Pat Roberts

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, today I want to honor the life and work of a man whose inventions--most notably, the large round hay baler--literally changed the landscape of America. Wesley Fisher Buchele, a native Kansan and professor emeritus of agricultural engineering at Iowa State University, died September 13, 2017, at a hospice in Ames, IA. He was age 97. Wes and his twin brother Luther were born in a Kansas farmhouse near Cedar Vale, KS, on March 18, 1920, to Charles and Bessie (Fisher) Buchele. Wesley and Luther were the youngest of seven Buchele brothers. Growing up on a Kansas farm in the 1920s and 1930s was hard work. Economic depression in rural America started early in the 1920s and worsened when the Great Depression hit the entire country in 1929. When Wes was 11, his father, Charles Buchele, died, leaving Wes's mother and the Buchele brothers to run the family farm. Wes and Luther and several other brothers were still in school. The Bucheles ran a raw milk farm. Among other jobs, Wes delivered fresh milk early in the morning on his way to school, which sometimes made him late to school. When the principal found out why Wes was late, he essentially gave Wes permission to be late if needed, saying that Wes had made more money for his family that morning than the principal would make all week. All the brothers worked to fill their father's shoes, driven by the fear of losing the family farm because of a $5,000 mortgage, roughly $60,000 in today's money. They succeeded. At the close of the Depression, the Buchele farm was the only one in their valley stil1 in the same family's hands as at the beginning of the Depression. At age 15, Wes was running a four-man threshing crew, when ``it was 105 deg.F in the shade--and there was no shade!'' The Buchele brothers bought a used tractor and ran it 24 hours a day, doing contract field work. One night, Wes pulled a night shift on that tractor, and while plowing, he woke up as the tractor powered through a fence. The experiences of the sweaty, dirty, grueling work of threshing grain and baling hay led him to a lifelong interest in making the lives of farmers easier and safer. After graduating from Cedar Vale High School, Wes enrolled at Kansas State College where he earned bachelor of Science degree in agricultural engineering. While at Kansas State, Wes met Mary Jagger. They were married at Mary's hometown of Minneapolis, KS, on June 12, 1945. At K-State, Wes enlisted in the Reserve Officers Training Corps, ROTC. As second lieutenant in the U.S. Army, Wes was on a troop ship sailing toward Japan for the anticipated invasion when Japan announced its surrender after atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Wes was part of the demilitarizing force on the island of Hokkaido and the northern part of the island of Honshu, Japan. After World War II, Wes served in the Army Reserve for 20 years, retiring as a major. After leaving Active Army Duty, Wes worked as an engineer for several years for John Deere in Waterloo, IA. He then left John Deere to do graduate work at the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, where he earned his master's degree agricultural and mechanical engineering. He and Mary then moved to Ames, IA, where he earned his Ph.D. in agricultural engineering and soil physics at Iowa State University. After earning his Ph.D., Wes taught at Michigan State University in East Lansing, MI, before returning to Iowa State University in 1963 to join its faculty. As noted by his son, Steven Buchele, after the move back to Ames, ``Dad never worked another day of his life. For Dad, it was all fun and interesting and ISU encouraged his imagination and he loved teaching and inventing things. It wasn't work, and he earned the name `Wild Wes.' '' He also earned the name ``Blood and Guts Buchele'' for how he championed the cause of farm machinery safety. In class, he showed hundreds of slides of people who had lost arms or legs, hands or feet to a PTO shaft or a grain auger or what a farmer looked like after being sprayed with anhydrous ammonia. One student said that he never looked at farming the same way after seeing Wes's slides. At Iowa State, Wes's creativity blossomed. He published hundreds of technical articles, aided greatly by the able editing of his wife, Mary. He was awarded 23 patents, the two most notable being the large round baler and the axial-flow threshing cylinder for combines. Almost all combines sold today are rotary combines that employ a variation of the axial-flow threshing cylinder. Wes also designed blade guards for rotary lawn mowers, a tandem tractor--a precursor to the four-wheel drive tractor--and devices for harvesting crops like strawberries, alfalfa, and marigolds. He developed a ridge-till farming system that, in addition to saving farmers time and fuel, also helped the environment by conserving topsoil and soil moisture. It was a precursor to today's ``No-till farming.'' Wes loved teaching and mentoring the hundreds of graduate students who came from all over the world specifically to study with him. Upon graduation, they then went into industry or back to their home countries, helping further improve agricultural practices throughout the world. Wes published three books: ``The Grain Harvesters'' with Graeme Quick, in 1978; ``Just Call Us Luck'' with twin brother, Luther, about their childhood in Kansas, in 2008; and ``Who Really Invented the Cotton Gin'' with William D. Mayfield in 2016. He also wrote many other unpublished books, including a volume two to the Grain Harvesters, and hundreds of short stories. Leading up to and after retirement in 1989, Mary and Wes traveled the world, teaching in China before and after Tiananmen Square, in Ghana, Australia, Tanzania, Nigeria, and the Philippines. After the death of his wife, Mary, in 2000, Wes wou1d visit, his four children and their spouses--Rod and his wife, Mary Lou, Marybeth, Sheron and her husband, Curtis, and Steven and his wife, Suzanne, his eight grandchildren, and four great-grandchildren, staying for 6 weeks to 2 months, depending on ``the list.'' ``When Dad arrived, he would ask for `the list,' a list of things that needed fixing around the house, promising to stay only as long as there were things to do on that list. Then he would move on to the next child's family--and a new list,'' said Steve Buchele. On Labor Day 2017, Wes decided to mow the backyard of the home in Ames he shared with his daughter, Marybeth. As he used a rope to lower the lawn mower down a slope to finish mowing, he had a major stroke. Nine days later, he died, after hundreds of friends and family came to hospice to say good-bye. Wes Buchele lived a long, full, productive life with energy and verve. He had, indeed, fulfilled his calling to help make the lives of farmers easier and safer, and our country and our world are better for that.