Harry Reid

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Oh, it is not divided. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I join the Republican leader in welcoming the Prime Minister from India to America. Mr. President, in my office I have a wonderful memento of my first meetings with Indians. I went to school at Utah State University in Logan, UT. It was so cold. My wife and I lived off campus, and we would drive a couple miles up a hill to the Utah State campus. Along the way, I would see Indian students walking to school. They were engineering students and agricultural students at the college. I would give them rides. I did that for a couple of years. When it came time for me to graduate, one of the Indians I had gotten to know asked if Landra and I would be willing to stay over an extra day and they would make us a traditional Indian feast. We did that. It was a feast. They were dressed in their Indian garb. They had worked a lot on that food. It was the first Indian food we had eaten. We have eaten a lot of it since. It was a wonderful, warm occasion that we will always remember. They gave us some presents, and with five children and moving quite a bit, most of those presents are history. I don't know what they were. But one that I have always protected is a little bone-carved statue of Gandhi that they gave me. He is in his regular clothes that we see him in. He has a staff in his hand like he had most of the time. It is finely carved. You can pull that staff out even today. It is a miracle that it made it through my five children, but I have done everything I could to protect it. Now I have it in my office in a little glass enclosure, and I show my Indian guests that meaningful memento of mine. The other reason I am going to have the opportunity in an hour or so to meet with the Prime Minister with Senator McConnell, the Speaker, and Leader Pelosi--I hope I have the opportunity to tell him of my fondness for Indians but especially those named Modi because the spokesperson's name from the group of Indians that I met was Modi. I have come to the realization in recent years that that was his last name. Everybody called him Modi. He was an engineer. He moved to New Jersey, and we kept in touch. I am happy that the Prime Minister is going to be able to address our Nation in the House of Representatives, and I am sure his people look forward to that. Again, I tell everyone here about my warmness for India, this great democracy. The second largest Muslim population in the world is in India. So it is a friend that we have, and we must maintain that friendship.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I just left a meeting, a stunningly important meeting where every one of the guests were prominent, but the two I want to refer to briefly are Dr. Frieden, head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Dr. Fauci, head of one of the health institutes at the National Institutes of Health, Infectious Diseases, among other things. What they told us was very frightening. As we speak, there are three confirmed cases of babies born in the United States with the Zika virus. Of course, they are all very sick. The life expectancy is not very long. They said in unison how vitally important it is and has been for months to get them some money so they can do the research needed to stop the spread of this virus. They have borrowed money from malaria research, TB research--all terribly difficult problems we are having in the world and the United States--to take care of the immediate funding for research on Zika. They have taken huge amounts of money--more than half a billion dollars--out of the Ebola fund, which is still a very serious problem. There are active cases as we speak. This is not an effort we can just walk away from. This money has been needed for a long time, and it is sad that the Presidential request of $1.9 billion has been opposed. The senior Senator from Florida was at the meeting today talking about how every day there are new cases in Florida. Yesterday there were five new ones. We needed to do something on that yesterday, not wait until the fall, as has been suggested by my Republican colleagues.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, Senate Republicans are waiting with gleeful anticipation for Donald Trump to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court. Donald Trump, who last week attacked a Federal judge because of his Mexican heritage--even though the judge was born in Indiana--said that District Judge Curiel shouldn't be allowed to preside on his case because of his ethnicity. Donald Trump, moments later, said that he would feel the same way if the judge were Muslim. This is the man--Donald Trump--for whom Senate Republicans are blocking a supremely qualified nominee for the Supreme Court, a man by the name of Merrick Garland. This is the man--Donald Trump--for whom Republicans are abdicating their constitutional responsibility. This is the man--Donald Trump--whom Senate Republicans want to determine the makeup of the Supreme Court for at least the next generation. The Senate Republicans are united in blocking Judge Merrick Garland's nomination to the Supreme Court. Republicans are united in refusing to provide their advice and consent to President Obama's nominee to the Supreme Court. The Republicans are united in doing it for Donald Trump. They say so. They should be ashamed. It is hard to imagine anything more humiliating than holding a Supreme Court seat open so that Donald Trump can fill that seat. Is this why my Republican colleagues entered public service--to march in lockstep behind a man who spews hate and attacks the basic rule of law in America? The Republican leader says: ``We know that Donald Trump will make the right kind of Supreme Court appointments.'' This is sad for the Republican Party. If my Republican colleagues aren't embarrassed, they aren't thinking very well. President Obama has nominated a moderate, experienced, brilliant jurist to the Supreme Court, but instead of giving Judge Garland the impartial treatment he deserves, Republicans are refusing to do their jobs. And for what? So Donald Trump, a man who routinely insults Republican Senators to their faces, among others, denigrates Senator McCain's heroism, says people's heritage makes them unable to perform their jobs, and all the terrible stuff about women, handicapped people--we want this man to appoint someone to the Supreme Court? The Republicans should come to their senses. It is time to drop the charade and give Garland a fair hearing and a vote.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, on another subject, Americans share many common values, and one of the most fundamental is this: If you make a commitment, you should keep it. If you reach an agreement, abide by it. Simply put, a promise is a promise. Unfortunately, the pending amendment from the chairman of the Armed Services Committee would undermine this basic tenet. Last year, Democrats and Republicans made an agreement. Democrats were committed to helping the middle class. Republicans were focused only on the Pentagon. Ultimately, we reached a compromise that was based on the principle of parity. We want to help the military, and they should be helped, but there should also be help for programs that are also important for our national security that are not the Pentagon. We provided additional resources to the Pentagon, as I said, but we also provided the same level of help for the middle class. That included improving our security through efforts of domestic agencies like the FBI, Drug Enforcement Administration, Department of Homeland Security, and others. That was our agreement, but now some Republicans want to break their word. Senate Republicans are demanding billions more from the Pentagon but refuse to provide an extra penny for the middle class, and that is wrong. It is completely inconsistent with last year's agreement, and it is blind to the many serious needs here at home that Republicans continue to ignore, and Zika is one. That is why I support the amendment offered by the distinguished Senator from Rhode Island, Jack Reed, along with the leader we have on the Appropriations Committee, Barbara Mikulski. The Reed-Mikulski amendment would provide the same extra support for our middle class that Senator McCain is demanding for the Pentagon, and it recognizes that our security depends on more than just the Defense Department. The Reed amendment includes more funding to address the dangerous Zika virus and fight the scourge of opioids. It also would help mitigate lead contamination, which is long overdue, in Flint, MI. This amendment strengthens domestic security through support of the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. It will improve airport security and community policing, and it will address the threat of cyber crime and terrorism. The amendment by the Senator from Rhode Island and the Senator from Maryland will create jobs and address our Nation's crumbling infrastructure. It will not only improve our transportation system but medical facilities for our veterans and our National Park System. The Reed amendment is also an investment in our future. The legislation will promote science and innovation through support for the National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, among others, and it will support education. I urge my colleagues to support this important proposal which will make America a better and stronger country. The bottom line is this: A promise is a promise. The middle class needs help at least as much as the Pentagon. Republicans should keep their promise to hard-working American families. I yield the floor.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the 50th anniversary of the Nevada Justice Association. Since 1966, the Nevada Justice Association has been a fierce advocate for justice and worked to fulfill the ideals enshrined in our Nation's justice system. The Nevada Justice Association is a nonprofit, professional organization of lawyers, united over their goal of improving the justice system. In addition to keeping members and other lawyers informed about Nevada's legal system, the Nevada Justice Association seeks ``to educate the public regarding their individual rights and responsibilities as citizens.'' The Nevada Justice Association also operates student chapters to help develop the next generation of lawyers and prepare them to defend Nevadans' access to justice in the future. In their effort to educate the public, the Nevada Justice Association's activities range from debunking legal myths to televising lecture series that explain important aspects of the law that people who do not have a legal background can understand. The Nevada Justice Association's outreach and education programs also encourage citizens to play an active role in the lawmaking process and participate in civil society. For 50 years, the Nevada Justice Association has made tremendous advances in educating everyday Nevadans about their legal rights. Their commitment to ensuring that people have equal and lasting access to the justice system has helped Nevadans enjoy the protections our system of government has to offer. I commend the Nevada Justice Association for their hard work in educating the public on their rights and protecting people's access to justice.