Joe Manchin

Mr. MANCHIN

Mr. MANCHIN. Madam President, today I wish to celebrate an exciting and significant victory for local veterans in southern West Virginia and to recognize the unwavering dedication of the people who have worked tirelessly to bring the first-ever mobile veterans health clinic to Mercer County. Today, the Beckley VA Medical Center will debut the long-awaited mobile health clinic in Bluefield, WV. This facility will improve access to primary and mental health-care to the growing number of veterans in the region. This is wonderful news for our brave heroes who have been without accessible health care for far too long. Until now, our veterans' only option for receiving health care has been to drive over an hour to the closest clinic or hospital. Expecting our veterans to commute this far after these courageous men and women have already risked their lives in the defense of this country is simply unacceptable. I have always said that West Virginia is one of the most patriotic states in this great Nation, and we are so proud of the number of veterans and Active-Duty members who have served with honor and distinction. Upon returning home, they truly deserve the absolute best care and treatment that is available. That is why we have made it our top priority to bring this clinic to serve the veterans in Mercer County and the surrounding communities with quality care. The mobile health clinic will be an extension of the Beckley VA Medical Center, and it will be initially stationed in Bluefield, WV. As long it is utilized by area veterans, we can count on this facility to stay in southern West Virginia for years to come. I especially want to emphasize the efforts of one very special West Virginian who has dedicated the past 18 years to helping the veterans of southern West Virginia--Al Hancock. His leadership and commitment to the betterment of the veteran community is truly why this mobile clinic will open its doors today. Throughout his life and still today, Al has answered the call of service--whether it was serving our great Nation or helping the people of West Virginia. He is a retired teacher and a retired Air Force veteran who served two tours in Vietnam. A proud and passionate leader, he was the chairman of the retired military support group and he led discussions among over 250 veterans about the issues concerning them most. He talked with fellow veterans, their spouses, and their families regularly. One issue that continued to arise was the need for more accessible health care. After more than 150 letters sent to the local newspaper and issuing a petition containing more than 3,000 resident signatures, he provided a voice to the veteran community. Despite the many obstacles and hurdles, Al never gave up--he worked passionately and tirelessly to bring this issue to light. And finally, that voice resonated loud and clear. Because of Al's perseverance and determined vision, I am proud to have worked closely with Al to help bring people together to make his vision a reality. With the hard work and partnership of the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Beckley VA, and the West Virginia delegation, we have been able to make a difference for Al and for all of the veterans who reside throughout southern West Virginia. We owe our veterans more than a debt of gratitude. Showing our appreciation to the brave men and women who have served is something we should do each and every day. By delivering this mobile health clinic, we are paying tribute to those who have answered America's call of duty. I thank Al, the VA, the Beckley VA Center, and all those who have worked to bring this much needed health care access to Mercer County. This clinic will greatly benefit communities that have a need for health care resources, and it will help ensure all of our veterans and their families have access to the care they need and truly deserve.

Mr. MANCHIN

Mr. MANCHIN. Mr. President, 50 years after the assassination of John F. Kennedy, America still mourns his loss. For those of us who were inspired by his Presidency, it is easy to understand why. In a time of indifference, he reawakened this Nation to the finest meaning of citizenship--placing public service ahead of private interest. That is why a half a century later, he remains a powerful symbol of a time of soaring idealism in America, when our people believed our country could do anything--even go to the moon. John Kennedy also inspires Americans who know him only from history books or from the stories their parents and grandparents tell of that all-too-brief shining moment that was his Presidency. John Kennedy was in the White House for only 1,000 days, not even 3 years. But his achievements exceeded his years. It's easy to dismiss his Presidency as one of rhetoric more than results. But to do so ignores the New Frontier he pioneered--a new era of economic growth, space exploration, civil rights advancements, conservation of natural resources, nuclear disarmament and generations of Americans who have made public service a way of life. John Kennedy's immortal words, especially those of his Inaugural Address, still call us to action--to think beyond our own self- interests, and to do what is best for our country and the people of the world. Like millions of Americans, I vividly recall the exact moment on that cold day of November 22, 1963, when I heard the shocking news from Dallas that the President had been shot. I was a junior at Farmington High School. By the time we were told of the tragedy, it was just after lunch and my classmates and I walked into English class. Mr. Simon Matthews, our English teacher who also was one of our football coaches, broke the unspeakable news. Mr. Matthews announced austerely, ``The President has been shot.'' We thought he was joking and teased him to quit kidding us. He said again, ``The President has just been assassinated,'' and we were sent home from school early. When I arrived home, I was stunned to walk in to my living room and find it filled by my entire family. I had never seen my grandfather or father or my uncles leave work early. It was a somber time for every member of my family as we tried to come to grips with the terrible news. It was just so hard to believe our President could be taken from us. But he was. Three days later, it was decided that our family would go to Washington to pay our respects to the President. As an eager 16 year old who had just gotten my license a few months before, I volunteered to drive us in Papa's '58 Cadillac. Six of us piled into the car and made the trip to our Nation's capital. I will never forget, as the caisson bearing the President's casket was led down Pennsylvania Avenue on its way to Arlington Cemetery, my cousins and I climbed into the trees for a better view of the procession. We saw the President's stricken family and friends, the somber Washington dignitaries and world leaders, and Black Jack, the riderless horse with boots turned backwards in the stirrups, a heartbreaking symbol of the loss of a great leader. As I watched the procession move slowly to the sad cadence of military drums, I thought of the time I had been fortunate enough to meet members of the Kennedy family. I was working on my go-cart downstairs in the garage when they visited my family in Farmington as then-Senator Kennedy was preparing for the West Virginia presidential primary. My hands were dirty and greasy, but my mother insisted that I wipe them clean and come upstairs to meet a few people. As I climbed the steps, I smelled my grandmother, Mama Kay's, spaghetti. Everyone had gathered at the table for dinner and an exciting discussion about the political race ramping up in West Virginia. That was the day I shook hands with the Kennedys. John Kennedy and his family spent so much time campaigning in West Virginia that he once quipped that ``West Virginia'' was the third word his daughter Caroline learned to pronounce. He once boasted that he was the only Presidential candidate in history, other than West Virginian John Davis in 1924, ``who knows where Slab Fork is and has been there.'' John Kennedy came to West Virginia to show that a Catholic could win in a predominantly Protestant State. Americans worried that a Catholic President would be controlled by the Pope and that Catholic Mass would be held in the White House every day. Let me just note here that John Kennedy carried the West Virginia primary in a landslide--with 60.8 percent. He won our votes and our heart. He went on to become, as he put it, ``not the Catholic candidate for President,'' but ``the Democrat Party's candidate for President, who happens also to be a Catholic.'' But there was one Catholic Mass in the White House, on November 23, 1963--a Requiem Mass for the slain President. As I reflect now on how much life intersected with John Kennedy's life, I prefer to think about the beginning of the Kennedy Presidency rather than its tragic ending. I prefer to remember his Inaugural Address. It was just 1,355 words and 14 minutes long, but it set in motion a generation of Americans with a passion for public service. Some were inspired to defend liberty as soldiers, sailors, Marines and airmen. Some would march for civil rights in the South. Some would join the Peace Corps and become ambassadors of peace in villages throughout the world. And some would answer the call to service by seeking public office. John Kennedy was a powerful and positive force in my life and the life of our Nation. To me, he embodied a time when politics could be harnessed to higher aspirations, to do good things for the country. Not only did his Inaugural Address famously challenge us to ask ourselves what we can do for our country, it also provided timeless advice on how to overcome the bitterness of partisan politics. An election, he said, is ``not a victory of party, but a celebration of freedom,'' not an end but a beginning ``signifying renewal.'' That is still good advice. John Kennedy was a committed Democrat and few people loved politics more than he and his family. But he understood--as he wrote in his book Profiles In Courage, that ``there are few if any issues where all the truth and all the right and all the angels are on one side.'' He accepted the fact that democracy relies on competing views and vigorous debate. But he did not believe the objective should be to win political power but to solve our country's problems. As he once said, ``Let us not despair but act. Let us not seek the Republican answer or the Democratic answer but the right answer. Let us not seek to fix the blame for the past--let us accept our own responsibility for the future.'' That is what I have always tried to do--to find the right answer and to do what is best for my country and the generations of Americans to follow. That is why, 50 years after John Kennedy's death, I still try to follow his admonition to ``go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own.'' He acknowledged that this was not the work of a hundred days, or of a thousand days, or of one administration, or of a lifetime, but of generations. Even so, he said, ``Let us begin.'' Mr. President, to you and to all our colleagues in the Senate, I say: Let us continue.

