Joe Manchin

Mr. MANCHIN

Mr. MANCHIN. Will my good friend the Senator from Utah yield for a question?

Mr. MANCHIN. I yield for the Senator from Massachusetts for the purpose of a question.

Mr. MANCHIN. Would the Senator be kind enough to yield for a question from the Senator from Massachusetts if I would yield?

Mr. MANCHIN. I just feel very strongly that this most reasonable thing that we have asked for is something that was done under President Bush. I think it was in his wisdom to put it out there before. There was nothing to hide. If we looked into their dialogue back at that period of time, they felt it was necessary, as Senator Warren mentioned, to get the public's buy-in, to get support from the public. So they were proud of what they put into it. I am not saying things in here aren't good and won't be good for this country. But there might be some things that could be improved upon that would make it much better for this country. I have lost 31,000 manufacturing jobs since NAFTA. It is hard when I go through my State and I look at people struggling. The jobs have not returned. They have not come to our little State. We did not see the uptick. I am not saying my State represents every State, but I am sure there are parts of every State that have been hit pretty hard by this, and we want to make sure we get this one right. That is all we have asked for. So I am sorry you had to object. I hope you understand our position on this.

Mr. MANCHIN. Senator, if you do see something, let's say, as the bill unfolds and comes to its completion, that you really think is going to harm the people of Utah, you are not going to have any input to change that harm. And it is only going to take 51 votes to pass it, even if harm is in there for Utah.

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. MANCHIN. I understand.

Mr. MANCHIN. Senator, again, I know you understand it. I am sure you probably have gone down into the secured room and maybe have looked through some parts yourself. But it is quite an onerous process. I couldn't take my staff person who had expertise in that arena because he did not have that clearance. So I had to go in, and I couldn't take notes out. Then on top of that, I couldn't even speak to him about what I saw because he didn't have that clearance. I have never been through something like this. For me to go home to West Virginia and say, with all full knowledge and my ability to make a decision on the facts I have in front of me, that I support or I do not support it for these reasons--I can't really do that. I am not really sure if I could support it. Maybe I can support TPP. But I am really objectionable to TPA by not having that opportunity to have input in TPP. I think that is where I fall. And with a 51-vote threshold, I am not going to have any input to represent the people of West Virginia. With all due respect, that is where I am on this.

Mr. MANCHIN. He let everybody see it months ahead of time before he was granted the fast-track authority. He never even asked for TPA until he released it. And I am sure that you were in the majority at the time, and everyone had to support that position, I would think.

Mr. MANCHIN. That is because he hasn't offered it to us.

Mr. MANCHIN. Mr. President, I come to the floor and I, like my good friend the Senator from Massachusetts, am very concerned about the lack of transparency in this whole process of the trade agreement, very concerned. I saw the TPP text. I went downstairs and I saw that. I have to say the whole process was extremely disturbing to me. Members must go to a classified room. Now, we do go to classified rooms, as a bipartisan group, on many issues that are very important to this country. I had gone down because I wanted to see for myself the transcript of the TPP, what they have dealt with and how far they are along right now in the negotiations. The viewing of the documents that are very technical in nature, as we all know, is oftentimes without a trade staffer with appropriate clearance. So here I am, I am not able to take staff--or only staff who has had secured clearance, and it might not be the staff on my staff who has the expertise in this, so that takes that equation away. We are unable to take any notes to consider what we just saw unless we have a photographic memory. Unfortunately, I do not. I have tried the best I can to remember and look for things I knew I was looking for. But still yet, it is almost impossible to walk out of there having the ability to sit down and evaluate what you just saw, and then we are unable to talk to anyone about it--even to my staff, as I would like to get their input, since I have been, basically, looking at the details, and especially the public, too, has no idea about any issues that concern them. The secretive nature of the largest free-trade deal in America's history truly just lacks common sense. Let me explain. In July of 2001, President Bush at that time released the draft text of the Free Trade Area of the Americas Agreement, the FTAA. He did this months before he was granted fast-track authority. He wasn't afraid to let us see it. He wasn't afraid to let the American public know what was in that. We were able to see it, and it didn't squelch the deal. It didn't harm anything. They released the text of the FTAA, the different positions of 34 countries in important areas such as intellectual property rights, investor-state dispute settlements, and antidumping duties--all very important to our country and the jobs we have in this country. Now we have a massive 12-country trade agreement that is currently being negotiated, and the President wants us to grant him the fast- track authority before not only the American people have even seen the text but mostly even our staffs whom we delegate to work on these intricate documents. Our bill that we will be asking consideration for would simply require the President to release the scrubbed, bracketed text of any trade agreement at least 60 days before Congress would grant the fast- track authority. This is pretty sensible, pretty reasonable. Just release the scrubbed document that you have agreed on so far 60 days before you ask us to give the fast-track authority. Before any Member of Congress is asked to vote on the most expansive bill in U.S. trade history, the American people deserve to see what is in the bill. That is why they elect us, to make sure we are able to confer with them, have a dialogue, and explain why we are or why we may not be for a certain piece of legislation, especially a trade agreement. If this bill is as good for the American worker as proponents have claimed, then the administration and anybody else should not find it objectionable to see the details before Congress is forced to grant the President trade promotion authority. I want to say, in my beautiful little State of West Virginia, as I go through it and we look back through the trade agreements that have already been granted since NAFTA, we have not seen an uptick. In fact, we have lost 31,000 manufacturing jobs. I, for one, am not willing to vote to put one more job in jeopardy in West Virginia. That is the concern we have. So what we are asking for is a very modest, very sensible, very reasonable, commonsense approach to how we should do the job the people elect us to do and how it should be transparent. At this time I yield the floor to my friend, the Senator from Massachusetts.