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, if I have time at the end of my remarks, I would like to yield to the distinguished Senator from Hawaii. I will try to be prompt. Soon, this Senate will take a historic vote that will impact every American. These votes do not come very often. The last was decades ago. I think we all understand--or at least most of us understand--how critical tax reform is. All of us in the Senate, on both sides of the aisle, are familiar with the burdens and the complexity and the lack of competitiveness associated with our current tax system. It is abundantly clear that this complexity and our antiquated corporate tax system acts as a brake on our economy. It is equally clear that in recent years our economic growth rate--our gross domestic product--has been stuck at a historic low level of 1.9 percent or less. There are many opinions as to why our economy has been so stagnant, causing American job loss, unemployment, and more reliance on government programs. I want to underscore what the people of Kansas have told me repeatedly as to why, at least in part, this has happened. Small business owners, manufacturers, our community bankers, other lending institutions, individual workers laid off or workers hanging on paycheck to paycheck, and virtually everybody in rural America-- farmers, ranchers, and growers--at every townhall meeting have told me that the No. 1 issue of concern is the crushing weight of Federal regulation. That was summed up by one Western Kansas rancher who said: ``Pat, I feel ruled, not governed.'' But we are unwinding right now this regulatory overkill. Today we are making government a partner, not a regulatory adversary. How on Earth did we reach this sad state of affairs? Well, there are many factors-- administrative policies that seem to mimic or compare to the European Union monetary policy, government agendas, and central control. But with this tax bill that can change, and it will change if only we recognize and take this important opportunity--an opportunity that many Members in this body have never had to truly make a difference. This time we can. Can America get back to a place to make history and, once again, to experience the power of the American dream? I am confident that we can. We have before us now a comprehensive plan to address these issues, cleaning up and modernizing the Tax Code to help generate more growth in our economy. The bill before the Senate does exactly that, providing meaningful tax relief for families, small businesses, farmers, ranchers, and growers. I am especially pleased with the rates and bracket structure the legislation would put into place on the individual side. We have done a good job pushing these rate reductions down to lower and middle-income families. This would provide a net tax cut for families in Kansas of about $2,500 and over 10,000 new jobs. As many have pointed out today, we accomplish this by reducing individual tax rates, raising the standard deduction, and increasing the child credits in the Tax Code. Let's be clear, these are consensus, bipartisan ideas and proposals that many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have, in the past, at least--now not now, because of the legislative standoff we have been going through--regularly proposed and supported. Let me also comment on concerns raised by some of my colleagues that we simply cannot afford this bill and that it will worsen the country's financial condition. In putting this bill together, we have used very modest economic growth estimates, below the historic post-World War II norm of 3 percent. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office is currently projecting 1.9 percent growth over the next 10 years, and we learned today that the Joint Committee on Taxation says the Senate bill will create only modest economic growth. Now, notwithstanding the fact that I have never seen a CBO or Joint Taxation Committee projection that has been really accurate, I think these estimates are far too low. It is hard to believe. It is simply unacceptable. I refuse to accept that we cannot return to a more robust economic growth. I think we will achieve better growth rates, and observe that we are well on our way. Recent economic activity bears this out. The economy is now growing at a solid pace with low unemployment and low inflation. Real GDP growth during the first two quarters of the year averaged 2.1 percent at an annual rate, and since January, the unemployment rate fell 0.6 percentage points to 4.2 percent in September. That is the lowest rate in about 16 years. Overall growth is poised to average about 3 percent over the second half of this year--3 percent in the second half of this year. While these are positive trends, my colleagues, we can do more. We need even stronger growth. Stronger growth leads to higher living standards, less dependence on governmental support, and a lower need for spending on entitlement and other programs. How do we get there? We have a tax bill--a tax bill to maximize growth, to create jobs, and to increase wages. This is not what we have just heard from many on the other side--trickle-down economics or any other name that they want to call this. This is commonsense economics, which I have yet to see be refuted by any mainstream economist. Increase the supply of capital in the economy, and you expand the productivity of the economy. This result is more business investment, leading to worker productivity gains--workers who can then earn more, increase their after-tax income, and, in the end, raise their living standards. I want to turn to an essential sector of our national economy-- agriculture, those who are responsible for feeding America in a troubled and hungry world. I am very pleased that the bill reflects the importance of production agriculture to our economy. It is important to keep in mind that few other sectors of the economy face the multiple uncertainties of production agriculture. We are talking about weather, storms, fires, volatility in our global commodity