Lisa Murkowski

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Reserving the right to object.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Point of inquiry: Do I understand that the Senator from Rhode Island wishes to make his amendment pending or just speak to the amendment?

Ms. MURKOWSKI. I thank the Senator from North Dakota for his leadership on this issue. He has been persistent, diligent, and very articulate as we have moved through the process, and I appreciate that a great deal. I thought I was going to be spending the vast majority of my time this week going through each of these many amendments that Members have presented. As I mentioned, we have 140-plus amendments. But my attention on Keystone and the issues in front of us was dramatically pulled away because of an announcement by the administration which I learned of late on Friday evening, and which was the first announcement today. The fact is I am not in a very good mood right now. I am not in a very good mood, and I think it is probably true to say that most Alaskans are not in a very good mood, because folks back home woke up Sunday morning to the news that this President effectively declared war on our economic future in the State of Alaska. I know those are pretty hard words. It has been suggested by some in the administration that perhaps I am overreacting. Let me tell my colleagues, when our economic opportunities as a State, which lie in our natural resources, are denied us as a State and the promises that were made when we entered the Union--the compact we made--we are now not able to see those promises, then there is nothing else. There is no other way to describe it than that it is a war on our economic future. We have winter going on in Alaska right now. In my hometown where I went to high school, I think it was about 30 below this weekend. Up on the North Slope, temperatures are about 60 degrees below zero. It is pretty cold. The President, in his video where he made his announcement that he is moving to put the Arctic Coastal Plain in de facto wilderness, described the area in the North Slope as fragile, that the wildlife is fragile. I will tell my colleagues, the area in the coastal plain, the area in ANWR is an amazing place. It is a special place, as are so many places in Alaska. It is an amazing place. I am blessed to call it home. But the President decided on Sunday that this was the perfect day to announce his unilateral decision to manage the Arctic Coastal Plain as de facto wilderness. Now the coastal plain--and I don't have my maps, but we are going to be seeing a lot of maps of Alaska and ANWR coming up here. The coastal plain is the area on the very northern part of the State, and it is part of the nonwilderness portion of ANWR. People need to understand that ANWR is a huge area. It is 19.7 million acres. It is an area the size of the State of South Carolina. There are portions of ANWR that have been designated as wilderness and they were designated as wilderness back in 1980, along with other areas in the State of Alaska that were designated as wilderness. In fact, so much wilderness--close to 60 million acres of wilderness designated in 1980--so much so that there is actually a provision in the law, in ANILCA, that says, that is enough. Alaska has given enough, in the sense that more than half of the wilderness area in the United States of America is in Alaska. That is, Alaska has more than half of all of the other wilderness in all of the remaining 49 states. Alaska has more than half. So the sense was there will be no more wilderness declarations in Alaska. Yet, the President announces Sunday that, in addition to the coastal plain, effectively all of the balance of ANWR will be managed as wilderness. So what does this mean to a State such as Alaska? Again, history is going to be important in this discussion going forward because the area in the coastal plain--the 1002 area--and it is designated as such because of a section in the law--the coastal plain was specifically set aside in 1980 for further study of its oil and gas potential. So a decision was made back in 1980 where we had more than 100 million acres in Alaska that were turned into Federal law, but it was recognized that this area--that 1.57 million acres--was unique because of its resource potential. It was identified in law as such. And it said, We are going to reserve this. We are going to study it for its oil and gas potential. Then, in the 1980s, the Reagan administration did just that. They studied the coastal plain and they recommended that it be open to responsible energy development. Ever since then we have been seeking permission to open up just 2,000 acres on the coastal plain for that very purpose--for oil and gas exploration. We are not talking about opening up the full coastal plain. We are not talking about touching any of the area that was designated as wilderness in 1980. We are talking about a development that would have an impact on an estimated surface area of 2,000 acres in a 1.57-million acre area that has been set aside specifically for this. So when we think about what that means, we learn that 2,000 acres is .1 percent of the entire 1002 area. It is .01 percent of ANWR. When we put it into context, 99.9 percent of ANWR would remain untouched if all we were seeking to do was to access the 2,000 acres. We also know that if we were able to access this small area within the coastal plain that we can gain access to an estimated 10.3 billion