Harry Reid

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask the clerk to report amendment No. 2917.

Mr. REID. There is no shortage of contradictions today from my Republican friends. The first amendment was called, ``If you like what you have, you can keep it.'' A couple of hours later, the same Republicans came back and voted to strip the health care for 22 million Americans. In one of the few bipartisan moments today, 90 Senators voted to remove the provision that would restart the Cadillac tax in 2025. Yet minutes later, the Republican leader offered the pending substitute amendment to put that provision back in. Do they really believe those who oppose the Cadillac tax will not recognize that they voted with them and then immediately reversed themselves and voted against them? I am offering them a chance to correct the record. My amendment will again remove the provision that restarts the Cadillac tax in 2025. I urge all Senators, particularly the 90 who just voted yes, to support this amendment.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I wish to recognize the 40th anniversary of the Las Vegas Latin Chamber of Commerce. Since its inception, the Latin Chamber of Commerce has been a champion for the Hispanic business community in Nevada. In working to fulfill its mission of promoting the success of its members and the more than 18,000 Hispanic-owned small businesses in the Silver State, the chamber is driving growth in Nevada and enriching the U.S. economy. By cultivating positive business, cultural, and educational relationships and expanding opportunities for Latino businessowners, the Latin Chamber of Commerce has ensured the success of hundreds of new businesses and transformed the very fabric of southern Nevada. The Latin Chamber of Commerce was founded nearly four decades ago by a handful of determined individuals who were seeking the resources and support necessary to realize their personal and professional goals. Under the leadership of Arturo Cambeiro, the organization's first president, the chamber developed the foundation needed to become a leading advocate for Hispanic-owned businesses and Latino entrepreneurs. Today, the Latin Chamber of Commerce has grown to include more than 1,500 members throughout the Silver State, making it one of the largest organizations of its kind in the country. I applaud the Latin Chamber of Commerce for its 40th anniversary of dedicated service to the Hispanic community. The chamber's work is truly appreciated and admired. I also commend the leadership of the Latin Chamber of Commerce, particularly Mr. Otto Merida and Ms. Victoria Napoles-Earl. Their tireless commitment to the Latino business community has played a critical role in the growth and success of the chamber. For the last 40 years, Mr. Merida has dedicated his work to developing and expanding the presence of the Latin Chamber of Commerce in southern Nevada. He has worked hard to fulfill the Chamber's mission and led the organization with the highest standards, currently serving as the organization's chief executive officer. Ms. Napoles-Earl joined the chamber in 1987 and recently announced her retirement after 30 years of service. I would like to congratulate her on her upcoming retirement and career accomplishments. From starting as the chamber's office manager to becoming its senior vice president, Ms. Napoles-Earl has dedicated her career to investing in Latino-owned businesses. During their distinguished careers, Mr. Merida and Ms. Napoles-Earl have successfully secured millions of dollars in funding for Latino businessowners, including grants, loans, and contracts. On behalf of the chamber and the thousands of Hispanic-owned businesses in Nevada, Mr. Merida and Ms. Napoles-Earl have effectively advocated for policies that help Latino entrepreneurs start and expand their business. In addition to their roles at the Latin Chamber of Commerce, Mr. Merida and Ms. Napoles are active members in the community and have held various leadership positions at the State and local levels. Mr. Merida has worked for the State of Nevada's Department of Education, served as chair of the Las Vegas Housing Authority, and was appointed to the Nevada Commission on Economic Development. Ms. Napoles-Earl has served as a commissioner for the Nevada Commission on Minority Affairs and on the board of directors of Dignity Health's St. Rose Dominican Hospitals. I have had the honor and privilege of working closely with Mr. Merida and Ms. Napoles-Earl throughout my time in Congress, and I can say without reservation that the Hispanic business community in Nevada is fortunate to have them working on its behalf. You will be hard pressed to find more effective advocates. As the Latin Chamber of Commerce begins its next chapter, I wish them continued success for years to come and thank them for supporting the economic growth and development of Latino entrepreneurs for 40 years and counting.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, the Republican leader comes to the floor virtually every day and talks about this great new Senate. He talked about the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. We tried to do that many times. It was blocked by Republicans. That is why it was not done before. Highways. We tried valiantly to do something on highways, but all we could ever get, because of the obstruction of the Republicans, was short-term extensions. Cyber security. My friend the Republican leader comes to the floor and talks about, we got cyber security done. We got it done. It is not a great bill. It is better than nothing. But we tried for years--5 years. Every time we tried, it was blocked by Republicans. One of the newspapers here has a Pinocchio check. They look at the facts and analyze them, and they can give up to four Pinocchios, meaning people simply did not tell the truth. So I want to remind everybody here that I am happy to participate in getting something done with the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, led by, on our side, the senior Senator from Washington. We were able to get that done because of her good work and others. It was not because we did not try before. We could not get it done before because of the obstruction of the Republicans. This is the most unproductive Senate in the history of the country, and there are facts and figures to show that. So we are not going to be awarding Pinocchios here based on the statements of my friend the Republican leader, but everyone should understand there are different ways of presenting the facts. It is always best to present facts that are accurate. He said, for example, that bills--TSA, highways, and cyber--languished in the Senate. That is true, because of Republican filibusters. We tried to pass those bills in the last two Congresses. They were blocked by Republicans. We are now helping pass legislation, and that is our job. The job of Republicans was to oppose everything President Obama wanted, and that is, in fact, what was done.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, on ObamaCare, one newspaper reports: Fewer Patients Have Been Dying From Hospital Errors Since ObamaCare Started. Report says about 87,000 lives have been saved since 2010. This is as a result of that legislation. I am not going to read the whole article. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the article to which I just referred.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, among other things, this article says: ``Hospitals have cut down on deadly medical errors, saving around 87,000 lives since 2010, according to a new government report.'' I am not going to read the whole thing, but it is part of the Record. The article also says: Many analysts think government initiatives within the Affordable Care Act have played a significant role in the progress so far. In short, ObamaCare may literally be saving lives. The new report comes from Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. . . . On Tuesday, the agency announced its latest findings on these ``hospital-acquired conditions''. . . . That rate is unchanged from last year, but it is down 17 percent from 2010, when it was about 145 out of every 1,000 patients. That is not the case anymore. Continuing: That decline works out to roughly 87,000 lives saved and $19.8 billion not spent on extra medical care, according to the report. . . . A major goal of the Affordable Care Act was to reduce and eventually eliminate these incentives for poor quality care, while rewarding the hospitals that get better results. Today, for example, Medicare pays less to institutions with high rates of hospital-acquired infection, injury and readmission--in other words, large numbers of patients returning to the hospital for treatment shortly after discharge. . . . And under an initiative called Partnership for Patients, the federal government provides extra funding to hospitals that agree to monitor patient safety and implement schemes for improving quality. So to my friend who continually berates ObamaCare, we have before us today and tomorrow an effort to show how wasteful the time is trying to wipe out ObamaCare. The House has voted 46 times. The Republicans, of course, have lost every time. In the Senate, I think it has been 16 times or 17 times trying to repeal ObamaCare. Each time, it failed, as it will fail in the next day or two.