Patty Murray

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, Democrats and Republicans agree that the automatic spending cuts across defense and nondefense investments are terrible policy, and it has to be fixed. I am proud that the bipartisan budget act that we passed last Congress did exactly that for the past 2 years. It offered us a template for how we can tackle this challenge in a bipartisan way once again. That deal succeeded because it rolled back cuts to defense and nondefense equally, and it did it with a balanced and responsible mix of savings and new revenue. The amendment before us builds on that deal and extends the sequester relief for 2 more years. We don't need to rely on gimmicks in this budget or the hopes that we are going to solve this later. We need to fix this now. In 2013, it took a government shutdown to bring both sides to the table to get a deal for this. I am hoping we don't have to wait for another crisis, and I encourage our colleagues who oppose sequestration to support this amendment.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I want to thank Senator Mikulski for offering this really important amendment because I believe that real, long-term economic growth is built from the middle out, not from the top down. Our government and our economy should be working for all families, not just the wealthiest few. We in Congress need to be focused on raising wages and expanding economic security and making sure our workers have the opportunity to work hard and succeed. That is exactly what the amendment the Senator from Maryland has offered will do. It would build on the promise of the Equal Pay Act to help close the pay gap between men and women. Today, nearly half of our workforce is not earning equal pay for equal work. In fact, women across the country, as we know, get paid just 78 cents for every $1 a man makes for the same work. That is not just unfair to women, it hurts our families and it hurts our economy and we need to fix it. Last year, at a hearing in the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, we heard from a woman named Kerri. For 5 years, Kerri worked for an auto supplier as a supervisor. She liked her job. She did it well. Her boss gave her glowing performance reviews for her work. But when that auto industry ran into trouble, her company had to file for bankruptcy, and it was through those bankruptcy court reports that Kerri found out she was making significantly less than the men she supervised. After all those years of hard work, she found out her employer valued her work less just because she was a woman. She said she was heartbroken and embarrassed, but more than that, she told our committee last year that those years of lost wages affected her family for the rest of her life. And she is not alone. Across the country, pay discrimination hurts women and families' ability to make ends meet and get ahead in the workplace. I thank the Senator from Maryland for her extraordinary leadership in the fight for equal pay and for bringing this important amendment forward today. This amendment will help move us toward an economy where women get a fair shot at pay equity in the workplace and set us up to tackle pay discrimination head-on. Pay discrimination, by the way, is not just unfair to women, it is bad for our families, and it is a real and persistent problem that hurts our economy. It is important to remember that women's roles in our economy has shifted dramatically in the last few decades. Women now make up nearly half of our workforce. Today, 60 percent of families rely on earnings from both parents--up from 37 percent in 1975. More than ever, today women are likely to be the primary breadwinners in their family. So we have to make sure working women can succeed in today's economy because their success is critical to families' economic security and to our Nation's economy as a whole. According to a recent report, closing the pay gap between men and women would add $446 billion to our economy. I hope we can all agree that in the 21st century workers should be paid fairly for the work they do regardless of their gender, and I hope we can agree we need to expand economic security for more families. That should be our mission to move our country forward. This amendment supports the basic principle of fairness in the workplace. It would help women, families, and our Nation's economy. I want to make this clear: I am urging my colleagues to vote for the Mikulski amendment--the only proposal on the table right now that would move us toward a real solution to this problem. Senator Mikulski has been our leader on this issue. I hope Republicans will join Democrats on real solutions and work with us to create jobs, increase wages, and expand economic security that benefits all workers and families, not just the wealthiest few. I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business, and that following me, the Senator from Washington be allowed to speak.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, almost 1 year ago, on a calm Saturday morning in the small town of Oso, more than a square mile of mud rushed down a mountainside in my home State of Washington. In a matter of seconds, dozens of homes were destroyed, dozens of people were missing, and they were trapped in the debris from the mudslide. It was unclear at first the extent of the damage, the number of people trapped, and what could be done in the face of such devastation. First responders risked their own lives, braving dangerous conditions to look for survivors. Some were pulled from the rubble, but so many, too many, were lost. Houses over more than a square mile were simply swept away. The main highway to nearby Darrington was blocked, isolating that community. Forty-three people--children, mothers, brothers, and aunts--were killed. This was the deadliest mudslide in our country's history. A year later, there is not a single person in Oso who has not been affected by this devastating natural disaster. In the blink of an eye, they saw water and earth wipe away their homes and their entire community. Let me tell you what I found when I visited the small nearby town of Arlington, where recovery plans were being made just days after the mudslide occurred 1 year ago. I saw small towns like so many across the country in all of our States, the types of towns where everybody knows each other, the types of places where everyone stops to say hello and lend a helping hand. What I saw that day last March was a community where there was not a single person who was not doing every single thing they could to help. Amidst the terrible destruction, I saw hope. I spoke to firefighters who had not slept for days, refusing to stop searching for survivors. I saw neighbors and friends and volunteers providing food and shelter and hugs and prayers, anything to assist the community who had experienced the unthinkable. I want to tell one story from the days following that awful moment, a story that has been told before but bears repeating. A local woman named Rhonda Cook heard about the slide and she found out that her friend was driving by and was buried when the slide hit. Rhonda spent days digging through that debris looking for that blue car she knew was there somewhere, determined to bring her friend out of the mud. When that car was finally uncovered and her friend's body was lifted out, Rhonda paused to pay her last respects. But then she kept on digging, looking for others. Rhonda is just one of the many heroes. There were so many, and so many more who continue working to this very day. Last year, I joined many others in a pledge to stand with the people of Oso and Darrington in the months and years to come and to do whatever we could to help them on the road to recovery. I was proud to work with my colleagues in the Senate and with our friends in the House to make sure the Federal Government was offering a hand, because we are a nation that sticks together when times are tough. We worked to secure housing grants and FEMA funding and transportation investments to repair State Route 530. More than 600 National Guard soldiers were deployed to help in the emergency response. The main highway through Darrington reopened finally last summer. Homes are now being rebuilt. Lives are being pieced back together. While I am so grateful for all that has been done to aid the recovery, our work is far from done. Although the devastation will eventually be cleared, injuries will heal, the emotional scars will always remain, and the memory of those who were lost will never leave us. A disaster of this magnitude requires long-term assistance to help these communities respond, rebuild, and cope. Now a year down the long road of recovery, there is one word that comes to mind when trying to explain what the people of Oso and Darrington are at their core: resilient. Aid workers searched for remains to return to loved ones for as long as 4 months after that mudslide. A man who lost his wife and son gave thousands of dollars in donations to other victims who he thought needed the money more than himself. The people of Oso and Darrington will look back on March 22, 2014, this weekend, remembering lost homes and lost loved ones and even pets. I want those communities to know that all the way here across the country in the other Washington, I stand with Oso. We stand with Oso. Their resiliency in the face of such unthinkable devastation is an inspiration to us all. We will always remember what it means to be ``Oso strong.'' They have the thoughts and prayers of everyone in the country to continue rebuilding, from Washington State to Washington, DC, and everywhere in between. I yield the floor to my colleague, Senator Cantwell, who, as I was, was there time and time again with this community.