Mr. MANCHIN

Mr. MANCHIN. Mr. President, today I wish to observe the birthday of one of the greatest Americans to grace these Chambers--Cornelius Calvin Sale Jr., better known to us--and to history--as Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia. Robert C. Byrd was born Cornelius Calvin Sale Jr. in North Wilkesboro, NC. He was 10 months old when his mother died from flu, and he was adopted by his aunt and uncle, Titus and Vlurma Byrd. They changed his name to Robert Carlyle Byrd and raised him in the coal- mining Appalachian region of West Virginia. And in the 150 years of West Virginia's history, our State has had no greater advocate than Robert C. Byrd. Many in the Senate today served with Robert C. Byrd, and they can bear witness to the fact that the Senate, like the State of West Virginia, also had no greater advocate than Robert C. Byrd. Today would have been the Senator's 96th birthday, and every day since his passing in 2010, the people of West Virginia feel the loss of this great man. The Senate also feels his loss because no one knew the Senate--its history, its traditions, its precedents--better than Robert C. Byrd. He made it a point to meet with every new Senator and to impress upon them the fact that they were to be caretakers of this institution--an institution he regarded as both the morning star and the evening star of the American constitutional constellation. He also impressed upon them that they did not serve ``under'' any president, but that as a separate but equal branch of the government, they served ``with'' presidents, acting as a check on the executive's power. When he passed away, he was the longest serving member of Congress in our Nation's history and, as such, served with 11 Presidents. In his long life, Robert C. Byrd had three great loves--his wife ``fair'' Erma, as he called her; the State of West Virginia; and the United States Senate. But he also had a great passion for the document from which the Senate and this great country sprang--the U.S. Constitution. I have always thought that is why he kept a copy of the Constitution in his coat pocket--it was easy to reach for quick reference, but in his coat pocket, it also was close to his heart. Even though he could recite most of it by memory, he consulted his dog-eared copy of the Constitution often and without hesitation. In its words, he often said, he always found wisdom, truth and excitement--the same excitement he felt as a boy in Wolf Creek Hollow, WV, reading by kerosene lamp about the heroes of the American Revolution and the birth of our Nation. And those words guided him every day of the 58 years he spent in Washington as a member of Congress and as a Senator. Robert C. Byrd cast more than 18,500 votes in the Senate--a record that will never be equaled. Whether he voted with others or against them, it was never hard ideology with Robert C. Byrd. He had no use for narrow partisanship that trades on attack and values only victory. Any time Robert C. Byrd spoke, the Senate came to a halt and Senators on both sides of the aisle leaned forward--to listen and to learn. He ran for public office 15 times--and he never lost. He was first elected to the West Virginia legislature in 1946 and then was elected to three consecutive terms in the U.S. House of Representatives before his election to the Senate. He was a keen observer of politics--he advised more than one Presidential candidate to go to West Virginia, ``get a little coal dust'' on their hands and ``live in spirit with the working people.'' He was deeply proud of West Virginia and its people. He proudly defended his work to invest Federal dollars in his State. He breathed new life into many communities with funding for highways, hospitals, universities, research institutes, scholarships and housing--giving West Virginians the opportunities he himself never had. Robert C. Byrd's journey was, in many ways, America's journey. He came of age in an America segregated by race, which he eventually said was one of our country's greatest mistakes. And, as did America itself, he repented and made amends. The moments that define the lives of most men are few. Not so with Robert C. Byrd. He devoted his life to his beloved Erma and his family and to public service. He was a major figure in the great panorama of American history for more than half a century. His devotion to the Senate and his colleagues was unequaled. His mastery of Senate rules and parliamentary procedures was legendary. And his contributions to West Virginia and to this Nation were monumental. He was a true giant of the Senate. He is as much a part of this Chamber as these 100 historic desks, these galleries, and these busts of Senate presidents. Robert C. Byrd revered the Senate and the Senate revered Robert C. Byrd. It is for this reason that I wish to observe the anniversary of the birth of a great West Virginian and great American--Robert Carlyle Byrd. May God bless his memory and his great spirit.

