Harry Reid

Mr. REID

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

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I must comment on some of the statements that my friend the Republican leader has made. We have been able to accomplish a few things during this work period, and the reason we have been able to do so is that we, the minority, have cooperated. For 4 years, my Republican colleagues in the minority objected to everything we tried to do--everything. I don't mean most everything; I mean everything. That was a plan they had. I have mentioned before and I will mention again that they decided they would make sure that Obama was not reelected. That failed. And, No. 2, they were going to oppose everything he tried to do, and they have done that overwhelmingly. So it was really hard for 4 years to get things done. Now, my friend the majority leader can talk all he wants about how much we have gotten done. Look at what we have been able to accomplish. The majority of the measures we have done could have been done before, if Republicans had not objected to them and stopped us from moving to those matters. So we are going to continue to do everything we can to move measures, in conjunction with my Republican friends, but we shouldn't be hearing a lot of speeches here about how great things are now, because every time that happens I am going to come and tell everybody what has happened for 4 years. Government is all about priorities. What do we, as Senators, value the most? With only a few days before the Memorial Day recess, I am disturbed and distressed by the Republicans' priorities. For example, the majority leader knows that the Federal highway program expires this month--not next month, this month. He knows that the highway trust fund runs out of money a few weeks later. Why then are Republicans making no serious effort to pass a long-term reauthorization of the Federal highway program? I can easily answer this question. They do not know how to pay for America's next jobs bill. So with no as the answer, they again do nothing. Another short-term extension--this is one of many--one of many. I think the last I remember, the last my staff brought me up to date--I think it has been 12 or 15 times that it has been extended for short periods of time. This is not good. This is such bad news for every State--every State--because the directors of the departments of transportation can't do anything long term. The only way to have a good program for construction is to be able to look ahead. As the Senator from Vermont said the other day, Vermont's season to be able to do construction work is very short, and they can't do long- term planning when the money is only going to be available for a few months. So this is really unfortunate and really too bad. I say again, this could be America's next jobs bill. So it is really too bad. We also have the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, known as FISA. It expires on June 1. It must be extended and reformed. Last week, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the bulk collection program, as currently constructed, is not authorized under current law--meaning the law is illegal. It would be irresponsible for this Congress to merely reauthorize and not reform. How can we reauthorize something that is illegal? We can't. We shouldn't. Why would anyone agree to reauthorize a program which our circuit courts deem to be illegal? My friend the majority leader keeps talking about extending the program for 5\1/2\ years. Extending an illegal program for 5\1/2\ years? That is not sensible. What should happen is that we should move forward and do something that is needed here; that is, do it all over again. The House of Representatives is sending us on Wednesday a new FISA bill, one that has been vetted by those people concerned about the rights of our citizens. They have determined that what the House has done is good. They have passed it out of committee 25 to 2. Senator Leahy has a bill over here that is almost identical to that bill. So I can't understand why we just don't wait until the House sends us that bill and we turn around immediately and give it to the President as passed by the House of Representatives. The President will sign it. He realizes the program has to be changed. We cannot reauthorize a program that is illegal. So I hope we can move forward on what the House has done. To his credit, Senator Leahy is not saying: We have to have my bill. He is saying: If we don't do my bill--Senator Leahy's bill--pass the House bill. That would be good. This is the only bipartisan, bicameral solution we have today that will end the illegal bulk collection program in its current form and reform and reauthorize key provisions of FISA. Otherwise, I am not the only one, Mr. President. I was told walking over here that the junior Senator from Kentucky is not going to let the extension of FISA take place. So why don't we just go ahead and get it done now; that is, when the House sends us their bill, say we are going to pass that and send it to the White House for signature. I hope the majority leader will reassess his priorities and instead choose to protect Americans' civil liberties. What is the business of the day, Mr. President?

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. I object.

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

Mr. REID. Through the Chair, I ask my friend from Indiana how long the Senator wishes to speak as in morning business.