prices, trade disputes, and transportation issues, and the list goes on. When we pass this bill, the agriculture industry will have a number of provisions in the Tax Code that recognize the uncertainty and the volatile nature of the income and expense associated with agriculture operations. These provisions--and we are talking about 34, 35 of them at last count--include accounting rules that allow farmers to manage their income and expenses. For example, in the year when our commodity prices are low--and, yes, this year they are low--they can account for costs in a way that keeps them in operation. There are also specific inventory rules to help manage costs associated with the livestock and dairy operations and to handle items needed for other basic operations, such as fertilizer and also crop treatments. There are unique rules for timber operations. Now, if you want to get down into specifics and just how far we drill down to be of help to agriculture, even baby chickens have their own inventory rule--which, by the way, differs from the rules for ostriches and emus. I would imagine nobody would even think of drilling down to that extend. There are rules set for how to handle damaged stocks and livestock disasters. They are certainly important as of today. I can tell you that these disaster rules provided a critical boost to ranchers in my State, enabling them to begin to recover from the devastating prairie fires in Western Kansas earlier this year. Turning to the new provisions in the bill, we have developed it with agriculture in mind. I would be remiss here not to mention the strong input and advice I have received on these matters from Senator Grassley, Senator Thune, Senator Scott, and my other colleagues who also share a strong interest in the agriculture economy. The bill, for example, liberalizes the depreciation rules for agriculture operations, giving farmers and ranchers 5- year property depreciation, and permitting full expensing of plant and equipment purchases. The bill would greatly improve the ability of the agricultural community to use the cash method of accounting, which provides complexity in managing cash flow, which is essential to providing certainty in operations. There are significant provisions in the legislation that establish a new income tax rate for passthrough organizations. This is a very important issue for the agricultural community. The majority of farms and ranchers are set up as passthroughs, and most of the income earned by farmers flow through these structures. The bill also includes new rules for farmer cooperatives, which are a very important part of production agriculture. We work very hard to ensure that the benefits of cooperative farming are held whole in this tax reform plan. The bill also doubles the exemptions for the estate and gift taxes up to $22 million per couple. I know this sounds like a lot to some of my colleagues, but for landowning, cash-constrained farmers, they can hit this exemption amount quickly, especially in my State of Kansas. Even when they do not, many farmers and ranchers spend thousands of dollars a year on lawyers and accountants' fees to plan for the best way to pass their life's work on to their children--something very special in rural and smalltown America. While I will continue to press for a permanent repeal of the death tax, for now, let's modify it so we reduce its damaging reach. Finally, and above all, the legislation will provide farmers and ranchers with certainty during a very difficult time that we are going through, certainty that they will be not taxed out of business on a down year, certainty that they will have cash available to fund their own operations, certainty that their hard-earned income, farm, or ranch will not have to be sold off just because someone has died, certainty that the Federal Government recognizes their irreplaceable role in meeting the challenges of a very fractured and hungry world. I am very pleased, to say the least, that the Senate bill keeps the ag tax provisions but will also help our farmers by creating a much more pro-growth tax system, lowering their tax burden and simplifying the tax provisions relating to the ag sector. We have an opportunity to experience a renaissance in our American economy. It seems to me that for too long we have had a sort of copycat kind of economic policy based on the European Union. We are talking about a lot of government control. We are talking about more taxes. We are talking about a lot of things that simply have enabled us to tread water. I know we are in a difficult time in the Senate with regard to partisan differences. It reminds me a little bit of a country western song that obviously my staff would hope that I would not mention, but it was: ``The bridge washed out, I can't swim, and my baby's on the other side.'' Well, the bridge is not washed out, and the tax bill is on the other side, along with an American renaissance that will make America enjoy even more economic growth and get us back to that historic 3-percent growth rate and even more. That bridge is open. I urge my colleagues to consider it as we go forward in this debate. Hopefully, we have the votes. Then, if we have the votes--and I think we do--hopefully, some of my colleagues across the aisle will join us. I yield the floor.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, pursuant to section 904 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and the waiver provisions of applicable budget resolutions, I move to waive all applicable sections of that act and applicable budget resolutions for purpose of H.R. 2266, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. ROBERTS

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

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be discharged from further consideration of S. 1616 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time.

Mr. ROBERTS. I know of no further debate on the bill.

Mr. ROBERTS. I ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I rise also to talk about my dear friend and mentor, Bob Dole. Senator Dole just celebrated his 94th birthday, and I think it is obviously right and proper to honor his contributions to our Nation.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I am sorry that I did not catch all of the Senator's remarks, but I think he said that this is a vote on a bill that was introduced in the House. How many cosponsors are on this bill? Is this a legitimate effort here?

