James Risch

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Madam President, I rise in memory of Marcos Gil of Arimo, ID, who gave his life on April 28, 2018 rescuing a young woman from drowning. When 17-year-old Marcos Gil saw his girlfriend caught in a circular current downriver from a waterfall, he rushed to her aid. Despite being a poor swimmer, Marcos jumped into the Portneuf River to save the 14- year-old girl as she called for help, submerging himself in the powerful current and pushing her toward the bank of the river. With Marcos' help, the young woman was able to grab hold of a branch at the edge of the riverbank and swim to safety. Tragically, Marcos was unable to extricate himself from that same current, drowning in the process of saving the young woman's life. Those who knew Marcos described him as friendly, deeply caring and eager to serve, and the story of his courage and sacrifice continues to resonate throughout eastern Idaho and beyond. Members of the community have rallied around the Gil family, including the Bannock County Sheriff's Office, which honored Marcos posthumously with the first ever lifesaving award presented to a civilian, and the Red Cross of Greater Idaho, which recognized Marcos with its East Idaho Real Heroes award. This year, Marcos was posthumously awarded the Carnegie Medal by the Carnegie Hero Fund Commission. The award, which is given to recognize those who have risked their lives to save others, will be presented to his parents, Margarito and Silvia Gil. At just 17 years old, Marcos Gil left the world far too soon. He is deeply missed by his family and all who were fortunate enough to know him, and his bravery and heroism will not be forgotten.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, along with my colleagues Senator Mike Crapo and Representative Mike Simpson, I congratulate College of Southern Idaho, CSI, president Jeff Fox on his well-deserved retirement. At age 10, just as CSI was gearing up to offer its very first classes in the fall semester of 1965, Dr. Fox's grandfather took him to the farm fields where the new local college was being built. Twenty-two years later, Dr. Fox returned to the College of Southern Idaho to begin his career in education. For 33 years, Dr. Fox has dedicated his life to educating and developing the citizens and the communities of South-Central Idaho. He first came to CSI as an English professor, spending 15 years in the classroom helping his students learn and grow. His talent and skill eventually led him to accept positions in the college's administration, serving as the director of the Academic Development Center, chairman of the English Department, and executive vice president and chief academic officer. In 2014, Dr. Fox was selected to serve as the fourth president of CSI. During his tenure, he oversaw a rapid expansion of the campus and community, introducing new training programs and academic offerings to better equip students to thrive after graduation. Among his many accomplishments, he was instrumental in the dedication and administration of the Applied Technology and Innovation Center that houses CSI's workforce development and custom training programs for businesses and industries. Today, CSI is known throughout South-Central Idaho for its outstanding nursing, agriculture, business, and workforce development programs, and its passion for equipping students with the tools needed to build a successful career and life. The students and faculty at CSI have been fortunate to prosper under Dr. Fox's skilled and steady leadership, and there is no question he has left an indelible mark on the CSI campus and the Magic Valley community at large. President Fox, congratulations on your outstanding career. You make our great State proud, and we wish you all the best in your retirement and future endeavors.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Madam President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, I would like 3 minutes to close the debate on Michael Pack.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President and fellow Senators, we are about to do the final vote on Michael Pack. This man is uniquely qualified to hold this position. He has done an outstanding job. Everyone should look at the most recent documentary he did on the Supreme Court. It was just outstanding. There has been a political fight over him for 2 years and 1 day. Today is the moment of truth. It is time to vote on Mr. Pack. Debate is closed. I yield the floor.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Thank you. I appreciate these comments. There is nothing that the Senator just stated that I disagree with. One point, in passing, and I say this in the spirit of trying to get to the objective that I laid out, and that is, it is my intent to engage the second branch of government, not only the agencies that are responsible for this--Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, the State Department, USAID--but also the White House. The President has to have a role here. He has obviously undertaken the role. I have already spoken to him about this. I intend to have other lengthy conversations about this. I am engaging the President to assist us. This is not a partisan issue. As Mr. Durbin has pointed out, and rightfully so, this virus doesn't care whether you are a Republican or Democrat; it doesn't care whether you are an American or not an American. It doesn't care if you are a President of the United States or, in the case of some countries around the world, a member of the highest authority there is in that country. The virus just doesn't care. In order for us to accomplish this, it is going to be a bill--it is not going to be a resolution--and it has to be approved by the second branch of government. They fully understand what we are trying to do here. They have committed their resources and their input to this, and I am convinced they are working in good faith, just as everyone here is, to try to reach these goals of doing something better in the future than what we have experienced just recently. Senator, again, thank you for your attention to this. Thank you for your input, and I commend to you that we will work together on this as we go forward

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, would the Senator yield for a few moments?