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I come to the floor with a simple message for our Republican colleagues: Enough is enough. The bill we are debating today, the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act, should without question be bipartisan because the bill about combating trafficking is no place for politics. That means it is no place for harmful, partisan measures that restrict women's respective health options. So it is deeply disappointing that over the last week, Republicans have insisted on including such a provision in this Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act. Then, instead of working with us to take this provision out, get this bill done, and move on to other important work, they have dug in their heels. Democrats want to work with Republicans on this legislation and get it back on track. We put forward a substitute that takes out the politics and focuses on what matters in this debate, which is helping the survivors of trafficking get the justice they deserve. It would be shocking if Senate Republicans refused to support this alternative just because it does not include an expansion of the so-called Hyde amendment that restricts women's access to health services--especially, by the way, since the House has already passed this bill without this harmful women's health provision, just as the Senate did last year. So we know Republicans can support an antitrafficking bill that does not hurt women. There is no reason why we should not be able to shift this back to something that both sides can support. What makes all of this even worse is that the majority leader is now insisting on even more gridlock and dysfunction. He has said that in efforts to continue a political attack on women's health, he will not only hold up the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act but also the confirmation of a highly qualified nominee for Attorney General. That is indefensible. Loretta Lynch deserves a vote. She has been waiting longer than any of the last five nominees for Attorney General. She has been confirmed by the Senate twice already for her position for previous roles. She deserves to be able to get to work. The majority leader has said the Senate will not move to her nomination until we finish the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act. I would like to note that we voted last night on two other nominations, so it seems pretty absurd to say that we cannot work on both at the same time. The bottom line is that Senate Republican have a choice today-- politics as usual or working with us to get this done. They can continue to hold up important work, to draw out a political fight we have had again and again, or they can work with us to get our nominee for Attorney General on the job, pass the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act, and move on to tackle the many other challenges our country faces today. I really hope they will choose to work with Democrats, fight human trafficking, and help women across the country. 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. Mr. President, yesterday I came to the floor with a very clear message for my Republican colleagues: A bill about combatting human trafficking is no place for partisanship. It is not an opportunity to try to get a political victory for your base, and it absolutely should not be a vehicle for policies that would roll back a woman's right to make her own choices about her own body. Instead, a bill like the Justice for Trafficking Victims Act should be focused only on protecting the rights and the safety and the health of survivors of sex trafficking, who have faced truly extraordinary violence and hardship. I called on Republicans to work with Democrats to ensure this legislation gets back on track as the bipartisan effort it should be-- by simply removing a provision that would expand the so-called Hyde amendment, allowing politicians to interfere even more with the most deeply personal health decisions a woman can make. I am disappointed that so far my Republican colleagues have said no and continued to push for a completely unnecessary fight over women's health. So today I am back on the floor, joined by several of my Democratic colleagues, to tell the other side of the aisle that we are not taking no for an answer. We Democratic women believe a bill intended to help women should be about helping women, period. There is no reason for a political restriction on women's health in the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act, just as there wasn't a reason for Republicans to threaten the government with a shutdown over Planned Parenthood funding back in 2011 or try to jam through reproductive health riders on spending bills. The women Senators who have joined us on the floor today have seen this kind of inappropriate, disappointing political stunt geared at rolling back women's rights before. Republicans are going to get the same response they have gotten every other time: not on our watch. Right now the ranking member of the Committee on the Judiciary is working on alternative legislation that would take out the divisive, harmful expansion of the Hyde amendment and keep this effort focused on survivors who need support and deserve justice. Democrats are laying out a path to keep this bill bipartisan and get it done. I hope our Republican colleagues will reconsider the partisan approach they have taken and work with us. I hope they will think about why it doesn't make sense to choose partisanship over trying to just address a truly horrific problem in our country, especially one we all agree needs to be solved. I hope they will commit to putting the politics aside and join us to make this bill the bipartisan effort we all hoped it would be. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, we are debating a bill today that should be about an issue we can all agree on--eliminating human trafficking. This bill should be about protecting women's health and rights and about fighting back against the unacceptable presence of human slavery in our country. In other words, if anything should be bipartisan, this bill is it. I know many of us were hoping this bill--the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act--would be an example of Republicans and Democrats working together because surely we can agree these problems need to be addressed--and urgently--and that the gridlock and dysfunction we see far too often in Congress should have absolutely no place in this discussion. So I am appalled that on a bill intended to help women, Republicans actually have chosen to double down on their political fight against women's health. Republicans have tried to sneak in a provision that would hurt women and drag this bill into yet another partisan fight. They just can't seem to help themselves. The provision the Republicans are hoping to sneak in--again, on a human trafficking bill--would be a permanent extension of the so-called Hyde amendment. It would move beyond the status quo, which only applies to appropriated taxpayer money, and expand it into the new nontax- funding streams this bill would authorize. That means if this law passes--a law intended to help women who have experienced truly horrific violence and hardship--Congress would at the same time allow politicians to interfere even more with the most deeply personal health decisions a woman can make. Trying to slip a women's health restriction into a women's safety bill is akin to slipping a tractor ban into the farm bill. It doesn't