Mike Rounds

Mr. ROUNDS

Mr. ROUNDS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, August 5; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; that following leader remarks, the Senate resume consideration of the motion to proceed to S. 754; finally, that the time following leader remarks until the cloture vote be equally divided between the two managers or their designees.

Mr. ROUNDS

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. ROUNDS

Mr. ROUNDS. Mr. President, I rise today also to speak with regard to the work of the Veterans' Affairs Committee. The Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee yesterday passed some very critical legislation. It is great to see the chairman and the ranking member and how they worked together side by side--Republican and Democratic colleagues working together to improve the lives of our veterans and truly to begin the process of reforming a broken VA system. More than a year ago, the VA wait list scandal was made public. One of the biggest reasons the problem grew so large was the lack of accountability within the VA. Yesterday, with bipartisan support, we reported out five bills. Among those were two bills focused on bringing accountability to the VA. I would like to talk about that process and about what I learned as a freshman Senator, stepping in and watching-- after listening to all of the stories about how the Senate was dysfunctional and things were not working right; Republicans would not work with Democrats, and Democrats would not work with Republicans--how Chairman Isakson and Ranking Member Blumenthal worked their way through these bills and unanimously passed them out of committee. I also watched as some members offered amendments. The chairman suggested, strongly, that perhaps they should withdraw them because we did not have what we call pay-fors with them, where there might have been an expense, or we did not have a report saying whether it would add cost to a VA system that was also already short on funding in those particular areas. Rather than simply having votes and having acrimony, what those Members said was this: Would you work with us to see that our goals would be accomplished? I watched as our chairman, along with Ranking Member Blumenthal, work to get the job done to make things better for veterans. It was not acrimonious. It was a matter of members of this committee working side by side committing to help each other make the VA perform better than what they have in the past. That is the type of work that we need in the Senate. It is what our people want us to do. It is what veterans want to have happen. So I am here to say this can be done and it can be done correctly. I will also tell you that in talking with members of that committee afterwards, there was real interest. Republicans and Democrats side by side were saying: Look, there were some good ideas offered in that committee, and they would make good amendments to the bill, but we had to know what the costs were. The commitment on both sides of the aisle was to find a way to work together. I commend the chairman, and I commend the ranking member for their work and the way that they worked through some very serious issues. The first one of those bills that I wanted to talk about was S. 1082, the Department of Veterans Affairs Accountability Act. It was introduced by Senators Marco Rubio and Ron Johnson. Senator Johnson I am sure will be here to speak because he understands exactly from his constituents what the need is to reform the system. This bill would allow for the removal or the demotion of employees of the VA based on performance or misconduct. It also gives the employee ample time to appeal the removal or demotion. Finally, it extended the probationary period for Senior Executive Service employees to make sure the high-ups are doing their jobs correctly. The second one is S. 627, the Ayotte-Cassidy accountability bill. You have heard a little bit about it already. This bill would force VA employees who purposefully manipulated wait lists for veterans' health care to repay their bonus. It seems like only common sense--the kind of common sense we have in South Dakota and that we like to have. I know the Presiding Officer's home State in Nebraska has that kind of common sense. It says: If you are doing something wrong, you should not get paid a bonus and be allowed to continue on. This behavior of any VA employee should not be tolerated--let alone rewarded. I am happy to see that this passed the committee, and it sends a message to the other hard-working employees of the VA administration that their hard work is not going to be tainted by individuals who are not doing their job correctly. Let me just share this. I just have to share this story. Some things you think you would not see, and yet, in South Dakota, I have a good friend who is 83 years old. He is a veteran. All he wanted to do was to get a new set of glasses. He has diabetes. He wanted to get it through the VA. He had gone to his own optometrist because in our part we don't have contracts yet in the central part of South Dakota through the VA for optometrists. So he had gone in and had separately paid for the work of the optometrist. The optometrist had written a prescription. This veteran only wanted the VA to take care of the cost of the glasses. They expected him to travel over 150 miles to get to a VA facility to go get glasses. We sure don't want him driving. Yet that was the expectation--to come up. Look, this is the kind of stuff that makes people irritated with the system that should be helping veterans. Our office got involved with it. In fact, I offered to go on out and meet with the VA in Sturgis, SD, to find out what the problem was and why they would not deliver this. My staff suggested that I should simply stop by if they could not take care of the problem. The VA indicated at that point they would get it taken care of. But later they came back and suggested: Well, you know, we don't know why this guy should get new glasses more than every 2 years. That is because their contract would not allow for it. That is not the type of attitude we want among VA officials. That is not the way we should be treating our veterans. This is the reason that we want accountability within the VA system. We found Republicans and Democrat side by side saying: We are going to fix it. Now, we have a long way to go. We have a man at the head of the VA right now that truly wants to fix it. He walked into the middle of a swamp, and he is up to his butt in alligators. But he is there to fix a problem. We want to do everything we can to give him the tools to get the job done right. Hopefully, next week we will start with fixing a budget problem they have by simply allowing them the flexibility to take the resources that are already there within the Department and move them into locations where they are more appropriate. That is what this is all about--using a little bit of common sense in Washington, DC, to fix a problem for veterans that has gone on way too long. Today I wish to say thank you to our veterans, to those men and women that wear the uniform of the United States of America. We cannot say enough about what they have done for the rest of us here. But we can continue to tell them thank you time and again and to send a message that we are not going to allow them to go without the services that they are entitled to, the services that we want to render to them in an appropriate fashion, and that we will work until we get it done and get it done correctly. I yield the floor.

