Harry Reid

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, as I have stated on the record many times, I have great admiration for the Senator from Arizona. We came together to the House, came together to the Senate. But I have to say, it is obvious my friend has a short memory. These bills take a long time. That is traditionally how it has worked around here. For weeks, we work on these bills. I understand the bill as reported complies with the budget agreement. I appreciate that. But the Senator from Arizona, I have been told, wants to offer an amendment to expand military spending without doing anything to address the middle class. The fight against terrorism, the fight for security in our country is more than bombs and bullets; it is the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security; it is what we are doing to fight the scourge of drugs. All of those things are important for the security of this Nation. There is nothing being done in this bill to fight ZIKA. Is that a security issue? Yes, it is. There is nothing being done to fight opioids. Is that a security issue? It sure is. During the time we have had this little exchange, there will be a number of people who will die across America as a result of the overuse of opioids. Flint, MI, has been going on for months. Those poor people have been ravaged with lead in the water. So I would have to say that my friend, as I have indicated, has a very short memory. I don't know how many times he has voted not to proceed to a piece of legislation. We need to address those issues that I have talked about. I think the people of Arizona, the people of this country, want us to do our jobs. You would think that one thing we could do is look at this bill. This bill is not 64 pages long, not 164 pages long; it is 1,664 pages long. What makes it even more concerning to me and my colleagues is the fact that it was basically done in secret. It was a closed hearing. So for heaven's sake, let's be brought back to reality. We have been very clear. We think we should take care of the middle class as we take care of the military. We are obligated to do both. The President will veto any bill that violates that principle. So before we begin consideration of this bill, it wouldn't be bad if we read it. It wouldn't be bad if we had a chance to study this. It wouldn't be a bad idea if we had our staff give us some information on this bill of 1,664 pages. So, without any question, I object.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I come to the floor today not to talk about a political issue, in the real sense of the word--not Democrat versus Republican--but a very difficult sensitive issue. It is hard to talk about, but we as a nation can't keep ignoring this important topic. It has been more than 20 years since I learned about something called female genital mutilation, known as FGM. Since then, I have spoken often against this awful procedure and the devastating effect it has on women and girls around the world. A number of people warned me 20 years ago that this isn't a subject I should talk about. It was taboo. They thought it would be untoward for me to do so. But I told them I had to because no one else was talking about it. So I am going to continue doing everything I can to bring attention to this issue and fight to end this horrible, awful, brutal practice perpetrated against women and girls. It was a 1994 cable news program that introduced me to this practice. One of my friends in Las Vegas said: You can't imagine this. This was a young woman who sent this to me. I didn't expect getting this from her or anyone else. But we were friends, and so I watched this. She said: You have to. And I did: A 10-year-old little girl in a party dress held down by two men, her legs spread apart, and she was brutally mutilated as her genitals were cut away. These images have continually haunted me over the years. I will never ever forget the picture that I saw. There are different forms of female genital mutilation around the world. The most severe and atrocious is the one in which the girl's genitals are cut away. But then the little girls are literally sewn shut, leaving only a small opening for urine and menstrual blood. Though FGM is performed for different reasons around the world. One thing is very clear: Whatever rationality you try to give to this practice, it is a form of control and oppression of women and girls. In addition to the psychological impact, this form of gender-based violence has serious medical risks, including death, of course. It is recognized by the United Nations as a human rights violation, as it should be. But FGM is still happening. As we speak, 200 million women and girls worldwide have undergone FGM--200 million women and girls who are alive today who have undergone that procedure that I watched on cable news, or something like it. More than two decades after I first saw that program, women and girls are still being hacked, mutilated. It is not done in a hospital, an operating room. It is done in very unsanitary conditions most of the time. This practice remains prevalent in at least 30 countries. In some places, the rates of FGM are higher than 90 percent--90 percent. In many of these countries, girls are cut before the age of 5. In most places they are cut between the ages of 5 and 14. In many of these countries, girls--well, enough. Imagine that--girls who haven't even started school yet, of kindergarten age or younger, being subjected to this horror. Because of these millions of girls, I have spent more than 20 years trying to do something about it. I have worked hard to pass legislation outlawing the practice in the United States and banning so-called vacation cutting, which goes on when young girls are shipped overseas. Because it is illegal here, due to the laws we passed, they take them overseas to be cut. There was some bipartisan support, obviously, for this. It is not a partisan issue. We were able to have a few victories--certainly not enough, but some. Still, this brutal practice continues around the world, and it is clear there must be much more done--much more done. That is why, at my request, the General Accountability Office began a study on the American Government's efforts to stop this practice. The GAO has now completed its report about our government's international efforts. It wasn't much of a report. It was kind of short. The report is shameful in terms of what we have not done. The title of the report says it all: ``Female Genital Mutilation/ Cutting: U.S. Assistance to Combat This Harmful Practice Abroad is Limited.'' And ``limited'' is an understatement. I am publicly releasing this report today, which outlines the U.S. Government's limited--limited--efforts. I am terribly disappointed. I am embarrassed that the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development are not fully engaged in dedicating resources to put an end to this. According to the GAO report, USAID and the State Department each had just one active stand-alone project focused on stopping female genital mutilation. One of these projects is gone--already ended. Less than $2 million has been spent on these projects combined. The GAO also found that the United States has never contributed-- never contributed--a penny to the world's largest international effort against this horrible, awful practice. It is called the Joint Programme on FGM/C. It is embarrassing. We have not put one penny into this. During the course of the GAO investigation, State and USAID both began to take action. They were embarrassed, I assume. If they