make sense. This isn't the first time Republicans have tried this political stunt. Again and again Republicans in Congress have picked completely unnecessary political fights over women's health. They threatened a government shutdown over Planned Parenthood funding in 2011. They have tried to jam through reproductive health riders on appropriations legislation. House Republicans even attached women's health restrictions to the education bill they tried to pass this month. It is shocking to see it happening again. The good news is that the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act can still be the bipartisan legislation it should be. Democrats are here and ready to work with Republicans to fix this bill and move past this partisan debate over women's health. We are very hopeful that once that happens, we can get this bill passed and take a step toward solving a horrible problem we all know needs a solution. I hope my Republican colleagues agree with me that women deserve better than one step backward for every step forward when it comes to their health and their rights. I hope they agree that a bill to end modern-day slavery in the United States is not the right time to try to sneak in a political victory for their base. If they agree, they will prove that by working with us rather than focusing on political fights we have seen more than enough of in this Congress.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I wish to say a few words about the oral arguments in King v. Burwell that took place last week. Similar to many of us on the floor today, I was here when we fought to get the Affordable Care Act passed. I know firsthand our top priority was to help all Americans get more affordable health care coverage. That goal is clear in the history and in the text of this law. I am confident the Supreme Court will reach the same conclusion; that no matter how the health care exchange is set up in any State, if people qualify for tax credits, people should get them just as Congress intended. Unfortunately, many of our Republican colleagues appear to be hoping for the opposite outcome. I wish to take a step back to note how appalling this particular situation is. Right now Republicans seem to be rooting for a ruling that would take away millions of Americans' health care coverage. They seem to want a ruling that would put their own constituents' health at risk, and that amounts to a tax increase on 6.5 million people of about $3,200 a year. Working families should not have to pay the price for Republican political games, including this Supreme Court case that they pushed for. If I were a mother who no longer has to worry about what happens if my child breaks an ankle or a struggling worker who now has a little bit more to spend on groceries because their health care insurance no longer costs so much, I would have a lot of tough questions for Republicans right now. I would wonder why on Earth Republicans are so focused on taking apart a law that is helping families get quality, affordable health insurance. The Affordable Care Act was a critical step forward in terms of making sure our health care system puts patients and families first. Over 10 million Americans have gained coverage in the last 2 years. In fact, today the uninsured rate is at a near-historic low. Health care coverage is more affordable for families across the country, and we are seeing important improvements in the quality of care patients are getting. We have a lot more work to do to strengthen our health care system, but there is no question that this law is doing what we set out to do: expand access to affordable health care for all--all--Americans. Democrats want to build on this progress. So while we see Republicans putting politics first ahead of families' needs, Democrats are going to be focused on building on the Affordable Care Act with more coverage, not less; more affordability, not less; and better quality, not less. We know the work to put patients first didn't end when the Affordable Care Act passed. That is why we are going to keep working to move our health care system forward, not backward, for our families. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, together Senator Cantwell and I have been proud supporters and advocates for PNNL here in the other Washington, working to make sure our colleagues and the administration understand the important research it conducts, and the significant contributions it makes to the Tri-Cities community. Over the past 50 years, PNNL has benefited from a talented and committed staff of scientists, engineers, and nontechnical staff, a dedicated and committed operator in Battelle, and a strong partner in the Department of Energy. Congratulations to PNNL. I know Senator Cantwell and I look forward to PNNL's future contributions to Washington State, the Nation, and the world.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, today, with my colleague Senator Cantwell, we commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, PNNL, a true example of scientific excellence located in our home State of Washington. For the past 50 years, PNNL has served as the Department of Energy's premier chemistry, environmental sciences, and data analytics national laboratory and has tackled some of our Nation's most complex and urgent challenges. In 1965, Battelle won a contract to operate a research and development lab at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington State. Then known as Pacific Northwest Laboratory, its scientists provided critical support to plutonium production and nuclear waste cleanup at Hanford. Through its commitment to excellence and innovation, the lab grew and evolved to serve the ever-changing needs of our Nation. In 1969, the Pacific Northwest Laboratory's scientific prowess caught the eye of NASA, which chose the lab to analyze lunar soil samples that were collected after landing a man on the Moon. The lab changed its name to the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in 1995, and in 1997 opened the Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory. This state-of- the-art national scientific user facility provides researchers from around the Nation and the world with experimental instruments, a high- performance supercomputer, and specialized staff allowing them to advance energy and environmental discoveries. Today, the lab employs 4,300 people at its main Richland campus, the marine research facility in Sequim, and in satellite offices in Seattle, Tacoma, Portland, and Washington, DC, and conducts $1 billion in research annually for the Department of Energy, Department of Homeland Security, National Institutes of Health, and many more. While it is clear PNNL serves as a cornerstone of the Tri-Cities economy, the dedicated staff are also key leaders in the community. The lab has made it a priority to invest in STEM education, playing an important role as a founding partner in one of Washington State's first STEM high schools. Delta High School is now educating our next generation of scientists and engineers. In higher education, PNNL supported efforts to create a Washington State University branch campus in the region which led to WSU Tri-Cities opening its doors in 1989. I am consistently impressed with PNNL's contributions to the local community.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, the NLRB's current election process has some glaring problems, contrary to what some of my Republican colleagues have claimed. For one, the process is inefficient. In many cases across the United States, frivolous litigation and needless delays threaten the rights of workers who want to vote on union representation. Federal appellate courts have called union election delays ``inexcusable,'' ``deplorable,'' and ``egregious.'' The new reforms specifically target those systemic inefficiencies and excessive delays. Secondly, the current system is outdated. Right now, the NLRB, employers, and unions are barred from filing forms electronically during the election process. And it does not allow for the use of modern forms of communication to employees through cell phones and emails. The updates will adapt the election procedures to few forms of technology. Another problem is the current system is unpredictable. Right now, the election process for one region of the country could be substantially different in another region. That adds to inefficiencies and confusion. The new reforms will provide uniformity and certainty in elections across the country. There is a clear problem here. The NLRB made modest, but important, changes to modernize and streamline the process. Mr. President, today, we have heard