Mr. MANCHIN

Mr. MANCHIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to 5 minutes, and that after I conclude my remarks, Senator Chambliss be recognized, followed by Senator Ayotte.

Mr. MANCHIN. Madam President, I rise to highlight for Senators the important work of the Airland Subcommittee in the fiscal year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act as reported by the Committee on Armed Services. I am very proud to be the chairman of the Airland Subcommittee and for the close working relationship I have with Senator Wicker, the ranking member of the subcommittee. The Airland Subcommittee has broad responsibilities for substantial parts of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force budgets. The Airland Subcommittee also has responsibility for National Guard and Reserve equipment and readiness. As a former governor, I know firsthand how effective the National Guard is, and they provide a great value for all Americans. Throughout this process the goal of the Airland Subcommittee has been to promote and improve current and future readiness of our military, all while ensuring the most efficient and effective use of taxpayer dollars. This year the Airland Subcommittee has jurisdiction over $49 billion of the Defense Department's base and overseas contingency budget. This includes $37.1 billion for procurement and $11.9 billion for research and development. In this regard the Airland Subcommittee's recommendation fully supports the Department's budget request for Overseas Contingency Operations and would support most of the major weapons and equipment programs in the base as requested. However, sequestration presents many challenges. We can no longer spend billions of dollars buying equipment the military does not need or want. Just a few days ago, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of staff, General Dempsey, provided me with a list of programs the Department of Defense no longer needs and they want to retire. This much is clear: We can no longer conduct business as usual. In fact, the Bowles-Simpson Commission recommended the Department of Defense and Congress establish a commission that would review major weapons programs unneeded by the Department. This is something we should take a look at. I look forward to working with my colleagues on this important issue, and the National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force is already reviewing and will make recommendations on the retirements and divestiture of aircraft the military no longer needs. In future subcommittee work I will be reviewing General Dempsey's list and will be working with my colleagues on the programs the Department no longer needs. Congress must debate this important issue so that we spend every dollar we have wisely and keep our military the strongest in the world. I wish to compliment Senator Wicker again on how well we have worked together this year, and I thank Chairman Levin, Ranking Member Inhofe, and the wonderful committee staff who have worked so closely with my staff and me on this bill. Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. MANCHIN

Mr. MANCHIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Dan Gilbert, my Department of Defense Fellow, and Erica Miller, my State Department Fellow, be granted floor privileges for the duration of the National Defense Authorization Act, through final passage.

Mr. MANCHIN

Mr. MANCHIN. Madam President, I am very proud to be a part of a group who truly put their country first. I have been here probably a shorter period of time than most of my colleagues--not quite 3 years. I think people know I have been a little bit frustrated at times, if not quite frustrated. I heard stories about how the Senate used to work and that when the going got tough, the Senators really got going. I have not seen much of that in the last 3 years. We had a dichotomy of Senators--Angus King, my dear friend, who is an Independent from Maine, seven Republicans led by Senator Collins, and our Democratic colleagues--come together and play off each other's strengths. They did not play off of their egos at all. Two weeks ago I could not believe the self-inflicted pain this Congress put upon the people of America by shutting down the government--also coming on the brink of a financial calamity, if you will, and not being able to pay our bills. I have watched businesses and individuals get into financial problems before. Financial problems can come in many different ways, but basically you have early warnings and can step in front of that so you can restructure your spending, restructure your habits, and get yourself whole again--it takes a while--or you can wait until it hits you, and then you have to foreclose or go bankrupt, and it is almost impossible to get yourself out of it. This was really congressional-made. There may be times when we have pressures put upon us as a country where we will have to do extraordinary work to keep ourselves afloat, but this is not one, and it should not be made because of political dysfunction. I saw our colleagues playing off of the strengths each person brought to the group, and it got stronger and stronger each day. We faced the shutdown that we thought was absolutely ridiculous and unnecessary and should never have happened, and then we were looking at facing a financial meltdown, if you will, the insolvency of our country, and that could not be tolerated. As each person played off the other to try to help make this come together--I think Senator Collins explained it so well--we were able to have a piece of agreed-upon legislation that had a tremendous framework and good template that was presented to leadership here in the Senate. I applaud both of our leaders, Senator Reid and Senator McConnell, for taking that constructively and working with it. They worked together to try to make the best possible piece of legislation, and we encourage our colleagues in the House to accept that legislation. I am hopeful for a large vote in the Senate. I am very much hopeful for that. I am hopeful that our colleagues in the House will accept that in the spirit of a bipartisan agreement we worked on. When we were doing this, we considered the House and what would be acceptable and palatable, but, more importantly, we took into consideration the American people and what they wanted us to do and why they sent us here. In the spirit of the Senate, I am proud to see the Senate rise to the occasion and work the way I heard it used to work. I was able to experience that in the last 2 weeks, and I am proud to have been a part of that. I thank all of my colleagues on the Republican side in both the Senate and the House. This is truly a time when America rose to show its best. Now we have to make sure we complete this. During the negotiation we found out why we could not get to a budget conference. This bill will have a mandatory budget conference that has to report back and go back to some regular order. That was important for all of us to agree on. Everybody said there will be some criticism because of the short time period. We have a better framework than we have ever had in order to fix and repair the damage that has been done and address the uncertainty that will be lurking if we don't do something. I am very pleased and proud. I thank Senator Collins, Senator Murkowski, Senator Klobuchar, Senator Pryor, Senator King, and Senator Heitkamp, and everybody who has worked so hard to make this happen. Again, I am proud to be a part of an extraordinary group of people who put the country before themselves.