barrels of oil. If we produce oil at that rate of 1 million barrels a day, it will last almost 30 years. Right now we have an oil pipeline in Alaska, the Trans-Alaska oil pipeline, which bisects the State 800 miles from the North Slope down to Valdez, and it has been doing a fine job of providing resource to the country in an environmentally sound and safe manner. It is an engineering miracle. It is fabulous. What it lacks right now is more oil in the pipe. We are less than half full. So the State of Alaska is being aggressive in looking for how we might not only fill up the pipe to help Alaska and to help the country and to bring about jobs and bring about revenues, but how we can do so in a responsible manner. We think we have some pretty high standards in Alaska, and we need to. This is extreme environment. It is tough working there right now, let me tell my colleagues. They don't shut down because it is cold. In fact, this is the only time of the year they can explore out there, because the environmental safeguards are such that we can't take exploration rigs out on the tundra in the summer where it might leave a mark. No. We wait until it is the coldest, the darkest, and the ground is frozen as far as it possibly can. So this is the time of year that we are hoping to be able to do more. But what this President is doing is not only saying no to that 2,000 acres we are seeking to access that will be bringing us a million barrels a day, potentially, for 30 years and allowing for jobs and a resource--no to that 2,000 acres--he would say no forever. He would not only say no to oil and gas development, but no to anything else. No road, no airstrip, no nothing. The President is saying the Congress has to make this decision, and in fairness, that is true. It is only the Congress that can make that decision to convert the coastal plain to permanent wilderness. But the reality is he has made this decision, and he has made it without us. What happens under this comprehensive conservation plan--this CCP--this area is now immediately treated as wilderness, with or without our approval. So that designation may not be there, but how is it being treated? It is being treated as wilderness. I would assert this is in clear violation of the ``no more wilderness'' clause--the ``no more'' clause in ANILCA. It is so frustrating. It is so infuriating to think that we acknowledged that some 30 years ago, when ANILCA was passed, and that recognition--when so much of the State of Alaska was put off limits to any form of development, to place it in wilderness status and to have the Federal Government agree that we had done our part, that we had contributed enough of our lands. The Presiding Officer is from a State that has wide open spaces. What do we do as a State if we have so much of our State--66 percent of the State of Alaska that is federally held? And we all know there are different aspects to Federal public lands. BLM lands mean something, Park Service means something, refuge status means something, and wilderness status means something else altogether. So when we acknowledged and the Federal Government acknowledged no more in Alaska, we thought that would be respected. We thought that might be respected. But, apparently, this President is going to choose to ignore it. My colleagues can tell this is an argument and a debate I feel very strongly about, and I feel very strongly about it because I have been living with it my entire adult life. For as long as I can remember, we have been talking about how might it be possible to look into these extraordinary reserves and resources that we know are in the 1002 area. There have been highs and there have been lows. Back in 1995, when it was my father and Ted Stevens who were working this issue, they were able to successfully get it through the Congress only to have it vetoed by President Clinton. And then 10 years later, it was Senator Stevens and myself who were able to get it so close; we were one vote shy in the Senate. The House has passed ANWR, I believe Congressman Young told me today, on 12 separate occasions. Now we are back yet another 10 years later. So maybe this is an issue that keeps coming back every 10 years. This wasn't the worst part of the news I was dealing with this weekend. At the same time I was given a heads-up that the administration was going to be releasing this CCP--this comprehensive conservation plan that will treat ANWR as wilderness--I was told that we are going to see the announcement of the administration's 5-year lease/sale plan. That is substantial for us. As folks know, we have been trying to advance the leases that have been sold in the Beaufort and in the Chukchi for some period of time, and it has been a tortured process, as many people know. But what we are told is that with the lease/sale that will be announced, portions of the Beaufort Sea and the Chukchi Sea will be indefinitely withdrawn from the next 5-year plan for the Outer Continental Shelf which, again, is due to be released. I think it is important to know we have had deferrals off of our coasts in the Beaufort and the Chukchi, but these are no longer going to be deferrals. They are going to be withdrawals, which means that not only will they not be included in this lease sale from 2017 to 2022, but they will stay in place until such time--it is an indefinite withdrawal--as the next President, whoever he or she may be, should decide to change it. It is different than a withdrawal. What it then says to