklahoma City bombing the most important thing he has ever done in his life. As we remember those who were lost on that day in 1995, and in light of last week being National Crime Victims' Rights Week, we remember how Judge Garland honored those victims with his dedicated service. Judge Garland not only did his job with a great deal of heart, working with families who had lost loved ones, but with the vigor to demand that justice be served. His fairness and diligence earned him praise from Members of both parties, from victims' families and law enforcement officers, and even from the lead lawyer defending McVeigh. A person like that, driven by the desire to help people and serve the public, is someone who deserves fair consideration by all of us in the U.S. Senate. Unfortunately, that is not what is happening right now. We are 66 days into the Supreme Court vacancy, and so far Republican leaders are still refusing to do their jobs. They will not say they are opposed to Judge Garland. They are refusing to even live up to their constitutional responsibility and consider him. That kind of pure obstruction and partisanship is absolutely wrong. People across the country are not going to stand for that. Last week I met with Judge Garland and talked through his background, his experiences, his philosophy, his judicial philosophy. What I found out--and it would be difficult for any right-minded person not to come to this conclusion after meeting with him--is that Judge Garland is highly passionate, he is highly respected, and highly qualified to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court. I am very glad some Republicans have started meeting with him. That is a great first step, but it cannot be the last step. Families across this country deserve to hear from Judge Garland in a Judiciary Committee hearing, under oath, and in public, and then he should get a vote where every Senator will have the opportunity to do their job and weigh in. If any Member doesn't think Judge Garland should serve on the highest Court in the land, they should feel free to vote against him, but give him a hearing, give him a vote, and stop this partisanship and obstruction. Evaluating and confirming Supreme Court Justices is one of the most important roles we have in the United States, and it is this issue that actually pushed me to run for the Senate in the first place. In 1991 I was a State Senator, a former school board member, and a mom. Similar to so many people across the country back then, I watched the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings in frustration over how the nominee wasn't pushed on the issues that I and so many others thought were so important to the future of our country. I saw how a woman who came to talk about her experiences, Anita Hill, was treated by this Senate. I decided then and there to run for the U.S. Senate, to give Washington State families like mine a voice in this process. I have had the opportunity to use that voice in the Senate and to make sure Washington State families had a seat at the table in Supreme Court nominations and confirmations over the years. I voted to support some of the candidates, including the Chief Justice nominated by a Republican President. I voted to oppose others, but I always thought it was important that a nominee got the consideration he or she deserved, and I always worked to make sure the people I represented got their questions answered as best as I could and that they could have a view into the process that should be above partisanship and politics. If Republicans continue to play election-year politics and continue to refuse to do their jobs, my families in Washington State will not have a voice. Families across America will not have a voice. The tea party gridlock and dysfunction that has dominated too much of our work in Congress will have claimed another victory. That is unacceptable. Once again, I am on the floor to call on my Republican colleagues to do your job; meet with Judge Garland, hold a hearing, and give him a vote. We owe that to our constituents. It is our constitutional responsibility, and we should get it done. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. MURRAY

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

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. I object.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, the bill my colleague from Nebraska is asking to bring to the floor falls far short of closing the wage gap. I want to speak for a few minutes about why. At the end of my remarks, I have a unanimous consent request. If we really want to offer working women solutions for wage discrimination, we should instead pass Senator Mikulski's Paycheck Fairness Act because today women across the country make just 79 cents for every $1 a man makes. This is an issue that Democrats have been focused on for years. I am glad at least some Republicans finally recognize there is a wage gap problem, and I welcome their support for fixing this systemic problem. Unfortunately, the Republican proposal that is offered today will not provide the solutions working women need. Many companies prohibit workers from discussing their pay. So if a woman talks with her male colleague about their salary and discovers there is a wage gap, her employer could fire her or retaliate in some other way. The Republican bill would make it illegal for an employer to retaliate against workers for discussing salary but only when those conversations are for the express purpose of finding out if the employer is providing equal pay for equal work. Nonretaliation is only one small part of the wage gap problem. It doesn't provide nearly enough protections to actually make a difference in closing the pay gap. In today's workplace, many workers find out about pay discrimination by accident. Maybe they see a spreadsheet that was left on a copy machine or maybe a male colleague's salary comes up in casual conversation, but in these circumstances, any worker who attempts to address the problem would have no protections from retaliation under this bill. The only way to qualify for these limited protections is if a woman uses the magic words that pass a legal test when discussing equal pay with her colleagues. It is even worse than that. This bill can give workers a false sense of security that their conversations about equal pay are protected, when instead women can still be reprimanded or, worse, lose their jobs altogether for finding out their male colleagues earn more than them. So this Republican bill wouldn't even solve the one narrow problem it is trying to address. Thankfully, we do have a bill that would address the wage gap. It is the Paycheck Fairness Act that Senator Mikulski has championed. The Paycheck Fairness Act would make it unlawful for employers to retaliate against workers for discussing pay, period. It wouldn't involve a complicated legal test like the Republican proposal, and the Paycheck Fairness Act would help close the wage gap in so many important ways. If a woman finds out her male colleagues are paid more for the same work, the Paycheck Fairness Act backs her up. It would empower women to negotiate for equal pay, it would close loopholes in the Equal Pay Act, and it would create strong incentives for employers to provide equal pay. I want to make one thing very clear. The Republican bill being offered today has zero Democratic cosponsors. It is not bipartisan. By contrast, before Republicans politicized equal pay for equal work, the Paycheck Fairness Act actually passed the House of Representatives in both 2008 and 2009 with bipartisan support. Unfortunately, since then, some Republicans have decided to make the wage gap about politics and blocked it in the Senate. So today I am glad Republicans do agree with us that this is an urgent problem. We need real solutions to address it. That is why I object to the Fischer bill, and I urge my colleagues to support the Paycheck Fairness Act that would tackle pay discrimination head-on. Therefore, I ask unanimous consent that the HELP Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. 