Mr. MANCHIN

Mr. MANCHIN. First, I wish to apologize to the people of West Virginia. I am embarrassed and ashamed as a Senator and Member of Congress by how we are acting. I have been answering phones in my office. They are upset. I said: Well, you are not as upset as I am. I have a front-row seat, and it is not pretty. This is not what we were sent here to do. It is not what I signed up for. It is not why I asked the people in West Virginia to allow me to represent what I consider to be the greatest State in the Nation, and I am sure each Senator feels the same way about their State and its wonderful people. I have always looked at public service as an opportunity to fix problems, to make life better, to be able to use the wisdom and skills we have obtained through our experiences in life and watching people and the compassion we have for people to try to make it better. Shutting down government is simply unacceptable. I don't care what way a person looks at this, it is unacceptable. This is the first time in 17 years that our government is not open for business--the first time in 17 years we are not open. This is self- inflicted. This did not happen by any outside forces. This has all been self-inflicted. It not only hurts the people of West Virginia deeply, it hurts people all over this country, and they are feeling the effects. This is only the second day, but it is 2 days too long. Most of you know I am pretty moderate. I am very conservative on fiscal issues. This is how we were raised. We were expected to pay our bills, to take care of our debts, and take care of ourselves and our families. So I have watched that very carefully. When I became Governor, the first thing I did was I tried to put our financial house in order in West Virginia so that basically we could take care of our values. That was our priority, based on what we wanted--our children to have opportunities. We never cut any services during the recession. We took care of our seniors with the dignity and respect and pride they should have. We took care of our veterans. We could not be everything to everybody, but we really watched our dollars and got our financial house in order. So I look at it from that standpoint, where I come from, as a proud West Virginia Democrat, but I am also very compassionate on social issues. Watching my grandparents and watching my family in the little town of Farmington, WV, where I grew up, people expected you to do things. They expected you to really chip in and help people, but they expected you to help yourself also, and they expected you to take care of those who could not, the less fortunate. I have always taken that with me in every aspect of public service. I think I am reasonable and willing to compromise and work with anybody on any issue. I have always put my State's interests ahead of my party politics. I do not make any excuses. I really believe I am an absolutely privileged person to be living in the greatest country on Earth and to be a member of a great family in the great State of West Virginia. But I am an American, I am a West Virginian, and then I am a Democrat in West Virginia, and I have dear friends who are Republicans from West Virginia and from all over the country. So when I looked at the cause of this problem we have right now, it is about finances, strictly about finances. Can we continue to pay? I also looked at the way I felt Democrats truly looked at this. They said: Fine, we will agree to the $986 billion number--$986 billion. That was the Republicans' request, to keep that spending level. The Democrats would have loved to have $1.058 trillion. They reduced it $90 billion. To me, that was a good compromise. We can live with that $986 billion number. We have to tighten our belts a little bit, but we are good at that in West Virginia. And we did it. Then, all of a sudden, the Affordable Care Act--or ObamaCare, as people have referred to it--becomes the issue. There are a lot of things in that piece of legislation that I do not agree with. I do not know how I would have voted if I had been here. I would have tried to make what I would have thought were constructive changes. But do you know what. It is the law. And I said: I am in a mode that I would call for a reform, repair, and then repeal parts of it we cannot fix. I do not know that yet. We have to get in there and do it. I am probably part of the problem and caused some of this because I made a statement. We were talking to some people, and they asked me: What do you think is going to happen? I said: Well, for my colleagues and friends on the other side of the aisle--my Republican friends--I would think they would look, and if they really want to talk about health care, can it be extended for 1 year before it takes effect as the law. I did not mean to postpone it. I did not mean to stop and don't start it until next year. I meant the fines and the penalties. Think about this. I am very much opposed to the individual mandate, but I understand it is part of the process. But I would have thought, why wouldn't we have a transition year? So the law took effect as of yesterday. It has. We have people trying to find the best opportunity they have. In my little State, we do not have a lot of options, so I want to make sure the people who have good insurance are somehow able to keep that. There has to be a way we can work through that. I want to make sure the people who have no insurance and have never been able to buy insurance can now be able to afford it. I want to make sure of that. I want to make sure people who had a preexisting condition or had a child who was born with a condition are able to keep the insurance they now have that they could not have before. I want to make sure that basically the senior citizens in West Virginia, who basically are filling the doughnut hole out of their pockets, which they cannot afford, are taken care of. They can go get an exam on an annual basis and not have to pay a copayment from their Medicare. Those are all good things, and I know my good friends on the Republican side feel the same way about some of this. Why would you want to throw the baby out with the bathwater when all you have to do is maybe change the water every now and then and we have a little clean water we can bathe the baby in again? These are sensible solutions, like how I was raised, looking at how do you fix it? I can assure you this: I have never fixed a problem by calling somebody else a name. I have never chastised somebody for their beliefs. I really have not. I have tried to think, OK, if I were in their shoes, how could we fix this? When I was Governor, I used to sit down with people on the opposite side and think, OK, in the profession we are in--public service--how do I allow them to go home to save face? How do I allow them to have some comfort that they are going to be able to bring constructive ideas to the table that basically make it better? I have always thought of that. So you are not going to hear me saying that we are right and they are wrong. In this case here, I will say: Please, don't have this self- inflicted pain on the people of my State of West Virginia or your State or this country. There could be a time when we might not be able to stop what might be happening. The market forces might push us in a direction that we cannot control. This is something we can control, and all we are asking for--please, let government continue. If you want to talk about a big, grand plan, which I hope we do, which is fixing the financial condition, getting our financial house in order, I have been a big supporter of Bowles-Simpson. It is the only bipartisan package that has been on the table since I have been here. There are an awful lot of things of which people say: Well, I don't like this, I don't like that. None of them have said it is not what needs to be done. It is a three-pronged approach. That is the big fix we have talked about. But we are not talking about any of that. We are talking about things we do not like. We are talking about people we do not like. We are calling people names. And it just does not fix things. It does not make it right. So you will hear me continue to talk about the grand bargain. This is the time, between now and the debt ceiling. I will say this about the debt ceiling: Raising the debt does not fix the debt. We need to have a path to fix it. We should not be going through this political fight every 3, 6 months. This is the fifth time I have been in a debt ceiling debate. How many times have we voted on the so-called ObamaCare? It is ridiculous to continue to fight the same fight over and over. I hope we are in a reform or repair, and then repeal when you cannot fix it. When you have given it your all for the betterment of your country and it is just not fixable or doable, then you change. We have not gotten there yet. We have all naysayers and people basically who just do not want change. I have too many people who need the services of government. I have too many people who depend on it--not that I believe people should be dependent. I hope people would be independent. But government is so intertwined in all of our lives, and to just say you want to stop it all is wrong. So I would ask my dear friends and my colleagues on the Republican side to please think about a continuing resolution. Please. We have come to the agreement on the number that you wanted of $986 billion. Health care--if you wanted to bring up the Keystone Pipeline, I am a total supporter of the Keystone Pipeline for energy independence. I am an ``all energy'' person--use whatever we have. It is not the place for it. As much as I would like to see it, it is not the place for me to draw the line to inflict so much pain on so many Americans, so many West Virginians, just because of one issue I like or do not like. There is a time for that. There will be a time for this health care bill, ObamaCare. It will either succeed or fail on its own. But we ought to try to make it better if we can. If we cannot, then come to the conclusion we cannot, but do not shut down government because you do not think it will work--or maybe you are afraid it will work. That could be it too. With all that being said, I say to my friends, you will never hear me say anything derogatory about you. You can always reach across the aisle to me. I am always going to sit down and talk to you. I am willing to compromise and work on any issue that betters the position we have, that betters the quality of life, that creates opportunities, that makes us the strongest and most powerful Nation on Earth. I will continue to fight for that. But I am asking you for this time, do not allow this self-inflicted pain to continue. This is not fair to my State, it is not fair to the people of West Virginia, it is not fair to the Presiding Officer's State of Wisconsin or to anybody in this great country of ours. With that, Madam President, I say thank you for allowing me to say what has been on my mind. I am a proud American, and it is about this country first, and it is always going to be about this country first. If the United States of America does well, I will guarantee you the great State of West Virginia is going to be just great, we are going to do fine. But we have to work together and put our priorities in place. I yield the floor.