us is, okay, no, we are going to lock up ANWR permanently so that the resources that may be available to you--as much as a million barrels a day coming down through your pipeline to supply this country--no, put that off limits, and, oh, the offshore you want to try to advance, we are going to make it a little more difficult because we are going to take these areas and we are not going to include them in this 5-year lease sale. In fact, we are going to indefinitely withdraw them. This could have significant impact on our ability to access the estimated 23 billion barrels of oil of Alaska's North Slope. Again, when we are talking about how we are going to fill up that pipeline, we have been working toward those opportunities offshore. But there is a third gut punch to Alaska that is coming--a third. Remember, all these were supposed to be unveiled this week. What a week. First, close off ANWR permanently. Second, make the offshore that much more difficult. And third is in the area where all those who said no to wilderness, go over to the National Petroleum Reserve, that is where you should be accessing this oil. Well, okay, that is where folks are going. ConocoPhillips is trying to access some leases in the National Petroleum Reserve. These are leases that were awarded in 1998, so more than a few years to be working through all of the issues here. What we learned was that the terms and conditions of the mitigation that are going to be required by the Department of the Interior to allow Conoco to proceed with the alternative that would allow for a short road to access the pad, those mitigation costs and other requirements are going to be so much that the project will no longer be economic. Think about it. Years in the process and the permitting and the cost that goes into it, years to get there. I don't think most people know--do you realize how much oil is produced on Federal lands in Alaska? It is a real easy answer because it is a big fat zero. There is none. There is no oil that is produced on Federal lands. We have been trying to make it happen. We have been going to the National Petroleum Reserve because we have been put off limits with ANWR. It hasn't been made permanent wilderness. We haven't been able to access it because that too takes permission from Congress. So the whole area where our State has these resources--these reserves, ANWR to the east, Beaufort, Chukchi offshore, National Petroleum Reserve--Alaska--what this administration is doing is saying this ``all of the above'' strategy for an energy plan for America, we are starting to think in Alaska that means everybody but Alaska. I just can't articulate the anger, the frustration. As I tried to convey my thoughts to the Secretary, I said, I am just not sure if this administration doesn't care about Alaska and its people at all or whether you even think of us. But I have come to the conclusion that they still view us as a territory, a place where you could come in and do what you will because you are a territory. Well, we are not a territory. We are 1 of the 50 States. We are one of those stars on that flag. Last time I checked, we had just as many rights as any other star on that flag. What is coming at my State and the arrogance with which this administration is treating us is unacceptable, and it will not stand. Everybody wants to know, what are you going to do about it? What are you going to do about it? I am going to make sure that people understand who we are, that people understand that there are human beings who live in the 1002 area. You are going to take an area and declare it wilderness. People live there. Children go to school there. Yes, we actually have a polar bear watch to make sure the kids don't leave their homes early in the morning to go to school when it is still dark, and there might be a polar bear out there. Things are different in Alaska, but we still live there. We still want a quality of life for the people that is not unlike what we would have here. We don't want to have communities where we still have no sanitation facilities, where people are hauling their human waste in a bucket in the corner of the house and dumping it in a lagoon. We don't want to be in that situation. But you know what, it seems as though we have to get permission to do anything, and that permission is routinely denied. Or if it is denied, they delay it indefinitely so that it adds to your cost. We pay more for our energy. We pay more to keep warm in the State of Alaska than you do anywhere else. You might say, of course, it is colder up there. You know, back here it is going to be cold in New York. There is nobody in New York who is paying $10 a gallon for fuel like the people in Kobuk are paying. There is nobody in Massachusetts who is going to get hit by this storm and it is going to be cold and is paying $7.50 for fuel like the people in Fort Yukon are paying. We live there because we want to live in Alaska. It is an amazing place. We make a lot of sacrifices. But one of the sacrifices that we won't make, one of the things we will not give up, is to be treated like some second-class citizens, to be treated like a territory that has no rights. So when we are full participants and we say there are special places in Alaska that should be wilderness--and we signed off on that in 1980--then negotiate with us. Talk to us about what happens next. But I made the statement--again, it is harsh words, but I have suggested that this administration is one that is willing to