Mr. REID. I do not care. I would just like to know. That is fine. I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from Indiana be recognized for up to 10 minutes.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, if I could ask the distinguished majority leader if he would be willing to go into a quorum call for a brief conversation. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, three decades ago, when Senator Robert Byrd began drafting a series of lectures on the history of the United States Senate, to whom did he go for help? Don Ritchie. Ten years ago, when Dan Brown, the popular author of the best-selling ``DaVinci Code,'' wanted information about the Capitol for his new novel, to whom did he go? Don Ritchie. Even now, when famed historian and biographer Robert Caro needs facts for his five-volume work on Lyndon Johnson, he goes to Don Ritchie. Well, for 39 years, any person needing valuable insight into the United States Senate and its history has known where to go-- the Senate Historian, Don Ritchie. And Don has obliged, sharing his wealth of knowledge with anyone who asked--Senators, staff, authors, historians, and visitors. But after four decades of service, Don will officially retire from the Senate Historical Office at the end of this month. As the senior Senator from Kentucky stated, from his first day here in the Senate, Don Ritchie made this institution a better place. The first-ever Senate Historian, Don's predecessor, Richard Baker, once said, ``March 8, 1976--that's a date, like my wedding anniversary, that I remember.'' Indeed, that was the day Don Ritchie was hired as an Associate Historian in the newly formed Senate Historical Office. Don Ritchie, a former marine, was fresh out of graduate school at the University of Maryland, having received his Ph.D. in history just a year earlier. He was getting his start in the profession, driving all over the DC area, teaching at George Mason, Northern Virginia Community College, and University College. He was also working part time with the American Historical Association. When offered a job in the Senate Historical Office, he jumped at the chance. The rest is, as they say, history. Don has served honorably as Senate Historian. Prior to that, he worked as Associate Senate Historian for 33 years. Over the combined 40 years of service, Don has authored 12 books, 3 textbooks, and a fourth is now on the way. He has lectured on Senate history at just about every major historical society in America. He has become a fixture on C-SPAN. But his crowning achievement would be his development of the Senate Oral History Project. Don has recorded countless interviews with people who worked in the Senate, from Parliamentarians, to clerks, to pages. Future generations of historians will better understand the Senate of the 20th and 21st centuries because of Don Ritchie's Oral History Project. That is an accomplishment which will stand forever. On a more personal note, I have so appreciated Don's insight and expertise. Every week, I begin my caucus by calling on the Senate Historian, and he talks to us about so many fascinating things, things we do not ordinarily know about, but they are all interesting, whether it is Prohibition, whether it is events that took place in the first or second Roosevelt administration--it does not matter what it is. These are times I look forward to, and, quite frankly, it shuts up my caucus. When he shows up, they are suddenly attentive. I would like to think they are not more attentive to him than to me, but I would think that is the case. As I said, our lunches can be fairly boisterous, and they stop all conversation to listen to Don Ritchie. That is because so often Senators walk away from his lectures with a better understanding and appreciation of the Senate. He has been invaluable to me and every other Senate Democrat. As we heard from the majority leader, he also has been very good for the Republicans. As he prepares for a new chapter in his life, I wish him the very best. It is good news that he and his wife Anne will be jumping into retirement together. As we have heard, for historians, retirement only means more time to pore through books and find out what someone else missed and try to take another run at writing something that is interesting. After a successful career as an archivist and historian, his wife Anne is retiring from the National Gallery of Art. Together, Anne and Don will have plenty of time to spend with their two daughters, Jennifer and Andrea, and their three grandchildren, Cami, Jack, and Boone. Even in retirement, Don will continue reading and researching about this institution he and I love so dearly--the Senate. After all, as Don himself points out, ``Historians don't retire''--as Senator McConnell said--``they just get more time to research.'' Thank you, Don Ritchie, for your four decades of service to the Senate and your country. You really will be missed. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the 10th Annual Sennoras of Excellence and Sennores of Distinction Awards Gala hosted by the Foundation for Excellence and Distinction in Las Vegas, NV. The Foundation for Excellence and Distinction was created by Sandy and Roger Peltyn with the sole purpose of raising funds to award scholarships for young Nevada students pursuing excellence in higher education. Over the last 10 years, the Foundation has awarded more than 700 scholarships through local charities, including the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, UNLV, Foundation, Nevada State College, Nevada Hospital Association, the Center for Academic Enrichment and Outreach at UNLV, College of Southern Nevada, Puerto Rican Association Scholarship Fund, HEART for children with AUTISM, Latin Chamber of Commerce Scholarship Fund, City Impact Center, and Miss Nevada Scholarship Organization. These scholarships would have not been possible without the support of the people of Nevada and the immeasurable contributions and collaboration from Karen Cashman and Ellie Hirschfield. The foundation has recognized many strong sennoras and sennores throughout the community for their work to encourage the success of future generations. A Sennora of Excellence can best be described as a woman who is confident in her beliefs, loyal to family and friends, accepts victories and disappointments with grace, and rises above life's challenges. A Sennor of Distinction is a man who bases his life on principles, raises spirits, never lets people down, and makes sacrifices for future generations without expecting to receive anything in return. We pay tribute to this year's award recipients and the previous honorees of the Sennoras of Excellence and Sennores of Distinction, Lifetime Achievement, Corporation of Distinction, and Humanitarian of the Year awards. This year, my dear friend Wayne Newton is the recipient of the Humanitarian of the Year award. I am grateful for his commitment to supporting education and his fierce advocacy for improving the lives of our Nation's service men and women. I thank the foundation for their continued leadership and commitment to youth education and congratulate this year's award recipients. I wish the foundation continued success in the years to come.