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, the Republican nominee of our great country continues to attack a Federal judge because of his Mexican heritage. This is not only wrong, it is racist and un-American. It is also a fundamental attack on the American judiciary system. When issues like these arise, the Nation has historically looked to the Senate for leadership. In particular, throughout our history, the Senate Judiciary Committee has been a bastion of independence and bipartisanship. When Federal judges are under assault, we should expect the chairman of the Judiciary Committee to rise above politics and condemn racism--but not this Judiciary chairman who is now the chairman of the committee in the United States Senate, not the senior United States Senator from Iowa. Instead of a bold feat of bipartisanship, we are left with yet another example of how he has become the most partisan Judiciary chairman in the history of America. Instead of rising above partisanship and condemning Trump's racist attacks on a highly qualified judge--by the way, who was born in Indiana--Senator Grassley kisses Trump's ring and toes the party line. Instead of condemning Trump, Grassley defended him. His rationale is mind-boggling. Listen to this: Senator Grassley says that Trump must respect the Judiciary because over the course of hundreds of lawsuits and years of litigation, Trump has actually won some cases. I can't make up something like this. For example, a quote from a newspaper article: Grassley also suggested Trump's propensity for filing lawsuits showed some level of respect for the judicial branch. ``He must respect the Judiciary,'' Grassley said. ``I've seen statistics that he's won over 400 cases, only lost 30.'' How about that. I find it curious that the chairman doesn't have time to read Merrick Garland's questionnaire or give him a hearing, but he has time to study Donald Trump's success rate in the courtroom. This says a lot, and one of the things it says is what Senator Grassley's priorities are. In spite of everything coming out of Donald Trump's mouth, Senator Grassley remains loyal to Donald Trump. According to an Iowa newspaper, the Ames Tribune, Senator Grassley told his constituents on Friday: ``He isn't concerned by any of the controversial or inflammatory rhetoric coming from the Trump campaign.'' I am a little disappointed, but--with what has happened the last couple of months--not surprised. I believe no Member of the Senate has done more for Donald Trump than the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. In January, when many Republicans were still trying to distance themselves from Donald Trump, Senator Grassley introduced Trump at an Iowa campaign event. Since then, despite dozens of editorials against Senator Grassley and pressure from his constituents, Senator Grassley has done everything in his power to hold open a Supreme Court seat for Donald Trump to fill. I am surprised Senator Grassley has yet to acknowledge these racist attacks on Judge Curiel because these attacks are beyond the pale. Instead, Senator Grassley chose to further establish himself as a Trump cheerleader, just like the Republican leader has done. Last week Senator Grassley told his constituents: He's building confidence with me. Talking about Trump. I've already said I'm going to vote for him. . . . I'd campaign with him. But this is not the beginning of Senator Grassley's campaign for Donald Trump. Senator Grassley's entire chairmanship the past 6 months has been one big campaign push for Trump. His committee has become an extension of the Trump campaign. The Republican Judiciary Committee has done everything to focus on boosting Trump but has neglected to do its job in the process. Under Chairman Grassley, the committee is reporting out almost no bills, fewer judicial nominations than any time in recent history, and because of this inaction by the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, the Senate has confirmed fewer judges than in decades. We heard the report yesterday of how the Federal system of courts in our country is in disrepair. Why? Because the Judiciary Committee is processing none of the appointments President Obama has made. What has the Judiciary Committee done instead? It has spent its time carrying out a political hit job on Secretary Clinton. Senator Grassley has wasted countless dollars and staff time developing partisan opposition research that he hoped could be used to help Trump's candidacy against Secretary Clinton. It hasn't helped, but it has shortened the pocketbook of the American people. Senator Grassley has been so desperate to drag Secretary Clinton's name through the mud that he even encouraged the FBI to leak an independent review of Secretary Clinton's use of email. At every turn, the senior Senator from Iowa has used his committee for partisan purposes that benefit only one person: Donald Trump. There is no better example than the current vacancy on the Supreme Court. Rather than doing his constitutional duty and processing Merrick Garland's nomination, Chairman Grassley took his marching orders from Trump, and Trump said: Delay, delay, delay. And that is exactly what the Senator from Iowa has done--delay, delay, delay. Chairman Grassley is hoping to run out the clock. He is hoping President Trump gets to nominate the next Supreme Court Justice. That is why last month Senator Grassley said of Trump: ``I think I would expect the right type of people to be nominated by [Trump] to the Supreme Court.'' After Donald Trump's latest attack on the Judiciary, does Senator Grassley really believe that Trump is the right man to pick nominees to the Supreme Court or any court? Donald Trump said that a Federal judge should be disqualified from presiding over a case because of his Mexican heritage, even though he was born in Indiana. He said the same would apply if the judge were Muslim. Does Senator Grassley believe Trump's comments were racist? This is a place for the senior Senator from Iowa to start his quest for fairness. The Republican junior Senator from Nebraska agrees it was racist. This is what he tweeted yesterday: ``Public Service Announcement: Saying someone can't do a specific job because of his or her race is the literal definition of `racism.' '' The junior Senator from South Carolina, also a Republican, called Trump's remarks ``racially toxic,'' but what does the senior Senator from Iowa say? Zero, nothing. Does the chairman of the Judiciary Committee agree with Donald Trump? Does Senator Grassley also believe judges should face a religious test? The senior Senator from Iowa said he trusts Donald Trump's judgment. He said, and I repeat: ``He's building confidence with me.'' After everything we have heard from Donald Trump--all of his vile, unhinged rants--does Senator Grassley honestly have confidence that Donald Trump should pick the next Supreme Court Justice? I don't trust Trump to make that decision, the people of Iowa don't, and America doesn't. Senator Grassley must stop using his committee to do Trump's bidding. He must stop using the once-proud Judiciary Committee as an extension of the Trump political campaign. Instead of continuous delay, delay, delay, Chairman Grassley should give Merrick Garland a hearing and a vote, but do it now. Waiting for Donald Trump to choose the ninth member of the Supreme Court is not the answer. I yield the floor.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, today the Senate is returning from a 10-day recess, but even though the Republicans took 10 days off, the Zika virus did not. Last week a child was born in New Jersey with severe birth defects caused by the Zika virus. Thousands of our citizens are exposed to Zika now, today, but the problem will only get worse. Zika is a problem that is here and is not going away quickly. As the weather continues to warm and the mosquitoes become more active, it will inevitably cause local transmission. The number of infected Americans will skyrocket. In light of the threat posed by Zika, one would expect Republicans to spend their break working on an emergency spending bill to send to the President's desk with the full amount, $1.9 billion. They did not. Instead, Republicans spent their recess boasting their Republican standard bearer, Donald Trump. The Republican Party's capitulation to Donald Trump is complete. As headlined last week in the Washington Post, ``It's official: The GOP is now the Party of Trump.'' I was especially disappointed to see that our senior Senator from Kentucky personally led this pro-Trump propaganda tour. Senator McConnell spent last week as Donald Trump's head cheerleader, a trumpet. The Republican leader left Washington 10 days ago without doing his job on Zika so he could stump for Trump. In the last 10 days, it has become clear that Senator McConnell will go to any length to support Donald Trump. Consider the Republican leader's refusal to denounce Donald Trump's racist attack on U.S. District Court Judge Curiel, a man born in Indiana--in the United States. Donald Trump opined a Federal judge should be disqualified from presiding on his case because of his Mexican heritage. He went even further in saying he would feel the same way if the judge were Muslim. How did the Republican leader respond? Senator McConnell repeatedly refused to say Donald Trump's attacks on Judge Curiel's ethnicity are racist. This is precisely the type of failure that gave rise to Donald Trump in the first place. Senator McConnell and all congressional leaders have never taken a stand against Trump's vile rhetoric. That is because the hate emanating from Trump's mouth reflects the Republican Party's agenda in the U.S. Senate for the last 7\1/2\ years--the agenda Senator McConnell himself promoted. For years Senator McConnell and other Republican leaders embraced the darkest elements within