negotiate with Iran, but they are not willing to negotiate with Alaskans. Those days are over. Those days are over. We have some issues to deal with in front of us right now as we move through the legislation in front of us. We have been focused on energy for a good couple of weeks-plus now. I am glad of that. I am glad we are going to be able to work through a process where we can move through some of these amendments. But know that the words I have spoken tonight on the floor are words that come from my heart as an Alaskan. This is not about politics. This is not about me being able to wield some muscle because I have the gavel in the interior appropriations committee. This is about Alaska as a State and our rights as a State. This is about a compact that was made with the State of Alaska, about how we would be able to use and access our lands, how we would be able to care for the people who call Alaska home. This is pure passion that drives my comments, and my comments will be echoed not only by the full Alaska delegation, as small as we are, but by our Governor, by our legislature, by our elected officials, by people who live all around the State, including the people who live in the coastal plain in ANWR. This is serious, and Alaskans are going to take this very seriously. You will be hearing a lot more from us. With that, I thank my colleagues for the indulgence of time. I yield the floor.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum calls related to the cloture motions on Senate amendment No. 2 and S. 1 be waived.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Objection.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I do know the Senator from Washington and I were hoping to get a plan and a proposal for colleagues so that they would better understand how we might proceed tomorrow. And because we haven't had that opportunity to do that as of yet, I would like the chance to consult with Senator Cantwell here. My concern is that if we start getting all these amendments pending right now before we reach some kind of a path forward, it could get complicated.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. I object.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Madam President, I am seeking clarification. Is the Senator from California asking that these respective Members have an opportunity to speak to amendments or to get their amendments pending?

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Madam President, for the information of all Senators, we are working now to set up votes on several pending amendments to the bill. These votes should be after lunch today. Right now, we are looking at 60-vote thresholds on the Fischer amendment, along with the Boxer side-by-side, the Sanders amendment, and the Lee amendment. I do understand that the Boxer amendment is now filed at the desk. Amendment No. 18, As Modified I ask unanimous consent that the Fischer amendment, No. 18, be modified with the changes at the desk.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, we are back to continue debate and voting on amendments to this bipartisan Keystone XL bill. I will focus on two main subjects today. The first is to speak to what I think is the good progress we have made on this bill, moving us toward ultimately a final vote and final passage. I believe we probably surprised a few people yesterday by adopting an amendment on climate change that few thought would be adopted. We have now processed a total of nine amendments. Some would say, well, nine is not much, but just to put it into context, last year, the Senate held just 15 rollcall votes on amendments. That was in all of 2014. Over just a couple of days here in this new Congress, we are already at 60 percent of last year's total, and it is still January. We have eight amendments that are pending at this moment and set to be voted on today. We will work out the timing and order of those votes. My hope is that we will exceed last year's total today. I believe our productivity has been good. I appreciate the cooperation of the ranking member on the committee. What we have been able to do with this measure is important because I think it stands in pretty stark contrast to what we have seen in recent years and, quite honestly, to the delays the Keystone XL Pipeline has faced over those years. The second part of my comments this morning--I wish to provide a little bit of perspective about how long this cross-border permit has been pending, awaiting a final decision by the President. Sometimes when we talk in terms of the raw numbers, some ask: What does that really mean? What does it mean to be on the 2,316th day that has passed since the company seeking to build this pipeline first filed its first permit with the State Department? It has been more than 6 years, more than 76 months, and more than 330 weeks. The President noted in his State of the Union Address this week that Keystone XL was just a single oil pipeline. And he is right--it is just a single oil pipeline. We have multiple pipelines that cross the border. We have hundreds of pipelines that cross the country. So it begs the question: How and why has it taken so long to get action on just one single pipeline? Why has it taken so long? There have been a lot of examples we have heard on floor. I mentioned yesterday that President Obama was still a sitting Senator when the permit application was filed. Others have said the iPad was not even out on the market when the first permit was