Mr. MANCHIN. Senator, I have the utmost respect for you and the job you do here every day for all of us. I appreciate that. But we have a difference here. My difference is that I have to look at the people in West Virginia--fewer than 2 million people--who depend on the opportunity to make a living for themselves, and they have hard, strong feelings about what we have done over the years in trade agreements. They haven't seen an uptick in opportunity for themselves or their families. With that being said, what we have asked for here, the Senator from Massachusetts and I, is not something that has never been done before. I can't explain why President George W. Bush would have done this. Maybe it was on his own volition, saying: I am going to put out this agreement that has been scrubbed. Basically everything has been agreed on. We will let you see it and discuss it--the American people and the Senate and Congress that represents those people--to see if we have total buy-in and support. If not, we can make some adjustments and changes. He did that. That is really what we have asked for here. I respect your right to object, and I understand the process here. But the American people don't have input into this, and it has a 51-vote threshold from this day forward. So any of us who have any objections or maybe have something that would enhance this bill don't have that opportunity. That is the reason we have asked for this. I know the Senator was here and was very much involved in 2001. What was your position or your opinion when President Bush released a draft text of the Free Trade Area of the Americas, the FTAA? Do you recall, by any chance?

Mr. MANCHIN

Mr. MANCHIN. So the bill that we have proposed before us, it is going to require declassification of FISA Court opinions containing significant legal interpretation, which is a positive thing.

Mr. MANCHIN. I think we both agree and most of the people in this body agree that the bulk collection is wrong. It has been proven to be illegal, it shouldn't have been done, and it should be stopped. I think we all agree on that. I think we still face considerable threats from around the world on a daily basis, if not even greater than that. We are looking to try to find a balance, and I think the Senator from Kentucky is valuable in helping us find that balance. That is what we are looking for. I know our colleague, Senator Lee from Utah, has made a gallant effort in trying to find that balance and making sure that we don't overstep. The private companies are collecting. They already have that information anyway. It is not just sweeping from NSA, as they had been doing. Basically, I am understanding by this bill, the USA FREEDOM Act of 2015, that basically we would have to demonstrate to the FISA Court reasonable, articulate suspicion that its search term is associated with a foreign terrorist organization. They can't even go into those records until that is shown. That is the way I understood it. I am not sure if there is something I am missing.

Mr. MANCHIN. Your sincere belief is that if this sunsets, this bulk collection in the way the PATRIOT Act has been enforced before--if it sunsets and it goes away, which we agree that we are trying to replace that before the sunset--you believe the system we have had in place before the PATRIOT Act of 2001 gives us still the ability to keep the homeland safe, using the court system, as you say, following the rabbit down the hole using the court system? Because we know we have rapid fire coming at us from different directions and people trying to come into this country and do harm. Social media has blown up even since 2001, so we are much more vulnerable from that standpoint. What I am hearing you say also is that you are not really objectionable if you can find the right language--if you thought you could get protection of that individual without the interpretation of the entire broadness of the corporations.

Mr. MANCHIN. It sounds like we are not that far apart. I think we are all going down the same path, trying to keep the homeland as secure as possible while protecting the rights of all Americans. I appreciate that. I hope that we do. These are important issues. It is a dangerous world that we live in. It is a threatened world that our children are being raised in. We want to do everything we can to protect them, and I know you do, too. With that, I think we all came to an agreement that what was done before was wrong. So we all come unanimously to that agreement, and finding a pathway forward is what we are working on now. So I appreciate your sincerity and your intent to try and reach out and find that. I hope you can find that comfort level so we can move forward and still have a protected country. Thank you.

Mr. MANCHIN. The bill that we will be considering is expanding the opportunity for the appellate review of the FISA Court decisions. I think and I can understand that you are saying they can get a FISA order no matter what.

