Harry Reid

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, the Republican legislation to attack women's health is disguised as a way to help women. We have to look long and hard to find those people who are being taken care of across the country today because of programs that allow them to go to someone who knows what they are talking about when they are concerned about their fertility, they are concerned about birth control, and a myriad of other problems that happen as women go through life. The Republican bill pretends to be for women's health, but it would prohibit Federal funds to go to an organization that is the health care backbone for American women during their lives. In fact, it is the only health care that a significant number of women get. For about 30 percent of women, that is their health care. You can disguise this by giving fancy titles to the legislation any way you want. This is an attack on women's health. It is stunning to me that the 16 people who are running for President are out there going after immigration. They are going after not only immigration generally but specifically. These young men and women who came to America--and the face of this picture in Nevada is a woman by the name of Astrid Silva, who came here as a little girl with her mother in a boat across the Rio Grande River with her little doll and her rosary beads that she didn't understand--a little, little girl. She knew no other country. What do the Republicans want to do? They want to deport Astrid Silva, a woman who finally because of the courageous action of President Obama--because Republicans refused do anything on immigration--was allowed to get her driver's license, to fly in an airplane for the first time, to be able to go to the airport without fear of being arrested, and they want to do away with that. But that is not enough. Most of them want to privatize Social Security; they want to change it in some significant way. It is led by one President's son, one President's brother who basically said we have to change Medicare, as he was speaking to the Koch brothers. We are working, trying to get the Ex-Im Bank that affects the lives of 165,000 working Americans. Most of the Republicans want to get rid of that. Now the program is out of sync. It has expired. The environment. Don't worry about it; it is fine. The icecaps are melting in the Arctic. Don't worry about it. We have the worst fires in the history of Alaska because of climate change. Don't worry about it; it is only 5 million acres that burned this summer so far. The droughts are affecting all of America but especially the West. It is so bad in the West that in the Sierras there are bears that don't even hibernate anymore. It is not cold enough. In New Hampshire, moose are dying. About one-third of them are dead because of fleas and ticks. Why? Because it is not cold enough to kill them anymore. These little pests are ravaging these huge animals. I could go on, but I am going to stop, other than to say, in addition to all of that, now they are after women's health. I hope they understand the pretty posters and the fancy words--no matter how you package it--are an attack on women. Indirectly, it is an attack on my daughter, my wife, and my grandchildren directly. I should say my granddaughters directly. I have a few of them.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, the Constitution is very clear. It says the Government cannot spend a penny without an appropriations law--a law dealing with appropriations. I am so fortunate, when I came to the Senate, I became a member of the Appropriations Committee. I loved working on the Appropriations Committee. Under John Stennis from Mississippi, Robert Byrd from West Virginia, and Dan Inouye from Hawaii, it was a wonderful process. I have this job. I got off the committee, which was very hard for me to do because I loved that committee. We worked very hard every year to fund every one of those 12 appropriations bills. We did it because we were legislators. We compromised. We worked together to fund this government, but all of that is gone. Republicans do not work with us on appropriations bills. We don't do them anymore. This season of Republicanism is more than I can hardly understand. I certainly don't appreciate it. No job is more important in the Constitution than exercising the power of the purse. That is our responsibility, but that has been taken away from us by convoluted methods. I know my Republican colleagues will get up and say we have to do something about this terrible debt. Seated next to me in this august Chamber of the Senate is a man who is the senior Senator from Illinois. I have said this before, and I will say it again. The reason I mention his name is because I knew we needed to do something about the debt. I arranged a long trip--my first job as leader--to Central and South America, and I took Judd Gregg, a Republican from New Hampshire, who is an expert on the finances of this government, and a Democratic counterpart, Kent Conrad, who is just as good. They worked on that airplane side by side for 14 hours and worked up a plan. What they came up with was so brilliant. They said: What we are going to do is have a plan just like the base closings. The base closing commissions that were set up--we did two rounds of them--got rid of military bases in the country that we were trying to get rid of prior to World War II. We were able to do that, and as a result, we saved the country billions and billions of dollars. They introduced legislation that said that we are going to have a commission appointed. There will be legislators, and there will be people the President appoints and people from the outside. They will report to us, and there will be no filibusters, no amendments, and we will have an up-or-down vote. It was a great piece of legislation. When I brought that legislation to the floor, seven Republican Senators who cosponsored the legislation refused to vote for it, and we weren't able to move forward on it. Now I get to my friend from Illinois. I had the ability to appoint three Members of my caucus to be on the Bowles-Simpson Commission. The President did that because what Judd Gregg and Kent Conrad tried to do failed. To his credit, he did that. I needed a liberal. My friend and I are not afraid to use that term--a progressive, if that makes people feel better. He didn't want to do that. He did it because it was the best thing for this institution. He sat through days and days of hearings and became a believer that we had to do something about the debt. He voted for something that Republicans didn't vote for--to do something about the debt. I say to the Presiding Officer and to everybody within the sound of my voice: We have done something since then. We have reduced the debt of this country by $4 trillion. That doesn't mean we don't have a lot more to do. But what virtually all economists tell us is that we are at a point now where we have to start spending some money. My friend from California has worked hard on this highway bill. It was hard for her to do that because the Republicans weren't allowing her to come up with any new revenue. Anyway, my point is this: The Republicans are failing their most important job, and that is helping us come up with some spending programs. We called on the Republicans to get serious about budgeting. They have refused. We have pleaded with them to sit down and negotiate a long-term bipartisan plan to avoid another shutdown. From the start, it has been clear that Republicans are not serious about governing. A party that is serious about governing does not do the things they have done. For example, in the wake of mass shootings by individuals-- it is in every newspaper in the country, and it has been for weeks. There were new deaths in Tennessee and Colorado. It doesn't matter. I am sorry to say that we have lost track of where they all are. Even after these mass shootings, Republicans still want to cut our funding for mental health services. Gee-whiz--how could they do that? The Republican bill cuts funding for substance abuse and mental health services. They blocked research for funding for the Centers for Disease Control to study the cause and effect