Mr. MANCHIN

Mr. MANCHIN. We have heard our colleagues and had some good conversations with our colleagues. We have had other people saying for real, all you are doing is trying to stall. I said no. I don't believe anyone really questions the might of the government. I don't think it weakens the U.S. Government, to show super restraint, knowing the volatility of that part of the world. Also, past experience in my State of West Virginia--and I know in the great State of North Dakota--we know when you try something and put in so much effort trying to change that part of the world and have not had the success, nowhere near, and spent $1.6 trillion and the sacrifice of Americans--maybe that is not something we should repeat. We all know that. We get no support basically from our constituents. Those of us who are privy to all these high-powered meetings, if you will, have not been convinced that there will be change. With that being said, I say to my friends, if you believe anyone would discount the might of this Nation? I don't think so. The resolve of us to protect our country and our Americans? I don't think so. Or to support our allies, our true friends and allies? I don't think so. But you know, back home we have a saying: Sometimes you don't have a dog in the fight. We can't really find a friend in that fight. That is the problem. That is the hard sell. With that being said--I have said this before--the Arab League, they should step forward. That is in their backyard. We should give all the support. We have humanitarian aid. We will give all the support we possibly can, but they need to take the lead. It cannot always be the Americans being the policemen of the world and everyone saying: OK, call 911, which goes right to Washington. They will take care of it. I discount it when they start saying it doesn't show your strength, we might not have that strength of reputation or it might weaken the President. No, I don't think so. Not at all.

Mr. MANCHIN. I don't believe military action is going to correct what is going on with Syria. It is going to be diplomacy and democracy that will hopefully work there. We are trying to put that forward first. More people are coming on board, and we appreciate that. We thank all of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle. This is not a partisan issue. It truly has not been a partisan issue, and it won't be a partisan issue. This is an American issue that involves all of us, and it is a world issue. The world has great interest, but they also have to have participation.

Mr. MANCHIN. I believe that as the world watches what is unfolding now, they are watching a superpower make a decision. We are using super restraint. We are using super compassion, if you will. But we are super resolved and we have the super might to do what we need to do. I don't think anyone should take that lightly. I do not think anyone would take for granted that we will not defend this country and every citizen of this country with everything we have and try to spread humanity, if you will, all over the world. But it takes more than us as we move outside the borders of the United States of America. We need an international community working with us. We need some of them stepping to the plate; not just the rhetoric that we hear but basic stuff. We need the United Nations to be functioning again, to have a functioning role and have a strong support role and be able to step to the plate and do it in a fashion that protects the civilized world. Those are the things we have asked for. I think this gives it a chance. Today we have seen a breakthrough, if President Asad has said: I will sign and I will be a member and I will comply and I will have inspectors come in and I will make sure these weapons are secure and we will start destroying them, taking them off the shelf. Russia can play a part in that. They can pull their ships up, load them up, take them out, take them to a secured area. That is getting them out of that part of the world, and then hopefully we can get people working together to stop the war we have, to stop the carnage, too. It starts here. People are looking to the United States and I think they have been looking for the leadership we have been able to give, not just in the military and not just in financial, but in some good, solid, concrete decisions that bring this suffering that is going on in Syria to an end. I am very proud to work with the Senator from North Dakota on this issue. We are asking all of our colleagues to be involved in any way, shape, or form. We will work with them. If there is anyone who has ideas that can make this better and an even more perfect document, then we are all for that. I know the Senator from North Dakota feels that way, and I know her team feels that way also. I thank Senator Heitkamp for the work she has done and also the friend she has been. I believe we are close to getting this in the right direction where cooler heads prevail, and I think the world will be safer.