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, when Americans elect leaders, they do so in good faith. Our constituents want us to govern responsibly and work to embody American values. Both elected officials and candidates must realize that our words have deep meaning and can influence people far and wide. That is why I am very disappointed that instead of talking about issues important to the middle class, the Republicans have turned to the politics of hatred and division. It seems no one is safe from this Republican vitriol. Republicans demagogue women seeking health care through Planned Parenthood. Republican candidates use women, infants, and children seeking refuge from terrorism to fearmonger. Muslim Americans, immigrants, and even Americans exercising their constitutional rights in support of the Black Lives Matter movement are all subject to Republican insults and slander. Over and over again, Republican candidates have resorted to hatred instead of appealing to the highest sensibilities of the American people. We all know that on race and other controversial issues, Republicans have long practiced subtle bigotry, but Republicans now simply say out loud the many things at which they used to merely hint. Words have power, and when spoken by influential leaders, they infiltrate every corner of our society. In the wake of last week's murderous attack at a Planned Parenthood health center in Colorado, a leading conservative activist said: It really is surprising more Planned Parenthood facilities and abortionists are not being targeted. Given the public light shed on the atrocities committed by Planned Parenthood and both the government and media's turning a blind eye to it . . . it really should be surprising that Americans convicted of the need to stop the murder of children have not taken the law into their own hands. That is what the quote says. We know how exaggerated, untruthful, and unfair the film was that was put together as some B-grade movie and that has so maligned Planned Parenthood. One out of every five American women will go to Planned Parenthood during her lifetime. It is the only health care that women have in many parts of America. Is that the kind of language you want to encourage in the United States of America, that there should be more violence in these health clinics? Certainly not, but it is all too common in the Republican Party of today. Instead of recognizing the concerns of communities riddled by decades of police brutality and racial injustice, Republicans have vilified the Black Lives Matter movement, which has been drawing attention to these disturbing inequities. Rush Limbaugh has gone so far as labeling protesters a ``hate group'' for trying to bring equality to our criminal justice system. Just a few weeks ago, supporters of the Republican Presidential hopeful Donald Trump attacked a Black Lives Matter protester on video at a rally. Instead of condemning the violence displayed by his supporters, Donald Trump encouraged it. When asked about the incident, Trump said, referring to the protester, ``Maybe he should have been roughed up.'' That is stunning. A Republican candidate for President of the United States urged violence to silence his critics. Last week, four masked men with apparent White supremacist ties opened fire on Black Lives Matter protestors in Minneapolis. I am amazed that the junior Senator from Texas had the audacity to say earlier this week that ``the overwhelming majority of violent criminals are Democrats.'' And the article he quoted has been said to have been quoted improperly. That is really quite stunning, that someone with the academic background of the junior Senator from Texas cannot read a simple report. ``The overwhelming majority of violent criminals are Democrats.'' Think about that. Fanning the flames of intolerance is un-American. We are better than this. I am disappointed that Republicans who should know better are not speaking out against this vile rhetoric. According to the New York Times, ``Some of the highest-ranking Republicans in Congress and some of the party's wealthiest and most generous donors have balked at trying to take down Mr. Trump because they fear a public feud with the insult-spewing media figure.'' That is a sad reflection on one of America's major political parties. The Republican Party once claimed to stand for American leadership in the world, but as millions of Syrians have fled their country, seeking refuge from death and destruction, Republicans have instead used the humanitarian crisis as an opportunity to spread fear and animosity. Republican Presidential candidate Ben Carson described the Syrian refugees as ``rabid dogs.'' Mike Huckabee referred to the Syrian refugees as a bag of poisonous peanuts. Even more disturbing is the junior Senator from Texas, who went so far as to suggest a religious test for accepting refugees fleeing violence and oppression. He only wants to accept Christians. The Republican Party used to claim to stand for religious freedom, but they are now just pretending. Ben Carson doesn't think Muslims should be allowed to become President. The junior Senator from Florida, also a Republican Presidential candidate, speaks of a ``clash of civilizations.'' Those are buzz words meaning a crusade against Islam. He is saying that ISIS extremists are representative of an entire religion. It doesn't stop there. Republicans have targeted immigrants also--not just people who are seeking refuge, not just refugees, but also immigrants. The Republican Party wants to paint all immigrants as murderers and rapists. Congressman Steve King says all immigrants are drug traffickers. Republicans only talk about deporting families. Senator Rubio, the Republican establishment favorite, walked away from his single positive legislative accomplishment--comprehensive immigration reform--to please the party's extreme anti-immigrant base. He has gone from supporting citizenship for undocumented immigrants to wanting to deport DREAMers. And even Jeb Bush speaks of ``anchor babies.'' With the way our democracy is structured, there will always be disagreement about the best way elected officials can serve our Nation, but as we debate and disagree, we must do so responsibly. President Bill Clinton once said that those of us with influence must be mindful of our words because they fall ``on the serious and delirious alike.'' The venom Republicans continue to spew has consequences. History will judge those who stand idle as fear and animosity become the platform of an American political party. The simple fact is that Republicans are running on a platform of hate, and every Republican who fails to speak out against the hateful, dangerous rhetoric being spewed by their party is complicit. For the moral character of our Nation, we must demand that the Republicans return to the values on which our country was founded. Mr. President, Senator McConnell and I have finished our remarks. Would the Chair announce the business of the day.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, one need only watch the news to see how our Nation is facing threats abroad. We are doing the best we can, but as the world grows more dangerous, Senate Republicans continue to block and obstruct the President's national security. They are blocking the very people who could help us respond to these threats. Take, for instance--for week after week after week--Azita Raji, who has been nominated to be our Ambassador to Sweden. Nearly 300 Swedish citizens have left to fight in Syria or Iraq, making this nation the second largest country of origin per capita for foreign fighters in Europe. The Swedish Government is on heightened alert for an attack. Yet the United States doesn't have a Senate-confirmed Ambassador to represent us in Stockholm. Similar to Sweden, Norway is also dealing with the growing threat of terror, and some of their citizens have joined the radical ranks of foreign fighters, but due to Republican obstruction, our Nation does not have a confirmed Ambassador in Norway. Sam Heins, a Minnesota attorney nominated by President Obama, has been pending on the floor since July. We are now in December. So I personally applaud the Presiding Officer today for finally removing the holds on these two good people. I appreciate it very much. He and others have held up these nominees, and it is unfortunate. It is gone. I am pleased. In the wake of the Paris attacks and threats across the continent, it is imperative that we have Ambassadors working with European governments at the highest levels. Perhaps the most egregious example of Republican obstruction is the nomination of Adam Szubin. This man would lead--if he were approved in the Senate--a team within the Department of State that disrupts terrorist financing networks, cutting off money for terrorists so they cannot finance their attacks. Hand in hand, they work with the Treasury Department. You would think that such an important nominee would be quickly confirmed, but Mr. Szubin's nomination has been pending for more than 200 days. Remember what he does--remember what he would like to do, I should say. He would lead a team that disrupts terrorist financing networks, cutting off money for terrorists so they can't finance their own evil deeds. The chairman of the banking committee, the senior Senator from Alabama, has previously called this position ``a vital position in the effort to combat terrorist financing,'' but in spite of this, the committee on banking continues to block Szubin, despite his qualifications. I am sorely disappointed so many Republican Senators have decided that scoring political points is more important than confirming these national security nominations. Two weeks ago, I asked the senior Senator from Iowa to put an end to his partisan investigation of Secretary Clinton. For months, the senior Senator blocked more than 20 Foreign Service promotions. In fact, for a day it was some 600 nominations, just simply people who were in the Foreign Service who were entitled by law to a promotion. Well, he blocked these people for a long time, talking about how he wanted more documents from the State Department. I told the senior Senator that I thought it was a mistake to target career promotions, so I was surprised, happily so, when he appeared to change course and allow these good public servants to get the promotions they earned and deserved. Unfortunately, though, just as he took one step forward, he immediately took another step back. Although he allowed the list of 20 Foreign Service promotions to proceed, he doubled down on his obstruction by placing a hold on Tom Shannon, President Obama's nominee to serve as Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, an extremely important position that is not filled now. Ambassador Shannon is a career member of the Foreign Service, with more than 30 years of experience. He served as our Nation's Ambassador to Brazil, he worked on the National Security Council in the last Bush administration, and