of gun violence. They are cutting funding for counseling programs in elementary and secondary schools. That is only on one subject. A party that is serious about governing doesn't cut critical funding to our Nation's security. They have cut funding for the Bureau of Tobacco, Alcohol and Firearms, they cut funding to vital cyber-security upgrades and financial agencies. They cut funding for U.S. marshals, the brave men and women who helped to catch those two murderers who escaped from the prison in New York. A party that is serious about governing doesn't wage war against our Nation's infrastructure. They have cut funding for the Nation's electric grid by 40 percent, leaving our utilities susceptible to cyber attacks. Senate Republicans have cut transit projects all across this country. They have cut funding of the air traffic control system. The list is endless. There are cuts to education, women's health, agriculture, energy, and job training. If the Republican leader and the Speaker wanted to get serious about governing, they would sit down with us and craft a bipartisan compromise to prevent another government shutdown. On the bill before us, the Speaker of the House of Representatives has referred to that bill by using a very derogatory word which starts with the letter ``s.'' If the Republican leader and the Speaker want to get serious about governing, then they need to sit down with us so we can craft a bipartisan compromise to prevent another government shutdown. Instead they have already given up. Both the Speaker and the Republican leader have said that what we are going to do is abandon the appropriations process in favor of a continuing resolution, which is a buzzword for failure. Failure is another word for a government shutdown. It is another way to close our government. By relying on a continuing resolution, it leaves in place sequester cuts and underfunds critical priorities for working American families. Republicans are neglecting their responsibilities. They are not showing up for work. It doesn't have to be this way. We have time to come up with a balanced solution to keep our government funded. We have 2 months to come together, but a CR will not work. Sequestration will kick in, and it will harm every agency in the government. It will especially hurt the middle class of our country. If they are serious about governing, they will work together with us on appropriations bills rather than ignore us. Republicans need to sit down and get to work on their most important job, as is dictated by the Constitution. I apologize to everyone for taking more time than I normally do, but it was brought about by my friend the Republican leader. I ask the Chair to announce the business of the day.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the next 40 minutes be under the control of the Democratic side and that the time be equally divided among the following Senators: Reid, Boxer, Whitehouse, Markey, Schatz, and Schumer.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, at virtually every caucus we have, every Tuesday caucus, I have Senators report on what is going on in the world as it relates to climate change. I wish these were fun-filled presentations where people laughed, clapped, and smiled, but they are not. They are very downbeat because each Senator who makes a presentation--whether it is the senior Senator from New Hampshire, who talks about moose dying in her State because the fleas and ticks no longer die in the cold weather, she explained how about one-third of the moose are dead in New Hampshire, or whether it is the junior Senator from the State of Michigan talking about what is going on in that beautiful State of Michigan. Without going through the list of Senators who have reported what is going on as they see it with climate change, everyone within the sound of my voice should rest assured things are not good. Our world is changing and has already changed drastically. The Earth is undergoing a shift, a manmade climate change shift. We don't need to travel to the polar icecaps for proof, although if we did, we would see that too. There is evidence all around. Talking about the polar icecap, think about Alaska. Millions of acres are on fire as we speak--not a fire as we see in the forest or the range lands of Nevada, where you see fire flames flip up into the sky so high it is hard to believe sometimes. But this is burning underground at the permafrost. It is awful what is happening in Alaska. But let's talk about Nevada. Nevada is an unusual State in many different ways. We have over 32 mountains more than 11,000 feet high. We have one mountain we share with California that is 14,000 feet high. We have beautiful, beautiful wilderness. I have had the good fortune during my time in the Senate to legislate. When I came here, we had about 60,000 acres of wilderness. We are now approaching about 4 million acres of wilderness, and it is beautiful, beautiful country. There are beautiful mountains, antelope, and mountain sheep, of course. We even have mountain goats. It is a beautiful, beautiful State. We share Lake Tahoe with California--beautiful, beautiful Lake Tahoe that Mark Twain said is the fairest place on all the Earth. The water level this summer is at a record low. Water we used to take for granted that would come out of the lake isn't coming out anymore. Snowpack in the Sierra Nevada Mountains is a fraction of normal levels. A few decades ago, we used to have piles of snow that were unbelievable, tens and tens of feet of snow every winter--no longer. In fact, this past March, World Cup ski cross and snowboardcross races had to be cancelled. Why? We had no snow--no snow at a place where we had the Winter Olympics in Squaw Valley--no snow. They cancelled the races. As I have said on the floor, because it is so traumatic as far as I am concerned, many of our black bears aren't even hibernating. It is not cold enough. This past June, a few weeks ago--Lake Mead at one time was the largest manmade lake in America. It isn't anymore because of Lake Powell, which overtook Nevada for the largest manmade lake in America. Lake Powell is on the road to being eliminated. It is part of the great Colorado River program that allows the States of California-- all the upper Colorado States--Arizona, and Nevada, to survive. This past June, Lake Mead water levels sunk to record lows--record lows. Towns that were buried with the making of the Boulder, Hoover Dam, we can see them again. St. Thomas is an example. An early Mormon settlement there was buried in the water--no longer. Now they are doing archeological work on what was buried under Lake Mead previously. Now, that is only Nevada, and that is only a touch of what is happening in Nevada. Wildfires are devastating our State, wiping out native grasses and plants, causing endangered species that need to be listed as threatened or going extinct because, for example, if you have birds survive in our sagebrush, sagebrush is burned and no longer exists, you get these foreign species that come in, mainly cheatgrass, and it is no good for anything other than more fires. That is what we have in Nevada, devastating wildfires. Around the United States, massive floods are destroying life around the globe. The poles are melting. By the year 2050, scientists estimate the sea level will rise in the world by 16 feet. What will that do to Florida? Of all the major cities in the world, with virtually no exception, they are all in coastal areas. What coastal city in the world is going to be hit hardest in the world by this climate change, the rising of the seas? Miami, FL, the State of Florida. Massive floods are destroying life around the globe. Poles are melting. I repeat, ocean resources are being exhausted. Stunningly, Republicans in Congress are ignoring changes to our environment that we are all witnessing. They are here. They are in denial. They are in what I refer to as Koch denial because, remember, everybody, the two Koch brothers don't want us to do anything on climate change. Why? No. 1, it may prevent them from making more billions. They are heavily invested in tar sands in Canada, and, of course, their original fortunes were made in oil, gas, and coal in