Mr. MANCHIN. I am so proud to be working on this with the Senator. Our staffs have worked well together. They are most competent and they have done a yeoman job. The resolution we have come with basically is the only one out there, an option today that basically controls the chemical weapons. It actually controls these chemical weapons from ever being used on another human being--which we all deplore. With that, maybe we can help, now, move on to trying to help resolve this civil war. The carnage is unbelievable. They said there were 99,000 people killed in Syria with conventional weapons and 1,000 with chemicals. To me, every person is a life we could save, we ought to try to save. With that being said, we have to give them a chance to come be involved, and that is what we have done. At this time last week we never thought we would have been here. This time 2 days ago we would not have thought we could be here. But we are moving in the right direction. Let me make it clear what the resolution the Senator and our staffs have worked on does. The section, our title, is this, basically: Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, The section of our coining, this section of our title . . . may be cited as the ``Chemical Weapons Control and Accountability Resolution of 2013.'' Basically exactly what it says. The statement of policy is this: It is the policy of the United States that (1) the Government of Syria must become a signatory to the Chemical Weapons Convention and take concrete steps to comply with the terms and conditions of the Convention; (2) the failure by the government of Bashar al-Assad to sign and comply with the Convention clearly demonstrates a willful disregard of international norms on the use of chemical weapons; and (3) if the Government of Syria does not sign and comply with the convention within 45 days after the date of the enactment of this resolution, all elements of national power will be considered by the United States Government. That reaffirms the war powers the President has. I know there are some who do not believe that is constitutional or do not believe it is law, but we have checked it and researched it, and it is. We reconfirm that. It does not say that imminent strikes will happen at the end of 45 days. It will be up to the President to determine whether negotiations are moving in the right direction, if all players are being sincere in coming on board, but it gives him the chance to be the President, to do whatever he is elected to do. Whomever he or she may be, you want the President's office to be able to exercise the powers they have by law. That is what we have done here. Everybody has a different approach. Some may say 45 days or you don't need that. Fine. We are open to all that. We have said that before. But the experts who helped us put this together put in timetables they believed were reasonable and believed they were attainable.

Mr. MANCHIN. I sure do. First of all, we all applaud President Obama for bringing it to Congress. We think this is the right place for these types of decisions, with the consequences we are facing and what the repercussions could be. But we have come to a conclusion that any type of imminent strike and the reaction from that would be greater than inaction right now. But doing nothing is unacceptable, which is how we came to this. Basically, we call this the Chemical Weapons Control Act. The thing about the Chemical Weapons Convention, we felt--and we have heard from diplomats on this--this was the proper course. It was basically giving the Asad regime 45 days. Our resolution is very straightforward. The Asad regime has 45 days to sign and comply, and that means to identify, to secure, and to start eliminating and destroying. He cannot use, nor can he continue to produce, these types of weapons. Also, in that 45-day period, we have asked the administration and the President to lay forth a plan for Congress to evaluate what Syria would look like at the end. If they do not sign, what are we to do and how would Syria look? If they do sign and that still hasn't brought any peace and an end to a civil war, that needs to be looked at also. We have all heard from our constituents. In talking to our colleagues we have even heard a lot more. We have had some who have said: Listen, we don't want a strike under any circumstances. No way on God's green Earth do we believe a strike will produce anything but repercussions. I have said this, and the Senator and I have talked about this: If you believe that money or military might would change the course and direction of that part of the world, which we define as the Middle East or North Africa, then we would have had success by now. We have spent 12 years--the longest war in our history--and we have spent over $1.6 trillion and the results have not been beneficial whatsoever and we have lost thousands of lives. I have also said being a superpower means more than showing the rest of the world we have the super might to use whenever we feel it is necessary. Being a superpower comes with not only having the super military power, it comes with having the super negotiation ability, the super diplomacy, the super patience, and the super humanitarian aid, as needed. We have the ability to do all of that. That is what we have asked for. Now we are seeing an evolving situation--not only in 24 hours, but with every 24 minutes it seems like something is changing. The Russians have said they would ask Asad's regime in Syria to sign or be involved. Syria says they have accepted. We have heard now they have said they will comply and join the CWC. These are the changes we have to continue to try to bring to fruition. On that, we are very happy. I know the Senator and I have spoken about that--and our colleagues are looking at different options--that we didn't have different options as of Monday morning. There were no options. It was are you going to vote to strike or not vote to strike. I am pleased we are moving and I think cooler heads will prevail. I believe the President is open to making sure the players are sincere and real, meaning what they are saying. I believe now that they have announced to the entire world, the international world, that we will sign and be honest brokers, let's put them on the spot and see if they will sign that and be part of this and become part of the 21st century, if you will. I have and I will continue to work with my colleague. I think the Geneva Protocol of 1925 prohibits the use of chemical and biological weapons in conflict, but it did not go far enough. We know that. Syria signed the Geneva Protocol in December of 1969. They signed that one, but then they would not and have not been a signatory of the Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993. That is what we are speaking of. That one is the modern-day equivalent of the Geneva Protocol. The international community began negotiating the CWC in 1980 to close the loopholes of the Geneva Protocol. The CWC opened for signature in 1963 and after the required 65 ratifications were received, entered into force in 1997. We have, I think, five countries that have not signed. Most countries, 191, have signed. That is what we are asking for them to comply with, which we think is the best way, because there is an implementation organization which oversees it and it is not the United States or Russia or not any other country taking the lead but basically it is a way to have the entire international community come back into play.

Mr. MANCHIN. Mr. President, approximately 9 days ago most of us were on call and being briefed by the administration on what was evolving and how desperate and dire the situation was. At the time it was being proposed as an imminent strike that had to be done for the defense of this Nation, and we listened to that. Immediately after that conversation we had with many Senators and Secretary Kerry, my dear friend Senator Heitkamp called me and said: I would hope we have another option. We were looking for an option. The only thing we had before us was a vote to either support an imminent strike or not support a strike. It has been proposed if we don't show the strength of this great country of ours that it could weaken our standing in the world and our intentions might not be taken seriously the next time and also weaken the Presidency, which none of us want to do, no matter what side of the fence you might be on. So we kept looking and talking. I canceled all my appointments in West Virginia and Senator Heitkamp did the same in North Dakota and we came back as soon as possible. We attended every meeting, every briefing. I went to my Armed Services Committee meeting and also the Foreign Relations Committee meeting to hear the testimony from all of the people in the administration who were making their case. At the end of the day, it still did not rise to the level, in my mind and I think in the mind of Senator Heitkamp as well, that we were at a point to where it would be of imminent danger to the United States. So with that, we brought all the people together, and Senator Heitkamp-- and I want her to chime in here--and myself kept pushing and pushing the people who had the knowledge and who had been down that road before--military leaders, past and present, diplomats, and also think tanks--and we finally came up with something that could be done. I would defer to Senator Heitkamp on this, but we kept saying if the problem is chemical weapons, why haven't we addressed that? All we knew was there was an imminent strike. We were not going to be able to take out, nor did we intend to take out or change the regime. We could not put boots on the ground, nor did we have a desire--nobody had a desire--for our military men and women to go back in. So we couldn't secure those weapons. Senator Heitkamp might want to say how we came to the position we came to and why we felt it was so important.