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, we have all heard the legal maxim ``Justice delayed is justice denied,'' and it is really applicable to what is going on in the Senate today. Here in this body, justice is being delayed by the Republican majority. The refusal of the Senate Republicans to heed their constitutional duty to provide advice and consent on judicial nominations is an injustice to the American people. So far this year, the Senate has confirmed two judicial nominations-- just two--in more than 4 months. By contrast, in 2007, my first year as majority leader during the Bush administration, we had already confirmed 16 nominations. If the Republican majority keeps up their current trend of ignoring judicial nominees, by the end of this year we will have confirmed five for an entire year. The last time the Senate confirmed so few Presidential nominations was, unsurprisingly, when we had a Republican majority here in the Senate under the Clinton administration. It is funny how history repeats itself. The Federal courts depend on the Senate to do its job so justice can be dispensed in courtrooms all across the country. As of today, there are 55 Federal court vacancies, 24 of which are classified as emergencies. At the beginning of the year, there were only 12 judicial emergencies, but now it is double that--24. These vacancies create a backlog of cases, effectively delaying justice for plaintiffs and defendants, for prosecutors and the accused, and for the sitting judges who are trying their best to administer justice, but they can't do their work because they are so overwhelmed with work. This is about more than judges and lawyers. This is about the people who come before the courts, people who have cases that have been waiting and waiting. This is about a prosecutor who is going after somebody who, in their opinion, has done something really bad. We have all heard the expression ``They are trying to make a Federal case out of it.'' The reason they say that is because Federal prosecutors do such a great job. But if they have to wait and wait until there is availability in the courtroom, witnesses disappear and it makes it much more difficult. What has happened to our judicial system is, because of the Republicans, we are having justice delayed. This is unconscionable. It is no wonder Republicans are scrambling for cover on judicial nominations. They are scrambling because they have been ignoring their constitutional duty. This afternoon, the courts are going to be looked at by the Judiciary Committee. In fact, the committee is going to hold a hearing on several delayed judicial nominations. But everyone should look at Felipe Restrepo, the President's nominee to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. That is in Pennsylvania and other places--a very important circuit. Despite being nominated by the President 6 months ago, this man is not even going to be on the calendar. And this is what was done previously. The man, my friend, who is chair of the Committee on Finance, was chair of the Judiciary Committee back in those days, and he did the same thing--just ignored them, didn't even schedule them for a hearing. Senator Leahy has been to the floor many times--our past chair of the Judiciary Committee, now ranking member of the Judiciary Committee--talking about how bad that used to be, and now he is talking about how bad it is even today. So Restrepo and others will not be on the agenda. Despite the fact that this Philadelphia-based seat is a judicial emergency, they just ignore people like Restrepo. They say: We only have a few people on the calendar. Why aren't there more on the calendar? Because they won't schedule hearings. It is so unfair. Now Restrepo won't be on the agenda in spite of the fact that the junior Senator from Pennsylvania said Restrepo would be a ``superb addition to the third circuit.'' Why doesn't the junior Senator from Pennsylvania talk about this man being held up by his own party? There is no reason he has been held up for 6 months other than the Republicans simply want to do everything they can to create problems for President Obama. But it is not a problem for President Obama. President Obama is doing just fine. It is a problem for the people I have talked about--the prosecutors, those who are accused of crimes, plaintiffs and defendants in civil cases, and, of course, the judges. After having heard the statement from the junior Senator from Pennsylvania, I wonder what Pennsylvanians are thinking. Are they left wondering why this qualified judicial candidate is not moving forward and not a word from the junior Senator from Pennsylvania? Not a word. It appears Republicans are heeding calls from the far right to retaliate against President Obama by blocking judges. Republicans couldn't defend their trying to shut down the Department of Homeland Security. They tried. They tried to block Loretta Lynch's nomination, and they couldn't get that done. So now they want to block President Obama's judges. Our courts should be above political gamesmanship. Qualified judicial nominees such as Mr. Restrepo deserve a vote in the Senate. President Bush's judges were considered fairly when I was the majority leader, and there is no one who can say that nominees are now being handled fairly. It is certainly not unreasonable for Democrats to expect the same measure of cooperation and fairness from Republicans that I gave them. The American judicial system should not be taking a backseat to Republican politics here in the Senate, in our Nation's Capitol. If it were only the judges they are holding up, that would be one thing, but Republican Senators are holding up basically all his nominations, with rare exception. For example, the chief law enforcement officer of this country, Loretta Lynch, who is well qualified in every way--experience, education, and character--was held up for 6 months. If what they did in her case wasn't bad enough, they now are not allowing her to have the people she needs around her. They are not allowing a vote on her No. 1 assistant. It is unfair and just too bad that justice delayed is justice denied. I am sorry to say that is where we find ourselves today.