their party. The Republican Party made anti-woman, anti-Latino, anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant, and anti- Obama policies the norm. Trump is the logical conclusion of what Republican leaders have been saying and doing for the past 7\1/2\ years. By refusing to denounce Trump's attack on a Federal judge for the racism it clearly connotes, it shows Senator McConnell is the poster boy for Republicans' spinelessness that allowed Donald Trump to be the Republican nominee for President of the United States. I have made this argument for months. I am not the only one making it now. Now, even some Republicans are joining me. The conservative blog ``RedState'' railed against Senator McConnell's refusal to condemn Trump's racist attacks. The conservative blog ``RedState'' said this: ``[Senator McConnell] fell back to the last coward's refuge: we have to support Trump because he won the primary.'' The junior Senator from Nebraska, Mr. Sasse, a Republican, is willing to say what Senator McConnell will not. What he is saying today and he tweeted was: ``Public Service Announcement: Saying someone can't do a specific job because of his or her race is the literal definition of `racism.' '' Newt Gingrich, former Republican Speaker of the House, called Trump's comments ``inexcusable.'' There are others. But for his part, Senator McConnell is doubling down on Trump. The Republican leader is waging a nonstop campaign to persuade any Republicans who have doubts about supporting Trump to drop their complaints and fall in line. The Republican leader even went so far--listen to this--as to compare Donald Trump as comparable to President Dwight Eisenhower, to GEN Dwight Eisenhower. Donald Trump is a failed businessman who bilked millions of Americans out of their hard-earned money. No wonder he will not release his tax returns. Trump doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as President Eisenhower, who led the Allied forces in World War II and, among other things, integrated America's schools. Comparing Eisenhower to Trump? Give us a break. Donald Trump is the converse of all for which leaders such as Eisenhower, Lincoln, Roosevelt, and Ronald Reagan stood. They stood for equality, fairness, and decency. Trump and McConnell obviously do not. Donald Trump stands for hatred and stands for division. Senator McConnell also defended Trump's temperament, reassuring everyone that as President, Donald Trump ``would be fine.'' That is what he said. That is a quote. The Republican leader also extolled Trump's intelligence. Senator McConnell even claimed the Republican Party is ``at an all-time high,'' with Trump at its helm. That is how the Republican leader spent last week. He wasn't fighting for resources to stop the spread of Zika. He was leading the cheers as he stumped for Trump. Senator McConnell was doing zero for the 100,000 poisoned residents of Flint, MI. Senator McConnell was doing zero to fund our Nation's response to the opioid epidemic. It is terrible. The Republican leader was too busy being a trumpet for Trump, and now that he has firmly entrenched himself in Trump's corner, I can't help but wonder just how far Senator McConnell's support extends. For example, were Donald's Trump's comments about Judge Curiel racist, as the Senator from Nebraska said? Senator McConnell wouldn't answer that question yesterday. He had numerous opportunities to do it. So I will give him another opportunity today. There are other questions the Republican leader needs to answer. Does he believe a Federal judge should be disqualified because of his Mexican heritage? Does he believe these attacks are acceptable for a man who wants to be President of our great country? Does he agree judges should face a religious test? Senator McConnell said last week: ``We know that Donald Trump will make the right kind of Supreme Court appointments.'' After Donald Trump's latest attacks on the judiciary, does he truly believe Trump is the right man to pick nominees to our Nation's highest Court? The Republican leader defended Trump's temperament, saying he ``would be fine'' as President. I ask the Senator from Kentucky, is it fine when Donald Trump calls women pigs and dogs? Is it fine when Trump calls immigrants rapists and murderers? Is it fine that his party's Presidential candidate urges violence at rallies? These are not rhetorical questions. The Republican leader has so fully embraced Donald Trump that we are all unclear as to where Trump's platform ends and the Senate Republicans' begins. If Republicans think a man who believes in religious and ethnic tests for Federal judges is fit to be President of the United States, they must explain why this is acceptable. The Nation has a right to know how far Senate Republicans' support of Donald Trump extends, and that starts with the Republican leader because now there doesn't appear to be any daylight between Donald Trump and Senator McConnell. I yield the floor.

Mr. REID

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

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President. today I wish to recognize the 50th anniversary of the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU, of Nevada. Since it was established in 1966, the ACLU of Nevada has been dedicated to protecting the civil rights and liberties of all Nevadans. The organization, which was founded in a living room by a group of volunteers, had humble beginnings, but has grown to include 2,000 members throughout the Silver State. The ACLU of Nevada has been instrumental in defending voting, free speech, and other rights protected by the U.S. and Nevada Constitutions. The organization also works on other issues of importance to Nevadans, including privacy, public education, racial justice, criminal justice reform, and marriage equality. For instance, the ACLU of Nevada's efforts contributed to a successful outcome in the Nevada marriage equality case. Through public education, advocacy, and litigation, the ACLU of Nevada defends and advances the civil rights and liberties of Nevadans. I commend the ACLU of Nevada for 50 years of exceptional service, and I applaud executive director Tod Story and his dedicated staff for their fine leadership of this organization. As the ACLU of Nevada begins its next chapter in protecting civil liberties in the Silver State, I wish the organization continued success.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, it is not necessary to go into great detail about the past, but it is important to talk about the past so we understand what is going on now and what the future holds. The biggest change coming from the Republican majority is what the Democratic minority has done. We have cooperated. We are not in the business of filibustering everything. During the first 6 years of the Obama administration, the Republicans initiated more than 600 filibusters. They filibustered everything. As an example, we tried to do the Energy bill for 5 years. Each time we tried, it was brought to a standstill by the Republicans. We have a Republican bill that we worked on. It is the same bill we did with Senator Shaheen in the past with some additions to it. What happened to that bill is that it has gone to the dark hole in the House. They have stripped everything out of it that we had done. It is gone. We have done our utmost to cooperate. For my friend to talk about this Republican Senate that has done so much, he would have tremendous difficulty finding any one thing that we didn't try to do--any one thing. I talked about energy. It doesn't matter what it was, it was filibustered--I repeat--more than 600 times. The record will never be broken, I hope, as it has been a real detriment to our country and the U.S. Senate. For my friend to come and talk about how great the Senate is, is really absurd. I don't know if he is taking the pages from Donald Trump--if you say enough that is wrong, people will say: Well, maybe it is not that bad. This Republican Senate is a do-nothing Senate. He talked about opioid legislation. There isn't anyone--not anyone from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, any of the public health agencies around the country--who thinks what happened in the Senate helped them. Why? Because there is no money. They shuffled things around. There is no money. Opioid legislation needs money. They have refused to fund it. I don't know how long it has been, but it has been at least 4 months since the people of Flint, MI, came to the realization that they had been poisoned--their children had been poisoned with lead. We tried so many different ways to get the Republicans to help that beleaguered city, but, no, not a chance. The people of Flint, MI, are still drinking and bathing with bottled water. The children are still suffering the awfulness of lead. It is so detrimental to little brains. He talks about the Zika virus. How sad that he would think that giving no money to this program is a good deal. I will talk about that in a little more detail. The Zika virus is extremely serious. It could affect as many as 39 of our United States. There is no money. The President has said, and I will say right now, we should not go on recess while there is no money for Zika. The way things are set up under his great plan, the Zika virus will be funded sometime this fall. The mosquitoes will be dead or gone home--wherever that home is--by that time, and the American people will be infected. There was a mistake made by his staff dealing with renewable tax credits, which is so important to the Presiding Officer's State and other States, and there have been efforts made to correct that mistake. That hasn't been done yet. The House of Representatives, led by the Republicans, can't pass a simple budget. This great Senate that he talks about couldn't pass a budget. We don't have a budget. We have no district court nominations. We have emergencies all over the country because there are too many people in trouble who want to litigate, and there are no judges to do that. No, we are not going to move on judges because Barack Obama, in their mind, is an illegitimate President, and they have created Donald Trump--what has happened the last 7\1/2\ years, the Republicans opposing anything that President Obama tried to do. They have created Donald Trump. They are not only failing us on district court nominations, circuit court nominations, we have a Supreme Court that has been bare. We don't have a full complement of Supreme Court Justices. For my friend to stand here and say we are doing our job is absurd. If he wants to talk about the Defense authorization