Mr. MANCHIN

Mr. MANCHIN. I don't believe military action is going to correct what is going on with Syria. It is going to be diplomacy and democracy that will hopefully work there. We are trying to put that forward first. More people are coming on board, and we appreciate that. We thank all of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle. This is not a partisan issue. It truly has not been a partisan issue, and it won't be a partisan issue. This is an American issue that involves all of us, and it is a world issue. The world has great interest, but they also have to have participation.

Mr. MANCHIN. I believe that as the world watches what is unfolding now, they are watching a superpower make a decision. We are using super restraint. We are using super compassion, if you will. But we are super resolved and we have the super might to do what we need to do. I don't think anyone should take that lightly. I do not think anyone would take for granted that we will not defend this country and every citizen of this country with everything we have and try to spread humanity, if you will, all over the world. But it takes more than us as we move outside the borders of the United States of America. We need an international community working with us. We need some of them stepping to the plate; not just the rhetoric that we hear but basic stuff. We need the United Nations to be functioning again, to have a functioning role and have a strong support role and be able to step to the plate and do it in a fashion that protects the civilized world. Those are the things we have asked for. I think this gives it a chance. Today we have seen a breakthrough, if President Asad has said: I will sign and I will be a member and I will comply and I will have inspectors come in and I will make sure these weapons are secure and we will start destroying them, taking them off the shelf. Russia can play a part in that. They can pull their ships up, load them up, take them out, take them to a secured area. That is getting them out of that part of the world, and then hopefully we can get people working together to stop the war we have, to stop the carnage, too. It starts here. People are looking to the United States and I think they have been looking for the leadership we have been able to give, not just in the military and not just in financial, but in some good, solid, concrete decisions that bring this suffering that is going on in Syria to an end. I am very proud to work with the Senator from North Dakota on this issue. We are asking all of our colleagues to be involved in any way, shape, or form. We will work with them. If there is anyone who has ideas that can make this better and an even more perfect document, then we are all for that. I know the Senator from North Dakota feels that way, and I know her team feels that way also. I thank Senator Heitkamp for the work she has done and also the friend she has been. I believe we are close to getting this in the right direction where cooler heads prevail, and I think the world will be safer.

Mr. MANCHIN. We have heard our colleagues and had some good conversations with our colleagues. We have had other people saying for real, all you are doing is trying to stall. I said no. I don't believe anyone really questions the might of the government. I don't think it weakens the U.S. Government, to show super restraint, knowing the volatility of that part of the world. Also, past experience in my State of West Virginia--and I know in the great State of North Dakota--we know when you try something and put in so much effort trying to change that part of the world and have not had the success, nowhere near, and spent $1.6 trillion and the sacrifice of Americans--maybe that is not something we should repeat. We all know that. We get no support basically from our constituents. Those of us who are privy to all these high-powered meetings, if you will, have not been convinced that there will be change. With that being said, I say to my friends, if you believe anyone would discount the might of this Nation? I don't think so. The resolve of us to protect our country and our Americans? I don't think so. Or to support our allies, our true friends and allies? I don't think so. But you know, back home we have a saying: Sometimes you don't have a dog in the fight. We can't really find a friend in that fight. That is the problem. That is the hard sell. With that being said--I have said this before--the Arab League, they should step forward. That is in their backyard. We should give all the support. We have humanitarian aid. We will give all the support we possibly can, but they need to take the lead. It cannot always be the Americans being the policemen of the world and everyone saying: OK, call 911, which goes right to Washington. They will take care of it. I discount it when they start saying it doesn't show your strength, we might not have that strength of reputation or it might weaken the President. No, I don't think so. Not at all.

Mr. MANCHIN. I am so proud to be working on this with the Senator. Our staffs have worked well together. They are most competent and they have done a yeoman job. The resolution we have come with basically is the only one out there, an option today that basically controls the chemical weapons. It actually controls these chemical weapons from ever being used on another human being--which we all deplore. With that, maybe we can help, now, move on to trying to help resolve this civil war. The carnage is unbelievable. They said there were 99,000 people killed in Syria with conventional weapons and 1,000 with chemicals. To me, every person is a life we could save, we ought to try to save. With that being said, we have to give them a chance to come be involved, and that is what we have done. At this time last week we never thought we would have been here. This time 2 days ago we would not have thought we could be here. But we are moving in the right direction. Let me make it clear what the resolution the Senator and our staffs have worked on does. The section, our title, is this, basically: Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, The section of our coining, this section of our title . . . may be cited as the ``Chemical Weapons Control and Accountability Resolution of 2013.'' Basically exactly what it says. The statement of policy is this: It is the policy of the United States that (1) the Government of Syria must become a signatory to the Chemical Weapons Convention and take concrete steps to comply with the terms and conditions of the Convention; (2) the failure by the government of Bashar al-Assad to sign and comply with the Convention clearly demonstrates a willful disregard of international norms on the use of chemical weapons; and (3) if the Government of Syria does not sign and comply with the convention within 45 days after the date of the enactment of this resolution, all elements of national power will be considered by the United States Government. That reaffirms the war powers the President has. I know there are some who do not believe that is constitutional or do not believe it is law, but we have checked it and researched it, and it is. We reconfirm that. It does not say that imminent strikes will happen at the end of 45 days. It will be up to the President to determine whether negotiations are moving in the right direction, if all players are being sincere in coming on board, but it gives him the chance to be the President, to do whatever he is elected to do. Whomever he or she may be, you want the President's office to be able to exercise the powers they have by law. That is what we have done here. Everybody has a different approach. Some may say 45 days or you don't need that. Fine. We are open to all that. We have said that before. But the experts who helped us put this together put in timetables they believed were reasonable and believed they were attainable.