Mr. REID

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

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I rise today in celebration of Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month. In 1979, President Jimmy Carter established Asian Pacific Heritage Week. This week of recognition was expanded to a month-long celebration in 1992. Every May, Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month provides Americans the opportunity to reflect upon the many contributions made by the Asian American and Pacific Islander community in Nevada and across the Nation. May is a significant month in Asian American and Pacific Islander history. The first 10 days of May coincide with the arrival of the first Japanese immigrants in the United States on May 7, 1843, and the completion of the transcontinental railroad on May 10, 1869, which relied heavily on the work of Chinese immigrants. But Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month does not only recognize the past achievements of this vibrant community; this month is also a chance to honor the civil rights activists, farmers, scientists, entrepreneurs, health professionals, educators, and other members of the Asian American and Pacific Islander community, who continue to help shape our Nation into an even better place culturally, economically, and politically. In Nevada, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders are among the fastest growing populations and have enriched Nevada's history and culture. Hundreds of thousands of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders live in Nevada, and contribute to small business development and boost our economy. I am proud to represent such strong and innovative people, and I continue to work hard to enact legislation that positively impacts the Asian American and Pacific Islander community. For instance, I joined my colleague, Hawaii Senator Mazie Hirono, earlier this year in fighting for legislation that would reunite children and families of Filipino World War II veterans, and I will continue my steadfast support of family reunification efforts. America is a nation of immigrants with diverse backgrounds and united common principles, which is part of what makes us strong, resilient, and unique. This month, we celebrate the wonderful and important contributions of the Asian American and Pacific Islander community in Nevada and throughout the Nation, and I extend my best wishes for a joyous Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, the history of Cinco de Mayo is one that is largely unfamiliar to most Americans, but to Mexican Americans it is very familiar. It is a shame we don't know more about it because the story of Cinco de Mayo is one of inspiration. It is the tale of a small military force that was vastly outnumbered but refused to capitulate. At the Battle of Puebla, 153 years ago, a small Mexican Army force found itself outnumbered two to one by the French. The outmatched soldiers refused to give up. They couldn't. That was not in their makeup. The future of Mexico rested on their shoulders. Unbelievably, in spite of seemingly insurmountable odds, the Mexican Army refused to give up. That is what we celebrate today--Cinco de Mayo. It is not just Mexican culture and history, but also the resilient spirit that refuses to capitulate. Our United States is better off because of that spirit engendered by millions of Mexican Americans and, indeed, the entire Latino community. It is that same spirit today that injects new life into our communities. It is that same spirit possessed by generations of Mexican Americans that has fueled the economics and vibrancy of communities throughout the Southwest. It is that same spirit that empowers Latino students to push themselves to new heights. And it is that same indomitable spirit that inspires Hispanic Americans to defend our country on the front lines around the world, as they have done for many, many decades. Hispanic heritage in this country has never been stronger. Now it falls upon us, as Members of Congress, to support Mexican Americans and the greater Latino community to reach the promise of the American dream. We can do that by investing in working American families, not by kicking families off their health insurance, as my friend the Republican leader spoke of in this budget that is balanced in name only. Really, you can keep talking about how balanced something is, but if it is unbalanced, it is still unbalanced. The Republicans want to repeal ObamaCare for 16.5 million people--and on and on with all the things that are good in that legislation and that have so changed America. In this budget, they want to strip children's financial aid to go to college or cut job training programs--and on and on with what they want to do in this budget. They talk about this great meeting that took place to come up with this final bill in conference. That conference took about 10 minutes. They knew what they wanted to do, and they did it very quickly. The Republican budget is unfair, it is unbalanced, it is unwise, and, as some have said, it is immoral. So as we celebrate Cinco de Mayo today, I hope we will remember that unrelenting Mexican spirit that prevailed on the battlefield 153 years ago. But more importantly, I hope we will recognize that the same spirit is among us today, in the homes of Mexican Americans across America.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, on another matter, the Senate has a lot to do before the recess for Memorial Day. We need to finish the Corker- Cardin Iran legislation. We need to wrap up work on the budget resolution. But in addition to those two important pieces of legislation, there are other pressing needs. Surface transportation expires while we are on recess. The highway trust fund runs out of money, and the authorization for the Federal highway program expires later this month. There are 63,500 bridges that are structurally deficient, and more than 50 percent of our roads are in disrepair. That is according to the Federal Highway Administration. Without reliable funding, our highways and bridges will only get worse, and that is an understatement. Six States already are delaying or canceling important transportation projects because of questions over future funding--Arkansas, Delaware, Georgia, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Wyoming. The ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, the senior Senator from Vermont, said today that in Vermont--this tiny