America. Republicans are in denial. They are in Koch denial. Last month House Republicans passed legislation that would rescind President Obama's action addressing air pollution and climate change. That legislation is not going to happen over here, but that is the mindset of the Republicans. Not to be outdone, Republicans here in the Senate are trying the same thing with the Senate Interior and Environment appropriations bill, filling it with policy riders that are dangerous to the planet, dangerous to America. Republicans all know the planet is changing--I hope they do, but they don't. If a Republican knows this, they are a rare Republican and I am still waiting for them to step forward. Republicans don't admit it is a problem. Where is their solution? Well, they have none. They have no solution because they refuse to acknowledge there is a problem. Let's not fool ourselves as to why Republicans reject climate change. I have already said why. It is the Koch challenge they all have. Every Presidential candidate has to be very careful. There are certain things, and I don't know them all because I am not in attendance at the meetings, but No. 1 is that the Ex-Im Bank has to stay dead. Those 165,000 people working in America, get rid of them. It is a government program, get rid of it--even though, as we speak right now, 40 other countries have working ex-im bank programs that are taking business away from American exporters. My Republican friends are unwilling to stand up to the oil barons who bring their filthy tar sands from Canada. Republicans have offered no legislation nor have they offered a single idea that would protect our world from climate change. The closest they came was to try to be funny here on the floor when it snowed and they brought a snowball into the Chamber, saying: It couldn't be climate change; we have some snow today. Well, we did get some snow, but that doesn't mean we don't have climate change. It is shameful to turn our back on the biggest dilemma the Earth faces. We must come together to arrest climate change. I am very happy that my friend the junior Senator from Rhode Island is here because he is focused on all kinds of issues relating to climate, and he has been the driving force in recognizing that one of the places climate change is devastating our world is our oceans. We can't see that very well because the oceans are so massive, but in places our oceans are already dead--not dying but dead. So it is shameful, I repeat, to turn our backs on the biggest dilemma the Earth faces probably in the history of our world. We must come together to address climate change. There are solutions that involve, among other things, clean energy. Just a few weeks ago, a solar company announced it would build a 100- megawatt solar farm and sell the power to Nevada's utility. The electricity generated by that solar farm was described by the press as ``not only the cheapest solar--it may be the least expensive electricity in the entire country.'' That is what solar does now. Think about that. The cheapest power being built in America today is solar and it is inexhaustible. It doesn't have to be in the desert, where the Sun shines all the time; it can be used where the Sun doesn't shine all the time, and used well. Solutions to address climate change are here. They are right here. Nevada has seen $5 billion in development with solar and geothermal and a little bit of wind. Solutions to address climate change are here, and they are affordable and become more so every day. They have created thousands of jobs. And I misspoke earlier. It is $6 billion in Nevada-- not $5 billion--that has now been invested in clean energy. Republicans should stop denying climate change. If they want to keep complaining about the solutions, they should offer their own solutions. But there can't be a solution if they do not see a problem, so I am not going to hold my breath that Republicans are going to change their ways. This is the No. 1 issue facing our world. The Defense Department is concerned about the resources they are going to get for manpower. If you ask the people who run the government's military, the Chiefs of Staff, they will tell you they are concerned about what this means for the security of this Nation. We cannot ignore this issue any longer. It is affecting the security of this Nation for lots of other reasons--namely, what it does to other countries that puts pressure on us. I appreciate very much my colleagues joining in this discussion we are going to have today because it is a discussion we have to have because the world is in trouble because of the climate change.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I rise today to acknowledge the 100th birthday of an incredible Nevadan, Gertrude Silvia Rudiak. For more than 70 years, Gertrude has been a leader in southern Nevada and has remained committed to her family, community, and faith. Nearly a century ago, on August 2, 1915, Gertrude was born to Jewish immigrant parents in Dickinson, ND. As a child, her family moved from place to place across the country, but it was her parents' understanding of the value of higher education that brought them to the west coast. In California, she attended the University of California, Berkeley, where she received her bachelor's degree in music. Later, Gertrude built upon her skill set and earned credentials from the Business College of Oakland in office procedure. With undeniable tenacity and the knowledge she gained, she was able to work through the Great Depression. In 1942, Gertrude met the love of her life, George Rudiak, and they married in September the same year. George was born in Moscow, Russia, and the experiences he and his family endured as they immigrated to the United States greatly shaped the man he became and the civil work he pursued later in his life. George had received a law degree from the Boalt Hall School of Jurisprudence at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1940, but finding a job was a challenge. He was able to do some work for the State of California and the U.S. Employment Services; and in the midst of World War II, George enlisted in the U.S. Army Air Corps. The first place he was assigned was the Western Flying Training Command at Santa Ana. George was later transferred to the Las Vegas Gunnery School, which is now Nellis Air Force Base. Though the young couple was only stationed in Las Vegas for a short time, they fell in love with the city and moved back to plant their roots in the desert sand as soon as George was honorably discharged in 1946. The Las Vegas of the 1940s was quite different from the Las Vegas of today. Approximately 21,000 people called the city home, and there was racial segregation. Some even referred to Las Vegas as the ``Mississippi of the West.'' As the first city attorney of North Las Vegas, a Nevada Legislator, and chairman of the Nevada Equal Rights Commission, George was committed to bringing equality to Nevada. Gertrude supported his efforts; and for more than 70 years, has made civic, religious, and humanitarian contributions of her own that have shaped our community. Today, all Las Vegans benefit from the compassionate work of Gertrude and George to make our community a better and more just place. George Rudiak was a lawyer's lawyer. He was the lawyer we all looked to as the gold standard for an ethical, competent, experienced trial lawyer. There are truly selfless people in the world, and Gertrude is one of these people. She is dedicated to her five children, their children, and their children's children and still finds time to improve her community. Over the past seven decades, she has filled traditionally male-held positions on community boards, including becoming the first female to serve on the board of Temple Beth Sholom, and has been a champion of secular and Jewish education in Las Vegas and Israel. Her efforts have been recognized by the Jewish National Fund, the United Jewish Appeal, and the Anti-Defamation League. Additionally, Mayor Carolyn Goodman presented Gertrude with the rare honor of a key to the city of Las Vegas in 2014. On more than one occasion, the city has declared August 2, Gertrude's birthday, Gertrude Rudiak Day in recognition of her long-standing commitment to Las Vegas. I am grateful for Gertrude's contributions to our State, and I wish her a happy 100th birthday. May this year bring Gertrude and her family much health and happiness.