862, the Paycheck Fairness Act; that the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; that the bill be read a third time and passed; and that 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 ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, we are 103 days into 2016, and on Equal Pay Day, that number takes on significant, unfortunate meaning. Women have to work 103 extra days to match what men earned last year. That is unacceptable. Workers should be paid fairly for the work they do, regardless of their gender. Closing the wage gap would help grow our economy from the middle out, not from the top down. I am glad to be here today with my colleagues to recognize Equal Pay Day, to stand up on behalf of women across the country, and to renew our call to put an end to the wage gap. Last year, I heard from a woman named Sandy from Seattle. Right out of college, Sandy got a job at a local nonprofit. After a couple of months of work, she was just chatting with a male colleague and found out he was offered 20 percent more in salary for doing the exact same job. She thought there had been some mistake. But when she asked about it, her boss told her they could not offer her a pay raise because of budget constraints. Sandy's story is so common. On average, women today make 79 cents for every dollar a man makes. The pay gap is even wider for women of color. That is not just unfair to women; it hurts our families, and it hurts our economy. Today, 60 percent of working families rely on wages from two earners--60 percent. More than ever, women are likely to be the primary breadwinner for their family. Women's success in today's economy is critical to families' economic security and to our Nation's economy as a whole. We need to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act to help close the wage gap. I so appreciate Senator Mikulski's tremendous leadership and passion on this issue. Her Paycheck Fairness Act would make it unlawful for employers to retaliate against workers for discussing pay. It does so in a commonsense way that reflects today's reality in the workplace. It would empower women to negotiate for equal pay. It would close significant loopholes in the Equal Pay Act. It would create strong incentives for employers to provide equal pay. Passing the Paycheck Fairness Act is a critical stop on the long list of things we can do to build our economy from the middle out and make sure our country works for all families, not just the wealthiest few. No matter where they live, no matter their background, no matter what career they choose, on average, women earn less than their male colleagues, even women soccer players on the U.S. Women's National Team. The Women's National Team has won three World Cup titles. They have won four Olympic Gold Medals. But despite all of their success, they are not immune from the pervasive wage gap. In fact, on average as players, they earn four times less than their male counterparts. It is not just about the men. Think about the message the wage gap sends to young girls who see women valued less than men for doing the same work and, in the case of the women's soccer team, doing it so much better. I am glad members of the women's national soccer team are taking a stand to gain equal pay for the work they do. In the Senate, we are going to keep championing the Paycheck Fairness Act to make equal pay a reality for women across the country. I look forward to an Equal Pay Day in the future that we can actually celebrate, once we finally achieve pay equity regardless of gender. Until then, my colleagues and I are going to keep fighting on behalf of all women and families until they get the equal pay they have earned. I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I wish to pay tribute to my constituent LTC Edward P. ``Ned'' Ash for his exemplary dedication to duty and service to the U.S. Army and to the United States of America. Lieutenant Colonel Ash will retire this summer after more than two decades in the U.S. Army. Entering the Army from Vancouver, WA, Lieutenant Colonel Ash earned a commission from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point with a degree in international relations and was commissioned an armor officer in 1994. Lieutenant Colonel Ash served in a variety of cavalry units and assignments during his 22 years of service. As a lieutenant, he served as a tank platoon leader, scout platoon leader, troop executive officer, and as a squadron staff officer in the 2nd Squadron, 3d Armored Cavalry Regiment. As a captain from 1999 to 2001, Lieutenant Colonel Ash remained in a hardship assignment with the 2nd Infantry Division for 3 years to serve in Korea. While assigned to the 2nd Infantry Division, he commanded Bravo Troop and Headquarters Troop in the 4th Squadron, 7th Cavalry Regiment. After working at the national training center, where Lieutenant Colonel Ash trained units that were preparing to deploy in support of Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom, he was assigned to the 1st Squadron, 71st Cavalry Regiment. He deployed with this unit to Iraq while serving as the operations officer and then to Afghanistan as the squadron executive officer. Lieutenant Colonel Ash spent his last 4 years in the Army as a budget liaison in the office around the corner from mine in the Russell Senate Office Building and has become a fixture in the Halls of the U.S. Senate. My staff have called on him many times to help with issues affecting the soldiers and military families in Washington State and around the country. Lieutenant Colonel Ash has approached every inquiry from my staff, from requisition requests for tents to detailed questions about national strategy, with the same calm wisdom and thoughtfulness that puts serving people and getting results above all else. Lieutenant Colonel Ash has also led the teams that supported the logistic requirements for the funerals of two of my colleagues who served in the Army: Senator Daniel Inouye and Senator Frank Lautenberg. His efforts during these funerals helped ensure that they were conducted with the dignity befitting the memories of these giants of the Senate. I can confidently say that Lieutenant Colonel Ash's leadership has positively impacted his soldiers, peers, and superiors throughout his career. On behalf of a grateful nation, I join my colleagues today in recognizing and commending LTC Edward P. Ash for over two decades of service to his country. We wish Ned and his wife, Jamie Skaluba, all the best as they continue their journey of service.