Mr. ROBERTS. So this is a legitimate bill that is up. Well, it is not up for consideration now in the House. Is this the Conyers' bill?

Mr. ROBERTS. Is there at least a preamble to this bill or just an opening of a couple of paragraphs or something? Would the Senator describe it?

Mr. ROBERTS. And that is in the bill?

Mr. ROBERTS. Well, I think we have a very honest choice. There has been a lot of talk about single payer. There was a lot of talk about it early on in the debate about ObamaCare. I recall in observations made by President Obama that this was the first step toward single payer. I understand that--well, I know that the former Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, had the same plan, that ObamaCare was the first step toward single payer. All you are doing is just saying, OK, if that is the goal, bring it to a vote.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the distinguished accomplishment of Kansan Paul Kaster on the occasion of his 2017 National Federation of Independent Business, NFIB, Young Entrepreneur Award. Mr. Kaster, of Leawood, KS, is the founder and owner of Crooked Branch Studio, which specializes in woodworking. I ask that my colleagues join me in recognizing Paul on his outstanding achievements. I wish him nothing but the best for his future entrepreneurial and educational endeavors.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I thank my colleague, the ranking member of the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee, for engaging in this important discussion. I am proud to stand before my colleagues in the U.S. Senate to discuss some of the bipartisan work that we have accomplished through regular order at the Agriculture Committee specifically with regard to H.R. 1029, the Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2017, or PRIA 4. PRIA, while technical in nature, is critically important with assisting both EPA in carrying out administrative functions and industry that relies upon timely, science-based pesticide registration decisions to get products on the market and in the hands of farmers, ranchers, and other consumers. PRIA, historically, has received widespread support from a diverse coalition of stakeholders, including members of the pesticide registrant community--both agricultural and nonagricultural uses, labor, and environmental advocates, which has contributed to Congress's ability to pass reauthorizations swiftly and by unanimous consent. With the Widespread support of the PRIA coalition, as illustrated by a coalition letter addressed to our committee on June 29, 2017, which expresses support of the amendment to H.R. 1029 and urges swift action, this effort should be no different. Our committee held a hearing earlier this year to review this issue in an open and transparent manner. As we have heard time and time again, farmers and ranchers want regulatory certainty. EPA and registrants who rely on PRIA to get new products on the market and in the hands of farmers, ranchers, and other consumers want certainty. My colleague raises an issue that has historically been outside the scope of the technical, fee-based registration process of PRIA. I certainly understand the concerns that have been raised by some groups with regard to certain actions EPA is considering with regard to the Worker Protection Standard and the Certification of Pesticide Applicators rules. My hope is that EPA and the relevant stakeholders can constructively discuss areas of concern related to these issues within the framework of our Federal regulatory process without jeopardizing PRIA. Current authority for PRIA expires at the end of this fiscal year. With that deadline in mind, our recent committee action is timely and necessary to get PRIA updated. Should PRIA's authority lapse, pesticide registration will not be available for a wide range of crops that rely on innovative and new solutions for pest protection, and a lapse will have a negative impact on the products requiring registration that are used to protect public health and ensure public safety. It is important that we get PRIA across the finish line not only to provide certainty to the industry but to also provide new products to growers for crop protection and to consumers to protect public health, and the timely reauthorization provides resources to ensure safety education components are maintained. I thank my colleague Senator Stabenow and other members of the Agriculture Committee for working with me on this issue together and in a bipartisan manner. I look forward to working with Senator Stabenow and the coalition in support of this legislation to get this bill across the Senate floor as quickly as possible and ultimately enacted into law.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I would like to acknowledge an important event in our history, the Orphan Train Movement. This movement is not only extremely important to Kansas; it also placed approximately 250,000 orphaned, abandoned, and homeless children in homes across the United States. The National Orphan Train Complex, which is headquartered in our very own Concordia, KS--also known as Orphan Train Town--continues to tell stories of children who were impacted by these orphan trains. The first orphan train arrived in Kansas in 1859 to the city of Wathena, where three children were placed with Kansas families. Since this first train, 12,000 children were moved to Kansas homes. These children would grow up in Kansas, raising families, growing the economy, and serving their communities through farming, teaching, and starting businesses. These children and their journey are an integral part of Kansas history. The mission of the National Orphan Train Complex in Concordia, KS, is to collect, preserve, interpret, and disseminate knowledge about the orphan trains and the children who rode them. The National Orphan Train Complex is the only organization compiling a master list of orphan train riders to assist future generations with genealogical information. The tireless work done by this organization deserves acknowledgement. I am proud to recognize the 15th annual celebration of Orphan Train Riders, which takes place June 1 through June 4. I ask my colleagues join me in recognizing the Orphan Train Movement and the National Orphan Train Complex on their outstanding research and preservation of our Nation's history.