Mr. MANCHIN. It is a good point in the bill that we will be considering, the 2015 FREEDOM Act. It expands the opportunity for the appellate review of the FISA Court decisions, which I think the Senator has had a problem with, too, because it has been handed out, uncontested. Is that correct?

Mr. MANCHIN. If the FREEDOM Act goes away and the way they are doing bulk collection, which we agree should be done away with--and we don't come to some agreement--are you concerned that we might be in more jeopardy by not having something in place where we are able to get the necessary intelligence we need?

Mr. MANCHIN. I guess we are caught in that Citizens United decision, it sounds like.

Mr. MANCHIN. USA FREEDOM 2015.

Mr. MANCHIN. I know the Senator from Kentucky agrees with me that the defense of our country and the protection of our civil liberties should be bipartisan and above politics. I know he agrees that we can and must protect our citizens without violating their civil liberties. Again, I don't always agree with my good friend from Kentucky on every issue, but when it comes to this Nation's intelligence gathering and security, we agree more than we don't. As was he, I was deeply troubled by the revelation that our country was engaged in bulk collection--I think we all were surprised--and that millions of private citizens' data was gathered unknowingly and unjustifiably. In 2013, Edward Snowden revealed to the American public that NSA was engaging in ``bulk data collection,'' in sweeping up virtually every cell phone record of an enormous number of Americans, again for no reason. The U.S. spying program did this by systematically and indiscriminately collecting millions--I mean millions--of Americans' phone records by simply digging up every phone record that came into its net even if it wasn't remotely related to a broad, general search. These are not searches that were relevant to a particular threat or an individual group; it was just a huge database of documenting what millions of law-abiding citizens were doing. That is not what this country was based on, and I think the Senator from Kentucky has made that very clear. I know the Senator from Kentucky believes this was wrong, as I do. That is not just our opinion; national security experts, legal experts, the American public, and even several courts have said that the bulk collection of data is not only unconstitutional but also unnecessary to our national security. And my friend from Kentucky has confirmed that the President's review group has said that bulk data collection is not essential to preventing attacks and that the program has not made a difference in a single instance. The bill the Senate will soon be considering--the USA FREEDOM Act of 2015--will ensure that we restore important privacy protections for Americans. The United States will always face security threats--I think we all know that--and we will for generations to come. That is just a reality. On that horrible day of September 11, 2001, we as a country were reminded of this fact and realized we must meet those threats with strong law enforcement and strong intelligence. However, we must also balance that necessity with our constitutional rights. The NSA bulk data collection program clearly did not strike that balance, and the District Court of DC and the Court of Appeals of the Second Circuit of the United States struck it down. The courts have made clear that this program is not legal, and I understand the frustration of Senator Paul and Senator Wyden with any suggestion that it be continued. I believe this bill, USA FREEDOM 2015, moves us in a positive direction. It ends the bulk data collection program and ensures that the collection of data is related to a relevant, particular terrorist investigation. At the same time, it still protects this country. The USA FREEDOM Act of 2015 replaces indiscriminate bulk collection and allows the government to collect call detail records on a daily basis if it can demonstrate to the FISA Court a reasonable, articulable suspicion that its search term is associated with a foreign terrorist organization. The bill provides greater transparency about surveillance activities. It contains significant new government reporting requirements for FISA authorities to ensure its activities do not again break the law. It gives private companies increased options for reporting to the public information about the number of FISA orders and national security letters they receive. The bill requires declassification of FISA Court opinions containing significant legal interpretations. The bill requires the FISA Court to designate a panel to appoint individuals to advise in particular cases involving new or difficult legal issues. It expands the opportunity for the appellate review of FISA Court decisions. The bill strengthens the judicial review process for gag orders, imposes new privacy protections for FISA pen registers, and limits the use of unlawfully obtained information. The bill also contains many provisions to protect our Nation's security. It creates a new emergency authority to allow the government to obtain business records, including call detail records, without advance court authorization if an emergency requires those records. It also adds a short-term emergency authority for continued transnational surveillance of foreign terrorists or spies who come into the United States before emergency authorization can be obtained from the Attorney General. It permits ongoing FISA surveillance of an agent of a foreign power who temporarily leaves the United States. It clarifies that individuals can be subject to FISA surveillance if they are knowingly aiding, abetting, or conspiring with respect to the proliferation of WMD on behalf of a foreign power. Finally, the bill increases the statutory maximum penalty for material support of terrorism from 15 to 20 years. I know the Senator from Kentucky does not think it goes far enough in protecting our privacy rights, but perhaps my good friend can remind us again of what provisions he would like to see changed or strengthened in the bill to satisfy his interests and the interests of Senator Wyden and other people. I yield the floor back to the Senator from Kentucky to hear basically his concerns and how we can have some protections, and do we have any rights whatsoever to gather information when it is proven? I have heard the Senator from Kentucky say that if he thought we could prove it, there was a different concern we had and we could get the FISA Court involved and basically move forward from there. I thought this bill moved us in a positive direction--the new bill before the Senate that we are about to consider. I would appreciate it if the Senator from Kentucky could explain to me his concerns about that and what we need to do.