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I have often said when our nation sends men and women to war we commit to taking care of them when they return home. We also promise them important legal protections to allow them to focus on their mission and in recognition that while they are deployed or away from home servicemembers often do not have the resources to respond to a range of financial and legal issues. Despite these protections, too many servicemembers have been cheated on their student loans, on their mortgages, and on their credit cards. When our men and women in uniform are serving our country, they should not have to worry about whether our government is going to hold up its end of the bargain and fulfill its responsibilities to them. So today I introduce the SCRA Enhancement and Improvement Act of 2016, which will put an end to many of these predatory practices and give servicemembers and the government the tools they need to fight back when banks and student loan servicers deny servicemembers their rights. In 2014, I learned of allegations that at least one major student loan servicer had been overcharging men and women in uniform on their student loans while they were on active duty. That's unacceptable. One servicemember overcharged on their student loans is one too many. That is why this bill will end the unfair and improper practices of student loan servicers by requiring them to automatically apply the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, SCRA, interest rate cap, respond within 14 days to any request for SCRA protections, and provide a full explanation any time they deny an SCRA protection, along with clear instructions on how to remedy the situation so the servicemember can receive that protection. It will also require student loan servicers to have a designated service representative or point of contact for servicemembers and ensure these individuals are properly trained on the needs of servicemembers, how the military operates, and the protections required by SCRA, the Higher Education Act, and other laws. The bill will hold servicers accountable for their conduct and treatment of servicemembers by requiring them to retain all communications with servicemembers so we can conduct thorough oversight. The SCRA Enhancement and Improvement Act will also hold the Department of Education accountable for enforcing standards and the law with its student loan servicers. Following numerous allegations of servicemembers being mistreated by student loan servicers who were not complying with the SCRA interest rate caps, and at least 69,000 servicemembers who were overcharged by one Federal contractor, I asked the Department to review how many servicemembers had been improperly denied their benefits under SCRA. Shockingly, the Department told us that the servicers were complying in the ``vast majority of cases.'' This was inconsistent with what the Department of Justice and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau had found. I wrote to the Department of Education's Inspector General and asked her to review the Department's findings. Two weeks ago the IG released their report, and it showed that instead of doing a thorough investigation to find out exactly how many servicemembers may have been overcharged on their student loans, the Department's review was riddled with errors and papered over mishandling of military borrowers' loans. The bill I am introducing today will require sufficient notice to be given when a loan is transferred or sold, and that all benefits or protections for the servicemember are seamlessly transferred to the new loan servicer. It will also forgive all Federal and private student loan debt in the event the servicemember dies in the line of duty. The SCRA Enhancement and Improvement Act also expands protections beyond student loans. I was concerned when several years ago some of the nation's largest mortgage servicers improperly overcharged and foreclosed upon deployed servicemembers in violation of the SCRA. Thousands of servicemembers and veterans were wronged over several years. After those allegations came to light, and after the Department of Justice reached a settlement with those mortgage servicers, GAO released a report in 2014 looking at the importance of mortgage and foreclosure protections in the SCRA. The results were concerning, especially when they found at one mortgage servicer that 82 percent of loans that would have benefitted from the SCRA's interest rate cap still had rates in excess of 6 percent. This bill would reduce the interest rate cap to three percent to provide meaningful protection to servicemembers, including a zero percent cap for servicemembers eligible for hostile fire or imminent danger pay. It would expand the SCRA interest rate protection to all of a servicemember's debt regardless of when it was incurred, in order to cover consolidation loans and in recognition that the same challenges exist for military borrowers regardless of when a debt was first incurred. It would also strengthen the protections that prevent judgements against a servicemember who cannot appear in court because of military service. As the daughter of a World War II veteran, I know how much our military families sacrifice on behalf of their country. So I believe protecting our military men and women from predatory practices is an absolutely essential commitment we make to them. We will not allow our servicemembers to be taken advantage of. Finally, as we have seen too often, these protections are only as good as our ability to enforce the law and hold people accountable. The SCRA Enhancement and Improvement Act will give servicemembers, the Department of Justice, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau the legal and oversight tools they need to hold entities accountable. It would clarify that servicemembers may bring a private right of action to enforce their rights and make arbitration clauses unenforceable unless all parties agree after a dispute arises. The bill will give the Attorney General the authority to issue civil investigative demands in SCRA investigations. It would double the fines against parties found to be violating the protections afforded by the SCRA. With the number of Federal entities involved, it is essential the departments and agencies work collaboratively to protect servicemembers. The Defense Department must ensure it is providing clear, useful information to servicemembers on their rights and how to invoke them, and that