Mr. ROBERTS

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

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I wish to thank my dear friend, my colleague from Georgia, for making such an outstanding statement in his own inimitable fashion--sort of a Paul Harvey of the Senate, if you will--and I know that he would never lie on the Senate floor. He might stretch the truth a little, but just a bit. I thank him so much for his testimony on behalf of our next Secretary of Agriculture. The Senate will soon vote on the confirmation of Governor Sonny Perdue, the President's nominee for U.S. Secretary of Agriculture. The Department of Agriculture is made up of 29 agencies and offices, and it employs nearly 100,000 men and women who work in all 50 States and around the globe. The Department provides leadership on food, agriculture, natural resources, rural development, nutrition, scientific research, and related issues that impact every American every day. Throughout our Nation's history, our farmers and ranchers and business owners in rural America have survived drought and disease and floods and tornadoes and whatever else Mother Nature throws at them. We just had a big prairie fire in Kansas. Yet, year after year, they produce the safest, most abundant and affordable food and fiber supply in the world. Today, however, our producers from across the country are facing tough economic times, with multiple years of low prices. These same producers now need a strong market for whatever they produce. During this critical time, the importance of trade for the agriculture industry cannot be overstated. We have to understand within the administration, within this Senate, and with our colleagues in the House, that, yes, it is important to export things that we make, but it is also equally important to export things that we grow. On top of all of this, our farmers and ranchers and rural businesses have been burdened by regulations from agencies across the Federal Government. I have heard time and again, as has my distinguished colleague who is the Presiding Officer, that the costly and hard-to- understand regulations have and are endangering the ability of our producers to even stay in business. Members of the Agriculture Committee have a lot of work to do over the next 2 years, including regulatory reform and recommending to our new Secretary what he can do in that regard but also the reauthorization of the farm bill. We intend to do that work in the bipartisan fashion that has served us so well in the past. I will make the statement--I have the privilege of being chairman of the Agriculture Committee--that we are the least partisan committee in the Senate, and today that means a lot. It also means we work well with our distinguished ranking member, Senator Deborah Stabenow from Michigan. But, now, more than ever, agriculture needs a voice, an advocate, and a champion at the highest levels of government, and Governor Perdue has been nominated to serve in exactly that role. As has been said, he is from Georgia. He was raised on a farm and practiced as a veterinarian before returning to his home county to work in the grain business. He was elected to serve in local and State government, including two terms as the distinguished Governor of the State of Georgia. During his confirmation hearing--and I want to underscore that his confirmation hearing was unique in the Senate in that there were no attacks on the nominee--Governor Perdue knew the answers to the questions that he was going to be asked. He didn't have to be briefed. The Governor demonstrated a real understanding of the challenges that now face the agriculture industry and the willingness to work together to find solutions. The Agriculture Committee received many letters in support of his nomination, including support from six former U.S. Secretaries of Agriculture, representing both Republican and Democratic Presidents, and another from nearly 700 organizations across the agriculture and food value chain. Last month, the Agriculture Committee voted by voice vote to report Governor Perdue's nomination to the full Senate--a voice vote. Our farmers and ranchers have been long waiting for this important role to be filled. Once Governor Perdue becomes Secretary Perdue, I know he will put the needs of farmers, ranchers, and others in rural America first, and lead us in both the House and Senate to implement a productive trade policy and economic recovery in rural and smalltown America. So I urge my colleagues to join in bipartisan support for Sonny Perdue's confirmation as Agriculture Secretary and for being the champion for farmers and ranchers and growers and consumers. I yield the floor. Mr. President, after a careful counting of the Members present on the floor, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, today I rise to speak in support of the President's Supreme Court nominee, Judge Neil Gorsuch, who, right now, is about two-thirds through his second day of hearings--better described perhaps as a grilling. Simply put, I think the President made an extraordinary selection. Currently, Judge Gorsuch serves on the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, which includes my home State of Kansas. Our State has seen firsthand how Judge Gorsuch interprets the law. He has had an outstanding judicial record while serving on the court. What is more, he is highly respected and supported by individuals in the judicial community who align on all sides of the political spectrum-- except, inexplicably, the U.S. Senate. Judge Gorsuch's qualifications are not only noteworthy but extremely impressive. He graduated from Columbia University and Harvard Law School. He received a doctorate in legal philosophy from Oxford, as a recipient of the Marshall Scholarship, one of the most prestigious scholars programs in the country. He has litigation experience from his time as a law partner, and he has clerked for not one but two Supreme Court Justices. Examining his record during his time on the Tenth Circuit gives us some insight into the judge's approach to interpreting the law. When we read his opinions, we know he is a judge who follows the law, applying the text of the Constitution and statutes impartially. Of primordial importance to this body is his critique of the executive branch's tendency to assume the roles of the judicial and legislative branches. No matter which political party controls the executive branch, this body--the Senate of the United States--must protect its