his experience will help the State Department strategy in combatting ISIS, but he can't do that because we were not able to approve him because of the holds. The Senator from Iowa continues to block other important nominees, such as David Robinson to be Assistant Secretary of State in the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization. He is a 30-year veteran of the Foreign Service. This is a man who has served the Nation in Afghanistan, Bosnia, and many other places around the world. Brian Egan has been nominated to be the State Department Legal Advisor, their lawyer. He has been a senior member of the legal team in the State Department, Treasury, and the National Security Council at the White House, but he has been held up since June without a vote, all because of Republican obstructionism. Remember, it would be nice if the State Department had a lawyer, but as the senior Senator from Iowa will tell you, he has nothing against Tom Shannon, David Robinson or Brian Egan. Senator Grassley has expressed no substantive objections to these nominees or questions about their capabilities. Senator Grassley is blocking these important nominations for the sake of his committee's political crusade against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton--who as we all know is running for President. This good woman scares Republicans because she will likely win. It is all part of the disturbing trend of the Judiciary Committee to politicize the oversight process. It appears the constitutional duties of the Senate are taking a backseat to a political hit job on a Democratic candidate for President. Just look at what he and his committee are doing; that is, the chairman and his committee. They are requesting transcribed interviews from the Clinton staff. They have asked for timesheets. The committee investigation has gone so far as to ask for the maternity leave records of one of Secretary Clinton's closest aides, Huma Abedin. It appears that until the senior Senator from Iowa gets the maternity leave records he has requested and everything else he has requested, he is going to continue to block State Department nominees. I am disappointed my friend from Iowa refuses to do what I believe is the right thing. He should drop these unwarranted holds. I am disappointed he continues--under the guise of oversight--his anti-Hillary Clinton crusade, which is hurting American security. Each day this investigation continues, we can see what a waste of taxpayer resources this has become. Last month, when given the opportunity, my friend from Iowa refused to address the significant amount of resources his committee is spending to investigate Secretary Clinton. Why? If he is so confident of the work his committee is doing, why not readily acknowledge the amount of taxpayer resources that are being used? But aside from the wasting of taxpayer dollars, I am troubled by the way his committee staff is operating. The press reports have suggested the Republican Judiciary Committee staffers are selectively leaking confidential information. For example, in September, the State Department gave the committee information that Senator Grassley requested, with specific instructions that the documents remain confidential. That is because the information shared with the Judiciary Committee contains sensitive information or other personal information from State Department employees. Included in the State Department's response to Senator Grassley was a big warning in bold capital letters across the page--in very large bold letters: ``US DEPARTMENT OF STATE PRODUCTION TO THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE ONLY; NOT AUTHORIZED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE.'' The email reproductions from the State Department also contained a watermark in red capital letters saying the emails were not for public release. It was across the entirety of that document. It had the watermark and the large bold letters. Within 24 hours, that information was public and reporters began calling with questions. Within 48 hours, stories were published based on the emails given to the Judiciary Committee that falsely created the appearance of impropriety by Ms. Abedin--and I mean false. A reporter forwarded the watermark emails meant only for the Judiciary Committee to her and to her legal team for comment. How did the reporter get documents that were solely in the possession of the Judiciary Committee staff? As I have said before, Ms. Abedin is an American success story. She has reached the highest levels of politics, as an aide to Secretary Clinton for decades, through her hard work and loyalty. Senator John McCain said that Ms. Abedin is ``an honorable woman, a dedicated American, and a loyal public servant.'' She doesn't deserve the treatment that has come from the Judiciary Committee. Republican investigators on that committee cannot stop their fixation on Ms. Abedin, even going so far to request her maternity leave records. As a result, her personal information, including Social Security number and payroll records, has been given to the press. Violating the privacy of hard-working staff members--and in particular a staff member--to score political points against Secretary Clinton is unbecoming of the world's greatest deliberative body. The Senate has been through difficult times in the past when confidential information has been leaked. Senator Grassley and I were both here in the 1990s when then-Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell came to the floor to address this disturbing trend. He said: The unilateral decision by a Member or employee to release confidential committee information is inconsistent with the Senate's practice of making such decisions openly and collaboratively. Arrogation of this responsibility by individuals can destroy mutual trust among Members and be harmful to this institution. That is an understatement. Senator Mitchell's quote gets to the heart of the matter. Leaking information undermines the institution of the Senate and the trust between its Members. In the Republican fervor to target Secretary Clinton over Benghazi, we should not lose sight of the rules that govern our behavior in the Senate. The Benghazi report on her is now over $5 million. It is wrong to target a former Clinton aide with invasive requests about her maternity leave and pass her personal information on to members of the press. It is wrong to politicize the legitimate oversight role of Congress ahead of the 2016 Presidential election. Sadly, the improper disclosure of sensitive materials related to Secretary Clinton's aides only demonstrates the underlying political position of the Judiciary Committee's oversight. Going forward, I hope my Republican colleagues will exercise greater restraint in the relentless pursuit of Secretary Clinton, but, more importantly, I hope Senate Republicans take their constitutional responsibility more seriously to offer their advice and consent on the Presidential nominees. I hope they take them very seriously. It is shameful that the Republicans are blocking critical, national security nominees for political purposes. I would ask them to please change course because the American people are watching.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, my friend the Republican leader talked about the old forces of gridlock when he talked about cyber security. He and his caucus were those old forces of gridlock. We tried for 5 years to pass a cyber security bill; it was filibustered every time. The bills, quite frankly, that were filibustered were very strong, good, in-depth bills. We passed a cyber security bill--better than nothing, but that is about it. It was not really a resoundingly good effort to go after the problems we are having with cyber security, but we finally got it done because the problems on the Republican side disappeared.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, my friend the Republican leader has an obsession with the Affordable Care Act, ObamaCare. He cannot give up on this obsession. The share of Americans without insurance is at the lowest point in history. And one need look no further than renowned Republican--Republican--columnist of the New York Times, David Brooks. Here is what he wrote. I am sorry to take so much time reading something that was written by this man who is a Republican columnist for the New York Times. Here is what he said. Regardless of what the Republican leader may claim, the Affordable Care Act continues to work. It is increasing quality health care coverage and improving care, and there is no question about that. Brooks noted that health care costs are rising at the lowest rate in years. He said: The good news is that recently health care inflation has been at historic lows. As Jason Furman, the chairman of President Obama's Council of Economic Advisers, put it in a speech to the Hamilton Project last month, ``Health care prices have grown at an annual rate of 1.6 percent since the Affordable Care Act was enacted in March 2010, the slowest rate for such a period in five decades-- Fifty years-- and those prices have grown at an even slower 1.1 percent rate over the 12 months ending in August 2015.'' As a result of the slowdown in health care inflation, the Congressional Budget Office keeps reducing its projections of the future cost of federal health programs like Medicare. As of October, projections for federal health care spending in the year 2020 were $175 billion lower than projections made in August 2010. That would be a huge budget improvement. ``Historic lows'' and hundreds of billions of dollars saved by the Federal Government tell me that ObamaCare is working. Enough of this haranguing about ObamaCare from my Republican friend. One need only go home and people come up to you and say: You know, ObamaCare is so good. My daughter, who could never get health insurance because she was a diabetic--now she can get it. No one with a preexisting disability can be denied insurance. Young men and women struggling to finish their college education can stay on their parents' health insurance until age 26. That is important. That is part of ObamaCare. Community