the training stays current. I especially commend the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau for its dedicated work on behalf of our men and women in uniform. Our servicemembers deserve better than what they have gotten over the last several years. The SCRA Enhancement and Improvement Act will go a long way to ensuring our servicemembers are protected, putting a stop to the predatory practices of banks and student loan servicers, and change the apathy that has characterized the Department of Education's oversight. I encourage all of my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I have often said when our nation sends men and women to war we commit to taking care of them when they return home. We also promise them important legal protections to allow them to focus on their mission and in recognition that while they are deployed or away from home servicemembers often do not have the resources to respond to a range of financial and legal issues. Despite these protections, too many servicemembers have been cheated on their student loans, on their mortgages, and on their credit cards. When our men and women in uniform are serving our country, they should not have to worry about whether our government is going to hold up its end of the bargain and fulfill its responsibilities to them. So today I introduce the SCRA Enhancement and Improvement Act of 2016, which will put an end to many of these predatory practices and give servicemembers and the government the tools they need to fight back when banks and student loan servicers deny servicemembers their rights. In 2014, I learned of allegations that at least one major student loan servicer had been overcharging men and women in uniform on their student loans while they were on active duty. That's unacceptable. One servicemember overcharged on their student loans is one too many. That is why this bill will end the unfair and improper practices of student loan servicers by requiring them to automatically apply the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, SCRA, interest rate cap, respond within 14 days to any request for SCRA protections, and provide a full explanation any time they deny an SCRA protection, along with clear instructions on how to remedy the situation so the servicemember can receive that protection. It will also require student loan servicers to have a designated service representative or point of contact for servicemembers and ensure these individuals are properly trained on the needs of servicemembers, how the military operates, and the protections required by SCRA, the Higher Education Act, and other laws. The bill will hold servicers accountable for their conduct and treatment of servicemembers by requiring them to retain all communications with servicemembers so we can conduct thorough oversight. The SCRA Enhancement and Improvement Act will also hold the Department of Education accountable for enforcing standards and the law with its student loan servicers. Following numerous allegations of servicemembers being mistreated by student loan servicers who were not complying with the SCRA interest rate caps, and at least 69,000 servicemembers who were overcharged by one Federal contractor, I asked the Department to review how many servicemembers had been improperly denied their benefits under SCRA. Shockingly, the Department told us that the servicers were complying in the ``vast majority of cases.'' This was inconsistent with what the Department of Justice and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau had found. I wrote to the Department of Education's Inspector General and asked her to review the Department's findings. Two weeks ago the IG released their report, and it showed that instead of doing a thorough investigation to find out exactly how many servicemembers may have been overcharged on their student loans, the Department's review was riddled with errors and papered over mishandling of military borrowers' loans. The bill I am introducing today will require sufficient notice to be given when a loan is transferred or sold, and that all benefits or protections for the servicemember are seamlessly transferred to the new loan servicer. It will also forgive all Federal and private student loan debt in the event the servicemember dies in the line of duty. The SCRA Enhancement and Improvement Act also expands protections beyond student loans. I was concerned when several years ago some of the nation's largest mortgage servicers improperly overcharged and foreclosed upon deployed servicemembers in violation of the SCRA. Thousands of servicemembers and veterans were wronged over several years. After those allegations came to light, and after the Department of Justice reached a settlement with those mortgage servicers, GAO released a report in 2014 looking at the importance of mortgage and foreclosure protections in the SCRA. The results were concerning, especially when they found at one mortgage servicer that 82 percent of loans that would have benefitted from the SCRA's interest rate cap still had rates in excess of 6 percent. This bill would reduce the interest rate cap to three percent to provide meaningful protection to servicemembers, including a zero percent cap for servicemembers eligible for hostile fire or imminent danger pay. It would expand the SCRA interest rate protection to all of a servicemember's debt regardless of when it was incurred, in order to cover consolidation loans and in recognition that the same challenges exist for military borrowers regardless of when a debt was first incurred. It would also strengthen the protections that prevent judgements against a servicemember who cannot appear in court because of military service. As the daughter of a World War II veteran, I know how much our military families sacrifice on behalf of their country. So I believe protecting our military men and women from predatory practices is an absolutely essential commitment we make to them. We will not allow our servicemembers to be taken advantage of. Finally, as we have seen too often, these protections are only as good as our ability to enforce the law and hold people accountable. The SCRA Enhancement and Improvement Act will give servicemembers, the Department of Justice, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau the legal and oversight tools they need to hold entities accountable. It would clarify that servicemembers may bring a private right of action to enforce their rights and make arbitration clauses unenforceable unless all parties agree after a dispute arises. The bill will give the Attorney General the authority to issue civil investigative demands in SCRA investigations. It would double the fines against parties found to be violating the protections afforded by the SCRA. With the number of Federal entities involved, it is essential the departments and agencies work collaboratively to protect servicemembers. The Defense Department must ensure it is providing clear, useful information to servicemembers on their rights and how to invoke them, and