weren't, they should have been. But they haven't done much. USAID, for example, decided to update the guidance it released 16 years ago, and Secretary Kerry recently announced that the United States will be contributing to the Joint Programme for the first time. Bravo. I commend this commitment, but I understand these funds are not a dedicated funding source. They are just a one-time, very limited pledge. Maybe we will have to get another GAO report before we get something into that program. It shouldn't take a GAO investigation for State and USAID to act. The United States should prioritize ending this practice, but it hasn't. This is shameful. It is a tragedy that our great government is not doing more. It is inexcusable that the United States, a nation with wealth and power, is standing by while such sickening violence against women and girls is occurring. As we speak, 200 million have undergone this in the world--200 million. The State Department and USAID should end it or do everything they can to make female genital mutilation a priority and dedicate substantial resources to this issue. It is a cause. It should be, if it isn't. The United States can and must do far more to eliminate this practice worldwide. We still have problems here in the United States. This shameful GAO report, I hope, is a wake-up call. Something had to wake us up because we have done almost nothing as a country. The report should be a turning point in the fight against FGM, a moment when the most powerful nation in the world commences the stopping of this brutal form of abuse. The United States should be a leader in this fight and not a bystander. We must put this brutal practice to an end. America must lead the world in stopping these assaults of little girls and big girls and women. I hope the Senate will join me in these efforts. Mr. President, I don't see anyone on the floor. I ask the Chair to announce the business of the day.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I yield the remainder of the time on this side.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I have had a long, pleasant relationship with the senior Senator from Florida. We served in the House together. We have served in the Senate together. I have great admiration for him and his loving wife Grace, and I am happy to be on the floor with him today. People in Florida are so fortunate to have this good man representing them. Unanimous Consent Request--H.R. 3038 Mr. President, look at this map behind me. There are two types of mosquitoes that carry this disease--this condition, this virus. We see this map here, which covers 39 States. It goes without saying that they are not subtropical States. They are not Florida. They are not Louisiana or southern Texas. They are places like Boulder, CO, and Las Vegas, NV. Are those States subtropical? No, I don't think so. We get 4 inches of rain a year. It goes up into Maine. This is a serious issue which will affect 39 States. As the weather warms, the mosquitos will multiply and people will be bitten by these vicious little insects. Mosquitos have been causing problems in the world for centuries, but never to anyone's knowledge has a mosquito caused the types of birth defects that are now happening with the Zika virus. The virus was discovered in 1947 or 1948 in Uganda. In fact, ``Zika'' is the name of a forest there and means ``overgrown.'' Over the decades, something has happened and these mosquitos have become so dangerous. This virus is a threat to people living in these areas, and it is as real as it gets. Right now, the focal point is on two places, but it is changing as we speak. The American citizens of Puerto Rico have been hammered. That poor territory of ours has had so many problems--all the money problems they are having, compounded by the fact that tourism is being damaged significantly as a result of this Zika virus. It is not only the birth defects this virus causes, which are so repugnant and scary, but this virus also has the ability to create very serious problems with paralysis in human beings. It has happened, and there are already reported cases of that. This is a ravaging problem. Puerto Rico now has almost 1,000 reported cases, which include at least 128 pregnant women and probably more. One citizen died in Puerto Rico as a direct result of the Zika virus. It is estimated that 20 percent of the Puerto Rican people--or 3\1/2\ million--will be infected with this virus. We are talking 700,000 American citizens. As of May 11, there were 1,200 Zika cases on the mainland, and Senator Nelson has talked about that in detail--as well he should as a representative of that State. No State is on the frontlines of this ravaging problem more than the State of Florida. It is a nightmare, and who knows how long before this map becomes our national nightmare. No one is making this up. This is serious. Somehow, the Republican-controlled Congress still hasn't sent a bill to the President's desk to provide emergency funding so we can fight this devastating virus. If we were here talking about a national emergency--floods, fires, earthquakes, all of the many issues we often come to the floor to talk about--my friend from Texas is on the floor. How many times have we come to this floor to help the State of Texas? We have helped Texas so many times, and we were all glad to do it, to pass emergency supplemental bills to help the citizens of the State of Texas. There is no reason that I can understand why we don't have a piece of legislation on the floor just like we would if there were a flood, fire, or some other emergency in a State. But, no, we are going through a process that will never end in time to take care of the problem. Under the present process we have, this emergency spending is part of the appropriations bill. Everyone knows that the House can't even get a budget. They can't do their appropriations bills. How are we going to take these issues to conference when the House can't even come up with a budget? I don't know how we can do it any sooner than sometime toward the end of this fiscal year, which is September or October. By then, the summer will be beginning to be gone, but the mosquitos and the devastation they have left will not be gone. Experts tell us they need this money and they need it now. Yesterday I met with the President's Director of Management and Budget, Sean Donovan, and it is clear that they desperately need this money. It sounds as if my friend from Texas is saying: We have the Ebola money; use that. They are still working on Ebola. What was the emergency we had here 2 years ago? It was Ebola. What did we do? We provided the money so they could do the research to alleviate the spread of this scourge, and they are doing that now. We are robbing Peter to pay Paul. That is actually what we are doing. The $1.1 billion for Zika that we invoked cloture on yesterday is a bandaid. It is not enough. Congress isn't moving fast enough to give the researchers, doctors, and public health officials what they need to combat this virus. Now the House is going to make it even worse by passing a bill for $622 million. What would you guess they are going to use to fund this money? Let's see. What could it be? Oh, maybe ObamaCare, which they have tried to defeat 67 times, and each time it ends up the same. Einstein's definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. That is what we have with the House Republicans, and I am sorry to say this, but it has spilled over here too. They haven't tried to eliminate it over here that many times but as many times as they could. They are going to come up with a bill to provide $622 million, which will come from a number of resources, but it will principally be ObamaCare money. And $622 million is a fraction of what is needed. It is approximately 25 percent of what is really needed. To say that the appropriations process is too slow is a gross understatement. We need to get this done now. I don't know when, if ever, these appropriations bills will be signed into law. Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, has been at the forefront of all of these dreaded problems we have had in recent decades. He was a leading advocate scientifically during the AIDS epidemic we had. Here is what he said: ``When you've got an emergency situation, you really need to get funding as quickly as possible.'' The time to act is now. This summer, when Zika is on the news every day, which it will be, Senators will regret that they did not act quickly to address this crisis. I urge my colleagues to take care of this today and provide the $1.9 billion in emergency money, just as we have done with any other national emergency we have taken care of on this floor numerous times, and do it in a procedural way that will get the money to them the quickest. Mr. President, at this time I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 157, H.R. 3038; that all after the enacting clause be stricken; that the Nelson substitute amendment to enhance a Federal response and preparedness with respect to the Zika virus, which is at the desk, be agreed to; that there be up to 1 hour of debate equally divided between the two leaders or their designees; that upon the use or yielding back of time, the bill, as amended, be read a third time and the Senate vote on passage of the bill, as amended, and there be no intervening action or debate.

Mr. REID. I don't know what my friend from Texas is going to tell the people from Texas this summer when there is no money available. We heard the Senator from Florida talk about the need for local governments to prepare for this virus. Some of this stuff is pretty straightforward. How do you get rid of mosquitoes? You can't wish them away. They don't go away that way. We get rid of mosquitoes by mosquito control, and that takes money. Where does that money come from? It comes from local governments. That is why Florida is desperate for money, and they will be desperate for that money in Texas and everyplace else. Using the logic of my friend from Texas, don't worry about it. We will get you some money this fall. The money we voted on yesterday at the very earliest will not come until we wrap up our appropriations bills. I remind everyone that the House is stuck. They can't do appropriations bills because they don't have a budget. They can't get people to agree to what they want to do. My friend Paul Ryan has seen what John Boehner had to put up with all of those years before they ran him away from the Speakership, and he is having the same problem. This man who talked about budgeting--that was his key. He was the idea man. Paul Ryan can't get a budget with his own Republicans in the House. I think that my friend is saying: We got a downpayment. We took the money from Ebola. We will worry about Ebola later, and maybe we will borrow that money from someplace else to continue our research on Ebola. Senator Schumer mentioned in a meeting we had a short time ago that the one thing he remembered about the last time Dr. Fauci came to our caucus and talked about this dread problem was that he said that the National Institutes of Health is very close to coming up with a vaccine for this. But we take this money--just like when we had sequestration, they were close to a flu vaccine, and that is gone. You have to do it when you can, and right now is an opportunity for us to do something to save the lives of people and especially these unborn infants.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, it wasn't because of the good graces of the Members of the Republican Senate that President Obama took the money from Ebola and put it into fighting the problems we have with Zika. The President asked for this money 3 months ago. They took that money out of desperation because they had no other place to go for the money. That money is not sitting there waiting to be spent; it has been spent. They need money. They are out of money. There is no more robbing Peter to pay Paul. This is an emergency, and it should be handled now because under the process we have, the earliest there will be help for this will be this fall.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, my friend, the Republican leader, continues to complain about ObamaCare. This has been the mantra of the Republicans since it passed. But the true facts are these: ObamaCare has reduced the number of uninsured to the lowest rate since we have been keeping records in America. The uninsured are going down, not up. People are healthier now as a result of being able to go to the doctor or the hospital when they are hurt or sick. Now, we talk about ObamaCare in a vacuum. What was going on before Obamacare? Insurance companies ravaged the American people. The people who were fortunate enough to have health care had to be aware that at any given time they could have their insurance canceled. If you were disabled, there was no insurance. But that isn't all. If you had a prior malady of some kind--if you had cancer, if you had diabetes--you couldn't get insurance--but not anymore. Under ObamaCare you cannot be denied insurance for any condition. They used to charge women more than men--for no reason, except that some statistical analysis had taken place in some dark room by a guy with green eyeshades who determined that maybe, statistically, women cost a little more than men. They can't do that anymore. I am always so stunned by this mantra: ``We have to replace it.'' With what? It has been 7 years. With what? The Republicans have come up with nothing. So, in short, is ObamaCare perfect? Of course not. Could we improve it? Yes, we could. But it would be nice to have a little cooperation from the Republicans. They are unwilling to do anything other than complain.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, again the senior Senator from Kentucky complains about the fact that the most senior member of the Senate, the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Pat Leahy, is going to have a meeting today, and he has invited all the Judiciary Committee members to come--Democrats and Republicans. He has invited all Senators to come because he is going to have some witnesses testify about the importance of having a Supreme Court that is full of Justices--all nine. So that means full. Republicans won't come to that hearing, meeting. Call it whatever you want. They won't be there. No, they are blocking that, obstructing that like they have everything else. The American judiciary is in trouble, and that is why the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee is having this meeting today. To do its work, the U.S. Supreme Court needs nine Justices--not eight, not seven, but nine. But because of Senate Republicans' refusal to consider a senior judge on the DC Circuit--the second most influential court in the land--Merrick Garland, the Court is in trouble. The Court is short- staffed. The Court doesn't have enough people to do its work. People-- we are talking about one person who has so much control over what goes on in the Supreme Court. But that person is not there. In recent weeks, the Supreme Court has deadlocked on many important cases and questions before it. For