filed. We heard that 2,300 days is longer than it took the United States to win World War II, longer than Louis and Clark's expedition to explore the West, and longer than Project Mercury, which put the first American into space. There have been a lot of comparisons in terms of what it really means to be longer than 2,300 days. I mentioned on the floor many times that in Alaska we are seeking to try to advance our natural gas resource, and in order to do so we need a big pipeline to move from the North Slope down to tidewater, and so we are working to train welders because we know that when that day comes and we have the opportunity to build that line, we are going to want Alaskans to have those jobs. They may be temporary in that you don't weld a pipeline forever, you do it until the job is complete, but those are good jobs for those Alaskans and for people who come up to our State. The Fairbanks Pipeline Training Center in Alaska does a fabulous job. In my opinion, it is the best pipeline training facility we have in the country. Every year, graduates from the training center are sent out, ready to go to work on projects such as Keystone XL. We are probably talking about seven sets of welders who have graduated at this point, and we need to keep approving projects that can help these young people or those who have been retrained as welders to get jobs. That is what they are waiting for. We can even think about this length of time which has ensued since the first permit application has been pending in terms of flying to Mars and back. We could probably complete about three roundtrips from here to Mars and back, depending, of course, on the distance between the planets, but I am just putting it in context. If we wanted to stay closer to home, we could describe those 2,300 days in terms of how many times we could hike the Appalachian Trail-- probably 10 or 12 depending on the weather. One of these days I would like to hike the Appalachian Trail. I don't know that I have the time, it is one of those issues when you think about how long this has been pending before this administration. Today I will add one more example to show the comparison. At this time in the football season, we are all focused on what is going on with Super Bowl XLIX, which is coming up in 10 days now. We will see Super Bowl XLIX pit the reigning NFL champions, the Seattle Seahawks-- in Alaska we don't have our own professional football team, so we kind of adopted the Seahawks. I will let my colleagues know that I will be standing with the ranking member in rooting for the Seahawks on the big day next week. A lot of folks are excited about it, and we will be watching it. The game will be played next Sunday. For the moment, let's look back to September 19, 2008, when the first cross-border permit for the Keystone XL Pipeline was first submitted to the State Department. Let's specifically focus on the Seahawks because they provide a pretty good example of how much has changed over the past 6 years. Back in September of 2008, the Seahawks were about to start a season in which they would have a record of just 4 and 12-- winning 4 games and losing 12. At that point they were still a good team and we were still rooting for them, but they were a pretty different team. For starters, the Seahawks had a head coach. Their current coach, Pete Carroll, was still at the University of Southern California coaching the Trojans. Their star running back, Marshawn Lynch, was about to start his second year in the NFL as a member of the Buffalo Bills. It would be another 2 years before Lynch joined the Seahawks and just over 3 years before the Nation discovered his love of Skittles during the game against the Philadelphia Eagles. The most famous members of the Seahawks secondary--the Legion of Boom--are Richard Sherman and Earl Thomas. Back in September of 2008, both were still in college, respectively playing for Stanford and the University of Texas. Of course, we cannot forget Russell Wilson. A lot of Alaskans are rooting for him to get a second consecutive Super Bowl as the starting quarterback for the Seahawks. Back in September of 2008--he played just a handful of college games at that time. He was a redshirt freshman at North Carolina State. My point here is not necessarily about football--although that is what a lot of us are talking about--it is to demonstrate that a lot can happen over the course of 2,300 days, and it does, whether we are talking about what goes on in politics, in world events, or the world of sports. My point is that it should probably take the Federal Government less time to approve an important infrastructure project-- what the President himself has called just a single oil pipeline--than it takes to build an NFL championship team. I would like us to get to the point where we are done discussing the merits of this important project and be done in the sense that we can move forward not only with Keystone XL but move forward as a nation when it comes to North American energy independence and providing jobs and greater economic benefit to this country. I am pleased with the process we have had on the floor over the past couple of days. I look forward to the series of amendments on which we will have votes this afternoon--likely after lunch--and the opportunity to be in further discussion about these issues that I think have been pent-up for a period of time. With that, I acknowledge my colleague on the energy committee and co- fan of the Seattle Seahawks.