health centers around this country are booming. Why? Because of the Affordable Care Act, we put $11 billion in there to provide for those essential community health centers. I will have more to say about this because I am sure the Republican leader is going to come and talk about what a great victory it was on this reconciliation, which is an anomaly that we face every year. They are passing something that is just to satisfy the haranguing about ObamaCare. It means nothing substantively. It will pass and go to the President. He will veto it in about 10 seconds, and, of course, the veto will certainly be sustained. Even in Kentucky--here is what one article said in Kentucky: In a state of 4.4 million people, 500,000 people gained coverage because of [ObamaCare in that State]--4 in 5 through Medicaid. The effects were particularly dramatic in one Appalachian county, where many coal jobs have vanished and the poverty rate is 23 percent. From 2013 to 2014, the proportion of residents lacking health coverage plummeted by half--from 13 percent to 6.6 percent. Half a million Kentuckians are using the Affordable Care Act. That is more than 10 percent of the State's population. There are all kinds of personal accounts of how this has literally saved people's lives. One account is of an uninsured mother and daughter. This is from a news article: Amid the coal fields of eastern Kentucky, a small clinic that is part of the Big Sandy Health Care network furnishes daily proof of this state's full embrace of the Affordable Care Act. It was here that Mindy Fleming handed a wad of tissues to Tiffany Coleman when she arrived, sleepless and frantic, with no health insurance and a daughter suffering a 103-fever and mysterious pain. ``It will be all right,'' Fleming assured her, and it was. An hour later, Coleman had a WellCare card that paid for hospital tests, which found that 4-year-old Alexsis had an unusual bladder problem. Quoting another Washington Post story: [Dennis Blackburn] has a hereditary liver disorder, numbness in his hands and legs, back pain from folding his 6- foot-1-inch frame into 29-inch mine shafts as a young man, plus an abnormal heart rhythm--the likely vestige of having been struck by lightning 15 years ago in his tin-roofed farmhouse. Blackburn was making small payments on an MRI he'd gotten at Pikeville Medical Center, the only hospital in a 150-mile radius, when he heard about Big Sandy's Shelby Valley Clinic. There he met Fleming, who helped him sign up for one of the managed-care Medicaid plans available in Kentucky. So the facts never seem to get in the way of my Republican friend when it comes to ObamaCare--anything he could do to denigrate this system that is helping 17 million people.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, 60 years ago today Rosa Parks boarded a city bus in Montgomery, AL. She had worked hard all day. She was riding a bus. She was asked to give up her seat by the busdriver, who was a White man. She was sick of having to give up her seat and she was tired, but she refused to give up her seat, so she was arrested. On that day at that moment of courage, Rosa Parks sparked a movement that would end the legal segregation of public transportation, the Montgomery Bus Boycott. That boycott lasted from December 5, 1955, to December 20, 1956--almost 1 year, becoming the first large-scale demonstration against segregation in our country's history. The Supreme Court ultimately ordered Montgomery to integrate its public bus transportation system. Rosa Parks went on to become a pillar of the civil rights movement, a lifelong freedom fighter who changed the course of history. In 2013, a bronze statue of Ms. Parks was unveiled in Statuary Hall in the Capitol. In the decades since Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat on that bus, our Nation has made tremendous progress in the defense of civil rights for all Americans, but we have much more to do. Today, 60 years after Rosa Parks took a stand for equality, the fight for equal justice rages on. Just like Rosa Parks, many Americans across this country are very upset with the status quo, and they are taking a stand against injustice and discrimination. As we remember the valiant actions of Rosa Parks, may we be inspired by her character and her determination. May we follow her example and continue the work of the civil rights movement. Mr. President, what do we have the rest of the day?

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Madam President, I appreciate the Republican leader cheering for all of the great things that have happened here in the Senate, but the facts are that--look at any political scientist, anyone who watches what goes on here in Washington and add up the number of bills passed and the nominations confirmed in this Congress--this Congress is well, well beyond anything in recent history. In addition to that, we have had more revotes--that is, voting on the same thing over and over with the same result--in the history of Congress ever. So I appreciate his trying to make things look good. I hope it gets better in the next couple of weeks because we have a lot to do. We have a lot to do. I will talk about that in a minute. We have so much to do. We can accomplish a great deal if we finish the highway bill and elementary and secondary education, if we do the tax extenders, and if we do the omnibus spending bill. That would be terrific if we could get those done, but we only have a few days to get them done.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Madam President, our Nation is stunned following last week's wanton murders at the Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs, CO. That heinous attack left three dead: a police officer, a mother of two children, and an Iraq war veteran. Nine others were wounded. It is sickening that these innocent victims were gunned down in cold blood in a medical clinic in the holiday season. More casualties were avoided by the quick and heroic action taken by responding law enforcement as well as by a courageous bystander named Ke'Arre Stewart, the Iraq war veteran I just mentioned, who heroically reentered the building to provide help. While he was doing that, he was killed--murdered. I can only imagine the heartbreaking anguish that the victims and their families are experiencing. I know it is of little comfort, but the Senate mourns with them. Our thoughts are with them, their families, and the first responders who brought an end to this brutal attack. But we in the Senate should not fail to see the context in which this vile assault took place. Last summer, a rightwing group began unleashing a series of heavily edited videos with unsubstantiated allegations. Since that time, Republicans in Congress have made it their mission to push these unsubstantiated allegations every chance they get. They are actually baseless. They also have made it their mission to defund Planned Parenthood, which would irreparably damage this health care provider's future. Republicans have insisted on votes to strip Planned Parenthood from its Federal funding on two different occasions. Neither was successful. But they are still trying. Republicans want to stop Medicaid reimbursement to Planned Parenthood, among other things. Republicans also believe in politically motivated investigations of Planned Parenthood. The Republican chairman of the House oversight committee, Congressman Jason Chaffetz, has admitted that he has uncovered no wrongdoing in his investigation of Planned Parenthood to this point. But always willing to play a bad hand, that has not stopped House Republicans from allocating $300,000 of taxpayer money to fund a new politically motivated special subcommittee dedicated to investigating Planned Parenthood. Republicans should not waste their time. I would hope that they give up before they match the millions of dollars--at last count it is more than $5 million--that they have wasted on the so- called Benghazi ``let's get Secretary Clinton'' committee, another politically motivated and untimely fruitless attack. We should never forget that one in five American women will get care from a Planned Parenthood clinic at some point in their life. Cutting off access to important health care services such as breast and cervical screenings and contraception is bad for women and bad for the country. In the wake of this act of domestic terrorism, I commend Planned Parenthood for refusing to allow threats and violence to stand in the way of its work to ensure women have access to care. I hope everybody understands that I stand with Planned Parenthood. But we as leaders must be mindful of our words and actions. Whipping people into a frenzy of hate and anger while providing them with easy access to firearms has proven disastrous to our country. We have a responsibility as leaders to think very hard about what we say and do in this context and what the consequences are. We have a responsibility to fund ways to stop this violence. Democrats are working on reasonable gun safety proposals that will help ensure that firearms are kept out of the hands of people intent on committing violence. It is appalling how many times I have had to make this plea. This terrible event that took place in Colorado just a few days ago is already off the news. Why? Because it happens so often in America. It is appalling how many times I have had to make this plea, but I say to my Republican colleagues yet again: Join with us in passing sensible gun safety reforms. Help us keep guns away from people intent on using them to slaughter innocent people. First, we must do something to close to loopholes that allow FBI terror suspects and other unhinged individuals to legally buy AK-47s and other weapons. Right now a terror suspect, someone who is listed on the watch list, can walk into a gun store or a gun show and purchase sophisticated assault weapons. To leave that loophole unaddressed is sheer recklessness by congressional Republicans. Someone on the terrorist watch list can walk in and buy a gun, any gun they want. That is not good. We must also strengthen our Nation's background check system. We are failing to flag and prevent people who are