example, the day before yesterday, the Justices punted on two more cases, remanding both to lower courts. These actions were a clear indication the Court was tied 4 to 4. Due to the wisdom of the people on that Court, they decided it would be better, since they could not write the decision, to send it back to the lower courts and see if they could help work out the problems. Not having nine Justices is a serious problem. As was written yesterday in a New York Times editorial: ``Every day that passes without a ninth Justice undermines the Supreme Court's ability to function, and leaves millions of Americans waiting for justice or clarity as major legal questions are unresolved.'' Litigants take their cases to the Supreme Court in search of justice. It often takes years to get to that Court. They seek resolution. They seek clarity, but because of Republicans' unprecedented obstruction, Americans have gained neither. They are not getting clarity, they are not getting resolution, and they are not getting justice. The problem is only going to worsen, and that is the sad part of it. Already, the stalemate has created long-term issues for our Nation's highest Court. This term, eight Justices on the Court have agreed to hear only 12 cases its next term, which begins in October through January 2017. If the Court continues to accept or, I should say, not accept cases at this glacial pace, the next term will have Justices hearing fewer cases than has been heard by that Court in more than seven decades, 70 years. It stands to reason that Chief Justice Roberts and his colleagues are calling cases according to their ability to hear and process them. A gridlocked Court can't accomplish the same work as a fully staffed Court. It is not the Supreme Court's fault. The blame belongs to Senate Republicans for their blocking Merrick Garland's nomination. For 7\1/2\ years, Senate Republicans have blocked anything President Obama has proposed. Who is behind this? Rightwing organizations led by the Koch brothers. They want to keep it just the way it is. They want to keep this Court so it can't do its job. For 7\1/2\ years, Senate Republicans have blocked anything President Obama has proposed, including now a new Supreme Court Justice. Now, by preventing the Court from having nine Justices, Republicans are bringing gridlock in the legislative branch to the judicial branch. Previously, for the whole time Obama has been President, they were blocking what has gone on in the legislative branch. They have now broadened that to deadlock the Supreme Court. This is not acceptable. Justice delayed, we have heard, is justice denied, and that is certainly true. By bringing the Court to a standstill, Republicans are denying the justice all Americans deserve. There is still time for my Republican colleagues to do the right thing--fill the Supreme Court vacancy--but to do that they must begin to process Garland's nomination. His questionnaire is here. It is filled out. It is done. I wonder how many Republicans have even looked at it. Has there been any? Shouldn't there be a hearing? The reason Republicans don't want a hearing is they know that a hearing, public in nature, would show the American people and the world what a good man Merrick Garland is, what a good lawyer he was, and what a good judge he has been, but they have to start processing this. Republicans seem to be refusing anything dealing with him. I think they should attend the meeting today on the Garland nomination organized by Judiciary Committee Democrats, calling on the finest people we can find to tell us what is going on in the judiciary. My friend the Republican leader brings up Abner Mikva. Abner Mikva hasn't served in Congress in 40 years. He was a lawyer for President Clinton. We have been through quite a bit since then, but he has nothing else to refer to so he talks about Abner Mikva, who was going to come, who is not going to come. Do you think part of it can be he is more than 90 years old? Republicans should attend today's hearing. The Judiciary chair, Senator Grassley, should proceed with committee hearings. The American people deserve a full and transparent accounting of Merrick Garland's record and qualifications. After a hearing, of course we should move his nomination for a vote on the Senate floor. Every day that passes without confirmation, without a ninth Justice to serve on the Supreme Court, is another lost day for the Federal judiciary and American justice. Republicans claim their obstruction of President Obama's Supreme Court nominee is to give the people a voice, but their actions are doing just the opposite. Republicans are denying the American people the justice they deserve. For example, take the cases they referred back to the lower courts. They have already done it and litigants have waited years to get before the Supreme Court. Now, in effect, they have to start over. Republicans are denying the American people the justice they deserve--the justice we thought was guaranteed by the Constitution. So instead of silencing the Supreme Court and gridlocking our entire judicial system, Republicans should give the Court the ninth Justice it desperately needs. Focus has been on the Supreme Court, and it should be, but Republicans are doing the same thing with trial court judges. The Federal judiciary has many districts that have declared judicial emergencies. They don't have enough judges to do their work. Republicans are in a state of--the only thing they know to do very well is to block things. We, the American people, know we need to do something about the judiciary. Republicans should do their job and give Merrick Garland a hearing and a vote. Mr. President, my friend from South Dakota is here. I would ask the Chair, prior to the Senator being recognized, to tell us what the schedule is for today.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, today is International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia. This day of recognition is especially significant for America since the civil rights of transgender Americans are at the forefront of an important national debate. At its core, the debate comes down to a simple question: With whom do we stand? Do we stand with the bullies or do we stand against the bullies? Do we stand up for the bullies or against the bullies? Do we defend the persecutors or do we come to the defense of the persecuted? These are the questions posed to us, and they should be. These are the questions posed to us by what is happening in North Carolina and the law there that undermines the civil rights of transgender Americans. During a 1-day special session in March, the North Carolina legislature rammed through a controversial law that strikes down local antidiscrimination ordinances. The actions taken by North Carolina's legislature and Governor are nothing short of State-sponsored discrimination against transgender individuals. The law is clearly and completely illegal. It is in direct opposition to Federal civil rights statutes prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex. The Federal courts have made it clear that sex discrimination under the Civil Rights Act covers transgender individuals. This goes back to 1989, when the Supreme Court ruled in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins that sex discrimination includes sex stereotyping under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Relying on the Supreme Court's ruling in that case, appellate courts have concluded that discrimination against transgender people is prohibited when it is based on gender nonconformity. That