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Madam President, in the western part of the United States, it is now 8:05 in the morning. I am sure as one of these young girls is rushing to go out to school--let's assume she is an African-American girl--she is telling her mother, her dad or her teacher what she wants to be when she grows up. Maybe she wants to be a veterinarian, a teacher, a nurse, maybe even President of the United States or maybe run some company. The little girl is going to be shocked if her parents said: You can do it--any of those jobs--but remember that you will have to work twice as hard--at least twice as hard--to earn the same amount of money that your male colleagues do or your brother does or Billy, the neighbor, does. How would that little girl respond? She would probably exclaim: That is not fair. She would be right. It isn't fair. It is an injustice. Earlier this spring--April 14 to be exact--we recognized Equal Pay Day, marking how far into this year the average woman has to work to earn what a man, for the exact same job, earned last year. This pay disparity between men and women doing the same work is known as the wage gap. On average, an American woman makes 77 cents for every dollar that their male colleague makes for doing the exact same work. As bad as that is, the wage gap is even much worse if you are a woman of color. Today is Black Women's Equal Pay Day, a day that symbolizes how far into 2015 African-American women must work to earn what their male counterparts earned in 2014. What this means is she worked all of last year and now up until this day to basically earn the same that her male counterpart did. Let's think about that for just a second. A woman must work a full year plus an additional 6 months and 28 days just to make what her male coworkers made in 1 year. That is 208 days more than a man must work for the exact same salary. The average African-American woman working full time year-round will make 64 cents for every dollar that her White male counterpart makes. It is unconscionable that in the 21st century we have not resolved this income disparity. For millions of African-American women struggling to make ends meet to put food on the table, the wage gap puts the American dream out of reach. To give these women a fair shot--an equal shot--at prosperity, Congress must take action. We have to ensure that all women, African American and otherwise, are empowered to ensure that they are receiving equal pay for equal work. But that is not all. We should raise the minimum wage. I could do a quiz in this room, and I think everyone would miss it by quite a long mark, of how many Black women are earning minimum wage, what percentage of Black women are earning minimum wage in this country. Of 100 percent of people earning the minimum wage, what percentage is Black women? Almost 25 percent. Black women are almost 25 percent of everyone drawing the minimum wage. To be exact, it is a little over 23 percent. An increase in the Federal minimum wage would mean more money for their families. It would be maybe to buy groceries or for an extra pair of shoes for their children--or a pair of shoes for their children--or maybe to help with their education in some way, and importantly, for more time to spend at home. No woman should make less money than a man doing the same exact work. African-American women deserve better. So do my daughters and my granddaughters. That is why I remain committed to ensuring that American women receive equal pay for equal work. I encourage all Republicans, especially the leader, to take up Senator Murray's Paycheck Fairness Act, which would help close the wage disparity for African-American women. That may be a tall order to expect from today's Senate Republicans. After all, five times in 5 years, Republicans have blocked equal pay for women. How? By filibustering. Five times in 5 years Republicans have told their very own sisters, daughters, and wives that they are not interested in fixing this income disparity. It is unfair. I can't understand it. Who here can explain the concept of pay inequality to their daughter or granddaughter without shuddering? How do you tell a little girl--a little girl with big dreams--that in America today her life's work will not be compensated like a man's. It is not right. It is not fair. Today, as we recognize Black Women's Equal Pay Day, I hope my Republican colleagues will finally understand that it is unfair to continue the way we are, and we should finally come to our senses. I hope that the Republican leader will make the necessary moves to allow us to address this injustice that hurts millions of American families. Twenty-three percent of people drawing the minimum wage are African- American women. All women deserve equal pay for equal work. Would the Chair be good enough to tell the Senate what the business of the day is.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I raise a germaneness point of order against amendment No. 2328.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I choose not to speak today. So I would ask the Chair to announce the business of the day.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, later today the Senate will vote on one or more motions to overturn rulings of the Chair brought by disgruntled Republican Senators. At another time, Republican Senators would have called this a number of things, not the least of which is the nuclear option. Republicans have controlled the Senate for about 7 months now. It has become increasingly clear that what is wrong with the Senate today is the same thing that has troubled the Senate before Republicans took control--dysfunction in the Republican caucus. Republicans probably will not succeed in overturning the rules of the Senate today, but an honest observer of the Senate will recognize that the day is coming when they will, unless the Republicans become the party of Eisenhower, Dodd, Dirksen, and even President Reagan. I was amused to hear the Republican leader say he looks forward to amendments. Many Senators on our side look forward to being able to offer amendments; for example, to improve work safety provisions in the bill, but the amendment tree is filled. They are not going to have that opportunity unless something untoward happens. Today, the Senate will vote on two amendments. How Senators vote on these amendments will demonstrate their priorities--who is for American families and who is doing the bidding of special interests. Consider today's vote on yet another Republican attempt to repeal the Affordable Care Act--ObamaCare. By all accounts, it is working and working well. Is it perfect? Of course not. That is why we have invited the Republicans for years now to join with us in having a better health care delivery system, but ObamaCare is helping families all across this great Nation. There are many facts. Insurance companies can no longer discriminate against people with preexisting conditions. They can't discriminate against anyone as they did when they discriminated, basically, against everyone. Twelve million more people now have coverage through Medicaid programs and CHIP programs. Health care costs are growing but very slowly--the slowest rate of growth in a long time. Perhaps, most importantly, the share of Americans who lack health insurance coverage has dramatically declined. After the latest Supreme Court victory less than a month ago, I urged, at that time, my Republican friends to stop banging their heads against the wall because obviously it doesn't feel good. Why do they continually try to repeal the Affordable Care Act? Apparently, two Supreme Court wins and more than 50 votes by congressional Republicans to repeal or undermine the Affordable Care Act are not enough for the Republican leader and his friends. They are insisting on yet another partisan attempt to strip health insurance coverage from more than 19 million Americans--coverage that a recent Commonwealth Fund survey found that more than 80 percent