ability to legislate and create laws. The Founding Fathers intended for the separation of powers to remain inviolate. Judge Gorsuch understands the role of the judicial branch and the significance of maintaining that balance of power. He has made it absolutely clear that he will not legislate from the bench. I repeat. He has made it clear that he will not legislate from the bench. That might just be the problem for those who would like to vote for a judge who would legislate from the bench. I, along with many of my colleagues here in the Senate today, confirmed Judge Gorsuch over 10 years ago. Judge Gorsuch's record was so noncontroversial, the Senate unanimously supported his nomination. That includes the minority leader, Senator Schumer, and then-Senators Obama, Clinton, and Biden. I repeat. Judge Gorsuch has received support from across the entire political spectrum. His judicial record over the past 10 years has made him even more deserving of the Senate's full support. The American people went to the polls in November, knowing the next President would have the distinct honor of nominating the next Supreme Court Justice. The American people have spoken. As the Senate, it is now our responsibility to see through this nomination and appoint the judge to the High Court. The Wall Street Journal summed up what is happening within its editorial page today in pointing out that Senators want Judge Gorsuch to declare how he would vote in specific areas of the law--questions that every Supreme Court nominee declines to answer. Quoting from the editorial: ``At the 1967 hearings for Thurgood Marshall, then-Senator Edward Kennedy called it a sound legal precedent that any nominee for the Supreme Court would have to defer any comments on any matters which are either before the court or very likely to appear before the court.'' The Journal's editorial went on to say that in the 1993 confirmation hearings, Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg emphasized: ``A judge sworn to decide impartially can offer no forecast, no hints; for that would show not only disregard for the specifics of the particular case, it would also display disdain for the entire judicial process.'' I regret to say that profound advice apparently does not apply today. One of my colleagues serving on the Judiciary Committee pretty well summed up the dilemma we have in the Senate when he said to the judge: ``If you fail to be explicit and forthcoming, the committee would have to assume his views were in line with Mr. Trump's.'' And there is the rub. Judge Gorsuch has written 789 opinions, with only 15 dissents from other judges. The apparent burr in the minority's saddle--the Democrats' saddle--has nothing to do with Judge Gorsuch or his qualifications. The problem is that Mr. Trump is now President Trump. My question is this. All right, we know you feel that way. In every committee hearing that we have, we know you feel that way. When will this end? When will we get back to what is referred to as regular order? That question lies squarely with my colleagues in the minority. I am really disheartened to hear the rhetoric coming from across the aisle in the days since the new President took office. The minority has taken extraordinary lengths to extend the confirmation process of the President's nominees--from shying away from our constitutional responsibilities and not voting on nominees in committee hearings to using unprecedented amounts of time to speak on this floor, disapproving of the President and his nominees, or anything else. These stall tactics are unbefitting of the world's greatest deliberative body. We have fallen from bipartisan deliberation, worthy of public opinion and support, to engaging with poisonous arrows of political procrastination. With the nomination of Judge Gorsuch, we now have an opportunity to fix this sorry state of affairs. This is the opportunity we should seize to restore comity to the Senate. The people of this great Nation deserve nothing else. I am hopeful that the minority will recognize the superlative qualities Judge Neil Gorsuch possesses and provide him with a fair and swift confirmation process. That is not happening as of today. But hope springs eternal, even within the Senate as it now exists. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. ROBERTS

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

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Madam President, I rise today to speak about the historical and unprecedented wildfires that burned through southwest Kansas last week. We had fires in 21 of our Kansas counties, roughly one-fifth of our State. High winds and dry conditions caused fires of the highest classification that blazed across central and western Kansas some 30 to 40 feet high, burning more than 700,000 acres of land, making this the largest wildfire in our State's history. The Kansas Division of Emergency Management has said it could take weeks to determine the full extent of devastation from the fires. Clark County, KS, officials--that is the county that was the hardest hit--estimate a devastating loss of anywhere from 3,000 to 9,000 head of cattle. That is just in one county. As I indicated, Clark County was the hardest hit by the windblown fires, with over 85 percent of the land in the county consumed by these prairie fires. This is hundreds of thousands of acres in one county and over 700,000 in regard to our State. On Friday, I drove south from Dodge City, KS, through range and ranchland I didn't even recognize. What used to be gently rolling prairie, dotted with herds of cattle and crisscrossed by fencing, is now reduced to blackened dust. Friends of mine lost their ranch when a 40-foot wall of fire roared out of the valley over the bluff and burned out their operation. We have unimaginable damage to land and property, but also heart-wrenching scenes of cattle and wildlife burned, wounded, and wandering. Many Kansans lost everything. According to Sheriff John Ketron of Clark County, 31 houses and over 440,000 acres were burned there. We have longtime friends there, John and Carol Swayze. We have known them for years. John said with tears in his eyes: ``Pat, it took me 43 years to build up this operation, and it took about an hour to take it all down.'' Riding with Sheriff Ketron, we were assessing the town of Ashland, where a volunteer firefighting force managed to save the town when it became surrounded in flames. Some volunteers were fighting fires elsewhere in the area