is why last week the Department of Justice sued North Carolina, finding that its law constitutes a pattern or practice of discrimination under the Civil Rights Act, the Education Amendments Act of 1972, and the Violence Against Women Act, which we passed just last year. This kind of shocking discriminatory lawmaking has no place in the 21st century. It certainly has no place in America. Attorney General Loretta Lynch said last week: This is not the first time we have seen discriminatory responses to historic moments of progress for our nation. We saw it in the Jim Crow laws that followed the Emancipation Proclamation. We saw it in fierce and widespread resistance to Brown v. Board of Education. And we saw it in the proliferation of state bans on same-sex unions intended to stifle any hope that gay and lesbian Americans might one day be afforded the right to marry. This issue has been far-reaching. It has far-reaching consequences. This is about access to employment, education, and just about everything else in public life. This is about whether we are going to allow our fellow citizens to be bullied, intimidated, and harassed. The North Carolina law is not only wrong, but it runs counter to the progress we are seeing in States and cities across all of America. Right now, 18 States and approximately 200 cities have laws on the books to protect transgender individuals in being able to use the restroom that matches their gender identity. Take, for example, what happened in Reno, NV, just last year. Reno, NV, is in Washoe County. It is the second largest school district in Nevada. In February 2015, in response to concerns from parents and students, the Washoe County School District issued policies to help foster a healthy and inclusive environment for transgender students. The Washoe County School District developed thoughtful and commonsense policies that allow all students in Washoe County to have access to all school programs and activities. It was the first district in Nevada to do so. In the year since those regulations were adopted, schools across the district have reported few, if any, concerns about the new policies. North Carolina leaders need to learn from Washoe County. They need to learn a thing or two about tolerance, as exhibited by the students and, yes, the adults across Washoe County. North Carolina is already paying a severe price for its discriminatory law, and more is yet to come. Hundreds of America's biggest and most prestigious corporations and organizations have already come out in firm opposition to the law--companies such as Google, Bank of America, Starbucks, and Pfizer. You have major businesses that don't want to do business there. You have entertainers who won't perform there, such as Bruce Springsteen. But it is not just that. It is hundreds--hundreds--of other firms that are coming out in opposition to the law because what they are doing is illegal. But Republican leaders are standing by their bigotry at a tremendous cost to the State, and that is disappointing. I stand with the administration in opposing the North Carolina law. I stand with all Americans against this shameful bullying. Most of all, I stand with the transgender people of North Carolina and our country who are the targets of this State-sponsored discrimination. My heart goes out to them. This is not how a great nation should operate. We are better than this. So I look forward to the day, and it is coming soon, when this hateful law is struck down.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, yesterday, the Supreme Court chose not to rule on the merits of Zubik v. Burwell, a case brought by religiously affiliated nonprofit employers challenging the accommodation to the Affordable Care Act's contraceptive coverage provision. Instead, the Court remanded the case to lower courts for further proceeding. The good news is that the order doesn't stop women who rely on the Affordable Care Act for contraceptive coverage from getting the services they need while the legal process plays out. But this remand highlights that the Supreme Court cannot properly do its job until we do ours here in the Senate. We must give Judge Merrick Garland a hearing and a vote so the Supreme Court can become fully functioning again. There have been numerous cases that have been determined differently because of a 4-to-4 split. A number of them are just tied 4-to-4. A number of them have been remanded back to lower courts without action. The Supreme Court to do its job needs nine--nine--Justices. So I hope the time is coming quickly when American women will know once and for all that their bosses can't interfere with their health care decisions, and I am confident the courts will ultimately do the right thing and uphold the Affordable Care Act's accommodation to the contraceptive coverage provision. Until that time, though, Senate Democrats will continue to watch this matter very closely and do everything in our power to defend access for women to birth control measures that they feel appropriate. Mr. President, I think it is such a blight on the Senate that we are not doing anything to fill that ninth spot. It needs to be done, and it needs to be done quickly. Justice is being delayed. Justice is not being served. I see my friend from Montana is on the floor. I ask the Chair, prior to his being recognized, to tell the Senate what we are going to do today.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Madam President, I join the Republican leader in recognizing the contributions of law enforcement officers all around this country. I am sorry that they have such a tough job, and I don't think we appreciate them enough. So I appreciate what the Republican leader said. In Nevada, we too have had our share of these awful instances where these men and women are killed needlessly.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Madam President, what we know today is that the Zika virus was first discovered in 1947 in Uganda. It was first detected in monkeys, but in 1947 they also learned that the mosquito was now carrying this same virus the monkeys had. Initially, we didn't know or hear much about Zika. But we have heard plenty now, and we are going to hear a lot more. Researchers named the virus Zika because that is where the mosquito carrying the virus was discovered, in the Zika Forest of Uganda, as I mentioned. The Ugandan term ``zika'' means ``overgrown.'' So these mosquitoes with this virus were discovered in an overgrown forest in Uganda. Now, seven decades later, Zika is an international emergency, and countries are scrambling to address the problems created by this mosquito that bites. What I have learned is that there is more than one type of mosquito; there are two. Already Zika-carrying mosquitoes have transmitted the disease to American citizens in Puerto Rico and other United States territories. Soon, mosquitoes carrying this virus will be biting and infecting people in the continental United States. That is not hyperbole. It is going to happen. Zika-carrying mosquitoes won't be limited to the gulf coast. Madam President, look at this map. You can't see it very well on this, but you can see the discoloration here, the original coloring that we have. We have the blue, and we have the orange and the gray. Now, I was really surprised. I thought this would really be in the subtropical climates here in the United States, in the southern part of our country. I thought that is where it would be, but you can see that is not the case. Nevada is here, and Las Vegas is here. There are over 2 million people living