bill, we will be happy to do that. Here is a quote from Mitch McConnell, which is basically what today's vote on the Defense authorization bill is all about: ``The Defense authorization bill requires 4 to 5 weeks to debate.'' That is what he said. Now he is changing his tune. I am not saying it is 4 to 5 weeks, but this bill is almost 2,000 pages, which we received the night before last at 5 o'clock. Shouldn't Members and their staff be able to read these 2,000 pages before we dive into litigating and offering amendments? I will say, again, the chairman of the committee, the senior Senator from Arizona, has said: I am going to violate the budget agreement we have by bringing in $18 billion more for defense. The budget agreement says he can't do that unless you equally fund nondefense. Shouldn't we take a look at that? Shouldn't we take a look at a 2,000-page bill-- actually, 1,660 pages, not counting the annex that came on board Wednesday night as part of the bill? Shouldn't we take a look at that? There are all kinds of earmarks, little goodies in that bill. We need to take a look at it. Is there anything wrong with that? I don't think so. We look forward to considering this legislation. We did much better than the Republicans. If you want to go back, another little insight into history--they not only fought going onto the bill, once we went on it, they wouldn't let us get off the bill. That is not where we are coming from. We have a lot of things to do. We have to do TSCA. I hope he would find time in his busy schedule, his great accomplishments, to work on a bill we have been trying to complete. I worked on this bill for the first time 28 years ago in the Senate. I was chairman of the subcommittee in the Senate. I did my best to take on the chemical industry, and I am sorry to report they won and America lost, but now we have an opportunity to have the American people winning for a change. What is the holdup in doing that bill? It is a conference report. Four weeks ago, I stood on the floor and said we shouldn't go on break without having giving President Obama the $1.9 billion he needs to fight the Zika virus. Four weeks later--we are still off next week-- we are not going to worry about those pesky mosquitoes. The Senate is going to recess for another week. We are going to come back for 4 weeks and then we are out for 7 weeks. This great plan of my friend, the Republican leader, is somewhat misleading. Anything he has been able to get done and tried to boast about are things they held us up from doing for 6 years. Last Friday President Obama said we should not leave today without having given public health officials the resources they need to combat the spread of Zika in the United States. Researchers, doctors, and health officials--not only in the United States, all over the world-- need this money. This money will be spent in America, but there will be a lot of effects around the world. There will be a lot of problems in Central and South America that we will be able to help. If we do it the right way, they can develop a vaccine at NIH, the Centers for Disease Control. They can't do it without money. Again, there is no money. They shift things around. They say they have a plan. Don't worry about Ebola, which was 18 months ago--a ravaging fear in the American people. It is still there, once that disease pops up again, that condition pops up again in Africa, because it infects Americans who are there. But they have taken most of the money from Ebola, and the House is going to take all of it in this great plan he has. They need this money. They need it to prepare for this public health threat, which is here. To leave now without putting an emergency spending bill on the President's desk is the height of irresponsibility. No matter how you boast about that, that is a fact. As was reported by the Washington Post this morning, the New England Journal of Medicine released findings from the study of the Zika virus. Here is what they found: Women infected with Zika early in their pregnancies may have as high as a 13-percent chance of having a baby with microcephaly. What is that? The brain doesn't grow. The skull caves in. It is a devastating birth defect, involving very small heads and incomplete development of the brain. Mosquitoes have caused problems in the world for generations--many generations--but we have never had a report that the mosquito would transmit a virus that would cause 13 percent of pregnant women to have these deformed babies. The Republican leader only needs to keep the Senate in session next week so we can pass a stand-alone Zika funding bill that gives our country what it needs now, not this fall. We need to act before local transmission starts occurring in the continental United States. That is going to be soon. Late this fall will not do the trick. This fall is too late. It is time to act, not take a break. The Republican leader should not send the Senate out of session until we have done all we can to protect the American people from the threat of this horrible virus. It doesn't take into consideration the other things we are just leaving: Flint, MI, opioids. There are so many things we are walking away from in this institution.

Mr. REID

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

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I am so happy to have my friend talk about ObamaCare. I am happy to have him talk about that because he is making himself not look very good, and that is a gross understatement. Yesterday the Commonwealth Fund released its fourth survey of ObamaCare. Here is what they found: Since the enactment of the Affordable Care Act, 28 million people have gained coverage either through marketplaces or Medicaid. In the last 3 years, the number of uninsured Americans have been reduced by 13 million people. Those are 13 million more people who have insurance now than they had 3 years ago, and 82 percent of American adults enrolled in private plans or government coverage said they were satisfied with their plans. Those numbers are further evidence the Affordable Care Act is helping the American people. It is getting people insured, many for the first time in their lives. Yesterday a woman came to me and said: Thank goodness. I--a diabetic--have been able to buy insurance because of ObamaCare. It is giving families important subsidies so they can afford the plan they need, and it is providing options, allowing Americans to cater their health insurance plans to their needs. Much has been made recently about premiums. My friend has made a big deal about premiums, especially by Republicans looking for any opening to spread misinformation, falsehoods. They love to come and talk about ObamaCare, how horrible it is for the American people. Allow me to set the record straight again. At this point, we are all looking at proposed increases. This, of course, is preliminary information. Let's consider Arkansas as an example. I picked Arkansas because one of the Senators from Arkansas is usually presiding, and I want him to hear this. Three out of the four companies that offer policies on Arkansas' health insurance marketplace proposed high premium increases for their enrollees. All of these increases were hikes of at least 10 percent. Fortunately, for the people of Arkansas, the Affordable Care Act helps. For starters, the vast majority of enrollees in Arkansas are protected from premium increases. Why? Because ObamaCare tax credits actually cap health insurance premiums for 85 percent of consumers. In Arkansas, 87 percent of consumers receive tax credits that help make coverage affordable; 62 percent of Arkansas enrollees had the option to select plans as low as $75 per month after tax credits. There are other ObamaCare provisions that safeguard against these rates that are out of line. Thanks to a provision within the law, State leaders have the resources to conduct a thorough review of the proposed rate increases. In Arkansas' case, the State received $9.2 million to study proposed premium increases. Now it is up to Arkansas' Governor and insurance commissioner to do the job and examine their rate proposals. State leaders have until August 23 to approve final rates for the 2017 exchange plans. The Arkansas insurance commissioner, Allen Kerr, already made it clear that he and the Governor are opposed to the hikes. Governor Hutchinson is a well known, fine man. I served with his brother and him in Congress. His brother was in the Senate. Allen Kerr said: Governor Hutchinson and I do not believe there is substantive justification for these rate increases. For that reason, we expect to take action to deny the requested rate increases until there is sufficient justification to properly consider any rate increase. Before we passed the Affordable Care Act, Americans in the individual insurance market were hit with double-digit health premium increases every year without any exception. Back then, if the insurance company said you need to pay more, you either paid up or lost your insurance. Consumers had no recourse. And they were charged more because they had an illness the previous year. They were charged more for all kinds of reasons. And insurance companies could deny covering certain conditions all together--one is if you were a woman. Now that Americans have ObamaCare in their corner, insurers can no longer charge more because you are sick or deny coverage to someone who has a certain illness. All conditions are covered, period. When insurance companies want premium increases, States have resources to fight back just like Arkansas, and when consumers decide that a plan is no longer working, they can--and should--shop around. In fact, everyone should do all they can to ensure that they are getting the best deal possible. That is what these marketplaces are for--to give the American people options. The Republican leader should be embarrassed by what he said this morning. For all this misinformation said on the Senate floor almost every day, the truth can't be hidden: The Affordable Care Act is keeping Americans insured and providing them options to find health coverage that meets their needs. I say to my friend the Republican leader, that is why today America has the lowest uninsured rate in the history of the country. The uninsured rate is at 9.1 percent. That is the lowest rate ever. The facts are undeniable. The Affordable Care Act is working. Will the Chair announce the business of the day.