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, reserving the right to object. First of all, let me commend my good friend from Illinois for bringing this. I know he is frustrated, as all of us are, with what has happened with this pandemic that came out of China and swept the world and caused all the grief that it has for America and for every other country on the planet. It is important to note, I think, as we start, that the United States has been the single most generous donor of global health assistance around the world. We do hear people, from time to time, criticize the foreign assistance that America gives out. Probably the pandemic that we have just gone through, with this COVID-19 from China, is the best indication that there is for why certain foreign assistance is so crucial. This foreign assistance we give in the healthcare area is given, amongst other reasons, to keep those things from spreading to the United States. Last year alone, we, the United States of America, we American taxpayers, provided over $9 billion in global health assistance through the State Department and USAID. That $9 billion does not account for the amount that the CDC spent in global health efforts. So it is well over $9 billion that we Americans have put out there. We strengthen health systems; we train health workers; we build supply chains; we connect health networks; we support cutting-edge research and innovation; and, yes, develop and expand access to therapeutics and vaccines, which is what my good friend from Illinois is addressing here when it comes to vaccines. I am going to talk about that in a minute. We led the international efforts to combat AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis, polio, Ebola, and other viruses that came out of China. We are the single largest donor to the Global Fund and U.N. agencies, including UNICEF. I hope that there isn't a suggestion that we are withdrawing from collaborative efforts to develop a COVID-19 vaccine because we did not directly participate in the EU pledging conference. In reality, leading partners in that effort include the Global Fund and Gavi, where we are the major donors, so we will be participating in the collaborative effort to develop vaccines for COVID-19. I think it is also important to note that the President has made a historic--a historic 3-year pledge and is strongly supporting Gavi's COVID-19 efforts. Gavi stands for the global alliance for vaccines. It was essentially the brainchild of Bill Gates. He and Melinda, of course, in my judgment, are on an equal level with Mother Teresa for what they have done with global health. We are participating with Gavi and, like I said, the President has made a historic 3-year pledge to that. I appreciate the feelings the good Senator from Illinois has about the President of the United States, and he did indeed put the brakes on WHO because he felt there were shortcomings with WHO when it came to WHO's work with China and their failure really to get after China at the very beginning of this to do what it really should have done. I am going to object to this resolution not because the effort by the good Senator from Illinois isn't well-taken. It is well-taken. We had a similar one 2 weeks ago and they came out here and objected to it and the Senator is frustrated because he feels we should be doing more. First of all, during the 2 weeks--we obviously were gone for 1 week-- but let me tell you what was going on during that week and the subsequent week. I promised, at that time, that the Foreign Relations Committee was going to take this issue on because it is of such importance that we don't go through this again, and there is a lot more that we can do than simply pass a resolution. It is my ambition to create a very significant piece of legislation that will be bipartisan, that creates a vehicle to address a fast- moving virus like this. We can all argue about the WHO and what they did or didn't do, their connections to China and that sort of thing, but that is not going to help us as we go forward. What we do know is that WHO has done good work in the past. They were a really good partner with us, as the Senator knows, when it came to implementing PEPFAR and doing great things in the battle against AIDS. They were very helpful with Ebola and very helpful with smallpox, but this was a different virus. This was a house on fire. WHO is simply not, at this time, geared to be a fireman. When the fire bell rings, we need a vehicle to address a virus. This is going to happen again because in the Wuhan district, there is a vast bat population, and they are carrying about 2,000 different species of virus. Unfortunately, and frighteningly, we don't know what all those viruses can do. Heaven help us if we get one out of there that is worse than COVID-19 that we have had, but we need a fire department that can address this. I hope we are going to be able to engage China. If not, we are going to have to find ways of dealing with this. Where is that vehicle going to be carried? Is it going to be a new part of WHO? Is it going to be part of the CDC? Is it going to be a new international organization? I can't answer that, but I can tell you this. On a bipartisan basis, Senator Murphy, who is also on the Foreign Relations Committee, and I have introduced a bill to address a number of these things, including the vaccine question and including working on getting a vehicle to do what I have described. I think everyone is working on this in good faith. The bill that will be introduced is written on paper. It is not written on stone. We are wide open to suggestions as to what kind of a vehicle it is that will address this like firemen and not in a slower fashion like other health challenges have presented. Senator Murphy and I have had a number of discussions on this. We are both committed to reach the goals that I know Senator Durbin and that I think this whole body wants to reach. We are going to hold a series of hearings as to how to do this, how best to do it, how it should be funded, how it should be organized, and how the management should take place. What it is not going to focus on is the finger-pointing for what happened after COVID escaped from a bat into a human being in Wuhan, China, and what happened after it left Wuhan, China, and went around the world. We have really good information on that already. There is going to be a lot of other investigations and hearings and that sort of thing. We want to talk about, what do we do when this happens in the future? How can we create an agency that just like the