there. It is all over the United States. Boulder, CO, is up here. Puerto Rico and Hawaii are here. This map is from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and it shows the estimated range of the two types of Zika-carrying mosquitoes. Areas of this map, as I have indicated, are three in color and cover 39 States. Most of these States, as I have indicated, don't have subtropical weather. Nevada, Colorado, Wisconsin, Ohio, Kentucky, New Hampshire, and Maine are listed. Health officials are desperate to stop Zika, this devastating virus that has been around so long but it was not known to carry all the many problems it now carries. It causes birth defects and other deadly conditions. Last week, a report on NPR described what Zika does to the brain as it begins to grow. This is one condition: As the brain . . . starts to grow, it creates pressure, which pushes on the skull and causes it to grow. But if something stops brain growth--such as [the Zika] virus-- pressure on the skull drops. And the skull can collapse down onto the brain. Two weeks ago we had people come to explain this to my caucus, and they described these skulls that just collapse. But Zika isn't only linked to birth defects. As I have indicated, the virus is also associated with a nervous system disorder that can result in paralysis, among other problems. Yet, in spite of all the devastating impacts of Zika, I am sorry to say, the Republicans in Congress don't see this virus as an urgent issue. Months ago, President Obama requested almost $2 billion to fight Zika, and for the same months the Republicans have refused to give the money America needs to fight this crisis. The best time to deal with any crisis is before it is here, but Republicans have dragged their feet. We should have passed an emergency spending bill months ago--months ago. We need to address Zika in the territories and give States and local governments the resources they are begging for. Last Thursday, appropriators filed an amendment that would provide $1.1 billion in Zika funding. That simply is not enough. This isn't about negotiating an arbitrary number made up by lawmakers. Our public health officials have made it clear they need that money. Senate Republicans are giving our government half of what it needs to fight this ravaging virus. This is beyond reckless. House Republicans are even doing less. The chairman of the House Committee on Appropriations last week said that Republicans are working on a Zika funding measure, but what House Republicans are proposing is even less than about half of the already low $1.1 billion amendment from Senate appropriators. Republicans are trying to haggle as if this is some sort of bidding war. That is not how Congress should react to a potentially disastrous health crisis. We know what is going on in Puerto Rico. We know. Because of Republicans' refusal to lift a finger to help fight the Zika crisis, the administration was forced to use Ebola funds in order to fight Zika now. They had to take about $510 million that was set aside specifically for Ebola. Two years ago, America was afraid of Ebola. Ebola is still a killer, and we invested in supporting public health infrastructures to prevent future outbreaks like the one we saw, as I indicated, 2 years ago. We need to replenish these monies so we can continue to work on vaccines and other things, but Republicans are standing in the way. It is really a sad commentary on Republicans that when asked for emergency funding to protect millions of Americans, they respond by offering half of what is needed. This is in a spending bill, and then we have to go to the House and have a conference. In the meantime, people are begging for this money. Republicans should be ashamed that we aren't doing everything in our power to protect the American people from this virus now. We should have an emergency spending bill on the floor now. If it were a flood or a fire that occurred, we would have been here. It is just too bad because this is a crisis that is already here. It is not an emerging crisis. It is here. Madam President, last week, the Republican leader came to the floor and here is what he said: ``We have elections in this country right on time, and that is not an excuse not to do our work.'' Again: ``We have elections in this country right on time, and that is not an excuse not to do our work.'' That is what Senator McConnell said. So I say to my friend from Kentucky: I agree. Elections are no excuse not to do our work. So Senate Republicans should do their job and give Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland a hearing and a vote. There is clearly no question that Merrick Garland is experienced and qualified to be a nominee. He is the nominee, and he has the expertise to go along with what a Supreme Court nominee should have. Throughout his decades as a prosecutor and judge, Mr. Garland has proven himself to be committed to the rule of law and following it. That is more than I can say for my Republican colleagues who, by refusing to consider this nominee, are rejecting their constitutional duties. The Republican leader needs to practice what he preaches. He says that elections shouldn't interfere with our Senate duties. He should prove it. The Republican Senators should prove that. Put aside Presidential elections, put aside Donald Trump, put aside all the phony excuses, and give Merrick Garland the consideration he deserves. Study Judge Garland's questionnaire; it is here. Analyze his record; it is here. Give him a hearing and send his nomination to the floor now. As the Republican leader put it, ``We have elections in this country right on time, and that is not an excuse not to do our work.'' That is absolutely right. I would ask the Republicans to do their job. Madam President, on the Zika matter, I would add the following: ``The news from the House virtually guarantees that the Republican Congress will provide too little aid, too late to address the looming Zika crisis.'' The way things are going around here, the appropriations bills are not going to be finished until right before the end of this fiscal year, late September. The crisis will long have arrived and we will be talking about cases that exist in the continental United States. It is wrong to wait. I don't see anyone here on the floor, so I would ask the Chair to announce the business of the day.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, today the Republican Presidential nominee-- it is hard for me to say these words--Donald Trump, comes to Capitol Hill. He secured the party's nomination. He did that last week. Donald Trump will meet privately today with Speaker Ryan and Republican Leader McConnell. It is just the latest sign that Republican leaders in both Houses are marching lockstep with Donald Trump. Senator McConnell has fully embraced Donald Trump. He said last week when Trump secured the nomination: ``I have committed to supporting the nominee chosen by Republican voters.'' While speaking with reporters earlier this week, the Republican leader sounded enthusiastic about Trump's chances in the general election. I guess he should be giddy about a Trump Presidency. Donald Trump is everything the Republican leader and his party could ever want in a nomination. Trump's policy decisions are identical to the Republican Party platform. Today, when they meet in an hour or two, Senator McConnell can discuss that consensus with Trump. Let's talk about the Supreme Court. Donald Trump and the Senator from Kentucky can talk about their obstruction--for the first time in the history of the country--to