State, area-wise and population-wise, with about 600,000 people in it--their construction timeframe is very, very narrow. They can't do construction during most of the year. They need to plan way ahead of time, and they can't do that if there is nothing to plan. States need certainty from Washington that they will receive their highway dollars before construction leaders put shovels in the ground. Nevada needs that certainty. Tourism in Nevada welcomes over 50 million visitors annually, resulting in 17 billion miles traveled over our roads and highways. Nevada has $47.3 billion in statewide transportation needs. That is just one State. We must ensure our Nation's highway system has the necessary funds to address the pressing needs, and they are not there. Transportation would be the first easy place to find agreement in Congress, and it is hard to comprehend, but the Republican majority in the Senate has not held a single hearing on this most important piece of legislation--not a single hearing, nothing. We want to work with Republicans to address our Nation's crumbling infrastructure. We understand the importance of transportation investment for working families across the country. Yet, stunningly, Republicans have effectively put our Nation's transportation system on the back burner. Hearing the Republican leader's statement this morning, I guess that is going to continue. Procrastination is dangerous to American drivers and hurtful to our economy. The U.S. highway system is central to our Nation's economic competitiveness. It is how we move goods and services. It is central to American families who use our roads and bridges each day to go to work and take their child to school. Congress should do more to support these working families and businesses. For every $1 billion we spend on infrastructure projects, we create 47,500 jobs. Without strong Federal infrastructure funding, the American Society of Civil Engineers predicts that our country could lose $1 trillion in sales. That is almost 3.5 million jobs. Putting critical transportation investments on the back burner is not an effective way to govern, and I would hope we can have something done on highways before we go home for our recess. How can we be home in good conscience and say we tried but couldn't get it done? We also have to reform and reauthorize FISA, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. It is one thing that has kept us safe. The FISA provisions were expanded in the PATRIOT Act and they expire June 1. Senators Leahy and Lee, a bipartisan team of Senators, have introduced a bill that would reform these important provisions so they strike the right balance between protecting our Nation's security and preserving America's civil liberties. An identical bill was reported out of the House Judiciary Committee with a strong bipartisan vote of 25 to 2. The House is out this week, but I hope they take it up next week. I am told they are going to. This is an issue that warrants our full debate and deserves the Senate's attention before we leave. We have a lot to do and not much time. I hope Senate Republicans will help us move these important pieces of legislation without allowing either one to lapse. That is going out of business.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Madam President, every Member of this body wants to keep Iran from getting a nuclear weapon--everyone--Democrats, Republicans, and Independents. But I have to say, a number of my Republican friends have shown an unusual way of showing this. The chairman and ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee worked to find a middle ground on this bill that satisfies congressional Democrats, Republicans, and the administration. It wasn't easy. In fact, it was a long and difficult process. That bill came out of the committee 19 to 0. But these two good men, the junior Senator from Maryland and the junior Senator from Tennessee, were able to strike a delicate balance that allows Congress to vote on a final Iran agreement. They were able to build a consensus along the way. The Corker-Cardin bill was reported out of committee unanimously. Yet before this compromise even came to the floor, certain Senate Republicans were determined to destroy it. A number of Senate Republicans are prioritizing Presidential politics over national security. Others are simply trying to undermine President Obama. For example, the junior Senator from Arkansas has been on record for months stating his desire to see this negotiation fail. Back in January, before there was a framework of an agreement, he said the following about the ongoing negotiations to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon: The end of these negotiations isn't an unintended consequence of congressional action. It is very much an intended consequence. It is there what he said, just as clear as day. The junior Senator from Arkansas and other Republicans want to see any potential agreement with Iran crash and burn, even before we know what is in the final agreement. Some Republicans have proposed poison pills--poison pill after poison pill--to what was a noble compromise between the leaders of the Foreign Relations Committee. Republicans have proposed 67 amendments as of right now. If they could, they would offer more. Democrats, on the other hand, do not want to upset this delicate balance. We have offered no amendments. Instead, we have striven to preserve the Corker-Cardin bill. The difference, as usual, is that Democrats want to be constructive and Republicans continue to want to be destructive. Democrats want to pass this bipartisan bill right now, even as the junior Senators from Arkansas, Florida, Texas, and others work to ruin it. The Senate has already voted on two poisonous amendments, and we will vote on more if we have to, but we don't have to. It is not necessary. It is now clear opponents of the bill aren't interested in being reasonable. The opponents of the Corker-Cardin legislation aren't concerned with finding a middle ground. That is why the majority leader should file cloture now to preserve this legislation. Destructive Members within his own party have forced his hand. I support the majority leader in taking this step because it is the only path forward to passing this meritorious legislation. The exemplary work done by the chairman and ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee is too important to be undone by Senators who are putting politics before national and global security.