of Americans are satisfied with this program. Republicans claim this ObamaCare repeal is part of their crusade to reduce the deficit, but the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office recently estimated that repealing the Affordable Care Act will increase the Federal budget by more than $350 billion. So today's vote isn't going to be about reducing the deficit. This is about caving to special interests. This is about the Republicans and their leader desperately trying to appease their base. I am appalled and, more than that, disappointed by these continued partisan attempts to strip away insurance coverage for almost 20 million Americans. Congress passed the Affordable Care Act. The President signed it into law, and the Supreme Court has put a stamp of approval on it, not once but twice. It is time for Republicans to move on and not take another politically motivated vote that is going nowhere. Finally, on another subject, the Export-Import Bank. After the ObamaCare vote, we will then consider the reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank--in fact, their charter. Once again, how Senators vote on the Export-Import Bank will reveal their loyalties. Companies like Boeing, Caterpillar, General Electric, Honeywell, along with dozens of companies in sparsely populated Nevada, along with thousands of small businesses across this country, use this Bank to find a market for billions of dollars of their exports. It is not only for Boeing, Caterpillar, and these big companies; it is for thousands and thousands of small businesses. Most of the jobs in America are created not by the great big companies but by small businesses, and they need this. They want this. That is why even the U.S. Chamber of Commerce must have been desperate. Finally, siding with us on something, they support the Ex-Im Bank. This year alone, the Export-Import Bank supported 165,000 jobs in America. A vote for the Export-Import Bank is a vote for jobs, a healthy economy, and the prosperity of American families. Conversely, a vote against reauthorization is nothing more than a shameless attempt to garner the affection of the Koch brothers. After all, opposition to the Export-Import Bank is a prerequisite to having their support. All candidates running for President stumble over themselves to say: What do the brothers want today? What they want today is a vote against this Bank, contrary to the needs of the American people. The Koch brothers distributed a survey to the Republican Presidential hopefuls that essentially obligates those candidates to oppose the Ex-Im Bank. I ask my colleagues today: Are you working for the American people or are you doing the dirty work for a couple of billionaire oil barons? A vote for the Export-Import Bank is a vote for American families. A vote against the repeal of ObamaCare is a vote for American families. Today, the Senate Democrats will vote for American families. I was hoping to say a word about Senator Inhofe while he was on the floor, and unfortunately he is not here now. The senior Senator from Oklahoma is a very conservative Republican Senator. He and I disagree on a lot of things, but I have great respect for his courage on this legislation. I think this legislation, which we are moving forward on, is far from perfect, but I listened to Senator Jim Inhofe yesterday when he was answering the President. A Republican always follows the President. I think Senator Inhofe did a fine job of explaining how important it is that we have a transportation bill. We have said a lot of nice things about Senator Boxer, but it is time we said some nice things about Jim Inhofe because this bill would not be where it is without his efforts.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, has the bill been reported?

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that before the 3 p.m. vote that Senator Boxer be permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes and that Senators Wyden and Murphy be permitted to speak for up to 5 minutes each.

Mr. REID. Why does the Senator from Tennessee get so much time? But I don't object, Mr. President. Just before the vote.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Madam President, I am just trying to focus. Did I just hear the legislative tree being filled? I can answer that question. Tragedy in Lafayette, Louisiana Madam President, this morning, Americans are waking to another news account of a tragic and senseless shooting. This one occurred in Lafayette, LA. The details are emerging, but at least two were murdered and about a dozen others were wounded. We focus, as we should, on the innocent people watching the movie who were murdered, but we also need to focus on the other dozen. How many of those people will be paraplegics, quadriplegics or have injuries that will follow them for the rest of their lives? Time will only tell. I know I speak for every Member of the Senate when I say our thoughts are with the victims, their families, and the many brave first responders who were at the scene. Affordable Care Act Madam President, once again the majority leader has cynically filed another repeal of the Obama health care legislation--it was legislation; it is now the law. I hope the Senate doesn't try to catch up with the House as to how many times they are going to try to repeal it. It is a fact that the critics are stubbornly ignoring reality. That reality is that the bill passed many years ago. It has been reviewed in detail by various courts in the land and the highest courts in the land have upheld this law, including the Supreme Court, on two separate occasions. We passed the Affordable Care Act. It has been signed into law. The Supreme Court has upheld it on two separate occasions. It is time for the Republicans to move on and join us in trying to improve the health care delivery system we have in America today. It is time to move on to something else because now we are approaching 20 million people who benefit from the law that is now in existence. Madam President, 85 percent of these 10.2 million consumers who have coverage in these exchanges have tax credits to help them afford that coverage. These credits effectively cap premiums at a percent of income for those individuals, defraying the impact of any premium increases. Without going into more numbers, with rare exceptions, the fact is every time I go home I have people come to me and say that we are so grateful for this law because my daughter can now get health insurance. We are not talking about a bunch of teenagers; we are talking about people who were unable for all of their childhood and their adult life to get insurance until now. We need to move on. This is not productive. I hope everyone will recognize that the health care delivery system is not perfect, but we are willing to work with the Republicans in trying to improve it, but let's do it constructively. Sequestration Madam President, finally, unless we act, in 3 months the Federal Government shuts down. I appreciate that this is not just me speaking out that something has to be done. The senior Senator from Arizona has said over the last week or so how important it is for the defense of this country to get rid of sequestration. If sequestration kicks in, the funding for defense and nondefense will be exactly the same. The only way that can be changed is if we pass a law in the Senate. Frankly, I would think that is going to be hard to do. We believe we want to do everything we can to help the defense of this country, our fighting men and women, but we are also concerned about nondefense programs which are in need of repair. It would be untoward to think we are going to do sequestration at the National Institutes of Health, as an example. Lifesaving, scientific research is being done there every day. The last sequestration knocked their pins out. I have talked to the head of the National Institutes of Health, Dr. Francis Collins. For example, they were so close to coming up with a universal flu vaccine. They had to drop it. They lost almost $2 billion as a result of the first sequestration. I am sorry to say another one that is staring them in the face will only be more hurtful to that great institution. Appropriations