Mr. MANCHIN. I sure do. First of all, we all applaud President Obama for bringing it to Congress. We think this is the right place for these types of decisions, with the consequences we are facing and what the repercussions could be. But we have come to a conclusion that any type of imminent strike and the reaction from that would be greater than inaction right now. But doing nothing is unacceptable, which is how we came to this. Basically, we call this the Chemical Weapons Control Act. The thing about the Chemical Weapons Convention, we felt--and we have heard from diplomats on this--this was the proper course. It was basically giving the Asad regime 45 days. Our resolution is very straightforward. The Asad regime has 45 days to sign and comply, and that means to identify, to secure, and to start eliminating and destroying. He cannot use, nor can he continue to produce, these types of weapons. Also, in that 45-day period, we have asked the administration and the President to lay forth a plan for Congress to evaluate what Syria would look like at the end. If they do not sign, what are we to do and how would Syria look? If they do sign and that still hasn't brought any peace and an end to a civil war, that needs to be looked at also. We have all heard from our constituents. In talking to our colleagues we have even heard a lot more. We have had some who have said: Listen, we don't want a strike under any circumstances. No way on God's green Earth do we believe a strike will produce anything but repercussions. I have said this, and the Senator and I have talked about this: If you believe that money or military might would change the course and direction of that part of the world, which we define as the Middle East or North Africa, then we would have had success by now. We have spent 12 years--the longest war in our history--and we have spent over $1.6 trillion and the results have not been beneficial whatsoever and we have lost thousands of lives. I have also said being a superpower means more than showing the rest of the world we have the super might to use whenever we feel it is necessary. Being a superpower comes with not only having the super military power, it comes with having the super negotiation ability, the super diplomacy, the super patience, and the super humanitarian aid, as needed. We have the ability to do all of that. That is what we have asked for. Now we are seeing an evolving situation--not only in 24 hours, but with every 24 minutes it seems like something is changing. The Russians have said they would ask Asad's regime in Syria to sign or be involved. Syria says they have accepted. We have heard now they have said they will comply and join the CWC. These are the changes we have to continue to try to bring to fruition. On that, we are very happy. I know the Senator and I have spoken about that--and our colleagues are looking at different options--that we didn't have different options as of Monday morning. There were no options. It was are you going to vote to strike or not vote to strike. I am pleased we are moving and I think cooler heads will prevail. I believe the President is open to making sure the players are sincere and real, meaning what they are saying. I believe now that they have announced to the entire world, the international world, that we will sign and be honest brokers, let's put them on the spot and see if they will sign that and be part of this and become part of the 21st century, if you will. I have and I will continue to work with my colleague. I think the Geneva Protocol of 1925 prohibits the use of chemical and biological weapons in conflict, but it did not go far enough. We know that. Syria signed the Geneva Protocol in December of 1969. They signed that one, but then they would not and have not been a signatory of the Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993. That is what we are speaking of. That one is the modern-day equivalent of the Geneva Protocol. The international community began negotiating the CWC in 1980 to close the loopholes of the Geneva Protocol. The CWC opened for signature in 1963 and after the required 65 ratifications were received, entered into force in 1997. We have, I think, five countries that have not signed. Most countries, 191, have signed. That is what we are asking for them to comply with, which we think is the best way, because there is an implementation organization which oversees it and it is not the United States or Russia or not any other country taking the lead but basically it is a way to have the entire international community come back into play.

Mr. MANCHIN. Mr. President, approximately 9 days ago most of us were on call and being briefed by the administration on what was evolving and how desperate and dire the situation was. At the time it was being proposed as an imminent strike that had to be done for the defense of this Nation, and we listened to that. Immediately after that conversation we had with many Senators and Secretary Kerry, my dear friend Senator Heitkamp called me and said: I would hope we have another option. We were looking for an option. The only thing we had before us was a vote to either support an imminent strike or not support a strike. It has been proposed if we don't show the strength of this great country of ours that it could weaken our standing in the world and our intentions might not be taken seriously the next time and also weaken the Presidency, which none of us want to do, no matter what side of the fence you might be on. So we kept looking and talking. I canceled all my appointments in West Virginia and Senator Heitkamp did the same in North Dakota and we came back as soon as possible. We attended every meeting, every briefing. I went to my Armed Services Committee meeting and also the Foreign Relations Committee meeting to hear the testimony from all of the people in the administration who were making their case. At the end of the day, it still did not rise to the level, in my mind and I think in the mind of Senator Heitkamp as well, that we were at a point to where it would be of imminent danger to the United States. So with that, we brought all the people together, and Senator Heitkamp-- and I want her to chime in here--and myself kept pushing and pushing the people who had the knowledge and who had been down that road before--military leaders, past and present, diplomats, and also think tanks--and we finally came up with something that could be done. I would defer to Senator Heitkamp on this, but we kept saying if the problem is chemical weapons, why haven't we addressed that? All we knew was there was an imminent strike. We were not going to be able to take out, nor did we intend to take out or change the regime. We could not put boots on the ground, nor did we have a desire--nobody had a desire--for our military men and women to go back in. So we couldn't secure those weapons. Senator Heitkamp might want to say how we came to the position we came to and why we felt it was so important.

Mr. MANCHIN

Mr. MANCHIN. I thank the Senator and note the absence of a quorum.

Mr. MANCHIN. I thank the Chair. (The remarks of Mr. Manchin and Ms. Heitkamp pertaining to the introduction of S.J. Res. 22 are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')

Mr. MANCHIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to enter into a colloquy with my dear friend Senator Heitkamp of North Dakota so we can talk about the serious situation we have before us.

Mr. MANCHIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent the time until 7 p.m. be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

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