that the training stays current. I especially commend the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau for its dedicated work on behalf of our men and women in uniform. Our servicemembers deserve better than what they have gotten over the last several years. The SCRA Enhancement and Improvement Act will go a long way to ensuring our servicemembers are protected, putting a stop to the predatory practices of banks and student loan servicers, and change the apathy that has characterized the Department of Education's oversight. I encourage all of my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I come to the floor once again with a simple message for Senate Republican leaders: Do your job and let me do mine. When President Obama sends us a nominee to fill this vacancy on the Supreme Court, Republican leaders need to stop playing politics, stop pandering to the tea party, and fulfill their responsibility to their constituents, their country, and the Constitution. That is what people across the country are demanding. But the hearing Republicans on the Judiciary Committee held this morning makes it clear they are not getting the message, because while the Republicans on that committee say they won't take up their time to do their most important actual job, they were happy to spend their time this morning on their favorite hobby--doing everything they can to turn back the clock on women's health care. While they say they won't even hold a hearing on a Supreme Court nominee to fulfill their constitutional responsibilities, they were eager to hold the hearing this morning to attack women's constitutional rights. Mr. President, I wish I were surprised by this, but, unfortunately, this is just the latest example of Republican leaders playing political games with the rights of women across the country and pandering to their extreme tea party base. Republicans love to say they want to keep government out of people's lives, unless of course we are talking about women's health care and their choices. They love to talk about the Constitution, unless we are talking about a woman's constitutional right to make decisions about her own body or the part that lays out the Senate's responsibility when it comes to filling Supreme Court vacancies. But people across the country are sick of the partisanship, sick of the gridlock, and sick of the games. They want Republicans to do their jobs, and they are not buying their excuses for inaction. For the last few weeks, Republican leaders have been desperately trying to convince people that there is a precedent for their extreme obstruction in this election year. Well, first of all, their arguments have run up against the facts. They simply are not true. The Democratic Senate confirmed President Reagan's Supreme Court nominee in his last year in office. And that is just one example of many. But in case the facts weren't enough, last week the Republicans' message facade began to crumble, and the truth began to come out. First, one Republican leader warned that any potential nominee should be aware that he or she will be treated like a pinata. Republicans say they will refuse to even meet with the nominee. But they and their special interest groups are clearly getting ready to drag him or her through the mud. Also, speaking to his constituents back home, another Senator made it clear that Republicans' refusal to do their jobs right now is nothing more than partisan politics. He said: If this President were a Republican, it would be ``a different situation,'' and there would be ``more accommodation.'' We all knew this Republican obstruction had nothing to do with what is actually right and everything to do with the fact they do not like that President Obama is President right now, but it was nice to hear a Republican Senator actually admit that out loud. Another Republican, the senior Senator from South Carolina, admitted last week that this kind of blind obstruction, this refusal to even meet with a Supreme Court nominee or hold hearings, is absolutely unprecedented. He said Republicans wanted to create a new rule--right now--limiting President Obama's constitutional authority and responsibility. Well, I am glad he made clear that what Republican leaders have been saying about their obstruction being based on precedent isn't true, but creating this new partisan precedent for Supreme Court nominations would be absolutely wrong too. Republicans may not like to hear this, but the American people spoke. They elected President Obama twice, and they entrusted him with the powers and responsibilities laid out in the Constitution. Those responsibilities don't just last for 3 years. They last a full term, and people across the country are making it very clear they expect Republicans to work with the President, to meet with the nominee, to hold hearings, and to do their job. But if Republicans are open to new election-year precedents, I have one I would like to offer for their consideration that would actually be helpful. I propose that Republicans stop using attacks on women's health care to rally their tea party base, that they stop using women's rights as an election-year political football. That would be unprecedented for sure, but it sure would be a step in the right direction, and women across this country would really appreciate it. So when President Obama sends us a nominee, I hope Senate Republican leaders will move out of the partisan corner they are in now, will stop focusing on throwing red meat to the tea party, and will do their jobs. I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY

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

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may speak in morning business.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 5 minutes following Senator Alexander.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I come to the floor as well today to speak in support of Dr. John King's nomination to serve as Secretary of Education. This is really an important time for students when it comes to early learning. We have seen improvements, but we have much more to do to expand access to high-quality preschool so more of our kids can start school on strong footing. This is a critical moment as well, as we just heard, for K-12 education as schools and districts and States transition from the broken No Child Left Behind to the bipartisan Every Student Succeeds Act that the President signed into law late last year. I hear all the time from students and families who are struggling with the high cost of college and the crushing burden of student debt. With all of these challenges and opportunities, the Department of Education will need strong leadership, and I am glad President Obama has nominated Dr. John King who is currently serving as Acting Secretary of the Department. I want to commend Senator Lamar Alexander, chairman of our HELP Committee, for moving forward with Dr. King's nomination in a timely and bipartisan manner in our committee. I also appreciate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for