mentally ill or who have violent motives from legally purchasing weapons. Improved background checks are essential in keeping guns out of the wrong hands. What we are saying is if someone is a felon, a criminal or crazy, they shouldn't be able to purchase a gun without a background check, and they should never be able to purchase a gun--period. Finally, we have to close loopholes that allow people to illegally traffic in firearms. What does this mean? Right now we have no laws in place to adequately prevent individuals from purchasing weapons--buy huge numbers of weapons. Then what do they do with them? Sell them at a great profit and transfer them to criminals. For example, a person with a clean background can purchase an unlimited number of guns and then turn around and sell them to a cartel, a gang or a terrorist organization with no threat of prosecution. Unfortunately, as in the past, Republicans are nowhere to be found when it comes to implementing these commonsense changes to our gun laws. For example, as to the Colorado Springs murders, did we hear a single Republican running for President of the United States stand and say: We have too many guns; can't we stop this? I haven't heard a single Republican Senator come to the floor and say something about this terrible event that took place. Instead, they are busy fear-mongering against Syrian refugees, those fleeing Assad and ISIS. We have a rigorous screening process for when we accept refugees. The refugees we are accepting are women, children, and older men with families. Less than 2 percent of the men who come as refugees from Syria or Iraq are of military age. The Department of Homeland Security has verified that not one of the 1,800 Syrian refugees already admitted to the United States has a single confirmed tie to terrorism, but in spite of all the facts, Republicans would focus their attention on refugees and ignore the problem we have with gun violence in America. Republicans would have Americans believe Syrian refugees are the preeminent threat to our national security, and meanwhile the Republican Congress is doing nothing to curb our Nation's gun violence. It is a sad commentary on Republicans that they are more concerned about keeping Syrian refugees out of America than they are about keeping guns out of the hands of terrorists, those who are mentally ill, and those who are criminals.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Madam President, this year is quickly drawing to a close, as I mentioned earlier. That means the Senate has precious few days left to finish vitally important legislative matters, and it is not a small list. Before we leave this year, we need to address funding to prevent a government shutdown, a surface transportation bill, the elementary and secondary education conference report, important expiring tax provisions, including those for the middle class, not just for the big corporations, and a growing backlog of nominations, particularly those involving national security positions. Each of these matters I just mentioned is essential. We have to get them done, and we don't have a lot of time to do it. There is certainly no time for demagoguery and political distractions such as repealing Obama Care or defunding Planned Parenthood that have been the hallmarks of the Republican Congress. Instead, I hope my Republican colleagues will work with Democrats to accomplish all of the Senate's work in a timely fashion. Madam President, Senator McConnell and I have finished our remarks. What now is the business of the day?

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Madam President, as we speak, in faraway Paris, France, 194 countries are gathering to negotiate an international agreement to address climate change. Fortunately for the world, President Obama is committed to doing something about that climate change. I send all my appreciation, my accolades to the French people for going ahead with this extremely important conference and not letting those terrible acts that occurred stop them from doing so. Because of President Obama's leadership, the United States is taking on a more prominent role in rolling back dangerous carbon emissions, not only from our country but from China, India, Brazil, and other major sources of climate-changing pollution. Before the conference in Paris even started, more than 170 countries representing over 90 percent of global carbon emissions made concrete pledges to reduce carbon pollution. Climate change is among the most serious problems we face today. What does the Pentagon say? What do all the security agencies say is the most serious problem facing America today? Climate change. We are beginning to endure the devastating consequences of rising sea levels, extreme weather, and drought across America and all over the world. No country acting alone can halt climate change, but through American leadership and international cooperation, we can protect our air and climate for our children and their children. I commend President Obama for his work domestically and internationally to address this issue.

Mr. REID

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

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, we all know that the Federal Government has many obligations, but chief among them is to protect the American people from harm. That responsibility is now at the forefront of talk here in our Nation's Capital, and rightfully so. ISIS continues to spread its campaign of terror across the entire world. The United States is committed to combating terrorism. Our government will do all that is possible to protect the people of this Nation. In this fight against evil ISIS, it is absolutely critical that we as Americans do not lose sight of our Nation's core principles. Those principles are eloquently etched into the base of the Statue of Liberty. I can remember taking my family there for the first time. I didn't have all my children yet--we had more that had to be born--but my older children still remember that. I remember it. Here is what it says: Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The retched refuse of your teaming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me. That, of course, is directed to the United States. All across Europe and the Middle East, there are huddled masses of Syrian families desperate to find refuge someplace from Syria's civil war and the ISIS reign of terror. Millions of Syrians fled their country. About 300,000 of them have been killed since the civil war started--300,000. They fled to neighboring nations such as Turkey, Lebanon, and tiny little Jordan. But the crisis in Syria continues to worsen and people are forced to seek refuge. What else can they do? On a daily basis, Europe's borders are being flooded by people in search of safety and a better life-- mothers cradling infants and fathers carrying children in their arms. The nations of Europe have helped. Greece, Germany, and others have accommodated the enormous influx of people as safely as possible. They are overwhelmed. The United States must do its part. We have a rigorous screening process for when we accept these refugees. The refugees we are accepting are women and children and old and older men with families. Only 2 percent of the refugees are men of military age-- 2 percent. We accepted a little under 2,000 last year. Two percent of those were of military age. The United States has a long and proud history of providing refuge to the world's most vulnerable. That history includes my father-in-law, Israel Goldfarb. He and his family came from Russia. They were refugees escaping the programs of a czar. I have been disgusted in recent days to see some of my Republican colleagues shun the American tradition of displaying compassion for those in need, of sheltering those fleeing torture, rape and oppression. Frankly, I have been disappointed by Republican fear-mongering and bigotry. Apparently they have learned nothing from history. We cannot repeat the dark days of the 1930s when many Americans resolved to turn away helpless refugees fleeing Nazi Germany and Adolf Hitler or imprisoned innocent Japanese Americans during World War II, like our late colleague Dan Inouye and his family. Those mistakes were based on misguided fears of people we did not know. How many people died because of unfounded apprehension? I don't know but far too many. Yet it seems many Republicans are destined to go down that same path again. Some in the Republican Party have suggested that we categorically block all Syrian refugees. One Republican candidate for President suggested we turn away even 5-year-old refugee children. Two other Republican candidates for President implied that the United States of America should have some sort of religious test for refugees. They are saying only Christians. This is the latest in what has become a disturbing pattern of Republican hatred and intolerance toward Muslims. Remember, Syria is mostly Muslim, but there are Jews, there are Christians--lots of them. During the course of the current Presidential cycle, we have heard from the leading lights of the Republican Party the following: that we are at war with Islam, that we should be shutting down Muslim houses of worship in America, close the mosques, that we should ban Muslims from government service. We have two of my friends who serve in the House of Representatives who are Muslim. They are proud. That religion has made them better people. Now they are even suggesting that we should reject refugees fleeing persecution on the grounds that they are Muslim. That is not America. That is hate emanating from some Republicans. That anti-Muslim venom from Republicans is a propaganda bonanza for ISIS. Christian groups have responded to those Republican attacks. We have heard what the Pope said: to kill in the name of religion is blasphemous. World Relief, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service are all dismayed at the anti-refugee fervor pushed forward by Republicans and are urging supporters to contact elected officials on behalf of these victims of the Syrian conflict. We must pause and think about what they have been through--poison gas, cluster bombs. Let's think about who these refugees are. They are not our enemies. They are expelled from their homeland by the same evil rulers we are fighting. All they want is to find safety, to restart their lives. These people have been persecuted--that is an understatement--by President Assad and ISIS. The Syrian regime, I repeat, has barrel-bombed their own citizens, has unleashed chemical weapons against their own citizens, rapes, justifying the rapes of these hundreds and hundreds of women in the name of their religion-- murdering women and children. Those refugees hate Assad. They hate ISIS. That is why they are trying to get out of that horrible situation they find themselves. The Department of Homeland Security has verified that not one of 1,800 refugees already admitted in the United States has a single confirmed tie to terrorism--not one. To deny our moral obligation to these struggling people would be to abandon the principles of this great country. That is how France feels about it also. On the heels of last week's appalling attacks, the President of France is refusing to neglect France's duty to humanity. Here is what this good man said yesterday: 30,000 refugees will be welcomed over the next two years. Our country has the duty to respect this commitment. After what they have been through, this is what the President of France said: Accepting Syrian refugees is the moral thing to do and it is sound policy. Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice agrees that the United States must open its arms to those fleeing persecution. Here is what she said: What the United States has done is to be open to people who are fleeing tyranny, who are fleeing danger, but we have done it in a very careful way. Secretary Madeleine Albright authored an op-ed this week for Time magazine. Now, remember, she herself was a refugee. That is how she came to this country during World War II. She said Americans must respond with compassion if we are going to defeat ISIS. We can do all we want with refugees. This is no way to win the war, attacking the refugees. Here is what she said, Madeleine Albright: Our enemies have a plan. They want to divide the world between Muslims and non-Muslims, and between the defenders and attackers of Islam. By making Syrian refugees the enemy, we are playing into their hands. Instead, we need to clarify that the real choice is between those who think it is okay to murder innocent people and those who think it is wrong. By showing that we value every human life, we can make clear to the world where we stand. What Secretary Albright said and what Secretary Rice said is absolutely right. We process Syrian refugees in a very careful way. It has worked. We are not the nations of Europe. Has anyone stopped for a minute and thought that we have an ocean between us and them, an ocean, the Atlantic Ocean. The U.S. refugee screening takes place well before any individual comes to our borders. To enter the U.S. refugee program as an applicant, the U.N. Refugee Agency must first select and refer all potential refugees to our program. We accept refugees solely on a referral basis from the United Nation's agency. We do not go out and solicit any of these people. After being referred, all refugees, including those from Syria, are subjected to extremely rigorous screening and security checks. This is not some easy procedure where refugees fly right through the application process and are sent here in a matter of days. No. It takes an average of 18 to 24 months for a refugee to make it through the process to come to the United States. Remember, the vast majority of these people are checked and rechecked, taking 24 months; they are women and children and old men. I repeat. It takes 18 to 24 months for a refugee to make it through the process of coming to the United States. That is why only 1,800 refugees have been admitted since the start of the conflict out of the millions who are fleeing Syria. Our government accepts only the most vulnerable of the Syrians, survivors of violence and torture, those with severe medical conditions, women and children, but security precautions are not taking a backseat in the process. These Syrian refugees are real people. Images of their plight should be so visually apparent in our minds. Think of that little boy whom we saw and everyone saw around the world, a picture of this little dead boy washed up on a beach, a drowned Syrian boy whose body was washed up on this Turkish beach, pictures on the front page of newspapers, all the TV programs for several days. At that time, Democrats and Republicans together responded with calls for compassion and action. I urge Republicans to remember that little boy. We must help where we can. That is who we are. We are America. We come to the defense of the defenseless. We come to the aid of those in need. Right now we are needed. We are a nation--a nation of freedom. We should not forsake our duty and obligation to these struggling people. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I too agree with the distinguished Republican leader that it is good we are moving through the appropriations process. The key to getting this done is December 11. I have checked with the subcommittees, I have been in touch with the White House, and they have made significant progress. I would hope they will be working hard during the recess that we are going to have for Thanksgiving. By the time we get back here it is going to be time to start making some really difficult decisions, which we have to do. I look forward to the appropriations process succeeding, and next year I hope we can move through the bills individually. That would be the best thing to happen to the Senate in a long time. Mr. President, on the bill that is before the Senate at this stage, the education bill, we have two of the finest Senators I have had the pleasure of serving with who are the managers of this legislation, the distinguished senior Senator from the State of Washington, of course, a member of the Senate Democratic leadership, and the distinguished senior Senator from Tennessee, Lamar Alexander. They have worked together well, and it is easy to work well with either one of them. They understand what a legislator is. A legislator can't get everything they want, but they have to work for the good of the country. These two have done that with this legislation. Had I been writing this legislation and advocating on behalf of this legislation, I probably would have done it a little differently than they did, but it is a fine piece of legislation, put together by two very fine Senators. I look forward to it being completed in the immediate future. Surface Transportation Funding Mr. President, one of the Founding Fathers, Benjamin Franklin, said: ``You may delay, but time will not.'' For far too long Republicans have delayed doing anything to address our Nation's insolvent transportation system or to address other vitally important infrastructure problems. As Paul Ryan said earlier this year on the House floor: Instead of fixing the problem, we've dodged it. Five times we've come up with temporary solutions and transferred money from the general fund into the trust fund--which, in English, means we've patched a pothole and not fixed the problem. Sadly, that is what has happened, and it looks like it is going to happen again--which is too bad--and we are going to have another short- term extension because the conferees couldn't work out their differences. My Republican colleagues have delayed, but time has marched on, and it has wreaked havoc on our Nation's tens of thousands of roads that are in disrepair. This is a problem and a very dangerous one. We have 61,000 roads and bridges that have been deemed structurally deficient. Just a short distance from where we are here--just a couple of miles--is the Memorial Bridge that connects Arlington National Cemetery with the National Mall. That bridge is corroded and it is failing. They have closed down several lanes of that bridge. Vehicles that pass over this Memorial Bridge are subject to weight restrictions. Why? Because of the bad condition of the road and the bridge itself. Construction experts are working now to fix the problem, but here is the kicker: The Memorial Bridge is just 1 of 14 structurally deficient bridges in our Nation's Capital, according to the American Road and Transportation Builders Association. There are 14 structurally deficient bridges in our Nation's Capital alone. It is a staggering figure. But around the country, we have about 60,000 others where we have a problem. The problem is bigger than thousands of these decrepit bridges. The American Society of Civil Engineers estimates that one- third of all U.S. roads are in poor or mediocre condition. That is 1.3 million miles of roadway. The former Secretary of the Treasury and an academic said in a steering committee chaired by Senator Klobuchar recently that each year an American motorist who drives a car in effect is paying an extra $2,000 in damage to their car. Drive around and feel the crashes as you hit those big potholes. It is not only in Washington, DC. It is all over the country, and that is to say nothing of the time and resources wasted each year because of our struggling transportation system in other ways. We Americans waste nearly 7 billion hours in our cars due to traffic congestion. We waste 3 billion gallons of fuel. We need real, long-term investment in America's surface transportation infrastructure. Right now we are spending about $90 billion a year, including State and local funds, just to maintain the current poor condition. People don't like to hear this but the fact is that we need to do more. The Federal Highway Administration estimates it will take $170 billion a year to improve the condition of our roads and bridges. If we don't increase that funding, it will only get worse. The American Society of Civil Engineers maintains that by 2020 the United States will need to invest $3.6 trillion in our infrastructure to bring it up to par. If Congress continues the current baseline funding, in the next 6 years our transportation infrastructure will be a disaster, but it looks like that is where we are headed with the new highway bill. Instead of maintaining the status quo, now is the time for Congress to increase surface transportation funding. There is no reason for any Republican to balk at spending more money for our Nation's roads and bridges. We can be conservative and still support fixing our roads and bridges. Think about $2,000 per driver because of the condition of the roads and highways. We need look no further than the senior Senator from Oklahoma. Is there anybody in the world who could say Jim Inhofe is not a conservative? Of course he is. But he has worked hard with liberal Barbara Boxer to address this critical need. Their bill is not everything I would like--and that is an understatement--but I appreciate their efforts. We need other Republicans to step up, as did Inhofe, and do the right thing. We need a long-term highway bill with increased funding for our roads and our bridges. We shouldn't delay. Now is the time to be bold with adequate resources to address our infrastructure needs. Sarah Winnemucca and Native American Heritage Month