fire department, when the bell rings, they pull their boots on; they slide down the pole; they get on the truck; and they go put out the fire. I guarantee Senator Durbin that we will continue to work on this. My staff tells me--and I am glad to hear that Mr. Durbin's staff is working with them on the language on this particular resolution, and I thank the Senator for that and I invite him and commit to him that we will work with him as we develop this new legislation and as we go through the hearings. So, again, please don't take this as combative. It is not. It is intended, in the best spirit, to help us all move forward to get to a piece of very significant legislation that will hopefully take us forward like PEPFAR did and as some of the other monumental pieces of legislation did that can address this incredibly difficult situation and hurtful situation not only for America but for the world. And I state to the Senator that I invite your participation, encourage your participation, and assure you that we will work in good faith to try to reach these goals. With that, I object for the reasons stated.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, what you are seeing here today is a pure, unadulterated exercise in politics-- politics that are steeped with the difference of political philosophy between the two parties. With relation to the complaint that my colleague has just made that this nomination hasn't been adequately vetted, this nomination was made 2 years ago tomorrow, June 4, 2018. Mr. Pack came before the committee. He has been before the committee twice. He has produced numerous documents due to the complaints of the Democrats on the committee. He has been looked at by the White House. His business dealings have been looked at by the Justice Department, by the Internal Revenue Service, and he has been cleared of anything. The U.S. Agency for Global Media is an important agency because it is charged with supporting international broadcasting outlets around the world in the face of the kinds of misinformation and things that are put out by other countries that are untrue. The real reason for the objection to Mr. Pack's nomination is that this man is a patriot. This is a man who makes documentary films that portray the greatness of America. Anyone who disagrees with that ought to spend the time to look at the documentary he just made, which was run on public TV within the last 30 days, regarding Clarence Thomas and what he had to go through to get on the Supreme Court. It was a superb representation of what happened in that. If you watch that, you will see why the Democrats are absolutely opposed to Mr. Pack. But don't take our word for this. RealClearPolitics, after this whole thing started, did its own investigation into this, and they noted that the business arrangements of Mr. Pack used to make these documentaries are very common for documentary filmmakers and, like Pack, filmmakers and television producers also use nonprofits to collect contributions from donors and then set up a for-profit company to make these films. This is exactly what Senator Merkley was objecting to. Having said that, they went on to interview others, including attorneys and everything else. Another producer with no business ties to Pack told RealClearPolitics ``that he set up the same two-pronged way of funding films last year on the advice of counsel, who told him it was standard operating procedure.'' This has been looked at. It has been reviewed. Look, the committee has had this in its hands for almost 2 years. I have been really patient. Every time that I set this for a hearing and they wanted more time, I let that go. Finally, the last time, I was really, really disappointed in the Democrats' engagement of the political system, enjoining it with the potential criminal justice system, to try to stop this. The night before the business meeting, I got a letter from the attorney general for the District of Columbia--obviously a partisan individual--that says that he is going to look at this and, therefore, he is investigating it. The Democrats then said: Well, we can't go ahead with this because he is being investigated by this partisan person from DC. Look, I am on the Ethics Committee. There are six of us. Half of us sit on the Foreign Relations Committee. In every instance I can think of on the Ethics Committee where the U.S. Justice Department has asked us to stand down because they were doing a legitimate criminal investigation, we have done so. In this particular case, it was a partisan agency of the District of Columbia that noticed that they were going to do this investigation. I started my career as a prosecutor. I have always felt that the justice system and the prosecuting system should be above politics, but to get a partisan individual to send a letter--after 2 years--on the eve of the business meeting, that he was going to open a business meeting again, after many delays, was just too much. But I did delay the business meeting for 1 week, and after that 1 week we had a business meeting. The Democrats made motion after motion to delay. Again, I was as patient as I could be. I said during these motions that we were only going to go on so long with this. Finally, as was noted by some of the attorneys in the room, had this occurrence happened in a court of law, the attorneys would have been held in contempt of court for making repetitive motions that were obviously delay motions and done spuriously. So, after the eighth motion, I declared the motions out of order, and we went to what democracies do. We went to a vote. To no one's surprise, it was a straight party-line vote: 12 votes to send Mr. Pack's confirmation to the floor for confirmation and 10 votes against that. This is a democracy. The way we do this is we have disagreements, particularly when it comes to political matters such as this, but to try to engage the justice system in this I find just really, really disheartening. We are going to have a vote on Mr. Pack, and it is very simple. If you don't want Mr. Pack to take this job, then you vote no, and if you do, then you say yes. But this has been investigated back and forth. Regardless of the breast-beating and the rending of garments over what an awful person he is and how awful his businesses have been, keep in mind, this is all politics. If you see the kind of work that he has done, he makes America proud when he makes a documentary. So I would object to the resolution that has been proposed.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Not yet. I want to yield to Senator Braun.