bringing this nomination to the floor. Dr. John King has a longstanding commitment to fighting for kids. Through his personal background, he knows firsthand the power that education can have in a student's life. He has enriched students' lives as a classroom teacher and as a principal. He has worked with schools to help close the achievement gap. And he served as the commissioner of education for New York State for 4 years. No one can question his passion for our Nation's young people. This administration has a little less than a year left in office, but that is still plenty of time to make progress in several key areas, and that progress is more likely with a confirmed Secretary in place at the Department. In higher education, I, along with my Democratic colleagues, will continue to focus on ways to make college more affordable, reduce the crushing burden of student debt that is weighing on so many families today, and continue working to fight back against the epidemic of campus sexual assaults and violence. I would also like to see the Department take new steps to help protect students who are pursuing their degrees. As one example, students like those who went to Corinthian Colleges, have the right to seek loan forgiveness if they attended a school that engaged in deceptive practices. I am really pleased the Department has a new proposal to set up a simple way for students to get relief. And all borrowers should receive the highest levels of customer service and protections under the law, particularly our servicemembers and our military families. This is an issue I and others have raised directly with Dr. King during his confirmation and one where we are finally seeing the administration make progress. The role of Education Secretary has become especially important as the Department begins implementing the Every Student Succeeds Act. I expect the Department to use its full authority under the Every Student Succeeds Act to hold our schools and States accountable, to help reduce the reliance on redundant and unnecessary testing, and to expand access to high-quality preschool. A good education can be a powerful driving force for success in our country and help more families live out the American dream. That is what makes education such a vital piece of our work to help our economy grow from the middle out, not from the top down. I hope to partner with Dr. King as Secretary of Education to work toward that shared goal. I urge all of our colleagues today to support his nomination. Thank you. I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, today I wish to acknowledge the 50th anniversary of Casey Family Programs, the Nation's largest operating foundation focused on safely reducing the need for foster care and building communities of hope for children and families across America. Casey Family Programs works to influence long-lasting improvements in the safety and success of children, families, and the communities where they live. I am proud that Casey is based in Seattle, WA. March 15 is Casey's Founders Day, a time for its leaders to reflect on the history of Jim Casey and his vision for the foundation and its mission. Jim Casey, the founder of United Parcel Service, saw a critical need 50 years ago to ensure that our Nation's most vulnerable children had safe and stable families who would provide the opportunities and support they needed to succeed in life. After Jim's father died when he was just 14, he felt responsible for taking care of his mother and three younger siblings. As he was building the bicycle messenger service he started in 1907 into the world's largest delivery and logistics company, Jim also noticed that his most effective workers came from strong families, while those who did not thrive came from unstable backgrounds. Those experiences and his vision led him to generously invest his resources to create Casey Family Programs in 1966 to provide direct services to vulnerable children and families. The foundation now works with all 50 States, as well as tribal, county, and other child welfare jurisdictions, to safely reduce the need for foster care and help create and sustain safe and stable families. It also educates policymakers at all levels of government about effective policies and evidence-based interventions that improve the lives of families and children. From 2009 to 2015, Casey Family Programs invested $45 million in Washington State. It has helped support the child welfare system, courts, tribes, policymakers, and other organizations to improve stability for children and build communities of hope. Casey Family Programs provides education, research, and information that is valuable in policy discussions as well as for Washington State and other States participating in the Federal IV-Waiver Program. For instance, Casey Family Programs has provided specific research to track which evidence-based programs States are using under their Federal waivers so that States can learn from and replicate these practices. As the ranking member of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, I am committed to supporting policies to improve the lives of children and families. In particular, I was proud to include provisions in the Every Student Succeeds Act to increase educational stability for foster children and homeless youth. I appreciate Casey's commitment to these important issues as well. I truly value the contributions of Casey Family Programs to Washington State and our country. Jim Casey once said that ``inspiration and enthusiasm are of little value unless they move us to action and accomplishments.'' I believe that the current leadership of Casey Family Programs has embraced the vision of their founder. I look forward to working with Casey Family Programs in the years ahead.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, thank you to the Senator from California for her long advocacy on behalf of women across this country to be able to access the health care they choose. Tomorrow the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case of Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt. At its core, this is a case about whether extreme rightwing politicians will be allowed to block women from exercising their constitutionally protected health care rights, rights that have been affirmed by the Supreme Court for more than four decades. For women across the country, for our daughters, and for our granddaughters, there is truly a lot at stake. I have been so inspired to see women of all ages from across the country standing up now to share their stories and to make sure the Supreme Court knows why politicians should not be able to make women's health care decisions. In fact, 113 lawyers submitted an amicus brief to the Supreme Court explaining the difference that constitutionally protected reproductive rights have made in their own lives. The stories they tell are incredibly powerful. One partner at a major law firm wrote that after three miscarriages, ``my husband and I were delighted when I again became pregnant