Mr. MANCHIN. Mr. President, will the Senator from Kentucky yield?

Mr. MANCHIN

Mr. MANCHIN. Mr. President, I wish to recognize a dear friend, a dedicated public servant and a passionate West Virginia leader, Sam Kapourales, who is celebrating his 80th birthday on April 19, 2015. After proudly knowing Sam and his lovely wife Dee for more than four decades, it is a special privilege to celebrate Sam's vast achievements and his many years of steadfast service to Mingo County, to West Virginia, and to our Nation. I have never met anyone more humble, community-minded and family- oriented than Sam. Throughout his 80 years, and still today, Sam has always answered the call of service. At every turn of the road--whether as the mayor of Williamson in Mingo County for nearly 21 years, as the prosperous business owner of Kapourales Properties, as a successful pharmacist or as an invaluable member of countless boards and organizations that focused on helping others and impacting our local communities--Sam has never lost touch with his faith, his family and those in need. As a devout Mason, Sam has lead a life devoted to personal reflection, self-improvement and social betterment. He is a pure, true- blue West Virginian who has shown time after time that he loves his State and the people of West Virginia through his actions of service and philanthropy. For instance, Sam served as president of the Childhood Language Center in Charleston, where children with speech impediments could receive necessary treatments and services. He also helped recruit much-needed medical services and physicians to the Tug Valley region as a sponsor of the Tug Valley Area Ambulance Service. And as proud Shriner and member of the Beni Kedem Temple in Charleston, even serving a term as Potentate--a true honor indeed--Sam helped raise funds to transport disabled, burnt or sick children to regional medical facilities. Sam and Dee even started a scholarship to provide additional educational opportunities for graduating seniors at Mingo Central High School. Yet Sam's tireless community efforts do not even begin to stop there. Throughout the years, Sam served as a member on the West Virginia Board of Pharmacy, the West Virginia Health Care Authority Board, and the West Virginia Housing Development Authority Board. He was Director of the First National Bank of Williamson, the First Bank of Charleston, the Summit State Bank, and the Energy Services of America Corporation. He also chaired the advisory board of Southern West Virginia Community College of Nursing. Because of his passion, discipline, and staunch work ethic, it is no surprise that Sam has been recognized for his community efforts multiple times throughout the years. Yet to Sam, he says that the greatest of honors bestowed upon him is being a recipient of the 33rd Degree of the Scottish Rite, which is only granted for exceptional service to Freemasonry. His entire life, I never knew Sam to turn down participating in worthwhile cause or helping a neighbor in need. And I truly think that dedication stems from that of Sam's mission as a heartfelt Mason. Sam's unwavering dedication to Mingo County and the Mountain State, accompanied by his innovative vision, inspirational spirit, and savvy aptitude, have helped countless West Virginians throughout the years. His loyalty, trustworthiness, and dedication know no bounds. So today, I join his wife Dee his two wonderful daughters, Stephie-Anna and Susanna, and all West Virginians in wishing Sam Kapourales a very happy birthday. I look forward to celebrating many more birthdays with my dear friend for years to come.

Mr. MANCHIN

Mr. MANCHIN. Mr. President, today I honor the Charleston Job Corps Center and the 50th national anniversary of this outstanding program. Since June of 1965, the Charleston Job Corps Center has been a leader in advancing vocational education and providing training that our State's youth can utilize for the rest of their lives. A successful young workforce means great things for the future of our State's economy and for strengthening our local communities. What began as an all-female center at the old Kanawha Hotel on Summers Street grew to become a coeducational facility in 1976 as interest in the program increased. Administered by the U.S. Department of Labor, Job Corps is a no-cost education and career technical training program that helps youth ages 16 to 24 enhance the skills they need to be independent and successful individuals. The Charleston center is overseen by the Philadelphia Regional Office of the Job Corps and is operated by Horizons Youth Services. In addition to a strong emphasis on academics, the Charleston Job Corps Center also provides impressive recreational programs. These programs are critical to encouraging our youth to be creative and work as part of a team--both of which are prized assets to any employer seeking to hire hardworking, talented, resourceful employees. I cannot adequately express how valuable Job Corps is not only in West Virginia, but across our entire Nation. It is often underestimated how much of an impact an educator can have on a student--not only in the classroom or in a training session, but years down the road. Countless lives have been positively affected thanks to the educators, administrators, and supporters of Job Corps, and I sincerely hope this program continues to flourish for generations to come.