Mr. RISCH. Madam President, reserving the right to object, let me state the resolution referred to by my friend from Illinois is comfortably residing in the Foreign Relations Committee at the present time and is subject to the regular order of Congress and of the committee. There is almost nothing that the Senator said that I disagree with, although from time to time I do disagree with my good friend and colleague from Illinois. I think that this is a matter of most consequence to the United States of America today, and certainly the pursuit of a vaccine and/or a cure are of utmost importance. I think that the process by which we go through that is incredibly important. Like the Senator from Illinois, I am a huge fan of the NIH and, for that matter, the CDC, which do great things for the public health system in not only America but in the world. They are vastly underappreciated. They are much like the electric switch in our rooms. Every morning, we get up and turn on the electricity and everything is fine, and we just take it for granted and don't even think about it. That is true of the NIH and the CDC. They do good work regardless of whether we are thinking about it. In America, we have something more than just a government effort when it comes to public health. We have this great machine called the free market and free enterprise system that incentivizes Americans, through the private sector, to do great and glorious things. Indeed, while my good friend from Illinois was bragging on the efforts by other countries to pursue the kinds of things that are needed, within the last 24 hours we have had a very important announcement from part of our private sector, which is making great strides in this regard. I think it is important that we do accept that there are various ways that we can and should pursue the vaccine and the cure for this horrible scourge. This matter is a lot deeper than that. It is the intent of our committee to hold hearings and develop very comprehensive legislation regarding how we pursue this in the future. What has just recently happened to us is of great interest to all of us but not nearly as important as what is going to happen to us in the future. There are parts of S. Res. 579, if not the vast majority of it, that I hope will be included when we get to what, hopefully, will be a comprehensive piece of bipartisan legislation to address this. Some of the whereases I am not too red-hot about, but as far as the resolutions are concerned, certainly, they state things that there would be unanimity, I think, in agreement. Where are we going with this? What my friend from Illinois has raised is a very small facet--an important facet but a small facet--of what we are going to do, what is the intent of our committee to do, going forward in what I think will be a bipartisan fashion. Again, like I said, I hope we are able to include these. I welcome the Senator's participation and all Members of the Senate's participation as the Foreign Relations Committee does move forward on some comprehensive legislation. What do we know for sure right now? I think Senator Durbin did an excellent job of taking us through history when it comes to some of the things we have had in the past like smallpox, AIDS, polio, and Ebola. And, certainly, the United States has been a leader and will be a leader on this particular scourge. The WHO--and, for that matter, other world organizations--have been large players, important players, helpful players in those efforts in the past on smallpox, AIDS, polio, and Ebola. Again, I come back to, just as an example, polio. A huge factor in that was not the U.S. Government involvement--well, it was a huge factor, but another huge player in that were private citizens, a couple in the United States, Bill and Melinda Gates, who played a huge role in eradicating polio, working with the WHO, working with the USG, and many others. I have no doubt, as we go forward on this, there will be that type of collaboration in the future. As the good Senator noted, this is not a political issue. This is not a Democratic issue. It is not a Republican issue. The virus doesn't care who you are or what you are. It is just looking for a home. We need to deny it that home, and we will. I think we will make great strides as we go forward. What do we know for sure right now? What we know is that this particular virus evolved in China, particularly in Wuhan Province, and specifically in a species of bat. What we also know is that there are about 2,000, so far, identified viruses that are in the same position that are carried by bats in the Wuhan Province. What we also know is that a virus has escaped from China before. There is a lot of speculation as to exactly how this happened. We know that the virus jumped species, from the bat to a human being and then went around the world. We also know, for a fact, that this particular virus, like all viruses, acts uniquely. It is not exactly the same as other viruses that have jumped species and gone around the world. This one was unique in that, unlike some of the ones we have had in the past--this is our sixth experience since 2003 with the virus--this moved around the world at an incredibly fast speed. It was much more like a house on fire than the other diseases that we have talked about, like smallpox or polio. Its speed was unique. It was new. It was different. As a result of that, historical organizations that have dealt with these in the past were not expecting it and were not geared for it. They thought this virus would move much like the others that we have dealt with. The result of that, of