a lot about the National Labor Relations Board. We have heard about employers delaying workers their right to decide on union representation. We have heard about current election process that is outdated and inefficient. But, really, this debate is about what kind of economy we envision for our country. I believe that real, long-term economic growth is built from the middle out, not the top down. Our government has a role to play in investing in working families, making sure they have the opportunity to work hard and succeed and offering a hand to those who want to climb the economic ladder and provide a better life for themselves and their families. Our government and our economy should be working for all families, not only the wealthiest few. Thankfully, we have had the opportunity to put some policies into place over the past few years that have pulled our economy back from the brink and have started moving it in the right direction. But we have a whole lot more to do. Over the past few decades, for most workers wages have stayed flat or have fallen over the past five decades. That means that across our country today, too many families are struggling to make ends meet on rock-bottom wages and poor working conditions on the job. While the middle class's share of America's prosperity is at an all- time low, the biggest corporations have posted record profits. In Congress, we should be working on ways to build an economy that works for all families, not just the wealthiest few. Unfortunately, once again, instead of sticking up for workers, my Republican colleagues are rushing to the defense of the biggest corporations that have an interest in keeping wages low and denying workers a voice to improve their workplace. Workers have the right to decide whether they want union representation. To ensure they are able to exercise that right, the National Labor Relations Board helps make sure workers have a free and fair up-or-down vote. So the NLRB was absolutely right to carry out its mission to review and streamline its election process to bring down these barriers that prevent workers from getting a fair vote. After a rigorous review process, in December of last year the NLRB made reforms to their election process. These updates will make modest, but important, changes to modernize and streamline the process. They will reduce unnecessary litigation on issues that won't affect the outcome of the election. The new reforms will bring the election process into the 21st century by letting employers and unions file forms electronically. They also will allow the use of more modern forms of communication to employees through cell phones and email. These reforms will simply standardize the election process across regions, which will help all sides know what to expect during the process. But some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle take great offense to these modest changes. Instead of standing for workers across the country who are struggling with stagnant wages and poor working conditions, Republicans have chosen to challenge these common sense reforms with a resolution of disapproval. Instead of talking about how to create jobs and help working families who are struggling with stagnant wages, Republicans would rather roll back workers' rights to gain a voice at the bargaining table. Let's be clear. This rule is about reducing unnecessary litigation. And using cell phones and email to transmit information in 2015 is just common sense. By law, workers have the right to join a union so they can have a voice in the workplace. That is not an ambush. It is their right, as guaranteed by the National Labor Relations Act and by the First Amendment of our Constitution. So when workers want to vote on whether to form a union, they are not looking for special treatment. They are simply trying to exercise their basic rights. We as a nation should not turn our backs on empowering workers through collective bargaining, especially because that is the very thing that helped so many workers climb into the middle class. In Congress, we need to continue to work to expand economic security for more families. That should be our mission to move our country forward. This resolution would simply be a step backward. Instead of attacking workers who just want a voice in the workplace, I hope my colleagues will reject this resolution. I hope Republicans will join Democrats and work with us to protect workers' rights, increase wages, and grow our Nation's middle class. I truly hope we can break through the gridlock and work together on policies that create jobs, expand economic security, and generate broad-based economic growth for workers and families--not just the wealthiest few.

Mrs. MURRAY

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

Mrs. MURRAY. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I come to the floor this afternoon to join my colleagues in taking a step back from the partisan bills on the floor this week to talk about the ways we should be able to work together to grow the economy and help our working families. Democrats have an economic theory that we are pretty confident about. We believe that real, long-term economic growth is built from the middle out, not from the top down. We believe that government does have a role to play in investing in our working families and making sure they have the opportunity to work hard and succeed, offering a hand up to those who want to climb the economic ladder and provide a better life for themselves and their families. We believe our government and our economy should be working for all families, not just the wealthiest few. Thankfully we have had the opportunity to put some policies in place over the past few years that have pulled our economy back from the brink and have started moving it in the right direction. We are not there yet, but across the country businesses have added almost 12 million new jobs. We have had over 59 straight months of job growth, including almost 1 million manufacturing jobs. The unemployment rate is now under 6 percent. Health care costs are growing at their lowest rate in almost 50 years, while millions more families now have access to affordable coverage. The Federal budget deficit has been reduced by over two-thirds since President Obama took office. Although many Republicans seem to keep threatening to bring us back, we have been able to move away from the constant tea party-driven crises and uncertainty that were really destroying jobs and holding back our economy. We are headed in a good direction. I am proud of the policies that we fought for that helped us to get here, but we do have a whole lot more to do. The economy has changed over the past few decades, and our Tax Code has not kept up. Working families have seen their incomes stagnate while the cost of living, health care, and education has continued to go up. More and more families have two workers in the workforce, which is a good thing for so many women but brings additional expenses, such as childcare and transportation and the increased marginal tax rate paid by the second worker in the family. That is why I am very proud to introduce two middle-class tax cut bills today that will put money in the pockets of working families and update our Tax Code for the 21st- century economy. My 21st Century Worker Tax Cut Act would create a new 10-percent credit on up to $10,000 of the income of the second earner in a family. In other words, qualifying working families can reduce their income taxes by up to $1,000, which can go a long way toward offsetting some of the additional costs these families bear as they go back to work. That tax cut rewards families for more work, and it would especially help women who want to rejoin the workforce today. The second bill I am introducing today is the Helping Working Families Afford Child Care Act. This bill will update and reform the outdated child independent tax credit to help more working families. It would increase the tax credit to keep up with the rising costs of quality childcare and would make sure that the credit actually keeps up with the times by indexing it to inflation. I am very proud to introduce these two bills today, but I am even more proud that my bills are just two of the bills Democrats are introducing today that will help working families by putting more money in their pockets and helping them access more opportunity. My colleagues are going to be talking about the bills they wrote, but our package of bills also includes, besides what I just talked about, an earned-income and childcare tax credit expansion and expansion of the American opportunity tax credit to help middle-class families afford childcare so they can get back on the job and help them pay for college so they can work hard and invest in themselves and their careers. We know Republicans like to talk about cutting taxes. Well, with these bills we are giving everyone a chance to do exactly that--and not with more tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations. Republicans have given that trickle-down theory a try, and it failed. Our approach is tax cuts for the middle class, for the workers who need it the most, to help them afford the costs they are faced with, such as childcare, putting food on the table, getting back on the job, and to give them the opportunity to work hard and succeed. We want to grow the economy from the middle out, not the top down, and we think these middle-class tax cut bills are a very strong step in the right direction. We hope Republicans will join us to get these done.