in December 1999 and safely made it past the `danger zone' of the first trimester, passing an amnio with flying colors. [But] five weeks later, when I was heading into the sixth month of my pregnancy, I returned to the doctor for a routine ultrasound and the doctor immediately detected a problem.'' Her baby had a rare heart defect, so severe that he was already in congestive heart failure and would be born only to suffer if he survived at all. After talking with her doctors and her husband, they made the decision to terminate her pregnancy. She wrote: As a woman, a mother and a lawyer, I know I did the right thing. I have shared my story with my children, and hope that should my daughter ever find herself in a position similar to mine, she will enjoy the same rights that were available to me. It should go without saying, but politicians have absolutely no place in such a deeply personal, extraordinarily difficult decision. Unfortunately, the Texas clinic shutdown law being challenged in Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt--a law that has been driven by extreme rightwing politicians who want to undermine women's access to health care--would mean the exact opposite. This law and laws like the one that was allowed to stand in Louisiana just last week places burdens that health experts, such as the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, say are medically unnecessary on clinics in order to shut them down and make it harder for women to exercise their constitutionally protected reproductive rights. If the Supreme Court fails to block this law, three-quarters of the clinics that provide abortion services, as well as other health care in Texas, would be forced to close, leaving 5.4 million women in Texas with just 10 clinics statewide. Hundreds of thousands of Texas women would have to drive 300 miles round trip just to get care they need. If that is not an undue burden, I don't know what is. A ruling upholding the Texas shutdown law wouldn't just impact women in Texas, it would make it easier nationwide for politicians to interfere with women's health care and block them from exercising their constitutional right. That would be the wrong direction for women. It would be the wrong direction for families and for our country as a whole. That is why tomorrow women and men from all over the country will be outside the Supreme Court standing up for women's health, rights, and opportunity. I will be very proud to be right there with them because we are going to be sending a very clear message. A right means nothing without the ability to exercise that right. I hope the Justices listen, realizing how much this ruling means to women's lives. Ultimately, I hope they will rule in favor of ensuring women's health and rights continue to progress, rather than going backward. I know our country will be stronger for it. Mr. President, I express my appreciation to Senator Whitehouse and all of our colleagues who have worked very hard to bring this bill before us on the floor, the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act. It lays out key steps toward addressing the crisis of prescription drug abuse and heroin addiction, which is ruining and costing lives nationwide, including in my home State of Washington. I hear about this epidemic from Washington State families and communities far too often. Parents ask me what we are doing in Congress to help families like theirs who are trying desperately to help their children who are struggling to escape addiction. I am told about mothers and fathers who developed opioid addictions after being prescribed pain medication, with devastating consequences for their families. When I go to speak with local sheriffs and police chiefs, they say they are most often the ones responding to these crises and that our country needs to do better than allowing those struggling with addiction to cycle in and out of the criminal justice system. They tell me that heroin use is only becoming more widespread in our communities, especially amongst our young people. Penny LeGate is a former news anchor from Seattle and she knows this all too well. Her daughter, Marah Williams, had a happy childhood, ballet lessons, softball, a close-knit family, but in middle school, as she began to struggle with ADHD, depression, and anxiety, she also started experimenting with drinking and drugs. For years her parents tried everything they could do. As Penny will tell you, Marah did too. She fought hard to break her addiction and to keep her life moving forward, but tragically, when Marah began using OxyContin and then heroin, the grip of addiction was just too much. Marah died of a heroin overdose in the basement of her family home when she was just 19 years old. This is a parent's worst nightmare. It is happening to parents across my State, across the country, and it has to stop. I am pleased there is bipartisan momentum toward giving our communities the tools and resources they need to tackle this disease. The Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act, CARA, includes efforts to strengthening education, prevention, and treatment efforts around prescription drug abuse and heroin use. It will cut down on inappropriate use of pain medication that gets so many people addicted to opioids in the first place and would make it easier for people to safely dispose of pain medication so it doesn't get in the wrong hands. This legislation will also help police departments get access to naloxone, a drug that counteracts the effect of an overdose, which is something police chiefs I have spoken to make clear they need--and more. The bill we are debating right now would be a good step in the right direction, but it can be even better. As many of my Democratic colleagues have made clear, a problem as serious and urgent as this epidemic deserves a serious, urgent response. So we should enact the policies in this bill and at the same time we should also make sure families and communities will see additional tools and resources as quickly as possible. That is why I strongly support the emergency investments proposed by the senior Senators from New Hampshire, West Virginia, the junior Senator from Massachusetts, and others. Their proposal will actually help our States and local governments, as well as families who are on the frontlines of this battle, by providing the resources to prevent opioid abuse and expand access to the treatment that so many families are seeking. I am hopeful Republicans will work with us to move this alongside this important bill so families don't have to wait for Federal resources that this crisis desperately needs. As I have laid out, the legislation we are debating today would go a long way toward tackling the epidemic of prescription drug abuse and heroin addiction, especially if it includes an emergency funding that can offer relief and support quickly, but given the strong belief on both sides of the aisle that far too many people are falling through the cracks in our mental health and substance abuse systems, I believe we can and