course, was that it got away from us, from the world, and we now find ourselves in the position we are in because that happened. It is my hope, and it is my objective--and hopefully will be the objective of our committee, eventually the objective of the U.S. Senate, and hopefully eventually the objective of the world--that we develop a protocol for dealing with a virus or, for that matter, any other health challenge that moves at the speed of light and like a house on fire as opposed to a small, creeping thing that we have had in the past in some of the other challenges we have had. It is different. There is no doubt it is different. It is going to have to be dealt with differently, and we are going to have to develop a protocol that does address this speed. It is going to entail--and this is probably the heaviest lift of all of it we are going to do--the 200 governments around the world to come together and agree that when something like this happens in their country, instead of covering it up or instead of making political excuses, or instead of hoping it is going to go away, that instead they call the fire department. And the fire department will be a new agency or perhaps even one of the old agencies that we have had that are geared to handle a pandemic that moves at this speed or presents other challenges. The institutions we have simply aren't geared to do that, which we found out with this epidemic. I think a good example is, as my good friend from Illinois mentioned, the Ebola challenge we had. The historical institutions, I think, dealt quickly with that and really held down the damage from it, which could have been much worse than what it was. We need to develop protocols for dealing with this. This is going to be a challenge. There is no question it is going to be a challenge because politics comes into this simply because of governments in the various 200 countries around the world have to deal with this. When they do deal with it, they have different ways of dealing with it. As chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, I deal with our diplomats who deal with the diplomats from other countries. We deal with them on the committee directly, but since this thing has hit, we haven't had as much direct contact, but our diplomats have continued to have contact. In talking with them, one of the things I find particularly disturbing is, I ask: Are the Chinese humble about this? How are they dealing with this? What is their view of what has happened here? Interestingly enough, they take it as an opportunity to compare our form of government to their form of government. And they say: Look, we had a problem; we dealt with it. You guys had the same problem, and you dealt with it. And the reason is because we have this strong authoritarian central government that can control people and can control people in the most severe fashion, and we can deal with it. You people, with all these freedoms and your democracies, you have speech, you have these political arguments, you have these disagreements, and you allow dissent, and when you have that, you can't deal with it. Therefore, our form of government is better than your form of government. That is very dangerous talk. I am disturbed and disappointed the Chinese Government has viewed this as they have and has not viewed it as we have, as a challenge that is going to take historical changes as we go forward. That is a huge challenge as we go forward, but that shouldn't stop us from making every effort that we can to go forward, and we will. On the Foreign Relations Committee, it is our intent to hold hearings to deliberate, as the U.S. Senate does, and to produce what hopefully will be a bipartisan piece of legislation, which is substantially broader than what we have here, but hopefully that will include many of the things that we have here, and that will include--as the good Senator from Illinois has indicated--the necessity of including other governments in the effort as we go forward. I commit to Senator Durbin, and I commit to all that our committee will undertake this challenge. It is within the jurisdiction and the responsibility of our committee. We take it seriously. We are still in the throes of this, although it feels like we are on the downhill side and are starting to come out of this. As we go forward in a very commonsense, deliberative fashion, we hope to construct legislation that will address all of these very serious issues If there is one thing we know for sure--and I am absolutely convinced of it--this is going to happen again. Given the physical situation on the ground in Wuhan, China, and given the fact that there are 2,000 other viruses, probably some of which are substantially worse than this--and, for that matter, the same situation in other parts of the world--this is going to happen again. Given the population of the world and given the culture of the way we live today in the world and our travel and interconnectedness, this is going to happen again. We need to be ready for it. We need strong legislation that will address this, not only at the U.S. level but also at the international level. The United States has been the world leader in world health issues, and I anticipate that we will continue to be like that. At the present time, it is under consideration in our committee. At the present time, we can't go forward with this. Before I state an objection, I want to yield to my good friend from Indiana, who also has some ideas in this regard, and all of which will be, I am sure, constructive on both sides of the aisle. I want to yield the floor to Senator Braun at this time.