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I come to the floor this afternoon to join my colleagues in taking a step back from the partisan bills on the floor this week to talk about the ways we should be able to work together to grow the economy and help our working families. Democrats have an economic theory that we are pretty confident about. We believe that real, long-term economic growth is built from the middle out, not from the top down. We believe that government does have a role to play in investing in our working families and making sure they have the opportunity to work hard and succeed, offering a hand up to those who want to climb the economic ladder and provide a better life for themselves and their families. We believe our government and our economy should be working for all families, not just the wealthiest few. Thankfully we have had the opportunity to put some policies in place over the past few years that have pulled our economy back from the brink and have started moving it in the right direction. We are not there yet, but across the country businesses have added almost 12 million new jobs. We have had over 59 straight months of job growth, including almost 1 million manufacturing jobs. The unemployment rate is now under 6 percent. Health care costs are growing at their lowest rate in almost 50 years, while millions more families now have access to affordable coverage. The Federal budget deficit has been reduced by over two-thirds since President Obama took office. Although many Republicans seem to keep threatening to bring us back, we have been able to move away from the constant tea party-driven crises and uncertainty that were really destroying jobs and holding back our economy. We are headed in a good direction. I am proud of the policies that we fought for that helped us to get here, but we do have a whole lot more to do. The economy has changed over the past few decades, and our Tax Code has not kept up. Working families have seen their incomes stagnate while the cost of living, health care, and education has continued to go up. More and more families have two workers in the workforce, which is a good thing for so many women but brings additional expenses, such as childcare and transportation and the increased marginal tax rate paid by the second worker in the family. That is why I am very proud to introduce two middle-class tax cut bills today that will put money in the pockets of working families and update our Tax Code for the 21st- century economy. My 21st Century Worker Tax Cut Act would create a new 10-percent credit on up to $10,000 of the income of the second earner in a family. In other words, qualifying working families can reduce their income taxes by up to $1,000, which can go a long way toward offsetting some of the additional costs these families bear as they go back to work. That tax cut rewards families for more work, and it would especially help women who want to rejoin the workforce today. The second bill I am introducing today is the Helping Working Families Afford Child Care Act. This bill will update and reform the outdated child independent tax credit to help more working families. It would increase the tax credit to keep up with the rising costs of quality childcare and would make sure that the credit actually keeps up with the times by indexing it to inflation. I am very proud to introduce these two bills today, but I am even more proud that my bills are just two of the bills Democrats are introducing today that will help working families by putting more money in their pockets and helping them access more opportunity. My colleagues are going to be talking about the bills they wrote, but our package of bills also includes, besides what I just talked about, an earned-income and childcare tax credit expansion and expansion of the American opportunity tax credit to help middle-class families afford childcare so they can get back on the job and help them pay for college so they can work hard and invest in themselves and their careers. We know Republicans like to talk about cutting taxes. Well, with these bills we are giving everyone a chance to do exactly that--and not with more tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations. Republicans have given that trickle-down theory a try, and it failed. Our approach is tax cuts for the middle class, for the workers who need it the most, to help them afford the costs they are faced with, such as childcare, putting food on the table, getting back on the job, and to give them the opportunity to work hard and succeed. We want to grow the economy from the middle out, not the top down, and we think these middle-class tax cut bills are a very strong step in the right direction. We hope Republicans will join us to get these done.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I believe that real long-term economic growth is built from the middle out, not from the top down, and our government has a role to play in investing in working families, making sure they have the opportunity to work hard and succeed and offering a hand up to those who want to climb the economic ladder and provide a better life for themselves and their families. Our government and our economy should be working for all families, not just the wealthiest few. Thankfully, we have had the opportunity to put some policies into place over the past few years that have pulled our economy back from the brink and have started moving us in the right direction. We are not there yet, but across the country businesses have now added almost 12 million new jobs over 59 straight months of job growth, including almost 1 million manufacturing jobs. The unemployment rate is now under 6 percent. Health care costs are growing at their lowest rate in almost 50 years, while millions more families have access to affordable coverage. The Federal budget deficit has been reduced by more than two- thirds since President Obama took office. Although some Republicans are now threatening to bring this back, we have been able to move away from the constant tea party-driven crisis and uncertainty that was destroying jobs and holding our economy back. We are headed in a good direction, and I am proud of the policies we fought for that helped us get here, but we have a whole lot more to do. Over the past few decades, working families have seen their incomes stagnate while the cost of living and health care and education has continued to go up. For most workers, wages have stayed flat or have fallen over the past five decades. According to the National Employment Law Project, from 2009 to 2013 hourly wages declined by 3.4 percent. During that time low- and mid-wage workers experienced greater declines than higher wage workers. That means that across our country today too many families are struggling to make ends meet on rock-bottom wages and poor working conditions on the job. While the middle class's share of America's prosperity is at an alltime low, the biggest corporations have posted record profits. Congress should be working on ways to build an economy that works for all of our families, not just those at the top. Unfortunately, once again, instead of standing up for workers, my Republican colleagues are rushing to the defense of the biggest corporations that have an interest in keeping wages low and denying workers a voice to improve their workplace. Workers have a right to decide whether they want union representation. To ensure they are able to exercise that right, the National Labor Relations Board--or the NLRB--helps to make sure workers have a fair up-or-down vote. Unfortunately, too often big corporations take advantage of loopholes in the current election process to delay a vote on union representation. Unnecessary litigation