should do more to build on this CARA legislation in the coming months. We should pass this bill, but then I hope all of our colleagues will not just get up and walk away. We should build on this rare moment of bipartisan agreement, stay at the table, and keep working beyond this bill to strengthen mental health care and substance abuse treatment in our country. So even while we are debating this very first step, I wish to lay out just a few of the goals that should guide us as we look past this, goals I believe that can be met if we work together and take this crisis seriously. First, mental health is every bit as important as physical health, and we should make sure we work together to make sure they are both treated equally in our health care system; secondly, we should do more to break down the barriers that make it difficult to address patients' mental and physical health care needs at the same time; third, at a time when half of all U.S. counties lack access to a social worker, a psychologist or a psychiatrist, we need to strengthen our mental health care workforce so patients and families can get care when and where they need it, whether that is at a hospital or in their own community; fourth, we need to recognize that mental health care is important at every stage of life and ensure our system can address every patient's needs, whether that patient is a child or an adult; and, finally, continue taking steps to address the opioid abuse epidemic, I believe we can do more to expand access to medication-assisted treatment and offer our States more resources to respond to crisis situations, including by strengthening prescription drug monitoring programs. My colleagues on the Judiciary Committee have worked very hard to improve prevention and treatment of opioid addiction, especially among individuals who pass through the criminal justice system. I believe we need to ensure these tools and resources are available to all Americans struggling with addiction and ensure that our health care system is equipped to address addiction as a disease. I have been proud to work with the junior Senator from Connecticut and other members of the HELP Committee on both sides of the aisle, led by Chairman Alexander, the senior Senator from Tennessee, on a path toward meeting those goals. I am very hopeful we will be able to reach agreement on some additional steps that would make a difference for the many families and communities who are struggling to support loved ones in need. Mr. President, it goes without saying that in this divided government we don't agree on much, but there is some important bipartisan agreement on the need to close the gaps in our mental health care system and tackle the crisis of opioid addiction. So I hope we can pass the legislation we are debating today, along with improvements that ensure it helps patients and families as quickly as possible, but we shouldn't stop there. We should seize this opportunity, work together, and continue making progress for the families and communities we serve. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, next week the Supreme Court is going to hear oral arguments in Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt. This is a case that could not mean more to a woman's ability to exercise her constitutionally protected health care rights. As this case now moves forward, I want to take a few minutes today to explain how much is at stake and why it is so critical that Texas's extreme anti-abortion law be treated as exactly what it is: unconstitutional. Madam President, in Texas and across the country, extreme rightwing conservatives continue to try and turn back the clock on American women. Just yesterday, the Fifth Circuit allowed a Louisiana law to go into effect. That law would leave women with only one health center where they can exercise their reproductive rights. This debate is frustrating, it is disappointing, and, frankly, it is appalling that in the 21st century--43 years since the historic ruling in Roe v. Wade--we even have to have a discussion about whether a woman has the right to make her own decisions about her own body. But one thing that has always kept me going is seeing that when their health and their rights and their opportunities are at stake, women stand up and make it clear why reproductive freedom is so important. As we have fought back against Texas's extreme anti-abortion law, women have explained that because they were able to plan when they had children, they were able to escape abusive relationships. They have told us that because they had control over their own bodies, they were able to break cycles of poverty generations long and give back to their communities. They have shared their experiences of making the extraordinarily difficult decision to end a pregnancy out of medical necessity. These are powerful stories about the difference self- determination makes for women. These stories are possible because of constitutional rights affirmed in Roe v. Wade and protected in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. If Texas's extreme anti-abortion law stands, three-quarters of clinics in the State are expected to shut down--three-quarters of them. As a result, 900,000 women of childbearing age in Texas will have to drive as far as 300 miles round trip just to get the care they need. And women in States with laws like Texas will face similar barriers. I believe strongly that a right means nothing without the ability to exercise that right. Laws like those in Texas and Louisiana, which are driven by extreme conservative efforts to undermine women's access to care, are, without question, getting in between women and their constitutional rights, especially the rights of women who cannot afford to take off work and drive hundreds of miles when they need health care. Put simply: Texas's extreme anti-abortion law and laws like it across the country threaten women's lives. These laws are intended to take women back to the days before Roe v. Wade when women had less control over their bodies and their futures. As a mother, as a grandmother, and as a U.S. Senator, I know that is absolutely the wrong direction for our country. Our daughters and granddaughters should have more opportunity and stronger rights, not less. That is why 163 Democratic and Independent Members of the House and Senate urged the Supreme Court in an amicus brief to stand up for women's constitutionally protected health care rights. And it is the reason that even some of our Republican colleagues are focused on doing everything they can to undermine the Supreme Court. My Democratic colleagues and I are focused on how much the Court's decision in this case will mean for women now and for generations to come. So instead of trying to obstruct justice, we are urging the Supreme Court to ensure justice by upholding settled law. For women, being able to exercise their constitutionally protected reproductive rights means health, it means freedom, and it means opportunity. We cannot and we should not go backward. I yield the floor.