and learned their own homes had been engulfed and lost. I met with brave people in the towns of Englewood and Ashland, KS, in the heart of Clark County, who had just come through frightening experiences fighting the unpredictable and unstoppable fires. Some were out driving cattle away from the fires and had become separated from loved ones. When the flames turned, they were left to pray for their safety. Kylene Scott, with the High Plains Journal, calls it ``the worst day of her life.'' She wrote a courageous and honest account of the day. I will read her words now: I think I had them going the right way, then the wind switched. Now I just don't know. When I heard the crack in my husband's voice yesterday afternoon, I knew it was bad. He is normally the calm, cool, collected one. A family friend alerted him to the fire in Clark County very near the Scott farm after we'd returned home from burying my Dad yesterday. Coming back from a funeral. When they said the closest neighbor was being evacuated he went as quickly as he could fearing for the cattle herd he'd worked the last five years to build following the death of his own Dad. I stayed behind with the boys at our house 40 miles away. When the wind switched at my house from south/southwest to the north, I began to worry even more and called him. At this point he was waiting out the fire and smoke in the wheat field, helplessly watching the house and barn burn. I wanted to be at the farm so bad, but there wasn't much that could be done. When he made it home unscathed I was pretty happy, but sad at the same time. Knowing there was nothing we could do to fix what it took for Mother Nature mere minutes to destroy. Fifty-two cows are on the farm, with about half or \3/4\ of them with young calves. Most are accounted for. All the grass is gone, as is the hay stockpile. He went and hauled water to the cows this morning and some are scorched and others have udders with burns. One cow was bawling for her missing calf. ``Those poor mommas,'' was my text reply to him this morning. I made my way early this afternoon to see the farm or what's left of it with my own eyes. As bad as I wanted to be down there, a piece of me dreaded the drive. The closer I got to the farm, the worse it got. Blowing dirt, darkening skies because of the dust and awful winds. I pulled in the drive, like I had done a hundred times in the nearly 20 years I have been part of the family, and I had to stop my vehicle. The tears came and the heartbreak overwhelmed me. I thought of the old white farm house with the wonderful front porch, where my husband spent a large majority of his childhood in and around. My fondest memory is when we'd stop and see my husband's Grandma Pauline. She'd always have something sweet to eat and a cold drink at the kitchen table. The home had been around for 100 years and still had a large portion of the family momentos in it. It was reduced to ashes and rubble. All that's standing is the chimney. I couldn't see the barn around the trees, but I again had to stop and sit when I pulled around the corner. The barn. The old barn with its red siding. I remember when my father- in-law had it painted and how proud he was because it looked so good. I remember when he laid the brick in front of the tack room and built a new door for it. My boys explored every inch of it when we worked calves last fall. You could ``almost'' hear the horses munching in the stalls decades ago when you stood in the center alley. Now it's just a charred pile of tin. I realize the house and barn are just buildings. Things can be replaced. But dang, it's so hard to see it all reduced to ashes and rubble. To see part of the Scott family history, more than a hundred years, just be gone. Just like that. It's hard. We've had incredible friends and family offering help, hay and feed, and it's heartwarming to know how much people care. Like I heard an Ashland, Kansas resident on the news this morning being interviewed, it's just what southwest Kansas people do. Help and survive. Here is a picture that was taken on Kylene and Spencer Scott's wedding day in 2009 up here. It is a beautiful sight. Off in the distance is the Clark County Lake. It is rolling hills, cattle country, cattle, and grass. Looking at this picture now, it is not hard to wonder how this land will come back to provide for so many, as it has for generations of Kansas farm and ranch families whose sweat and blood have produced for Kansas, our Nation, and, yes, the world, as well. There is the other picture. They got married here. It was the happiest day of their life. They saw this, and that became just about the worst day of their life. And yet, having seen this devastation firsthand, I don't wonder about Kansas and our ability to rebuild. It is in our State motto: Ad astra per aspera--to the stars through difficulties. In one of the emergency management centers I met Joyce Edinger. When I asked her what I could do to help, she just said: ``The Lord will provide.'' She had lost virtually everything. I think that pretty well sums it up. The faith of Kansans gives us courage to rebuild--the courage to come through fire. Ashland banker Kendall Kay emotionally said: Senator, we are going to need help. We really don't want it, but we are going to need it. I am so proud of the people of my State who have come in with that help before they were even asked. I had been in contact with all of our producer groups in Kansas--the Kansas Livestock Association, the Kansas Farm Bureau--who along with our State agencies had been leading the voluntary relief effort. I commend them for their efforts in collecting hay for cattle, as well as monetary donations, coming in from all parts of the United States, and volunteer coordination for repairs to property and fencing. With Congressman Roger Marshall of the First Congressional District, and my colleague here and friend in the Senate, Jerry Moran, we have been in touch with the Department of Agriculture with regard to assistance that should be available to farmers and ranchers in counties that have suffered losses. Here is what we are trying to fix. This fellow is walking across here to that bluff that overlooks that valley that Spencer and Kylene looked over, and this fellow here is Chad Tenpenny, my top guy in Kansas. That is me with my hands in my pockets. It is pretty rough to see ground like this that was grass and to look at the utter devastation. Folks, when that wind blows and when that dust starts up again, we could be in