Madam President, I was terribly disappointed yesterday to hear that my friend the Speaker of the House intends to give up on doing his job. He intends to abandon the appropriations process. He told a press conference yesterday: ``It's pretty clear given the number of days we're going to be here in September that we're going to have to do a (continuing resolution) of some sort.'' By relying on a continuing resolution that underfunds critical priorities for working men and women in America--especially our families--Republicans are neglecting their responsibilities and giving up on the middle class. Instead of working together with Democrats to negotiate a long-term funding package, Republicans are calling it quits. A continuing resolution should be a last-ditch, eleventh-hour option, not an excuse 3 months before the deadline approaches to just say we give up. I hope the Speaker of the House will change course and recommit his party to working with us. Three months, surely my Republican friends must realize, is more than enough time for us to do our jobs. Madam President, finally, there are a lot of complaints people can have about the legislation before the body, but I do want to commend the Republican leader for having this amendment before us dealing with the Ex-Im Bank. It is very important that this legislation move on, and I hope the House will pass it as soon as they get it. Right now, we have--let me just count them. I will not take the time here, but there are about 45 different countries that have working export-import banks that help their businesses and workers compete globally. They are really hurting our exports because our exporters are going to these other companies trying to get some help so they can continue exporting. So I truly do appreciate this being part of this legislation. It is an important piece of legislation. I am so glad the majority leader put that in as something we are going to work on over the next few days. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, there are a select few men and women who come to work every day with one primary job: to protect those of us who work in the United States Capitol and all who come here from all corners of our country to see the heart of our democracy. In 1998, two of those brave police officers gave their lives while protecting the Capitol. They were Special Agent John Gibson and Officer Jacob Chestnut. Mr. President, 16 years ago today, a man entered the House side of the Capitol Building with a gun and shot Officer Chestnut at point- blank range. Agent Gibson warned tourists and staff to take cover and then confronted the gunman. Although Agent Gibson was also shot, he prevented anyone else from being killed. Both officers died that day. They served a combined 36 years on the force protecting the Capitol. I knew Agent Gibson. Years before the shooting, my wife and I attended a Senate retreat in southern Virginia. My wife became ill. Agent Gibson ran to her side. I can still remember how he was sweating from running so fast to come to my wife's aid. I have fond memories of these officers. Agent Gibson, who was from Massachusetts, would race to the back of the sports section each morning to find the box score for his beloved Boston Red Sox. He was a generous neighbor and a loving father to his daughter and two sons. Officer Chestnut--everyone called him ``J.J.''--was a father of five who loved his job and loved his country. He served in the Air Force for 20 years and fought in Vietnam. At the time of the shooting, he was just weeks away from retiring. Gibson and Chestnut were laid in honor in the Capitol Rotunda, just steps from where they were murdered--a distinction Congress has conferred upon only a handful of Americans, including Abraham Lincoln, John F. Kennedy, and our unknown soldiers. Jacob Chestnut was the first African-American ever to be so honored in our Capitol Rotunda. On this solemn anniversary, we pause to appreciate not just the bravery of two men who saved so many others but each and every Capitol Police officer who does his or her job so valiantly every single day of the year. On behalf of the entire United States Senate and everyone who works and visits here, thank you.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, we can tell a lot about how a Senator feels about our veterans by seeing how they vote on issues dealing with veterans. We can tell a lot about a Senator by how he or she treats our Nation's veterans. Are they committed to giving our veterans the care and help they deserve and need or do they see American servicemembers as political footballs to be used for partisan fights? I was disappointed yesterday to see my Republican colleagues try to actually manipulate a good veterans bill, a noble bill, and it was done for political purposes. The senior Senator from Washington, who has worked so hard on veterans issues for years now in the Senate, crafted a bipartisan piece of legislation to help veterans to do a number of things--basically, to help with their families. It is a tragic reality that thousands of veterans and servicemembers struggle with issues related to reproductive health, including fertility, some as a result of injuries sustained in combat. Senator Murray's bill would give the Veterans' Administration the resources it needs to attend to our veterans' reproductive health. The legislation would also help facilitate adoptive services for wounded veterans who want a family of their own. Senator Murray's bill was to be marked up. That means it would be finalized in committee before it was reported from that committee to the floor. That is one of the opportunities we have to get legislation on the floor. But in a cynical, duplicitous move, a handful of Republicans on that committee were determined to manipulate the legislation. Instead of working with Senator Murray and others on the committee to pass a good bill as is, the junior Senator from North Carolina and other Republicans tried to attach so-called poison pill amendments to the bill. Senator Murray, to her credit, saw immediately what this charade was all about as a political stunt and requested that the chairman pull her bill from consideration, which did happen. The Senator from Washington didn't want a good, bipartisan bill hijacked by a few Republicans looking to get their names on FOX television. This episode says a lot about today's Republican Party. This is an attack on families, it is an attack on the health of women, and it is an attack on our veterans. Every servicemember who puts on the uniform of the United States armed services deserves everything we can give them because they take an oath to defend our Nation. It is not a pledge taken lightly by these men and women who serve. They understand what is being asked of them. They know that at any given time they may have to sacrifice everything for this country. We here in the Senate take a similar oath when we are sworn in to office, but we also make an unspoken, yet equally solemn, vow--to do everything in our power to support these veterans. We aren't called upon to make the ultimate sacrifices they are, but we have to recognize that they need our help. That means we do anything we can to give them the care they deserve. That means we always put their well-being above partisan politics. The Republicans in this ploy yesterday put FOX News ahead of the welfare of the veterans community. This is, in fact, a reality. It is too bad for the veterans community. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I am proud to join in sponsoring the Equality Act. Last month, the Supreme Court ruled on the right side of history by deciding that loving and committed same-sex couples have the right to be married. While same-sex couples now can be legally wed, Federal law still does not protect them from being fired or evicted from their homes on the basis of their sexual identity or gender identity. The Equality Act addresses this issue and represents a major step forward in protecting the civil rights of all Americans. At the same time we celebrate this historic bill, we must ensure that religious institutions have the right to their own views of marriage. As the Supreme Court noted in its decision, ``it must be emphasized that religions, and those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned.'' I look forward to working with colleagues to address these issues as the bill advances through the legislative process.