Mr. RISCH. Madam President.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD- 423.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, for myself and Mr. Crapo, I want to recognize a very special nonprofit organization in our State that is celebrating its 75th anniversary on May 20. Mission Aviation Fellowship, or MAF, headquartered in Nampa, ID, was formed on May 20, 1945, by veteran pilots who returned from World War II with a vision that airplanes could be used for peaceful means, bringing medicine, education, and the gospel to isolated people around the world. One of their founding members, Betty Greene, served as their first pilot, becoming the first woman to fly over the Andes in South America and the first female pilot in Sudan as she traveled the world on behalf of MAF. Betty also received a Congressional Gold Medal for her wartime service as a women Airforce service pilot, WASP. She piloted MAF's very first flight from La Habra, CA, to Tuxpan, Mexico, and little did she know at the time that Mission Aviation Fellowship would eventually partner with over 500 organizations in 13 countries, delivering medical services and vaccines, assisting with disaster response, and offering physical help and spiritual hope for those living in the farthest reaches of the world. Their work among the most isolated people on our planet often goes unnoticed, but in 1956, the world was captivated by the story of MAF pilot Nate Saint and four other missionaries who were martyred on the banks of the Curaray River in Ecuador at the hands of Waorani warriors. Undeterred, MAF continued to expand its operations around the world, and in 2006, they moved their headquarters to Nampa, ID, to provide their pilots with quality backcountry flight training, favorable weather, and lower cost of operations. The Nampa headquarters hosts MAF's maintenance and training facility, along with all of the back-office functions for its programs around the world. The nearly 200 local employees and 300 volunteers support another 400 staff members in foreign countries. MAF has a fleet of 47 airplanes that includes 13 Kodiaks that are made in Sandpoint, ID, and are especially well-suited for the short, rugged mountain top and jungle landing strips in the areas they serve. Throughout their 75-year history, MAF has brought physical help and spiritual hope to those living at the ends of the Earth--even in the midst of wars, disease, and natural disasters. They look to serve those that are forgotten by the rest of the world, and I congratulate them on their 75 years of service and thank them for being there to provide hope and deliver needed resources in some of the world's most challenging places to reach.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, I rise today to honor an outstanding business leader from the great State of Idaho--Idaho Power CEO Darrel Anderson. There are many ways to define an effective leader: by their vision, their passion, or their courage to do something bold. Mr. Anderson possesses all the necessary qualifications and more. His impeccable character, his authenticity, and his humility define his success not only as CEO but also as an upstanding Idaho citizen, family man and friend. Mr. Anderson's tenure as president and CEO has been one for the records. He led Idaho Power's parent company, IDACORP, to a historic 12 consecutive years of earnings growth--an unprecedented achievement among investor-owned utilities in the United States. In 2019, the company saw the best employee safety results ever recorded in its history, something Mr. Anderson cares deeply about. Under his leadership, Idaho Power also experienced the highest customer satisfaction scores ever achieved. Business results like these deserve recognition. But if you ask any one of Idaho Power's nearly 2,000 employees, they will tell you Mr. Anderson's legacy will not be the company's impressive numbers; it will be that he knew their name, showed up for them in good times and bad and encouraged them to make a commitment to one another every single day. Mr. Anderson made employees feel valued and respected. He acknowledged individual contributions and inspired employees to do the same. On June 1, after nearly 24 years with the company and serving at its helm since 2014, Darrel Anderson is retiring. I send my sincerest congratulations to my friend and wish him all the best on his well- deserved retirement. Idaho Power's reliable, affordable and clean energy helps make our great State the ideal place to live, and I am grateful for his exceptional leadership of this outstanding company.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, section 36 (b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimoas consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.