for even more trouble. So cleanup is under way, but we are trying to get help to cut through the redtape and get a disaster declaration. I talked to the Governor this afternoon. Primarily, it is the Emergency Conservation Program, the Livestock Indemnity Program, and Environmental Quality Incentives Program, or EQIP, that are the key programs. It won't make people whole by any means, but it will give them hope. So cleanup is under way. Kansas is a bootstrap State. It is not just about building new fencing. We have families who have lost the farmhouse and all the equipment they need to rebuild. Many livestock producers have had the gruesome task of euthanizing cattle that have been badly burned. We have to remove the carcasses. We have to find land for the survivors to graze. And we have a lot of uncertainty. How long will it take for the grasses to come back? When can we get rain to avoid a dust bowl? It is really too soon to tell. But we have been through disasters before. Almost 1 year ago, we had the Anderson Creek fire, and we have come through tornadoes and ice storms. Recovery from disasters of this magnitude, however, requires us to cut through the redtape. It requires getting the right information to producers so they know how to apply for aid and then to expedite it. Yes, it requires us to look at our programs to see where we can improve them. Now, this fire has not received much attention in the national media. You see, we are a flyover State. All we do is produce food and fiber for Kansas and our Nation and for a troubled and hungry world. But I do want to commend members of the press in Kansas, especially photographer Bo Rader of the Wichita Eagle, who took this photo of my State Director Chad Tenpenny and me walking through rangeland outside of Ashland. The Wichita Eagle has gone out of their way to show the world what this fire looks like to real people. The Hutchison News, the High Plains Journal, and the Dodge City Daily Globe have all told and are telling this story. The same is true for the TV and the radio crews who have helped get the news of town evacuations safety notices to our people. This is what they do. Rest assured that, as chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, I am committed to the Kansans I serve. They know me. I know them. I know that Clark County and the other 20 counties will come back. We will ensure they get the help they need. Ad astra per aspera--to the stars through difficulty. It is not just a motto; it is who we are. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry has adopted rules governing its procedures for the 115th Congress. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 2, of the Standing Rules of the Senate, on behalf of myself and Senator Stabenow, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the committee rules be printed in the Record.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I believe that to continue to delay confirmation of Congressman Mike Pompeo to serve as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency would be a real disservice to the Nation and to the security of the American people. It was 2 weeks ago that I had the honor and privilege of introducing my colleague from Kansas during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee--a committee I once had the privilege of chairing. More than enough time has passed for all Senators to really acquaint themselves with the pertinent qualifications of the President's nominee. As a long-serving Member of the House Intelligence Committee, Mike has the merits for the job. He has the experience, he has the knowledge, the judgment, and the skills necessary to lead the Central Intelligence Agency. Mike is Army strong. He graduated at the top of his class at West Point and then served as a cavalry officer patrolling the Iron Curtain before the fall of the Berlin Wall. After completing his military service, Mike attended Harvard Law School, where he was an editor of the Harvard Law Review. Because he is an attorney, Mike understands the law, as emphasized by my distinguished colleague from California, a long-serving member of the Intelligence Committee, Senator Feinstein. Aside from the many questions posed to Congressman Pompeo, this is the salient point. He will respect the limitations we have placed upon our intelligence services, and he will preserve our constitutional values. After practicing law, Mike returned to his mother's roots in South Central Kansas, running several very successful businesses in Wichita before making the decision to run for Congress in 2010. Mike came to Washington with a strong desire to serve the people of the Fourth District. Ready for a challenge, he sought a seat on the House Intelligence Committee at a time when intelligence-gathering methods were under fire. Again, a salient point, as an experienced legislator, Mike Pompeo understands and respects the role of Congress and the need for vigorous oversight, again demonstrated by the remarks of the distinguished Senator from California, Mrs. Feinstein. I know he will provide the House and Senate Intelligence Committees with candid and honest assessments and provide the information the committee needs necessary to fulfill their oversight responsibilities. I know he will also demand that of everyone who serves at the CIA. In so doing, I know--and he knows--the difference between intelligence reporting and an intelligence product with salient input from all within the intelligence community, thus making sure our intel community does not become mired in assessment failure or any political controversy. We have certainly seen enough of that. There are few positions in government of greater importance than that of the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. At a time when democracy and freedom are under assault by radical elements fueled by hatred, our intelligence-gathering services must have a strong leader who will guide their mission and ensure the safety of the American people and not be swayed by any political interference. We must demonstrate the respect we have--all of us in this Chamber have--for the men and women of the intelligence community by giving them a leader that will have their backs while, at the same time, will demand excellence of each and every one of them. Mike Pompeo will be that kind of leader. I strongly urge every one of my colleagues to support his nomination. We have had ample time for debate. Now it is time to confirm. Mr. President, I yield the floor.