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I was saddened to learn that Sumner Slichter, who for three decades was the chief policy adviser to former Wisconsin and U.S. Senator Russ Feingold, died May 16 in his home in Alexandria, VA, after a battle with brain cancer. He was 62 years old. Sumner Pence Slichter was born August 31, 1953, in Urbana, IL, to Nini Almy and Charles Slichter. He was the oldest of four children and is remembered as being a kind and loving older brother to his younger siblings. As a student attending Dr. Howard Elementary, Edison Junior High School, and Champaign Central High School, Sumner played viola in the school orchestra. He left for the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 1970, where he majored in mathematics. Sumner continued to play viola in student ensembles and the UW orchestra, where he sat first chair. At the age of 19, Sumner began what would ultimately be a long and rich career in politics. His first job was on Ed Muskie's 1972 Presidential campaign. Later that year, he worked as an assistant at the Democratic National Committee convention in Miami Beach. From there, Sumner worked for campaigns and offices of State representatives in Illinois, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. In 1981, an encounter would forever change Sumner's life. That year he met a Milwaukee lawyer named Russ Feingold. At that time, Russ Feingold was working as a Democratic Party counsel on a close recall election. Sumner helped convince his new friend to challenge an incumbent for the 27th district State Senate seat. Feingold won the election in 1982, and Sumner followed him to the State capital. Sumner and Russ would spend the next three decades working side-by-side in Madison and Washington, DC. Working in the Wisconsin State Senate, Sumner helped design Feingold's trademark progressive initiatives that focused on the aging, consumer-focused banking policies, budget discipline, and tax policy. It was during his time in the State capitol that Sumner met Pam Russell, who was working as a legislative attorney. They were married in 1990. While they lived in Madison, Sumner had a thriving social life. He was a member of a city intramural league softball team, the Soft Balls, and he and his friends and teammates often took advantage of Wisconsin's beautiful State parks, going on annual camping trips to Governor Dodge and Rock Island, among others. Sumner enjoyed hosting friends at the summer cottage on Lake Mendota built by his grandfather, and in fact, it was there that Sumner held Russ Feingold's first fundraiser for the 1982 State senate campaign. In 1992, after 10 years in the Wisconsin Legislature, Russ ran for the U.S. Senate. Sumner was there with his boss, playing an important strategic role on the campaign. Many Wisconsinites still remember the funny, light-hearted campaign ads that Feingold ran in that campaign. Sumner was one of the campaign staffers who crafted those unforgettable ads. When Russ was elected to the U.S. Senate, Sumner and Pam relocated to northern Virginia where, on the day after they arrived, their daughter Sarah was born. Sumner worked for Russ in the U.S. Capitol for 18 years. He was Russ's policy director and helped shaped Senator Feingold's progressive legacy. Think about some of the courageous acts that defined Senator Feingold's work in the Senate: the McCain-Feingold Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, his votes against the Defense of Marriage Act, the Iraq war, and the sole nay vote against U.S.A. Patriot Act. For each of those votes and bills, Sumner was right there alongside Russ, counseling and helping in any way he could. He also helped Feingold author a resolution to censure President George W. Bush. It is no wonder that Russ said of his friend, ``Sumner was at my side for every vote I took in 28 years as a legislator, and I didn't vote until I sought his wise counsel.'' It is one thing to do good work for your boss, but it is another thing to treat your peers and colleagues with dignity, respect, and affection. Sumner was a great mentor and friend to his fellow staffers. Former Feingold chief of staff Mary Irvine remembers, ``It was quite a thing really how many issues Sumner worked on . . . A great solo player and an awesome team player. He must have spent hours and hours on the Senate floor on any number of issues but was always on duty for the entire lengthy budget resolution votes. Sumner was an amazing expert on the Senate budget process and on parliamentary procedure. He was a great political mind--there was no issue that Sumner couldn't figure out and explain to the rest of us.'' Outside of the Capitol, Sumner loved to cook for his friends and family. He was a movie buff who had a penchant for remembering lines, music, actors, and directors. He never lost his love of music and was always quick to respond to a danceable song. From his Madison days, Sumner brought annual Nixon Resignation and Derby Day parties and camping traditions to his family and friends in the D.C. Area. He had a deep love of dogs and was very attached to his pets. Sumner Slichter's passing is a loss for all of us here in the Senate. We grew accustomed to seeing his smiling face right at this boss's side. I, along with the entire U.S. Senate, send our condolences to his family. Sumner is survived by his wife, Pam Russell, of Alexandria, VA; daughter Sarah of Poughkeepsie, NY; mother Nini Almy of Mitchellville, MD; father Charles Slichter and stepmother Anne Slichter of Champaign, IL; brother Bill of Minneapolis and his wife Helen; brother Jacob of Brooklyn, NY, and his wife Suzanne; sister Ann of Los Angeles; half- brother Daniel of Boulder, CO, and his wife Yolanda; and half-brother David of Binghamton, NY. I say to his family: Thank you for sharing Sumner with us over the years. Thank you for allowing his bright and radiant personality to shine on us. He will be greatly missed.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, it is really unfortunate that the Republican leader comes here often and continues to harp and complain about ObamaCare, even though it is continuing to work. More than 9 out of 10 Americans now have health care. This is the best it has ever been. It has never been this way before. They say they want to repeal ObamaCare. They have tried scores of times. It hasn't worked. So I guess what they are saying is that they just want to get rid of this, and have people go back to the way it used to be. I remember and people in America remember canceling insurance if they were sick. If they had a real serious illness, they would cancel because their bills were too high. If they had a preexisting disability, forget about it--they couldn't get insurance. If they were a college student, they were cut off quickly; they couldn't stay on their family's insurance policy. Many men and women can stay on the insurance of their parents. So we would be much better off with ObamaCare and with helping the American people if, rather than complain, as they have for 6 or 7 years, they worked with us to try to improve the bill. We know it can be improved, but we can't do it alone. So that is how unfortunate this argument has been. We need everything ObamaCare does. We don't have anything better. And we are not going to do anything to help the poor. That is a strange way to conduct business, but that is the way it has been in the filibuster-laden Republican Party since Obama was elected.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, over the next few weeks, the Senate will be voting on both the Defense authorization and Defense appropriations bills, these two very important pieces of legislation. We need to take the time to understand them and, of course, to read these bills and make sure we are doing the right thing. Just reading the Defense authorization bill is not going to be an hour-long deal. It is not going to be done watching a ball game or watching television programs. Why? It is a very big piece of legislation. This is it. Try reading that between innings--1,664 pages. Chairman McCain may have read this. He may understand every line in it. He would have a better chance than most of us because he is the one who conducted the hearings behind closed doors--secret sessions. Few outside the committee probably know what is in this monstrous bill, this big bill. Even though the chairman came here on Monday and started complaining about this legislation, if you want to get an idea how the bill was hastily put together, consider this. The bill was put together behind closed doors. At 5 p.m. last night, Senator McCain's committee voted on the classified annex to the Defense authorization bill. He had been ranting and raving about Democrats holding up this bill. That is what the Republican leader did here today. He didn't rant and rave, but he did say we are holding it up. But the committee hadn't finished its work as of last night. The bill wasn't done. They just finished it last night at 5 p.m. Unfortunately, it appears that this massive bill is everything Senator McCain has in the past complained about. He says he hated what has gone on in the past. This bill is loaded with special projects--loaded with them-- sprinkled with special favors and many different flavors. It has extraneous provisions, and who knows what else. If there were ever anything that could be identified as an earmark or two or three or four or a few hundred, it is in this bill. I thought Senator McCain didn't like that. I can understand why some would want to rush this bill through the Senate without a lot of public scrutiny, but we are not going to do that. This legislation is far too important. I started reading a book last night called ``Red Platoon.'' It is a brand-new book written by a man who won a Medal of Honor. It talks about a remote outpost in Afghanistan. We know what sacrifices the Red Platoon and the men and women who fought in the new wars in Iraq and Afghanistan made. So we know they deserve better than just rushing through this bill. Hard-working American taxpayers deserve better. The one thing we can all agree on is that Americans must have a strong, strong military with the capability to defend America's national security interests around the world and to protect us here at home. There is no dispute about that. Democrats believe that we must take care of our middle class also. We must know that the security of all Americans depends not only on the Pentagon--on bombs and bullets--but also on other national security interests--the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and the help that comes through this legislation to local police departments and first responders. That is why we fought so hard as Democrats last year to stop the devastating