and excessive delays threaten the rights of workers who want to have a free and fair election. In too many cases big corporations take advantage of every possible opportunity and wasteful legal hurdle--sometimes on small technicalities--just to delay a vote. Sometimes the confrontation and hostility during the election process can be extreme. A study from the Center for Economic and Policy Research found that among workers who openly advocate for a union during an election campaign one in five is fired. Bureaucratic delays make the problem worse. Another study--this one from UC Berkeley--found the longer the delay before an election, the more likely the NLRB will charge employers with attempts to tamper with the vote. What is clear from that research is that delays only create more barriers that deny workers their right to organize a union. The NLRB was absolutely right to carry out its mission to review and streamline its election process and to bring down those barriers for workers to get a fair vote because it is clear the current system is outdated and vulnerable to abuse. As I have mentioned, the current election process is overburdened by unnecessary and wasteful litigation which drags out elections and puts workers' rights on hold. Not only that, the election process for one region of the country can be substantially different from another region, and that adds to inefficiencies and a lot of confusion. Workers have the right to vote on union representation in elections that are efficient and free from unnecessary delays and wasteful stall tactics. So after a very rigorous review process, in December of last year, the NLRB made reforms to their election procedures. These updates will make modest but important changes to modernize and streamline the process. They will reduce unnecessary litigation on issues that will not affect the outcome of the election. The new reforms will bring the election process into the 21st century by letting employers and unions file forms electronically. They will allow the use of more modern forms of communication to employees through their cell phones and their emails. It is important to note that in many regions the NLRB has already adopted some of these much needed reforms to the election process, so we know this can work. These reforms will simply standardized the best practices for the election process across regions, which will help all sides--all sides--know what to expect during the process to promote uniformity and predictability. These changes aren't just good for the workers, but they are good for employers by streamlining the process when workers file a petition to have an election on whether to join a union, and the reforms will make sure all sides have the information they need. I have laid out the improvements the new reforms will make, but let's talk about what these guidelines will not do. The new process does not require elections to be held within any specific timeframe. I want to repeat that because it is important. Contrary to what some of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are arguing, these new guidelines do not require elections to be held within any specific timeframe. Not only that, but this rule does not in any way prevent companies from communicating their views about unionization. Employers are able to communicate extensively with their employees about union issues, and these reforms do nothing to stop that. Employers would still be able to talk with their workers about what a union would mean for their company. The reforms simply make some commonsense updates to create a fair opportunity for workers to decide if they want union representation, but some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle take great offense to these modest changes. Instead of standing up for workers across the country who are struggling with stagnant wages and poor working conditions, Republicans have chosen to challenge these commonsense reforms with a resolution of disapproval, and that is why we are here today. Instead of talking about how to create jobs and help working families who are struggling, Republicans would rather roll back workers' rights to gain a voice at the bargaining table. The Republicans' attempt to stop this rule through a resolution would have major consequences for businesses, for unions, and workers who want a fair election process. Passing the resolution would not only prevent the NLRB from implementing these commonsense reforms, but this resolution would take the drastic step of also preventing the NLRB from adopting any similar election rules in the future. So the outdated election process that leads today to frivolous litigation and delays would remain frozen in time without further congressional action. Let us be clear. This rule is simply about reducing unnecessary litigation and allowing the use of cell phones and email. I have heard some of my colleagues call this frontier justice. Everyone else calls it the 21st century. By law workers have the right to join a union so they can have a voice in the workplace. That is not an ambush, it is their right. It is guaranteed by the National Labor Relations Act and by the First Amendment of our Constitution. So when workers want to vote on whether to form a union, they aren't looking for special treatment, they are simply trying to exercise their basic right. We, as a nation, should not turn our back on empowering workers through collective bargaining, especially because that is the very thing that has helped so many workers climb into the middle class. Workers having a seat at the bargaining table is very critical to America's middle class. When more workers can stand up for their rights or wage increases or making sure their workplaces are safer or they have access to health care, those things get better for them. In short, Americans are better able to share in the economic prosperity they have earned through their hard work. It is no coincidence that when union membership was at its peak in the middle of the last century, America's middle class grew strong. Collective bargaining is what gave workers the power to increase their wages. Unions helped workers get the training they needed to build their skills so they could advance on the job. They helped to make sure men and women had safe work places, and through collective bargaining access to health care rose. Workers shared in our country's prosperity. All of those benefits strengthen economic security for the middle class and for those working hard to get there. In Congress, we need to continue to work to expand economic security for more families. That should be our mission, to help move our country forward. This resolution would simply be a step backward. So instead of attacking workers who just want a voice in the workplace, I hope my colleagues will reject this resolution. Instead, I really hope Republicans will join with Democrats and work with us to protect workers rights and increase wages and grow our Nation's middle class. I truly hope we can break through the gridlock and work together on policies that create jobs, expand our economic security, and generate a very broad-based economic growth for our workers and our families, not just for the wealthiest few. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Emily O'Neill, a detailee with the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, be granted floor privileges for the duration of the consideration of S.J. Res. 8.