a Presidential Supreme Court nomination. It has never happened before. We have had some stalling and a couple of filibusters, but this is one where people didn't want to meet with him. A few of them have broken from that. They certainly don't want to have a hearing, and they don't want to vote. It was Trump who said Republicans should ``delay, delay, delay'' filling the Supreme Court vacancy. Following Trump's lead, the Republican leader has personally overseen the blockade of Judge Garland's nomination, forcing Senators to fall in line. Let's talk about Trump and women. When they get together they can talk about their policy about being anti-woman. Since Senator McConnell has so enthusiastically embraced Trump, we can only assume he agrees with Trump's view that women are dogs and pigs. We can only assume that the Republican leader is not repulsed by Donald Trump's vulgar behavior towards women. Look at the New York Times story yesterday with his cavorting with Howard Stern and how they talked about women. After all, the Republican Party has spent years blocking every substantive bill for American women--equal pay for equal work. This Republican Senate has undermined women's health at every turn, trying to turn Planned Parenthood into a punching bag--even though millions and millions of American women have been helped by Planned Parenthood. They will have an opportunity this morning to talk about the anti- Latino vote. They can discuss their anti-immigrant policies and their agenda. Since the Republican leader is all in for Donald Trump, we can only assume that he approves of Trump's calling immigrants rapists and murderers, and the DREAMers as being mules for drug dealing. I assume they can have a long discussion about the wall--how high it should be, how they are going to get the Mexicans to pay for the wall-- even though most people think the idea is insane. Let's not forget Republicans have demagogued Latinos and immigrants for decades. They are doing it today. The Republican leader voted against comprehensive immigration reform. Under Senator McConnell's leadership, Senate Republicans almost came within hours of shutting down the Department of Homeland Security because of President Obama's executive actions on immigration. They can talk about their outlook on families. Donald Trump and the Republican leader can mention how little they have done for American families. Except now, in today's news, they are going to cut Medicaid and Medicare. I guess that is because he is getting lined up for the meeting with Paul Ryan, because that is his No. 1 issue. Since the Republican leader has firmly established himself in Donald Trump's corner, one can only assume he is OK with Trump's shady business practices. He doesn't mind that Donald Trump rips off hard- working Americans, filed bankruptcy many, many times, and has a university that is corrupt. And the trial will go forward during the election. Sadly, a disregard for the middle class is an all-too-familiar position for today's Republicans. The Republican Party refuses to address the minimum wage, college affordability, or any other legislation that helps families. Here is a doozy. They can spend a lot of time talking about climate change. Trump and the Republican leader can, in this private conversation, talk about denial of climate change. But 97 percent of all scientists worldwide believe it is here. It is upon us. Ask the senior Senator from Florida. He will tell you it is here. Look at what is happening in Miami. You can talk to the Senators from Virginia, and they will tell you what is happening in military bases on the coast of Virginia. Donald Trump's highest ranking supporter in Congress, Senator McConnell, assumingly agrees with Trump that climate change is a hoax-- here is what Trump said--perpetrated by Chinese manufacturers. That position fits with a Republican Party that refuses to acknowledge the environmental and national security threats posed by climate change. If elected, Trump and Senator McConnell would lead the nation backward on a climate change denial agenda that would put polluters first and make the United States the laughingstock of the world. More than 170 countries have agreed to address climate change because of U.S. leadership, but Trump and McConnell have stated publicly that they will walk away from this. Let's talk about what Republicans like to talk about--what is happening with the economy--keeping in mind that Bill Clinton balanced the budget. Keep in mind that when George Bush came to the Presidency, there was a $7 trillion surplus over 10 years. With two wars unpaid for costing trillions of dollars and with tax cuts not being paid for, that surplus has long since gone. So they can talk about that. They can talk about how Trump has said that he thinks America should default on its debt. Just get the people we owe money to take less money. That is what he said. He doesn't want to pay our national debt. It seems that, on that issue, there is little distance between him and the Republican leader. Senator McConnell has presided over a Republican caucus that has taken America to the brink of default on a number of occasions, not the least of which is shutting down the government--this great government-- shutting it down for 17 days--closed, out of business. So Donald Trump and the Republican leadership should have a long, long conversation. They have a lot to talk about. At some point in the conversation, Donald Trump should thank the senior Senator from Kentucky. Trump owes his candidacy to the Republican leader and the policies he has led. It was the obstructionist, anti-woman, anti- Latino, anti-Muslim, anti-middle-class, anti-environment, anti-Obama, anti-everything Republican Party during the last 8 years that has made Donald Trump a reality. I note that no one is on the floor. Will the Chair announce what the Senate is going to do this morning.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the time of the Republicans and the Democrats be preserved. No one is here, but we should preserve that time.

Mr. REID. I think the order already is that the time will be equally divided. If that is not the case, I ask that that be the case. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Brad Hatcher, who is serving as my legislative fellow for defense issues this year, be granted privileges of the floor for the duration of 2016.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum, but I ask that the time be charged equally to both sides.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, Brad Hatcher, who is serving as my legislative fellow for defense issues this year, has done a terrific job. We are so fortunate to have the military we do have, and he exemplifies that.