cuts from sequestration, which was generated by the Republicans and which would have been a disaster for the military, our national security, and millions of middle-class Americans. We need a bipartisan budget agreement. We reached that, and it is commendable that the Republican leader said we want to stick with that. Well, we need to stick with it because that bipartisan budget agreement was based on the principle that we need to treat the middle class as fairly as the Pentagon. That agreement was intended to avoid another budget fight this year, but it doesn't appear that is possible. I was pleased that my Republican friends stuck to this budget agreement in the committee with both authorization and appropriations. But we have been told--and told publicly--that they intend to break the bipartisan budget agreement and propose $18 billion increases only for the Pentagon. This money is going to come from a strange source. It is going to come from the military itself. I had the good fortune of meeting with the Secretary of Defense last Thursday. To use the so-called OCO moneys--they are used for warfighting, and that is why they are put in there--to take this and use it for some other source or some other purpose is wrong. My friend talks about how the military supports this legislation. Of course they do. But they don't support what Chairman McCain is going to try to do. In the process, we need only to look at what else is going on with the Republican Senate. They refuse to provide money to fight the Zika virus, to stop the terrible situation regarding opioid drugs. The people of Flint, MI, are still waiting for help. We need funding for local law enforcement, which has not been forthcoming, and for the intelligence agencies and our first responders. It is wrong not to take care of these folks. We reached an agreement last year. Now both sides need to keep our promises and the agreement for the American people. We must treat the middle class fairly. Make no mistake, as the appropriations process moves forward, we are going to insist on that. I will support cloture on the motion to proceed to the Defense authorization bill today, even though in 2010 my friend, the chairman of the committee, voted with other Republicans to stop moving forward on the Defense bill. But Democrats are willing to proceed deliberately. We are going to hold Republicans to their word on the budget agreement. We are going to do our jobs, as we want them to do theirs. Our Armed Forces and middle-class Americans deserve nothing less.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, my friend the Republican leader talked about Ruby Paone. I have so much admiration and respect for her that it is hard to put it into words. In 1975, a young woman from North Carolina came to the U.S. Capitol. She was overwhelmed by everything, especially overwhelmed by this huge building she was going to work in. Ruby was excited for her first day of work at the Senate reception desk. But as she approached the Capitol, realizing what her new job was all about and the new city, she recalls: ``Walking into this building, I was overwhelmed.'' It is understandable that she felt that way. Many of us have and do feel the same way. The Capitol was a big change for Ruby. She was raised in the small town of Bladenboro, NC. She was a farm girl who spent her summers pulling peanuts--I didn't know you pulled peanuts, but that is what they do--and harvesting tobacco. Ruby graduated from a small Presbyterian school, St. Andrews University. She is the only one in her family to leave their small town in North Carolina. But as Ruby got situated in her new job that day, another feeling set in. She said: ``It just felt right to be here.'' Now, 41 years, 2 months, and 9 days after she walked through the Capitol doors to start a new job, she is leaving. It is hard to imagine her not being here. To borrow from her own words, ``it just feels right'' to have Ruby here. Tomorrow is going to be her last day in the Senate. After more than four decades of service to the greatest deliberative body, Ruby is retiring to spend more time with her family. Her family's gain is our loss. She is an institution, a fixture in the Senate. She is the longest serving woman who works with the doorkeepers. She has been here for 7 different Presidential administrations, 10 consecutive inaugurations, 16 different Sergeants at Arms, and 383 different Senators. She recognizes every one of those 383 Senators, and there is a reason that she does that. When she was first hired, we didn't have the names and faces in these books we give to the pages and to new Senators. It wasn't done that way then. She had to do it by memorizing their names and learning to recognize them when they came into the Capitol Rotunda and on the Senate floor. She would walk around and look for these Senators to get to know who they were. She grew close to many of these Senators, including Blanche Lincoln, Tom Carper, and Thad Cochran. I know Ruby. I know her family quite well. Her husband worked on the Senate floor for many years. He was instrumental to Majority Leader George Mitchell, Tom Daschle, and me. No one knows the rules of the Senate better than Marty Paone. He now works for President Obama in the Office of Legislative Affairs. He is a very special person, and I have such admiration for him. When their children were in high school, we would often talk about their children--how they played ball, how they did well, how they didn't do so well the night before. That is what our conversations were about. We didn't talk a lot of Senate business, unless we had to. I am sorry to say that we had to many times. Marty helped me so many times through very difficult situations on the floor. To say that I will miss Ruby is an understatement. I want be able to come to Ruby and say: How is Marty? How is he doing? Throughout my entire time in the Senate, she has always been here with a smile and a kind word. She is as much a part of this place as anyone who has ever served in the Senate. So I, along with the entire Senate--Senators, staff--wish her the best as she embarks on her well- deserved retirement. Ruby, thank you very much for your 41 years, 2 months, and 9 days of service. I yield the floor.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, every time I come to the floor when my friend is on the floor speaking, I need not tell everyone within the sound of my voice how much I admire him and the service he has rendered to our country, both as a naval pilot and as a Senator and as a Member of the House of Representatives. However, he has a job to do and I have a job to do. I, like most people in the Senate, have not served in the military. I acknowledge that. But I didn't go to Canada. I did my best. I had civil obligations during the time my friend was in Vietnam.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I do believe we have a job to do. He does his job the best he can, and everyone knows how hard he works. But I also have obligations to my caucus, to this body, and to the country. This is a very big, important bill. I have had the good fortune for all these years to work on it. It has been difficult sometimes where we just barely made it. I can remember one year that Senator Levin, who was our man on defense, and Senator McCain--we were able to do the bill in 2 days. It was an emergency situation. But we have gotten the bill done over all the years I have been here. We have gotten it done all the years I have been the leader. Here is the situation in which we find ourselves. This bill is almost 2,000 pages long. As he indicated, it could have been online from sometime Wednesday night, but the truth is that we didn't get the final version of this bill until last night at 5 o'clock. The committee voted on the appendix to this bill last night. They completed it at 5 o'clock last night. An important part of the bill deals with the intelligence aspect of this bill, and a lot of people want to read that and the rest of the bill. I don't think it is asking too much to allow Members to understand the bill, to have the opportunity--the Presiding Officer is a very studious man; maybe he will read every page of that bill. Most Senators will not, but they will make sure their staff reads every line. Why? Because they need to do that. This bill was marked up in closed session. It was marked up privately. There was no press there. It was done in closed rooms in the Russell Building. I believe that is where all the markups took place. The bill came to the floor. We have amendments we want to offer. We have a caucus tomorrow to talk about that. We have a number of Senators who are preparing amendments, and they want to discuss them with the rest of the Democrats prior to moving to this bill. We will be out for a week for the Memorial Day recess. When we come back, it would seem to me it would be much more efficient and productive if we were ready on that Monday we come back to start legislating. We are not ready to do that yet. We are not ready. We are going to proceed very deliberately in spite of all the castigations about me made on the Senate floor. I am going to ignore those because, to be quite honest with you, anytime we need to talk about any statements I have made at any time, I am happy to do it, but I think it would distract from what we are doing here today to go into the statements made by the junior Senator from Arkansas. But I do have to say this: I am not the reason we are having such short workdays in the Senate, even though that was alleged by my friend from Arkansas. If we are going to do our job, we are going to do it the best way we can because it is important. I have said it here on the floor, and I won't go into a lot more detail than what I am saying here, but in the room where we meet on a closed, confidential basis, last Thursday I met with the Secretary of Defense. I have the good fortune every 3 weeks to be briefed on what is going on around the world by the military and by others who help us be safe and secure in this country. We talked about a number of things that we need not discuss here openly, but one thing we can talk about openly here is that the Secretary of Defense thinks it is really, really, really--underscore every ``really'' I said--to put in this bill what my friend from Arizona said he is going to do, and that is move $18 billion from warfighting--the overseas contingency fund--into regular, everyday authorization matters that take away from the ability of this Pentagon to plan what they are going to be doing next year or the year after--this is something we--I--need