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

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to modify the Blunt amendment, No. 78, with the changes at the desk.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to call up the Cornyn amendment, No. 126, as modified with the changes at the desk.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I want to make sure we understand the vote was scheduled to begin 3 minutes ago. As part of the unanimous consent agreement, there was not a time allowed for Senator Boxer to speak. I don't have a problem in giving-- --

Ms. MURKOWSKI. I am happy to make sure that is allowed. It wasn't included in the consent, but I am certainly happy to allow for the minute as Senator Boxer has asked.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, we have just gone through a considerable period processing some votes. I appreciate the patience of colleagues as we have gone through it. As the majority leader mentioned, we want to figure out what the next tranche--the next grouping of amendments--will be, and then we will be able to figure out the path forward. It is the hope of myself and the ranking member of the committee that we be able to get through a few more votes this evening, at a minimum, but also to set up a more clearly defined path for the coming days ahead, for tomorrow and Monday. So I ask for the indulgence of Members as we call up a few amendments now to get them pending, and then we will work together to figure out what those votes will actually look like--which votes we will actually take up this evening. Again, I think the opportunity to get amendments pending on both sides is good. It gives everybody an idea of the lay of the land and gives them a chance to look at the amendments we will bring up. So at this point in time I wish to call up an amendment. When I have concluded, I will turn it over to the ranking member and an amendment will be called up on the Democratic side, and then we will come back to this side. We will alternate back and forth to get these amendments pending so Members can know what it is we have in this universe out there. Amendment No. 67 to Amendment No. 2 With that, I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendment and call up Sullivan amendment No. 67.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. I turn to my colleague, Senator Cantwell.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. I turn to my colleague from Arizona at this time.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I would like to turn to my colleague from Montana.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. In November, Father Chad Zielinski, the deputy wing chaplain at Eielson Air Force Base near Fairbanks, received what he regarded as an odd early morning telephone call. The call came from the Apostolic Nuncio, the Vatican's ambassador to the United States. The Nuncio informed Father Zielinski that he had been selected by Pope Francis to serve as the Catholic bishop of Fairbanks. His immediate reaction: This makes no sense; how can this be? There must be some mistake. But there was no mistake. In December, Bishop Zielinski was ordained and installed to lead the Diocese of Fairbanks. The Catholic Anchor newspaper reports that Bishop Zielinski is the first active duty military chaplain in recent history to shepherd a diocese. At age 50 he is also the 11th youngest of the 267 active U.S. Catholic bishops. The selection was met with great enthusiasm throughout interior Alaska and especially in our military community. Before being called to the priesthood, Bishop Zielinski served on active duty in the Air Force. He was ordained a priest for the Catholic Diocese of Gaylord, MI, in 1996. But after the events of September 11 he saw a need for Catholic chaplains in the military and rejoined the Air Force. His Air Force career was varied. Bishop Zielinski served as Roman Catholic cadet chaplain at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs and as a chaplain recruiter assigned to the Air Force Recruiting Service. He also served at Grand Forks Air Force Base in North Dakota and at RAF Mildenhall in Suffolk, England. And he served three tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan--his first in Baghdad in 2003 and his last in Afghanistan where he served 18 forward combat positions, where religious services were punctuated by the sound of live gun fire. On one sad day, the convoy in which he was traveling was hit by a rocket, killing one of the drivers, who also happened to be a parishioner. That day ended with the bishop conducting a funeral. Needless to say, Bishop Zielinski was regarded as an exemplary chaplain and I have no doubt that he will be an exemplary bishop. The Diocese of Fairbanks, the most northern and geographically diverse in the United States, covers some 410,000 square miles. It holds 46 parishes, most of which are in the Alaska Native villages. I am excited about Bishop Zielinski's elevation and I look forward to working closely with him in his new and important role as a leader in our faith community.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that privileges of the floor be granted to William Treadwell and Samin Peirovi effective today through June 1, 2015.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 22, 2015, at 2:30 p.m.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate, on January 22, 2015, at 10 a.m. in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.