Mr. ROUNDS

Mr. ROUNDS. Mr. President, today I recognize Cara Beck, an intern in my Washington, DC, office, for all of the hard work she has done for me, my staff, and the State of South Dakota. Cara is a graduate of Mitchell High School in Mitchell, SD. Currently, she is attending Augustana College, where she is majoring in history and political science. She is a dedicated and diligent worker who has been devoted to getting the most out of her internship experience. I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Cara for all of the fine work she has done and wish her continued success in the years to come.

Mr. ROUNDS

Mr. ROUNDS. Mr. President, today I recognize Leah Gosch, an intern in my Washington, DC, office, for all of the hard work she has done for me, my staff, and the State of South Dakota. Leah is a graduate of Great Plains Lutheran High School and is from Rapid City, SD. Currently, she is attending South Dakota State University, where she is majoring in electrical engineering. She is smart, hardworking, and has been an incredible asset to our office. I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Leah for all of the fine work she has done and wish her continued success in the years to come.

Mr. ROUNDS

Mr. ROUNDS. Mr. President, today I recognize Dustin Santjer, an intern in my Washington, DC, office, for all of the hard work he has done for me, my staff, and the State of South Dakota. Dustin is a graduate of Central High School in Aberdeen, SD. Currently, he is attending the University of South Dakota, where he is majoring in finance and political science. He is intelligent, hardworking, and has truly made the most of his internship here. I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Dustin for all of the fine work he has done and wish him continued success in the years to come.

Mr. ROUNDS

Mr. ROUNDS. Mr. President, today I recognize Brandon VanBeek, an intern in my Washington, DC, office, for all of the hard work he has done for me, my staff, and the State of South Dakota. Brandon is from Beresford, SD and is a graduate of the Netherlands Reformed Christian School. Currently, he is attending the University of South Dakota, where he is majoring in political science. He is a hard worker who has been dedicated to getting the most out of his internship experience. I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Brandon for all of the fine work he has done and wish him continued success in the years to come.

Mr. ROUNDS

Mr. ROUNDS. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the Bobby family from Roscoe, SD, for their work in railroad service. Roger, Duane, Albert, Bill, and Dale--led by their late father La Vern Bobby-- have served a combined total of 232 years with the railroad industry. The six men have worked with Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul, and Pacific Railroads, all serving in the Maintenance of Way department throughout their careers. Following La Vern, who joined railroad service in 1955 after serving on a U.S. Navy destroyer in World War II, the Bobby boys have dedicated their lives to the railroad. Their railroad service has spanned across a variety of Midwestern States, including South Dakota, Minnesota, and Illinois. They have made many sacrifices, frequently traveling, moving, and leaving their families at home to fulfill their duties with the railroad. The entire Bobby family deserves recognition for their hard work ethic, patriotism, and service to the railroad system. I extend my sincere gratitude and appreciation to the Bobby family for their dedication to an industry that is vital to our economy by connecting our country and transporting goods. I hope that the Bobby legacy will continue to thrive with the generations to come.