Mr. REID. Would the Chair announce the business of the day.

Mr. REID

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

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, as some know, I fought a little bit. I was in the minor leagues for a couple of years. As the Presiding Officer knows, in Nevada, on Saturday night, in Las Vegas, there is going to be a stunning athletic event, one of the most significant athletic events, actually, in the last 50 years. It is a wonderful occasion for Nevada to host the fight between Manny Pacquiao--I should say Congressman Pacquiao, who is a member of the Philippine Congress--and Floyd Mayweather. They will be battling for three separate titles. They are fighting for the 147-pound weight class--for all the people who think that is small, that is the class that--we have had some of our great fighters of all time who have fought that same weight level. These are two great athletes. The winner of the match will be crowned as the greatest pound for pound fighter in the world, and they will go down as two of the finest fighters ever in the history of the world. So regardless of who wins, this bout is projected to shatter boxing records for not only being a significant boxing match--the focus of the world will be on this fight. People all over the world will be watching this fight. They don't really know how many pay-per-view purchases are expected, but I made one last night. I was planning on going to the fight, but, as my friend the Presiding Officer knows, things have changed over the years. If we want to get one of those good seats, we have to pay for it. I have been willing to do that in the past, but the traffic was a little too heavy there, so I decided to watch it here with some of my family. But I am so happy that the pay-per-view purchases are expected to exceed 3 million people, and they won't get it any cheaper than I did--$99.95. So it is wonderful that all previous records will be broken as to revenue. The only thing I don't like about it is the fight doesn't start back here until 9 o'clock and usually they don't end until midnight. I wish they would start a little earlier, but, as I have learned with my baseball, they just start them later back here. I am very excited about this unforgettable fight. There is nothing like a championship fight. There is nothing like one that has all this attention. After I started practicing law, I started judging fights. I was on the Nevada fight commission, and I judged fights. I judged lots of fights. I can remember the first big fight I went to. Oh, it was a big fight. I walked in there, and I couldn't imagine there would be that much attention on anything. Of course, there were thousands of people there. I was excited. I was going to judge one of the preliminary fights. It was stunning. You see ringside all of these glamorous, important people. These fights catch the enthusiasm of sports fans all over the world. The eagerness that I have of watching this fight goes far beyond the sport of boxing or the spectacle of a marquis matchup. I am thrilled for Nevada. This fight will inject hundreds of millions of dollars into the State's economy. It will benefit Nevadans all--fighters and their teams, of course, hotels, restaurants, cab drivers, limousine drivers, parking valets, maids will get bigger tips than they usually get. It will be a great time for Nevada. So I have done everything I can within my power here as a Member of the legislature to help in any way that I can. I have interceded on a couple of occasions to help make this fight move forward, and I was very happy to do so. I love this sport. Some of my most prized possessions in my home are fight pictures. I have one picture of the great Joe Louis and Max Schmeling, and they both signed that picture before they died. I had the good fortune, when Joe Louis spent so much time at Caesars Palace, to have met him. I have pictures hanging on my wall of my dear father- in-law, who worked with fighters. I have a picture on the wall--they are all together--of him with Jack Dempsey, with Primo Carnera, who was 6 foot 7, a huge man--my father-in-law was about 5 foot 5--Sugar Ray Robinson. All these--not all of them, but many great fighters are there with my father-in-law. I love that picture, and it reminds me of my minor league experience in boxing. I am very excited about watching this fight. Las Vegas has been the entertainment capital of the world for a long time, and we are happy that, in fact, is the case. But a few short years ago, as the Presiding Officer knows, we were hit very hard. The debacle that took place on Wall Street hurt Nevada more than any other place. We have been recovering. We haven't recovered totally, but we have recovered significantly. The 2008 economic collapse took a heavy toll on Nevada. A quarter of Nevadans are employed in the tourism and hospitality industry, and when the recession hit, they got hurt, as did all working classes-- construction workers; everybody got hurt--but we fought our way back. Last year, we welcomed to Las Vegas 41 million people--little Las Vegas, 41 million people. It is not so little, but the Presiding Officer and I remember when it was a little place. But now it is a community with a metropolitan area of over 2 million people. Forty-one million people have come to Las Vegas and produced an economic impact of more than $50 billion. We shattered previous records by attracting 1.4 million more visitors than we did--in 2014. So it is only going to get better, and the Pacquiao-Mayweather fight will keep that momentum going for Nevada. I am not picking a winner. I wish both men the best of luck. But, admittedly, I am a little biased because of my relationship with Manny Pacquiao. As the Presiding Officer will remember, one of my real campaigners in one of my difficult races was Manny Pacquiao. He campaigned for me. He broke training to come out of L.A., flew in for a big event I had one night. So you have to remember that kind of stuff. So I have a very good relationship with Manny Pacquiao. Certainly, I don't have a bad one with Floyd Mayweather, but I know Manny Pacquiao much better than I know Floyd Mayweather. He stood in my corner in the past, and he will always have my support. Regardless, though, of which fighter reigns supreme on that Saturday night--and one of them will. They are alone. Nobody is there with them. Regardless of who leaves the arena with that big belt, Nevada's hard- working economy will have won the fight.