to take a hard look at. I said earlier today that I appreciate very much the Republican leader responding to a letter we wrote to him, saying that on these budgetary matters, he would stick with the 2-year deal we made. I am glad. That is great. But my friend from Arizona wants to violate that deal, and I think that is wrong. We are going to take a hard look at that because we believe that a secure nation not only depends on the Pentagon--bombs and bullets--but it also depends on all the other agencies of government that help us maintain our security: the FBI, the Drug Enforcement Administration, all of the different responsibilities of the Department of Homeland Security. Let's understand that no one is trying to stall this legislation. If nothing happens on this bill in the next 24 hours, I think it will be a much better process to finish the bill when we come back. We will do it with our eyes wide open. No one will be able to say: I didn't know that was in there. What I said--and I will say it with my friend on the floor--is there are a lot of little goodies in this bill. I think we need to take a look at those. My friend, of all people, who has worked hard during the entire time he has been in the Senate--he and I didn't get much done in the House. When you are there for two terms, you don't get much done. But in the Senate, he has gotten a lot done, focusing on what he believes is wasteful spending in the government. I disagreed with him on some of the examples he has pointed out--some of them have dealt with Nevada-- but he has done that well. We have a responsibility and we have been trained pretty well by the senior Senator from Arizona to look at these bills, what is in them. I have been told by my staff that we better take a close look at some of the things that have been identified in this bill. I am not here in any way to not give my full support to the efforts made by Jack Reed, the ranking Democrat on this committee. This bill is not John McCain's bill. It is not Jack Reed's bill. It is our bill. I want to make sure that this bill--our bill--comes out in a way that is good for the American people. My view of what is good for the American people may be different from others, but I think we have a responsibility to do everything we can to proceed in a very orderly fashion. As soon as we get on this bill, I will do my very best to move it along just as quickly as possible. I object.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, this is a new tack here. The Republican leader appears to say--doesn't appear to say; it is what he said--that a rule would require investment advisers to act in the best interests of their investors. Is there something wrong with that? I don't see it. Imagine, Republicans want investment advisers to act in someone else's interests--namely, their own. The reason this came to be is that investment advisers are more interested in how much they can make rather than the people who are trying to acquire some assets in their retirement age. This is widely accepted as being important. The only people who oppose it are the investment advisers who are putting money in their own pockets instead of those of the people they represent. They have a fiduciary rule which is unwritten--of course, now it will be written--that you should take your clients' interests first, and that is the way doctors have to operate, as well as lawyers and accountants. There is no reason that investment advisers shouldn't also be in a position where they are more concerned about their client rather than themselves.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, tomorrow is the 100th day that there has been a vacancy in the Supreme Court. To his credit, President Obama didn't rush into nominating someone; he took his time and interviewed scores of candidates recommended to him by his staff and Senators and many people around the country. So 30 days after the vacancy appeared, President Obama came forward with Merrick Garland. If ever there were a consensus nominee, Merrick Garland is that. The head of the Judiciary Committee at the time, the senior Senator from Utah, said: He is a consensus nomination. Why doesn't the President do that? When the President does, he is suddenly not interested--``he,'' meaning the senior Senator from Utah. For 70 days Senate Republicans have refused to do anything to move along Merrick Garland's nomination. They will not look at Garland's questionnaire or study his record. They will not give him a hearing, and they are certainly not going to give him a vote. They are absolutely committed to blocking a vote on this good man. So that is 10 full weeks of Republicans running away from their constitutional duty to provide their advice and consent to President Obama's Supreme Court nomination. Given Senate Republicans' light work schedule, perhaps it is no surprise that they have not found time to schedule a hearing and a vote on Merrick Garland. They are never here. News outlets are already reporting how little time the Republican Senate will spend in session this year. As one publication, Politico, said a few days ago, ``The chamber is on pace to work the fewest days in 60 years.'' This is what the Senate calendar looks like for 2016, this schedule released by the Republican leader. This is it. If you are wondering about these blocked-out days, that is when we are not in session. That doesn't include the rest of the time around here--or, I should say, barely around here. Mondays--the few Mondays that we are in--basically, nothing happens on Mondays. We get here and vote at 5:30. Fridays, we don't work. As you can see, once in a while they schedule a Friday, but we don't work on Fridays. We are so desperate to get out of here on Thursdays that votes are now scheduled at a quarter to 2--not until 2. We all have caucuses, but we can't wait to jump-start it and get out of here at a quarter until 2. As I indicated, we see the blacked-out days. These are recess days, days when the full Senate will not be in session and, of course, not working, not voting. To say we have had a lot of recesses lately is kind of an understatement. For example, the Republican Senate has worked just 27 days since Merrick Garland was nominated. He was nominated March 16. Remember, on Mondays we don't do much around here. Thursday afternoons, we don't. So we work Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and half a day on Thursday. That is quite a schedule. Had the Senate worked on any of these blacked-out days, we could have had a hearing for Merrick Garland, and we could have scheduled a vote. We also could have worked on any number of important issues Republicans have been ignoring. What about this Zika virus that is such a concern to health officials around the world? In March, we worked a little bit but not much. But at least in those days, perhaps we could have done something to fund Zika but, no, still playing around with that over here. A big cheer went up when a bill was passed, an appropriations bill, and it had in it a provision for Zika. One problem: That legislation will not be approved until the fall or even the winter. Mosquitoes are now breeding. It is getting warmer. It is going to be 90 degrees in Washington, DC, on Friday. But no one on the Republican side seems to be too worried about that. We could look again at March. We can pick any month you want, but let's try March. What about Flint, MI? Because of some manipulation by the Governor of the State and others, the people of Flint, MI, suddenly were asked to drink water from a new source. They did not know that water was tainted with heavy volumes of lead. What a shame. I will never forget what I watched on ``PBS NewsHour.'' A mother was there crying, saying: I wanted to have my two children healthy, so they could not drink any soda pop ever. I helped poison my children because they drank the water of Flint, MI. We could have done something about that in March, April. Look at the months. But we have done nothing. Not a single penny has gone to Flint, MI. They are using bottled water. The opioid epidemic--there was a big cheer here: We did something on opioids. The problem is that there is no money. As we speak here today, in the hour we will take up here on the floor this morning before we get to the business of the day, in America about 20 people will die from opioid overdoses. We should be doing something about that, but we are not. The American people have been saying that the Republicans should simply do their jobs, but, as we have seen from the schedule, it is difficult to do your job when you don't bother to show up to work. The theme for this year's Republican Senate should be ``The Republican Senate was not in session.'' That quote is from me. Remember, this is the lightest Senate work calendar in some six decades. The Republican leader has the Senate on pace for almost no work and for the most days off in 60 years. Look at the summer vacation. I think we should be able to get in a few days of leisure during the summer vacation. What do you think? Look at it--7 weeks, including the first week in September. Seven consecutive weeks off--the longest summer recess in many decades. The population of the country has increased in 60 years but not the Senate schedule. The problems of the country have increased in 60 years but not the Senate schedule. The Republican leader didn't have to set such a light schedule. There is no archaic Senate rule that requires the world's greatest deliberative body to go dark for an entire summer. This was his choice. Do we need all this time off in July for the conventions? I don't think so. We have so many Republicans who are saying they are not even going to the convention. They are embarrassed to be there with Trump, I guess. If they are not going to Cleveland, stay here and work. The Senate Republicans have already wasted the last 70 days doing nothing on Merrick Garland's nomination. These days are lost. We can't go back to them. But what about the rest of the year? We have all this time to give Judge Garland a hearing and a vote, but we can't consider the nomination if we are not here. The Senate should stay in session until our work is completed. The President said we shouldn't go home on Thursday. We shouldn't go home until we fund Zika. That is a menace the American people are facing, especially American women. We shouldn't leave town unless we fully fund the President's request of $1.9 billion. We should not take this summer off while a vacancy remains on the Supreme Court. The Republican leader should not have this body scheduled to work less than any Senate in the last 60 years while so many issues that are important to the American people go unresolved. Mr. President, will the Chair announce what the Senate is going to do the rest of the day.