Mr. REID. Mr. President, in the Capitol Visitor Center, there is a statue of a Nevada Paiute woman named Sarah Winnemucca. Each State gets two statues; one of ours is Sarah Winnemucca. I wish the other one would just go away, but it all has to be done legislatively. That is a subject for another discussion. I am referring to the other one from Nevada. The statue of Sarah Winnemucca is beautiful. The artist was a 23- year-old young man. When the contest was being held to find out who would get the benefit of being able to sculpt it for Statuary Hall and they brought in his design, the judges gasped. It was so unbelievable. Her skirt is blowing in the breeze. He depicted her with a shellflower in one hand and her autobiography in the other, her dress blowing in the wind. I admire that statue. In fact, I have a smaller version of that statue in my Capitol office. Think about her accomplishments. She was the first Native American to publish an autobiography. She was a scholar who spoke five languages. She was a defender of her people. She even met with the President of the United States, Rutherford B. Hayes, to negotiate settlement for the Paiute Tribe. Sarah Winnemucca was courageous and resolute. She was good for her people and good for her country. She is one of Nevada's heroes. November marks Native American Heritage Month. During this month, we honor the contributions of American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian cultures and their impact on the United States. We honor the contributions of Native Americans such as Sarah Winnemucca. Native American heritage is a pillar of America's foundation and certainly the foundation of so many different States. Nevada has 22 separate tribal organizations. We feel that is an important part of our history in the State of Nevada. The Native American cultures are uniquely embedded within the fabric of our Nation, and their contributions must never be forgotten. Would the Chair announce the business of the day. Compound Motion

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. I object.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, the Clean Power Plan that has been promulgated by the President will avoid 3,600 premature deaths, 1,700 heart attacks, 90,000 asthma attacks, and 300,000 missed work and school days in just the next 15 years. It will also lower power bills by reducing wasted energy. It is the right thing to do, and the President will protect this because it is the right thing for the health of America.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, President Obama has announced to our gratification that our own Senator Barbara Mikulski will receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom. She is an inspiring figure. She and I came to the Senate together and we will leave the Senate together. She has been a friend, an ally, and one of the most articulate people I have ever served with. She has a way with words that are just Barbara Mikulski's way of speaking. I so admire her for that and all the other things I mentioned. She has spent decades as a leader in Congress, what will be 30 years in the Senate, and during that period of time she has done social work, which is what she did by profession, and has focused on the poor, the middle class, and the disadvantaged. She has inspired a generation of women and has been a mentor to both sides of the aisle. We are all happy to see this great woman--and she is a great woman-- receive the recognition she so rightly deserves from the President of the United States and a grateful country. We should all congratulate Senator Mikulski on receiving this great honor.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, at 11 a.m.--a few minutes from now--a number of us will be down in S-117, which is the Foreign Relations Room. At that time, we will receive Ambassador Gerard Araud, who is the Ambassador from France to the United States. We are going to be there to express our condolences to the people of France by doing what has been done for a long time when these tragedies occur. We will sign a book of condolences. I look forward to doing that, and I hope my colleagues will join in doing that at some time during the day.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, for the first 6 years of Barack Obama's Presidency, Republicans have tried to block nearly every nomination that has come to the Senate. From a record backlog of judicial nominees to the first-ever filibuster of a Secretary of Defense, Republicans abdicated their constitutional responsibility to provide their advice and consent regarding these nominations. In fact, the Republicans have blocked President Obama's nominees more than all the other Presidential nominees in history combined. Think about that. They have blocked more of this President's nominations than all the preceding Presidents in the history of our country. Seventy-one percent of all cloture motions filed on nominees during the history of the country were for President Obama's nominees. Seventy-three percent of cloture motions on judicial nominees were for Obama nominees. Ninety-seven percent of cloture motions on district court judges were for Obama nominees. When Republicans assumed power of the Senate in January, some may have expected that their obligation to govern would bring an end to their obstruction, but it didn't. We all know what happened last year. We all know they were holding up all nominations they didn't like--not all of them but all of those they didn't like, and that is most all of them. Something that has been traditional in this country, the National Labor Relations Board--they refused to allow us to have a vote. They filibustered every one of them, which meant that the National Labor Relations Board, which is so important to working men and women in this country, could not go forward. They didn't even have a quorum. The second highest court--some say the most important court in the land--is the DC Court of Appeals. They refused to allow any votes on nominees. They filibustered every one of them. We have five vacancies. Well, something had to be done, and it was done. It was done for the right reason, and it was good for the country. Those people have now been confirmed. We have a better country as a result of that. When the Republicans assumed power, they kept talking about how they wanted to get the Senate back to work. Sadly, we all know that has been an absolute joke. We have had more revotes than in the history of the country during the time they have been in power here. We have done less than any Senate in the history of the country. So getting the Senate back to work is not very honest. Sadly, those who were hoping that the Republicans would get serious about governing have been terribly disappointed. Republicans are still doing everything they can to block even the most qualified nominees. Many of these nominations are vitally important to our national security. I will list the people who have been blocked from having a vote in the Senate--and they have even gone one step further; they are not even holding hearings to allow them to come to the floor. Here are some who we could vote on and we should vote on: The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security, Under Secretary of the Air Force, Secretary of the Army, Under Secretary of the Army, Under Secretary of Treasury for Terrorism and Financial Crimes. Those positions are unfilled. Think about the Secretary of Treasury for Terrorism and Financial Crimes. They are not even bringing it to a vote. As the United States continues to fight ISIS and its terrorism, shouldn't we confirm the person in Treasury who is responsible for terrorism and financial crimes? How about the Secretary of the Army--do you think that is important? Being disappointed doesn't go very far if all my Republican colleagues say is a resounding no. But this is all part of the Republican trend of grinding the nomination process to a halt. So far this year the Republican Senate has confirmed 100 fewer civilian nominees than it did during the most comparable Senate session in 2007, for example. That number also lags well behind any other recent session. Judicial emergencies are triple what they were at the beginning of this year. What is a judicial emergency? It means you have a judge who has more work than he can handle. Jury trials are not allowed to go forward, especially civil jury trials. Hearings on important issues, restraining orders, and other important issues are not held. In 2007 at this same stage we had confirmed 34 judges; this year, 10. Consider the nomination of a man by the name of Felipe Restrepo for the Third Circuit in Philadelphia. He was nominated more than 1 year ago. The seat to which Judge Restrepo has been nominated is a judicial emergency, meaning there are more cases than the judges are able to handle. The seat has been vacant since July 2013. Judges have said: We may do the work, but we are not doing it the way we should be doing it because we are so busy on everything. That seat, I will repeat, has been vacant since July of 2013. He is an American