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I am proud to join in sponsoring the Equality Act. Last month, the Supreme Court ruled on the right side of history by deciding that loving and committed same-sex couples have the right to be married. While same-sex couples now can be legally wed, Federal law still does not protect them from being fired or evicted from their homes on the basis of their sexual identity or gender identity. The Equality Act addresses this issue and represents a major step forward in protecting the civil rights of all Americans. At the same time we celebrate this historic bill, we must ensure that religious institutions have the right to their own views of marriage. As the Supreme Court noted in its decision, ``it must be emphasized that religions, and those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned.'' I look forward to working with colleagues to address these issues as the bill advances through the legislative process.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I am having a caucus today. We have the bill. We worked through the night. I wasn't up all night, but my staff was. I did spend quite a bit of time on this bill. I think we have a basic understanding of it. I am having a caucus today, and we will have my ranking members from Finance, Commerce, Energy, and Banking report on how they look at this bill. It is my hope that we can work our way through all the issues dealing with this legislation. I think the main reason we are where we are now is we have focused on the importance of a long-term highway bill. So I hope we can work our way through these issues. There are some significant issues, I have already been alerted by my staff, with the transit title. Some of the pay-fors are somewhat questionable. But before we start drawing lines in the sand here, let's see if we can figure out a way to get this done. So we will know that sometime early this afternoon.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, Alexander Hamilton said, ``The first duty of society is justice.'' If that is true--and I certainly believe it is-- then the Republican Senate is failing miserably on its first duty. By neglecting to live up to their constitutional duty to provide ``advice and consent,'' it is clear the Republican leader and his party are denying justice for the American people. Federal courts depend on us--the United States Senate--to do our job so justice can be dispensed in courtrooms across the country. But Republicans clearly have no interest in seeing these courtrooms and judicial chambers staffed adequately. So far this Congress, Republicans have confirmed only five judges. By this same point in the last Congress of George W. Bush's Presidency, under my leadership, the Senate had confirmed 25 judges. Five to one seems unfair. There are real repercussions when Republicans refuse to act. We didn't have judicial vacancies then. We did it because it was the right thing to do. If there aren't enough judges to hear the cases that are piling up, a vacant judgeship is declared an emergency. At the beginning of this year, there were only 12 judicial emergencies that deserved priority attention. Yet, in the mere 7 months of this Republican-controlled Senate, the number has doubled and is on its way to tripling very soon. As of today there are 28 judicial emergencies, including 4 judges currently pending on the floor. But that is really an unfair view because having them pending on the floor takes into consideration that the Judiciary Committee is doing their job--holding hearings on these nominations--and they are not. This is something which was learned years ago when the Judiciary Committee was operated by the present chair of the Finance Committee. How he got around having these judicial nominations stacked up on the calendar was he wouldn't do the hearings. That is what has now been taking place in the Judiciary Committee. There are real-life consequences to this obstruction. Each judge Republicans block, each nomination they slow-walk results in delay of justice. As the maxim goes, justice delayed is justice denied. And that certainly is true. A Wall Street Journal article from April quoted U.S. district judge Lawrence O'Neill from the Eastern District of California: Over the years I've received several letters from people indicating, ``Even if I win this case now, my business has failed because of the delay. How is this justice?'' And the simple answer, which I cannot give them, is this: ``It is not justice. We know it.'' Judge O'Neill is 1 of 25 judges I worked to confirm in the first 6 months of the 110th Congress with President Bush. He is absolutely right. What is happening now with the judicial emergencies across the country is not justice. This is Republican politics as usual. We saw it on display last week when the junior Senator from Delaware came to the floor and asked consent to confirm 5 consensus judges to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, a really important block of judges doing important work for this country. It was not an outlandish request. After all, the Judiciary Committee favorably reported these five nominations twice--last year under Democrats and again this year under Republicans--but the Presiding Officer, a Republican, objected to that request. His reasoning? The Court of Federal Claims doesn't need these judges. Perhaps the junior Senator from Arkansas should ask the chief judge of the Court of Federal Claims if his court does not need those new judges. The chief judge has pleaded for the immediate filling of these five vacancies since they are creating a caseload problem for the court. But the freshman Senator from Arkansas had his mind made up and blocked every attempt to confirm even a single judge to this important court. One of his home State newspapers, the Arkansas Times, headlined its report: ``Tom Cotton continues his obstructionist ways.'' Yesterday the Washington press took notice that the blocking of these judges coincidentally lined up with the interests of a powerful conservative law firm that is currently representing clients before this court. A Roll Call headline says: ``Cotton Blocks Judges on Court Familiar to His Former Law Firm.'' I don't mean to necessarily point fingers at anyone. After all, the junior Senator from Arkansas is only following, I assume, the Republican leader's example. There are currently five district court judges awaiting votes on the Senate floor. All five were reported out of the Judiciary Committee unanimously, proving they are consensus, noncontroversial candidates. So why hasn't the Republican leader scheduled their confirmation votes? Three of the district nominations are classified as judicial emergencies--including one judge in the Eastern District of California, and that is the court that Judge O'Neill serves. The Republican leader should bring them to the floor. Again, the record is clear. Democrats confirmed all of these judges for President Bush, and the Republicans are basically confirming no one for President Obama. Any objective observer would tell you that it is not fair. Not only is 5 to 1 not fair, but it is also the fact that hearings are simply not being held. Maybe it is time for a new strategy. Maybe it is time for the Republican leader to live up to his constitutional duty, do his job, and start moving all of these backlogged nominations and directing the Judiciary Committee to hold hearings. The American people need these judges, and they need them now, working to ensure that everyone gets the justice he or she deserves. To allow these qualified nominees to linger longer is simply unjust and unfair. The American people expect more from the Republican leadership and Congress and deserve better. We are going to do everything within our power to bring to the American people's attention that the Republican leadership is not doing a very good job on this and other matters before the Senate. Mr. President, what is the schedule of the Senate today?