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, in the coming weeks, Representative Lyushun Shen from the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office will be leaving his post and returning to Taiwan. Having worked with Representative Shen during his tenure in Washington DC, I would like to express my gratitude to him for his service. As West Africa battled the ravages of Ebola and the world united to help address the epidemic in 2014, Representative Shen and the Taiwanese rose to the occasion. On behalf of the Taiwanese, Representative Shen pledged $1 million to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to help the U.S. combat the Ebola virus and stabilize the region. This act of generosity came at a critical time and further demonstrated Taiwan's solidarity with the United States. During his post in Washington, Representative Shen made important contributions to the Global Cooperation and Training Framework, GCTF. Representative Shen is a valued friend of the United States, and I thank him for his work and wish him well in all his future endeavors.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Madam President, last Friday, as he should, President Obama gave the Nation an update on the fight against Zika, this virus that has become such a difficult issue to face. Here are the facts, as outlined by President Obama and reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: As we speak, there are more than 500 confirmed cases of Zika in the continental United States. There are at least 800 confirmed cases of infection in Puerto Rico, and most experts believe the actual number is significantly higher. There are 279 pregnant women in the continental United States and territories who are being monitored for possible Zika infection. We have yet to confirm any local transmission from Zika-carrying mosquitoes in the continental United States. Remember, we have had an unseasonably cold spring. That means that a mosquito with Zika has not yet infected anyone on the mainland. But the public health experts tell us that is going to change as soon as it warms up, and it is nearing the warmup time now. It is only when the warm weather hits that the mosquitoes become active, and they really become active. These pests are capable of transmitting Zika and are in 39 States. Residents of our Nation's most populated cities--such as New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Houston--could be at risk of infection. This map says it all. There are some places where there is only one type of mosquito, and, of course, the worst is the blue, as shown on the map. But there are places where there is a mixture of mosquitoes. There are two kinds of mosquitoes that cause a problem. It is spread to people primarily through the body of an infected mosquito. But look where it goes--from Maine to Texas, even reaching into Northern California, Las Vegas, and we see red up there, in Boulder, CO. So it is a concern, a real concern. For pregnant women, contracting Zika could mean devastating birth defects for their children, as we know, with these tiny little heads and underdeveloped brains and collapsed skulls. For others, the dangers of Zika range from possible nervous system disorders and potential paralysis to minor symptoms such as rashes and fever like the flu. This is the threat that Republicans in Congress have been ignoring for many months now. Back in February--we are fast approaching June. In February, President Obama sent an emergency appropriations request to Congress for almost $2 billion--$1.9 billion is the exact figure--to fight Zika. It wasn't some number that he picked out of a hat. This is a figure that researchers, public health experts, and doctors explicitly requested, and $1.9 billion is what our country needs. That is the number that I support and Democrats support. Anything less than that is simply not enough. Republicans did nothing in response to the President's request, letting weeks and weeks go by as the number of infected Americans grew. Because of Republicans' refusal to allocate Zika funding, President Obama had to act. He did the only thing he could do: He used $510 million in Ebola money to fight the spread of Zika. It was 18 months ago that we were first hit with the Ebola scare. It was a scare--and rightfully so. We were panicked about Ebola. Americans had been infected with this awful disease. But the only thing we could do was to do more to find out how we could stop it with a vaccine and with other treatments. It takes money to do that. But to take more than half a billion dollars of Ebola money and fight the spread of Zika is taking from Peter to pay Paul. What choice did President Obama have? They were ignoring his pleas for help. Now that they can no longer ignore Zika, Republicans in Congress are reluctantly going through the motions of providing funding. As my friend the Republican leader said, we have taken care of Zika here on the floor--how wrong, how misleading. The Senate agreed to provide $1.1 billion--about half of what President Obama requested. But everyone knows that is not going to do the trick because that money is not going to be coming until sometime this fall. To make matters worse, the Senate-passed $1.1 billion package would do nothing to pay back the Ebola money. It would pay back a tiny fraction of the $510 million in Ebola funds that are so necessary to continue the work on Ebola. The Senate's $1.1 billion is also wrapped up in the appropriations process. Appropriations bills take months to get done. By the time it gets to the President's desk, it will be fall. We will know by then how much damage has been done because of the Republicans' inability and refusal to help us with that money. The American people should not have to wait that long. That is why Senate Democrats have repeatedly come to the floor and asked that we move to a Zika funding package as a stand-alone bill, separating from the very slow and tedious appropriations process. But each time, Republican leadership has objected. Senate Republicans don't want to expedite the issue. They would prefer that our response to Zika be wrapped up in a drawn-out appropriations process. Our Nation cannot afford the unnecessary delay. House Republicans could not even pass a budget. Now we are depending on them to pass an appropriations bill before we do anything on Zika. They don't have a budget. These are the same House Republicans who last week passed legislation to give President Obama a third--$622 million-- of what the President asked. In fact, it is a little less than a third. Guess what. Guess where they are going to get that money. They are going to take it by raiding more Ebola money. Our Nation has spent the last 2 years fighting Ebola. But although we have been successful in responding to Ebola, it remains a threat. We do not have the ability to handle that disease. Last week, the White House reported that CDC officials in West Africa are processing 10,000 new Ebola samples a month. We can't afford to drop our guard on Ebola. That is what the Republicans are telling us to do. If we take these funds away from our Nation's response to the Ebola virus and we use them instead to underfund our response to Zika, we are ensuring that our defenses against both are inadequate. That is irresponsible and terribly dangerous. I don't understand the Republicans' refusal to take Zika seriously. Why do they refuse to listen to the experts who tell us they need the full $1.9 billion to be able to fight this devastating virus? It is as if the Republicans are betting that Zika will not be a disaster--like the horse race we had in Baltimore on Saturday. This is not a bet. It is as if they are betting against all the experts at the CDC and NIH who say the Zika virus is a real threat to Americans. They are saying it is a real threat to Americans because it is. Instead of gambling with the health and safety of millions of Americans, Republicans should give our Nation the money it needs to fight Zika, and they should do it now--not next month, not in the fall but now. As the President said on Friday, we in Congress should not leave for the Memorial Day break without having taken care of this issue. He is so right. We have been on record for weeks saying the same thing. We don't need more time off. We already hold the record for working less time. This Senate is working less time than any Congress in the last six or seven decades. We don't need more time off. So next week, rather than taking some time off, let's get the legislation to the White House appropriating that money. We have time to get out ahead of Zika, but we need to do it now. That window is rapidly closing by the day. Let's work together and do it now--Democrats and Republicans--to give our Nation the tools it needs to keep the American people safe from the virus. Right now, we are not safe.

Mr. REID

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

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Madam President, I join my friend the Republican leader in congratulating Marvin Simms on his well-deserved retirement next week, after more than 30 years working in the Senate Recording Studio. He has been involved in so many of the things I have done in the last 30 years. We started here about the same time. When Marvin began, it was then called the Senate television crew. It was a much smaller operation than it is now. As the Senate evolved in the age of 24-hour press and media--and so much going on with the Internet also--so did his job. Over his three decades in the Senate, Marvin gained more and more responsibility, culminating in his position today as the broadcast production director. Marvin has worked on many of my television interviews, and he did a superb job. I wish Marvin and his family the best in his retirement. He is an avid friend of NASA, our national agency that does so much in space and all things related to space. He is an avid fan. I hope he will use the extra time he has in retirement ``to boldly go where no man has gone before.'' For all you who don't know what I am saying, if you know anything about Star Trek, you will realize this is a phrase from the show's opening sequence. Marvin, go boldly where no man has gone before. Thank you very much for your good work. The floor appears to be empty, Madam President. I ask the Chair to announce what the Senate is going to do the rest of the day.