Mr. ROUNDS

Mr. ROUNDS. Mr. President, I rise to speak concerning the Dodd-Frank Act, which mandates the creation of 398 new rules. These rules are still in the process of being implemented, but already we have seen capital moving from productive uses to inefficient and unproductive uses as a result of this law. The end result is that every dollar going to comply with these rules is a dollar that can't be productively invested in our economy by providing loans or mortgages to customers or purchasing machines or, for that matter, hiring new employees. For example, at a recent Senate banking committee hearing, the comptroller for Regions Bank testified to us that the bank now employs more compliance employees than actual loan officers. This is not only bad for Regions Bank, it is harmful for our entire economy. Unfortunately, we see examples of overregulation stemming from Washington way too often. Another example of an unnecessary and redundant rule that costs businesses capital is the so-called pay ratio rule buried in section 953 of Dodd-Frank, and today I come to the Senate floor introducing legislation to repeal it, S. 1722. Pay ratio requires the Securities and Exchange Commission to promulgate a rule requiring companies to calculate the median salary of all their employees and then divide their CEO's pay by that number. According to one prominent organization in support of this rule, the purpose of it is to ``shame companies into lowering CEO pay.'' Forcing companies to move money from productive uses toward re-creating information that is already available so they can be shamed is a poor use of financial resources. In addition, it is also redundant. CEO pay is already public. If anyone is interested in finding the salary of a CEO of a public company, that information is easily available thanks to already existing disclosures. Also, both the Bureau of Labor Statistics and private economists already track the average salary for a wide variety of jobs. If we know the salary of a company's CEO and we know what their business does, we can already calculate a company's pay ratio. In fact, labor unions and private Web sites are already making these calculations. Unfortunately, the result of the pay ratio rule is more than just an academic exercise; according to the SEC, companies will have to spend $73 million per year to comply with this rule. And the U.S. Chamber of Commerce estimates the cost will be higher--as much as $700 million per year or more. If we take those two numbers and split the difference, if we add them up and divide them, we get $386 million per year as an average estimate just to comply with this one single rule. Taking a look at this rule, let's use our own pay ratio test. In 2014, the Bureau of Labor Statistics calculated that the annual mean wage was $47,230. If we divide $386 million, which is the cost of complying with the pay ratio rule, by $47,230, which is the mean annual wage for workers, we get the number 8,172. This means that on average we could pay 8,172 people their full salary for the amount of money it takes to comply with the pay ratio rule. Remember, this is only one of 398 such rules found within Dodd-Frank, a number of which have not even been implemented yet. The money they would use to do this has to come from somewhere to pay for the new compliance systems required to follow this rule, taking away much needed capital from businesses that could otherwise invest money growing their business and creating job opportunities. It is a waste of time, effort, and money. The legislation I introduced yesterday simply strikes this rule in Dodd-Frank. It does nothing to change any other part of the law. Repealing the pay ratio rule would allow companies to find more productive uses for their time and money so they can invest in the future and create job opportunities. I am committed to relieving Americans from this and other unnecessary and burdensome regulations during my time in the Senate. I encourage my colleagues to join me in this effort. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. ROUNDS

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

Mr. ROUNDS

Mr. ROUNDS. Mr. President, I rise today to speak on my amendment to the Every Child Achieves Act, which is amendment No. 2078. I would like to thank Senator Udall for joining me in supporting this important amendment. Since my time working in the South Dakota State Legislature and also as Governor of South Dakota, education in Indian Country has faced incredible obstacles, especially in rural and high-poverty areas. This is true not only in my State but across the entire Nation. Because of these barriers, 10 out of 13 Bureau of Indian Education high schools in South Dakota have graduation rates below 67 percent, and 6 of those schools have graduation rates at or below 40 percent. Meanwhile, the national high school graduation rate is 80 percent. These graduation rates must be changed, and my amendment will help lay a foundation to fix the systemic problems Indian Country faces. To address these concerns as well as other States' concerns, an analysis needs to be conducted to more closely examine these educational downfalls. So today we are proposing an amendment to the Every Child Achieves Act that would direct the Departments of Interior and Education to both study and create strategies to address these challenges. This amendment is being supported by the National Indian Education Association, the Great Plains Tribal Chairman's Association, and the National Education Association. According to the Congressional Budget Office, amendment No. 2078 will have no impact on Federal spending. This amendment would require the Departments of Interior and Education to conduct a study in rural and poverty-stricken areas of Indian Country in order to identify Federal barriers that restrict tribes from implementing commonsense regional policies instead of a one-size-fits-all policy directed from Washington. It requires that they identify recruitment and retention options for teachers and school administrators and identify the limitations in the funding source and flexibility for schools that receive these funds. It would study and provide a strategy on how to increase high school graduation rates. It is critical that we identify the limitations and barriers which tribal schools face and lay out a strategy to fix those problems. I hope my colleagues will join Senator Udall and me in supporting this straightforward amendment to help our students in Indian Country. I yield the floor.