success story. He was born in Colombia and came to the United States as a toddler. In 1993 he became a U.S. citizen. He is eminently qualified, having graduated from the University of Pennsylvania--one of the Ivy League schools--and Tulane University Law School. He worked as a public defender and started his own practice focusing on civil rights and criminal defense issues. Since 2013 he has served with distinction as a district judge in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The Senate confirmed him in his current judge position unanimously. More than a year ago, Senator Casey and Senator Toomey--a Democrat and a Republican--jointly recommended Judge Restrepo to the President of the United States for this appointment to be a circuit court judge. Senator Toomey said at the time: ``I believe [Judge Restrepo] will also make a superb addition to the Third Circuit.'' But despite his public statements of support, the Republican Senator from Pennsylvania refused to allow the Judiciary Committee to move forward with a hearing on his nomination by refusing to turn in something called a blue slip, as it is blue. It has been tradition in the Senate forever that you need both Senators to turn in their blue slips. He won't turn his in, which has delayed confirmation of a qualified man who has been recommended to the President. He could advance Judge Restrepo by signing a piece of paper, but he has long refused to do so. It is kind of baffling when he makes public statements about what a great guy he is. After the media started asking questions about the delay, the junior Senator from Pennsylvania told the Huffington Post: No, I'm not blocking him. But I've got to run for this lunch. The junior Senator from Pennsylvania couldn't wait for his lunch, but this judge and the people who he is responsible for taking care of are waiting. This Third Circuit is overwhelmed with work. It is a judicial emergency. Other judges are doing more work than they should be doing. They need him. So even though he couldn't wait for lunch, he is making millions of Americans wait for a judge they desperately need. In July his nomination was finally voted out of committee by voice-- meaning there was no controversy--showing, of course, that it should be voted on now, immediately. That was in July. Remember, that was a year after he was nominated. We are now in November. Why has a qualified judge's nomination sat on the floor since July waiting for a lunch that has never been completed? It is past time that the Senate confirmed Judge Restrepo. Senator Toomey should demand and ask the majority leader to allow us to vote on Judge Restrepo before we leave for Thanksgiving--and in the process, sign that little piece of paper. We would be happy to work with Republicans to confirm this good man today. Unfortunately, it is not just this junior Senator from Pennsylvania-- they should also confirm Judge Mary Barzee Flores to the Southern District of Florida. Unfortunately, Judge Barzee Flores's nomination has been held up due to the same delaying tactics that Senator Toomey used to stall Judge Restrepo. But this nominee is being delayed by one of the many Republicans running for President, the junior Senator from Florida. Senators Nelson and Rubio jointly signed and recommended that she become a judge in the Southern District of Florida. She was nominated on February 26, 2015--8 months ago--but since then the junior Senator from Florida is running for President. He doesn't have time to mess with a judicial emergency. The Miami-based seat is considered another judicial emergency. It has been without a Senate-confirmed judge for more than a year. Like her counterpart in Pennsylvania, she has an impeccable record. In fact, her nomination won wide praise in the Florida press. She is a familiar face to many in the legal community in South Florida, having served on the Eleventh Judicial Circuit of Florida in Miami for more than a decade. Prior to her judicial service, Judge Flores worked as a public defender for 13 years. By any measure, she is well qualified and deserves a hearing in the Judiciary Committee. Senator Nelson indicated his support 8 months ago, but the junior Senator from Florida refuses to sign off on Judge Barzee Flores and is the only obstacle stopping the nomination from moving forward. It is puzzling that Senator Rubio is delaying a judge whom he helped recommend to President Obama. Without his approval, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee cannot schedule a hearing on the Barzee Flores nomination. Even with his busy schedule traveling around the country--I recognize he doesn't vote here. He does not like to be in the Senate. He said so. He does not like the Senate. That is why I said he should resign. He talked about other Senators who missed votes. Any Senator who ran for President during my time in the Senate loved the Senate. They may have missed votes, but they never, never denigrated the Senate. Senator Rubio has done just that. So even with his busy schedule running for President and missing votes in the Senate, he should be able to find seconds to sign his blue slip that would allow Judge Flores to move forward with a hearing. The junior Senator from Florida simply needs to sign a piece of paper to advance a qualified nominee whom he recommended to fill a judicial emergency in Florida, but like the junior Senator from Pennsylvania, he refuses to do so. His constituents are paying a price, a big price. Sadly, Republicans' strategy for the sake of obstruction is by no means limited--sadly, I say it again--to the junior Senators from Florida and Pennsylvania. Right now, Republicans are blocking important State Department nominations. The junior Senator from Arkansas is preventing three Ambassadors from getting their rightful vote on the Senate floor. The junior Senator from Texas is blocking one of the most qualified nominees before the Senate, Gayle Smith. She was nominated 6 months ago as the next Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development. With this refugee problem facing the world, facing our country, wouldn't it be nice if we had someone whose job it was to oversee this for our government? But, no, there is some extraneous issue the junior Senator from Texas--who is also running for President--is more concerned about than this important Agency. I have spoken at length about the obsession of the senior Senator from Iowa with blocking more than 20 qualified State Department nominees. The nominees he has blocked are people who have worked as Foreign Service officers for a long, long time for different periods of time. When it comes time that they get automatic changes in their status, they get a few more dollars and get a different title. He is blocking these. That is so sad. There is no need for it. If Republicans were serious about governing, they would change course and stop blocking these nominations. Every moment that Republicans delay, they are hurting our country in many different ways: our justice system, our foreign policy system, and our ability to respond to the havoc that is taking place in the Middle East right now. Let's put an end to all of this obstruction. Let's move forward with votes on these qualified consensus nominees as we have done historically. It wasn't until this Republican crowd arrived in the Senate that they started doing it. We have never had this before. We may have held somebody up for a while, but they basically put a stamp of disapproval on anything that President Obama wants to do. We are not going to stand by silently and allow these nominations to linger in the Senate. We are going to continue to demand that they schedule votes on these qualified, dedicated public servants so they can work on behalf of our great country. Mr. President, would the Chair announce the business of the day.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, as the Senate convenes today, the world faces yet another horrific terrorist act, this time against America's oldest ally, France. Across our great Nation, Americans have displayed the French flag across buildings, monuments, and Facebook pages in solidarity with France, a country with which we have long shared democratic values. We, too, have felt the searing shock and pain of terrorism on our own soil, and just as France stood with us after the 9/11 attacks, we stand with France today. I personally express my condolences for those in France who lost a loved one. To the mothers, fathers, grandparents, children, friends, and relatives, we mourn with you. To all those in the midst of caring for loved ones, those injured in these evil attacks--as hundreds were--our hearts and our thoughts are with you. There are no words to adequately describe the barbarism of ISIS, the organization that carried out this attack and mowed down innocent civilians enjoying the freedom and beauty of a Paris night, but as we know, the attacks in Paris do not stand alone. ISIS has viciously attacked innocent people in Beirut, Syria, Iraq, Libya, and other places. They have beheaded Americans, beheaded others, instituted a policy of rape and violence against women, and are attempting to take civilization back to the Dark Ages. ISIS does not worship Islam. ISIS worships death. ISIS doesn't practice compassion and mercy. ISIS practices killing, torture, and violence. Instead of guiding its followers on the straight and narrow path, ISIS guides them to hate. As Pope Francis said yesterday: The road of violence and hate does not resolve the problems of humanity. Using God's name to justify this path is blasphemy. The Pope is right. Law-abiding Muslims--many of whom have also been innocent victims of terror--must not allow these radicals to be the face of their religion. We cannot allow it. They cannot allow it. I know I speak for the Senate in saying we are all committed to stopping ISIS. We are united in supporting France in every possible way, as the people of France move forward after these attacks. I repeat, as the Pope said yesterday: The road of violence and hate does not resolve the problems of humanity. Using God's name to justify this path is blasphemy. Will the Chair announce today's business.