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the 50th anniversary of the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, UNLV, School of Nursing. The UNLV School of Nursing has been an important part of Nevada's health care system since it admitted its first class in 1965. The program was established in part because of a nursing shortage in the State of Nevada in the early 1960s. The nursing shortage, coupled with the State's sudden population growth, threatened to create an untenable situation for all Nevadans. Recognizing this, various stakeholders, including the Nevada Public Health Association, Nevada Nurses Association, and Nevada State Board of Nursing, worked to create the nursing school to fill vacant nursing positions throughout the State and provide quality nursing education to Nevada residents. The first graduating class included 19 students; and to date, more than 4,300 students have graduated from the UNLV School of Nursing. In fulfilling its mission of providing an exceptional education to nursing students and meeting Nevada's health care needs, the UNLV School of Nursing has established a tradition of progress, innovation, and leadership. For instance, when the school first began, it only offered an associate degree program. Today, the school offers eleven academic programs. Additionally, the school began offering an online master's degree program in 2004. This program ranks among the top ten best online graduate nursing programs in the Nation. I am confident that the UNLV School of Nursing will continue to play a critical role in Nevada's health care system as it begins its next chapter. I commend the UNLV School of Nursing on their 50th anniversary and applaud their exceptional service to the State of Nevada.

Mr. REID

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

Mr. REID

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

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, the Republican leader will be here shortly. I have gotten word he is not going to be here right now, so I am going to proceed.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. This past weekend, Republican Presidential hopeful Donald Trump did what he did best: He said something dishonest and really distasteful. In speaking about the senior Senator from Arizona, he mocked Senator John McCain, mocked his service in the Vietnam conflict. He went so far as to say John McCain was not a war hero. John McCain and I came to the House of Representatives the very same day, both new Members of the House. He was representing a district in Arizona and I my district in Nevada. We are neighbors. We served together in the House. We came here to the Senate at the same time. He is one notch ahead of me in seniority in this body because the State of Arizona has more people than Nevada. That is how seniority is determined, among other ways. John McCain was a naval pilot and comes from a family who served our country admirably in the military for decades--his grandfather and his father. On one of his first missions to Vietnam, John McCain was shot down and badly injured--broken back and arms. He was very badly hurt. He was placed in a Vietnamese concentration camp, where he spent almost 6 years. About half of that time was in solitary confinement, and many days and weeks of that were spent being punished, tortured, and rebreaking parts of his body that had been broken. John McCain, to me, is a hero. He is a person who has represented this country admirably in the Congress. He was a Republican nominee for President. America knows John McCain. I personally have some disagreements on policy on an occasion or two with John McCain, but we have never disagreed about our relationship. My relationship with Senator McCain is one where I have great admiration for him, for his strength of character, and for his moral courage in Vietnam. In the aftermath of these remarks about John McCain, Republicans have been falling all over themselves to criticize Donald Trump. But it makes me wonder: Where were all these same Republicans when Mr. Trump slandered millions? It was only a month ago that Trump said: When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. That is his quote. When Trump insulted the Senator from Arizona, a Member of his own party, Republicans could not denounce him fast enough, but when Trump called immigrants ``rapists,'' there was nothing but silence--nothing but silence. There is an ugly truth behind that silence, and it is this: When it comes to immigration policy--and, frankly, most other policy--there is no meaningful difference between the Republican Party and Donald Trump. Consider the facts on just this one issue. Trump rejects a pathway to citizenship for the undocumented. Instead, he favors a system of merit that creates a road to legal status. He has never ever said two sentences defining that. We have heard before the same kind of talk from Republicans, those running for President--I think we have 16 of them now. Jeb Bush rejects the pathway to citizenship. He claims to support a pathway to legal status but ``not necessarily citizenship.'' Scott Walker rejects a pathway to citizenship. He said, ``If somebody wants to be a citizen, they need to go back to their country of origin.'' The junior Senator from Texas also rejects a pathway to citizenship. He said, ``I think that it is likely that there could be some bipartisan solution to those who are here illegally if a path to citizenship were taken off the table.'' Governor Chris Christie rejects a pathway to citizenship, too. He said it is ``an extreme way to go.'' Trump wants to terminate President Obama's Executive actions on immigration, tearing apart millions of families and deporting about 800,000 DREAMers. We have heard that before, too. Jeb Bush also wants to repeal President Obama's Executive actions. On FOX News, on the ``Hannity'' show, he said he would ``repeal Obama's executive amnesty.'' That is a quote. The junior Senator from Texas also wants to terminate the President's Executive actions. Here is what he said: ``If I am elected president, the very first thing I intend to do on the first day is rescind every single unconstitutional or illegal executive action from President Obama.'' Governor Chris Christie is actively opposing the President's Executive actions. In fact, his State joined a lawsuit challenging President Obama's actions. The junior Senator from Florida also rejects President Obama's Executive actions that keep families together. Senator Rubio's spokesperson told one news outlet that ``immigration executive orders won't be permanent policy under [a Rubio] administration.'' These are the facts. When it comes to immigration policy--and, as I mentioned, sadly, most other policy issues--there is no daylight between Donald Trump and the rest of the Republican field. While the rest of the Republican Presidential hopefuls may not engage in the same repugnant rhetoric, make no mistake--they are all on the same page as Donald Trump. If I ask each Republican running for President ``Name one difference between your immigration policy and Trump's immigration policy,'' given recent history, there will be a deafening silence. When Trump insulted McCain, Republicans couldn't denounce him fast enough, but when Mr. Trump called millions of hard-working immigrants rapists and murderers, there was nothing but silence. Maybe this is because none of the Republicans running for President can name a single way in which they disagree with Trump's policies on immigration. In the meantime, Democrats will continue to fight to pass comprehensive immigration reform, just as we did more than 2 years ago. We will continue to fight Republican piecemeal legislation that criminalizes immigrant communities--whole communities--and we will continue to fight for families who are constantly being scapegoated by today's Republican Party.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. I suggest the absence of a quorum, and I ask unanimous consent that the time be divided equally.