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the 150th anniversary of the Nevada Appeal newspaper. May 16, 2015, marks 150 years since E.F. McElwain, J. Barrett, Marshall Robinson, and editor Henry Rust Mighels published the first issue of the Carson Daily Appeal in Nevada's State capital, Carson City. Nevada had recently joined the Union, and the Daily Appeal soon began reporting on the important issues facing the newly established State. For 150 years, the paper has demonstrated its resilience and withstood a number of name changes and owners. One notable owner was Henry Mighels' widow, Nellie Verrill Mighels, who inherited the publication following Henry's death in 1879. Covering local politics and a popular boxing match, Nellie earned her place among the Appeal's journalists. Though her ownership of the paper was short-lived, she propelled the paper forward during her tenure. Today, the Appeal remains the longest continually running newspaper in Nevada and is among the oldest businesses in Carson City. Decades of committed staff and dedicated local readers have kept this important publication and piece of Nevada history alive. I applaud the Nevada Appeal on its 150 years of quality journalism and wish the paper much continued success for years to come.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I am grateful for the work done yesterday and during the entire process of working toward an agreement on the important Iran legislation. Senators Corker and Cardin have done a magnificent job. They are both good managers. I would suggest everyone who is concerned about amendments should come and talk to the two managers before they lay down their amendments. There is a process for moving amendments forward. It has been very well articulated by both Senator Cardin and Senator Corker, so we know what rules we can move under today. We know there are difficult issues with this bill--and those are some of the things we do here, work on difficult issues--not always but some of the time.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, Senator McConnell and I love our jobs. We realize how important things are that we work on, but once in a while we take a minute and talk about one of our hobbies and that is watching baseball. Because we are in Washington and have been for some time, we have been focused recently on the Nationals. They started off in a very bad fashion, losing, now--last night, they were in the process of a six- game losing streak. They brought in a pitcher because their star was injured. He gave up nine runs in two innings. So I think we were both fairly well going to acknowledge they were going to lose their seventh straight, but they won the game 13 to 12. I admire the tenacity of the Republican leader because he watched the end of the game. I couldn't do that. I tried, but at the beginning of the ninth inning--they had given up more runs earlier--they were behind with one out, and I said: I am going to go to bed. I was surprised when I got up this morning and they had won. So we had a good laugh talking about the game today that they had won. As I indicated, I am sorry I didn't get to watch the last of the game. I decided I didn't have enough faith in the team, and I went to bed.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, budgets should be about reality, not ideology. The reality of the budget today is that our middle class is being pushed to the edge of extinction, and that is the truth, while there is an ever-widening gap between the rich and the poor. As I have said--I will continue to say--the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting much poorer. But perhaps the most brutal reality is that Congress is not doing its job, and the real brutal reality is that congressional Republicans don't even seem to care. In the very near future, the Senate is expected to consider a conference report on the Republican budget resolution. It is a budget that is as irresponsible as it is immoral. It is a budget based on the failed ideology of a political party out of touch with America's middle class, a political party that is out of touch with reality. It amounts to an all-out attack on working families, an attack designed to protect only the interests of millionaires, billionaires, and many special interests. The Republican budget would deprive more than 16 million Americans of their health insurance. It allows big insurance companies to, once again, discriminate against women. It would cause people who have disabilities to be unable to get insurance--as it used to be before ObamaCare came into being. It threatens the coverage of hard-working Americans who lose their jobs or suffer from, as I have indicated, preexisting medical conditions. The budget that is proposed by my Republican friends would also make deep cuts to Medicare at the expense