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, it is interesting to hear my friend fictionalize what is going on in the world economy and in our American economy especially. We all know that when President Obama took office--the month after he was elected in November, 8 years ago--the economy lost 800,000 jobs. It was not 1 month. That continued. When President Bush took over the economy, we had a surplus of $10 trillion over 10 years--a surplus. My friend the Presiding Officer and, frankly, his good father have talked about money that was spent by this country that shouldn't have been. However, when Bush took office, we had a surplus. We had a balanced budget under Bill Clinton--a balanced budget. We didn't need to legislate it. It happened. Of course, with his leadership and the Deficit Reduction Act that we passed, it worked out very well. But that was all wiped out by the spending of the Bush administration. It was 8 years of 2 wars unpaid for and trillions of dollars--not hundreds of billions but trillions of dollars--paid for with a credit card. Tax cuts were paid for with a credit card. What did that bring to us? The collapse of Wall Street. President Obama went to work. It was difficult, but we passed the American Recovery Act, or the stimulus, as it was known. But for that, who knows how difficult our situation would be. In Nevada, we had the experience of what happened when Wall Street collapsed. We weren't the only State. It happened all over this Nation. For my friend to talk about how great the economy was during the Bush years is simply fictional. Are things perfect now? Of course not. We have had no help in the Senate. We had very little help in the House. For 7\1/2\ years, all Republicans have done is try to oppose--they didn't try; they opposed-- everything President Obama has attempted to do. We have been able to overcome some of that. Since Obama took office, the U.S. economy saw the longest stretch of private sector growth in its history, and it is still ongoing. There were some complaints last month that only 160,000 jobs were created. That was 160,000 compared to 800,000 being lost during the Bush administration. We need to do more. There is no question about that, but we need some help. Republicans are doing everything they can--and they have proven that in the last 7\1/2\ years--to make it tough for President Obama. We have a lot of people who aren't being paid enough. How about those people working on minimum wage and trying to survive? Yet Republicans refuse to help us raise that. How about paycheck fairness so that my daughter and my granddaughters are paid the same amount of money for the same work they do that a man does? Student debt is unbearable. I am seeing it now with my grandchildren. It is incredible. You are going to have to go borrow money. It is Republicans who stood in the way of recovery in so many different ways. So let's talk about the real world--not a fictional world.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, last week, the senior Senator from Iowa confirmed what Democrats have said all along: Senate Republicans want Donald Trump to fill the Supreme Court vacancy. I am sorry to direct my attention to the Presiding Officer, but I can't imagine how the Presiding Officer must feel with Donald Trump being the leader of the Republican Party. I can't imagine. I can't imagine what your good father thinks of Donald Trump leading the Republican Party, but I can imagine, and I have a number of times. In an interview with the Des Moines Register, Iowa's largest newspaper, Senator Grassley said of Trump: ``Based upon the type of people [Donald Trump would] be looking for, I think I would expect the right type of people to be nominated by him to the Supreme Court.'' That is fairly shocking, coming from a Senator who should know better. The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee trusts Donald Trump to pick ``the right type of people'' for the Supreme Court. I can't think of a worse idea than placing the power to pick the next Supreme Court Justice in the hands of an unhinged individual who derides women, who calls them dogs and pigs. Look at the front page of the New York Times, at how he and Howard Stern decided how they were going to treat women. Read it. It is demeaning to my wife, my daughter, and my 9 or 10 granddaughters. I have them mixed up. There are 19. It is an uneven number, but they are close. I can't think of a worse idea than placing the power to pick the next Supreme Court Justice in the hands of this unhinged individual. He calls Latinos rapists and murderers. This is the Supreme Court of the United States we are talking about-- the Court that decided Marbury v. Madison and Brown v. Board of Education, the anniversary of which is coming up next Tuesday. This is not Donald Trump's reality show. This is the real world. This is no game. This is not a choice about whether Meatloaf or Gary Busey made a better art project; it is a choice about the future of America. The balance of the Supreme Court has real-life consequences for all of us. Rational people don't want Donald Trump filling a Supreme Court vacancy. Iowans don't. The American people don't. But Senate Republicans obviously do, and Senator Grassley does--or I should say he does now. Two weeks ago, before Donald Trump wrapped up the Republican nomination to my dismay, the senior Senator from Iowa sang a much different tune. Back then--all of 13 days ago--before Donald Trump was his standard bearer, Senator Grassley said it would be a risk to let Trump pick a Supreme Court nominee. That was less than 2 weeks ago. This is what he said: ``If Trump's elected president, it probably is a little more unknown. . . . I would have to admit it's a gamble.'' It is a gamble, and it is not at a Las Vegas crap table or a slot machine. That it is a gamble is an understatement. Trump picking a Supreme Court nominee is a guaranteed recipe for disaster. But now that Trump is the nominee, Republicans are marching in lockstep with him on the Supreme Court vacancy. Republicans want to put the Supreme Court in the hands of an unbalanced egomaniac. Senator Grassley and his colleagues say they want the future of the highest Court to be determined by an anti-woman, anti-Latino, and anti- middle-class billionaire who demeans women every day. Yesterday Grassley told a reporter that ``there's no problem with Trump appointing people to the Supreme Court.'' But what had he said 2 weeks earlier? That it is a gamble. Donald Trump wants to ban all Muslims from even coming into our country. That is whom Republicans want picking the Justices to do the work of our judiciary system, deciding questions about civil liberties--somebody who says Muslims shouldn't even come to this country. Trump encouraged supporters to physically assault protesters. Here is what he said: ``Knock the crap out of them.'' That is whom the Republicans want to select Justices to interpret the law. It is insane that my Republican colleagues are willing to entrust such an important responsibility to this egomaniac. Instead of relying on the whims of an unscrupulous real estate tycoon--who inherited his money, by the way--Senate Republicans should trust in the Senate's time-honored process of considering Supreme Court nominees. Republicans can start by reviewing Judge Garland's nominee questionnaire, which the Senate got yesterday. After that, the Senate Judiciary Committee and Chairman Grassley should do their job and hold a hearing. Then the Republican leader should bring Merrick Garland's nomination to the floor for a vote. A hearing and a vote--that is what we need to have, and that is how we will get, in Senator Grassley's words, the right type of people on the Supreme Court. Meet with the man, hold hearings, and vote. This year the Republican Senate is on pace to work fewer days than any Senate in the past six decades--60-plus years. So in that we are not doing much anyway, couldn't we just work in a little time to have a Supreme Court nominee? Senator Grassley was right the first time. Letting Donald Trump pick a Supreme Court Justice is indeed a gamble. It is a risk the American people can't afford and shouldn't afford. Instead of waiting for Donald Trump, Republicans should just do their job and at least allow the Court to have a full complement of nine Justices. Mr. President, I see no one here on the floor, so I ask the Chair to announce the business of the day.