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Illinois for his passionate remarks. That rings so true to all of us. I thank him for all his work on the DREAM Act and making sure young people who are raised in this country have the opportunities that all of us do. As we count down the final days before funding for the Department of Homeland Security potentially runs out, I want to take a few minutes to talk about how we got to this point. As this deadline gets closer and closer, I have been continually reminded we have been down this road many times before. This is a manufactured crisis, and it is no different than so many others we have faced in Congress over the last few years. What is happening in Congress right now is not a debate over government spending policies or priorities. That much is certain. This is not a debate over how the Department of Homeland Security should function. It is certainly not a debate about our national security. This is, pure and simple, a political fight Republicans are having with themselves across the two Chambers of the Capitol and across the different factions of the Republican Party. That is not the case for every Republican in the Senate. Several Members have said clearly we should fund the Department of Homeland Security without any strings attached. The fact remains some Republicans are making it clear they are willing to hold hostage the basic operation of our government over rightwing politics and nothing else. While this process might seem complicated, it is actually very simple. Democrats--along with national security experts, law enforcement experts, State and local officials, and three former Secretaries of Homeland Security, including two Republicans--want to do nothing more than fund the Department of Homeland Security cleanly, no strings or unrelated political amendments attached. But because they are so angry about the President's actions months ago to improve our country's immigration laws, some Republicans are demanding to pass a bill that will tear apart families who are working hard to make it in America, put our security at risk, and seriously threaten all of the work we have done recently--including the budget agreement I reached with Congressman Paul Ryan--to keep our government functioning. That is not only bad policy. It doesn't make any sense. The bill passed by Speaker Boehner and House Republicans would be devastating to families across the country, and it would make day-to- day operations for the Department of Homeland Security needlessly difficult. For example, TSA agents who work to keep our airports safe and secure would be forced to work without pay. These men and women should be worrying about doing their jobs, not knowing whether they are going to be able to pay their bills and put food on their table. That is not what we want them worrying about. But because of political pressure from the extreme anti-immigration, rightwing party, that is what Republican leaders in the House are demanding. This looming shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security has become to them nothing more than collateral damage. The national impacts of not funding the Department of Homeland Security have been discussed for weeks now. This would also cause problems all the way down to individual fire departments in our local communities. Right now the Whatcom County Fire District 18 located in my State-- close to the northern Canadian border and it is about an hour north of Seattle--is applying for an assistance to firefighters grant which is funded through the Department of Homeland Security. This is a very rural fire district. They only have one paid employee--it happens to be the fire chief--along with a volunteer firefighting force of 16 and a volunteer EMT force of 6. They have applied for a very small $24,000 Federal grant to replace their heavily used and outdated equipment--everything from boots and helmets to gloves and fire hoods--that are now over 11 years old. I have been working with them to help them get that needed equipment which protects those volunteers who put their lives on the line to save others, but if Congress does not fund this department those grants are at risk. That is unacceptable. It is proof this political mess the Republicans have made is not a hypothetical problem. It is something that will have real impacts on every one of our communities across the country. My colleagues are not going to give in and let the Republicans play politics with the Department of Homeland Security. For years now we have seen that strategy doesn't work. It holds us back. I am encouraged the majority leader has said they are willing to bring up a clean Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill to the floor. We need the same commitment from the Speaker of the House of Representatives. Time is running out. The country is waiting. We need to fund Homeland Security. 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. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I wish to take a few minutes to discuss a piece of legislation I am introducing today--legislation I have written to improve access to health care for our Nation's veterans, because there is no more solemn promise we make as a nation than our commitment to care for the men and women who serve in the U.S. military. These men and women put life and limb on the line to protect our country, to protect our freedoms, and to protect our way of life. In return, we as a country make a promise to care for them, no matter what. Just as important, we make a promise to care for their families--their wives, their husbands, and their children. Many of the young men and women who serve in the military enter at a very young age, often before they have children of their own. Like so many other Americans, they have big plans for their lives after their service. Many of them plan to buy a house, go back to school, and eventually have a family. But in a time when our military conflicts involve roadside bombs, makeshift explosives, and life-threatening danger around every corner, many of our service men and women are coming home with injuries that leave them unable to start their own family. In fact, military data shows that over the last decade, thousands of servicemembers have suffered injuries that make it nearly impossible to have children. We should be doing everything we can, with the best science and health services available, to help our veterans and their loved ones have children, despite their injuries. But instead, outdated policies at the Pentagon and the VA are making it harder, not easier, for seriously injured veterans to have children. That is because when severely injured service men and women and veterans seek reproductive health services, such as in vitro fertilization, their military and VA health insurance simply doesn't cover this often very expensive procedure. As a result, the only option for these heroes and their partners to have children is to pay out of their own pocket, often tens of thousands of dollars, to try and conceive. So today I am introducing The Women Veterans and Families Health Services Act of 2015. It would basically do two things: First, it would expand the reproductive health services available for Active-Duty servicemembers and their families. Second, it would finally end the ban on in vitro fertilization services at the VA. I have introduced similar legislation in the past, and, as I have done before, I am going to share the story of SSG Matt Keil and his wife Tracy. Staff Sergeant Keil was shot in the neck while on patrol in Ramadi, Iraq, on February 24, 2007, just 6 weeks after he married the love of his life, Tracy. The bullet went through the right side of his neck, hit a major artery, went through his spinal cord, and exited through his left shoulder blade. He instantly became a quadriplegic. Doctors informed Tracy her husband would be on a ventilator for the rest of his life, and would never move his arms or legs. Staff Sergeant Keil eventually defied the odds and found himself off the ventilator and beginning a very long journey of physical rehabilitation. Around that same time, Tracy and her husband started exploring the possibilities of starting a family together. Having children was all they could talk about, once they adjusted to their ``new normal.'' With Staff Sergeant Keil's injuries preventing him from having children naturally, Tracy turned to the VA for assistance and began to explore her options for fertility treatments. Feeling defeated after being told the VA had no such programs in place for her situation, Tracy and Staff Sergeant Keil decided to pursue IVF through the private sector. While they were anxious to begin this chapter of their lives, they were confronted with the reality that TRICARE did not cover any of the costs related to Tracy's treatments, because she did not have fertility issues beyond her husband's injury. Left with no further options, the Keils decided this was important enough to them that they were willing to pay out of pocket to the tune of almost $32,000 per round of treatment. Thankfully, on November 9, 2010, just after their first round of IVF, Staff Sergeant Keil and Tracy welcomed their twins Matthew and Faith into the world. Tracy told me: The day we had our children something changed in both of us. This is exactly what we had always wanted, our dreams had arrived. The VA, Congress and the American People have said countless times that they want to do everything they can to support my husband or make him feel whole again and this is your chance. Having a family is exactly what we needed to feel whole again. Please help us make these changes so that other families can share in this experience. Tracy does not want to see other servicemembers and their families go through the struggle she and Matt did because of outdated policies that don't