of our Nation's seniors. It would raise taxes on working Americans by allowing the expansion of the earned-income tax credit and allows the child tax credit to simply expire, go out of existence. It would end key supports that help young Americans afford college. At a time when student debt is higher than credit card debt--we have tried to resolve it on the Senate floor, but the Republicans vote unanimously no. They are not going to cut parents--these young men and women who have debt--any slack. The budget they propose would undermine job training--and certainly at a time when we need it with the changing technology that creates jobs--for Americans who are simply trying to better themselves and get a good job or a better job. Meanwhile, Republicans refuse to close a single tax loophole to reduce the deficit--not one. They will not end tax breaks for companies that send jobs overseas. They will not close loopholes for wealthy hedge fund managers. They will not do away with wasteful tax breaks for the oil and gas industry. Once again, Republicans are attacking the middle class, and they are attacking it forcefully, while protecting the superwealthy. The budget is just wrong. It is also dishonest. It claims to be balanced. There is no balance in this budget. That is a word. The budget is no more balanced than the earthquakes they have had in Nepal. It claims to reach balance, but the claim is laughable, based on gimmicks and massive cuts that are left unspecified. When you have editorials from magazines such as Forbes, a conservative magazine, denigrating the Republican budget, you know it is wrong. One of the worst aspects of this budget is it uses sequestration to undermine America's middle class, to underfund the investments needed for our security and our future. Let's talk about sequestration for a minute, these automatic cuts. The example is the National Institutes of Health. It becomes very personal when you see these issues that face Americans--diabetes, the flu. The Presiding Officer is a physician who specializes in eyes. But the flu kills tens of thousands of people in America every year, and the NIH was on the verge of a universal vaccine for flu, any type of flu. As we know, what they do now, they try to find out what the flu is going to be, the variety of flu in a given year, and then they try to mix and match. Last year, that was effective at less than 50 percent. So if you got the flu shot--60 percent of people who got the flu shot got the flu anyway. But because of sequestration, they had to drop that. They have never gotten that money back--$1.6 billion. I mentioned eyes. I have become very concerned about eyes in the last couple of months, and there are all kinds of programs at the NIH that could be funded much better dealing with problems such as I have. So it is simply wrong that they are going to go forward with this sequestration. It is wrong. Sequestration was never intended to be implemented. It was designed with cuts so deep and so stupid that Congress would never let them happen. But my Republican colleagues let them happen. Republicans recognize that sequestration poses a threat to our national security, and their budget uses a gimmick. I am not calling it a gimmick--or at least I am not alone. We have Republicans--the junior Senator from Tennessee is talking about how he won't support the budget because he thinks there are some gimmicks in it, and many editorials have been written using that term over and over again. Their budget is not balanced, and it uses gimmicks to pretend. They do everything in this budget to protect the Pentagon, but it doesn't really because it is phony. They use the overseas contingency fund, which everybody knows is phony. They want to help the military. I want to help the military also. But, sadly, the Republican budget does absolutely nothing to provide similar protections for the middle class. There is, however, some good news about the Republican budget, and it is this: The Republican budget isn't worth the paper it is written on. It is going to go nowhere. There is no chance of the budget actually being implemented. President Obama and the congressional Democrats are committed to the middle class, so we are not going to let it happen. The administration has made it very clear that President Obama is not willing to lock in sequestration in any appropriations bill or in anything else. In a Statement of Administration Policy--the forerunner of a veto--the Obama administration said: ``The President's senior advisors would recommend that he veto . . . any legislation that implements the current Republican budget framework.'' Nor will the President accept fixes to defense without also fixing nondefense budget items. For President Obama, it is simply a matter of principle, and congressional Democrats fully agree with his principle. So the Republican budget isn't going anywhere. If Republicans insist on moving appropriations bills based on that budget, it is a waste of their time. It will not happen. We will not let that happen. What we need is a budget that is based in reality, a budget that is fair to the middle class, fair to the American people, a budget that will only happen when Republicans abandon their extreme attacks on the poor and middle class and sit down and talk to us about the way forward. I note that no one is seeking the floor, and I would ask that the Chair announce the business of the day.

Mr. REID

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

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

Mr. REID. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the time be charged equally between the majority and the minority.