reflect modern medicine. While the Keils' story may be unique, they are not alone. Thousands of servicemembers and veterans have returned from their service hoping to have children, only to find that, despite their sacrifices for our country, they are unable to obtain the kind of assistance they need. Some have spent tens of thousands of dollars in the private sector, like Tracy and her husband did, to get the advanced reproductive treatments they need to start a family. Others have, sadly, watched their marriages dissolve because of the stress of infertility, in combination with the stress of readjusting to a new life after a severe injury, driving their relationship to a breaking point. Any servicemember who sustains this type of serious injury deserves so much more. They deserve our support to help them start a family, and our support to raise that family. This bill is so important because access to childcare is one of the most significant barriers to care for women veterans and younger veterans. This bill makes permanent the highly successful pilot program in VA and expands it across the country. I am very hopeful today that both Republicans and Democrats can come together to support this bill. Just a few years ago we were able to pass similar legislation through the Senate, but, unfortunately, it didn't pass the House in time to get the President's signature and become signed into law. This time has to be different, because this bill is about nothing more than giving veterans who have sacrificed so much the option to fulfill the dream of starting a family. It is a bill that shows when we tell our servicemembers deploying to a war zone that we have their back, we mean it. It is a bill that recognizes the men and women who are harmed in the service of this country have bright, full lives ahead of them.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I wish to take a few minutes to discuss a piece of legislation I am introducing today--legislation I have written to improve access to health care for our Nation's veterans, because there is no more solemn promise we make as a nation than our commitment to care for the men and women who serve in the U.S. military. These men and women put life and limb on the line to protect our country, to protect our freedoms, and to protect our way of life. In return, we as a country make a promise to care for them, no matter what. Just as important, we make a promise to care for their families--their wives, their husbands, and their children. Many of the young men and women who serve in the military enter at a very young age, often before they have children of their own. Like so many other Americans, they have big plans for their lives after their service. Many of them plan to buy a house, go back to school, and eventually have a family. But in a time when our military conflicts involve roadside bombs, makeshift explosives, and life-threatening danger around every corner, many of our service men and women are coming home with injuries that leave them unable to start their own family. In fact, military data shows that over the last decade, thousands of servicemembers have suffered injuries that make it nearly impossible to have children. We should be doing everything we can, with the best science and health services available, to help our veterans and their loved ones have children, despite their injuries. But instead, outdated policies at the Pentagon and the VA are making it harder, not easier, for seriously injured veterans to have children. That is because when severely injured service men and women and veterans seek reproductive health services, such as in vitro fertilization, their military and VA health insurance simply doesn't cover this often very expensive procedure. As a result, the only option for these heroes and their partners to have children is to pay out of their own pocket, often tens of thousands of dollars, to try and conceive. So today I am introducing The Women Veterans and Families Health Services Act of 2015. It would basically do two things: First, it would expand the reproductive health services available for Active-Duty servicemembers and their families. Second, it would finally end the ban on in vitro fertilization services at the VA. I have introduced similar legislation in the past, and, as I have done before, I am going to share the story of SSG Matt Keil and his wife Tracy. Staff Sergeant Keil was shot in the neck while on patrol in Ramadi, Iraq, on February 24, 2007, just 6 weeks after he married the love of his life, Tracy. The bullet went through the right side of his neck, hit a major artery, went through his spinal cord, and exited through his left shoulder blade. He instantly became a quadriplegic. Doctors informed Tracy her husband would be on a ventilator for the rest of his life, and would never move his arms or legs. Staff Sergeant Keil eventually defied the odds and found himself off the ventilator and beginning a very long journey of physical rehabilitation. Around that same time, Tracy and her husband started exploring the possibilities of starting a family together. Having children was all they could talk about, once they adjusted to their ``new normal.'' With Staff Sergeant Keil's injuries preventing him from having children naturally, Tracy turned to the VA for assistance and began to explore her options for fertility treatments. Feeling defeated after being told the VA had no such programs in place for her situation, Tracy and Staff Sergeant Keil decided to pursue IVF through the private sector. While they were anxious to begin this chapter of their lives, they were confronted with the reality that TRICARE did not cover any of the costs related to Tracy's treatments, because she did not have fertility issues beyond her husband's injury. Left with no further options, the Keils decided this was important enough to them that they were willing to pay out of pocket to the tune of almost $32,000 per round of treatment. Thankfully, on November 9, 2010, just after their first round of IVF, Staff Sergeant Keil and Tracy welcomed their twins Matthew and Faith into the world. Tracy told me: The day we had our children something changed in both of us. This is exactly what we had always wanted, our dreams had arrived. The VA, Congress and the American People have said countless times that they want to do everything they can to support my husband or make him feel whole again and this is your chance. Having a family is exactly what we needed to feel whole again. Please help us make these changes so that other families can share in this experience. Tracy does not want to see other servicemembers and their families go through the struggle she and Matt did because of outdated policies that don't reflect modern medicine. While the Keils' story may be unique, they are not alone. Thousands of servicemembers and veterans have returned from their service hoping to have children, only to find that, despite their sacrifices for our country, they are unable to obtain the kind of assistance they need. Some have spent tens of thousands of dollars in the private sector, like Tracy and her husband did, to get the advanced reproductive treatments they need to start a family. Others have, sadly, watched their marriages dissolve because of the stress of infertility, in combination with the stress of readjusting to a new life after a severe injury, driving their relationship to a breaking point. Any servicemember who sustains this type of serious injury deserves so much more. They deserve our support to help them start a family, and our support to raise that family. This bill is so important because access to childcare is one of the most significant barriers to care for women veterans and younger veterans. This bill makes permanent the highly successful pilot program in VA and expands it across the country. I am very hopeful today that both Republicans and Democrats can come together to support this bill. Just a few years ago we were able to pass similar legislation through the Senate, but, unfortunately, it didn't pass the House in time to get the President's signature and become signed into law. This time has to be different, because this bill is about nothing more than giving veterans who have sacrificed so much the option to fulfill the dream of starting a family. It is a bill that shows when we tell our servicemembers deploying to a war zone that we have their back, we mean it. It is a bill that recognizes the men and women who are harmed in the service of this country have bright, full lives ahead of them.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. 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.