Mr. ROUNDS

Mr. ROUNDS. Madam President, I rise today to encourage my colleagues to join the bipartisan group of Armed Services Committee members who support a very important measure for our troops. Last month, we overwhelmingly voted in favor of the National Defense Authorization Act for 2016 that the Senate is considering today. The defense of our Nation is a fundamental responsibility of the Federal Government, and the annual passage of the NDAA is an important step in making sure that our servicemembers have what they need to do their job and to succeed. These brave men and women selflessly sacrifice everything to keep us safe from the forces of darkness that wish to do us harm. We owe it to these men and women to wisely work together to make certain they have the necessary tools to accomplish their dangerous and demanding missions, and that is what we did in the Armed Services Committee just a few weeks ago. Under the leadership of Chairman McCain and Ranking Member Reed, we reported a bill out of committee that not only supports our Armed Forces but makes a host of needed reforms as well, and we did this overwhelmingly by a bipartisan vote of 22 to 4. I would like to cite a number of the bill provisions which make our Nation stronger and which I hope Congress and the President will enact into law. Our bill cuts nearly $10 billion in wasteful and duplicative spending, thereby freeing up additional funds to develop and procure weapons systems of the future, while also giving our troops in combat the tools they need today. This bill also makes important reforms aimed at recruiting and retaining the All-Volunteer Force that has so consistently defended our country for over four decades. The Armed Services Committee produced this legislation by using the limited and admittedly less than optimal funding tools at its disposal. For now, the hand we are dealt is limited by the Budget Control Act, which includes arbitrary spending caps and the threat of sequestration. So in our bill we are funding our Armed Forces using funds from the overseas contingency operations account. We are doing so at a level above that requested by the President for this account. OCO was included in the Budget Control Act because Members of the 112th Congress recognized the importance of funding our men and women who serve on the frontlines. I believe that many Members of the Senate fervently hope that in the near future we will be able to fund our government in a fiscally sound manner, without the irrational budget caps and threat of sequestration that pervades all of Congress's budgetary deliberations. I am willing to work with any of my colleagues on either side of the aisle to fix the Budget Control Act, but until that day comes, we need to use the funding options we have available to keep America safe. The legislation before us today does exactly that. We are following the rules that are in force today. I am proud of my colleagues who serve with me on the Armed Services Committee for coming together to achieve a truly bipartisan, comprehensive bill. Our bill will support our troops and meet the demands of a military that needs to continue its dynamic evolution in the face of ever more sophisticated threats. And I am pleased that a number of provisions I offered are included in the final package we are debating today. Now that we have completed our work in committee and Leader McConnell has brought our bill to the full Senate for debate, we must come together to pass the NDAA, as the Senate has done each year for more than five decades. It is no coincidence that the NDAA is the only legislation to achieve this track record; rather, it indicates the vital importance that generations of Senate Members have attached to it. The defense of our country is not a partisan issue. The bipartisan NDAA sustains what our servicemembers need to succeed in a world that grows ever more dangerous. From the Russian aggression in Ukraine and mounting Chinese coercion in Asia to the ugly aggression of the self-proclaimed Islamic State in the Middle East, new threats continue to rise throughout the world. These threats are multifaceted, and our enemy's tactics ever-changing. We must make certain our Armed Forces can continue to face these challenges, and we must uphold our commitment to them. I encourage my colleagues to pass the NDAA, and I encourage our President to work with Congress to keep Americans safe. Thank you, Madam President. I yield the floor.

Mr. ROUNDS

Mr. ROUNDS. Madam President, I rise, for the first time speaking in this Chamber, to discuss the future of our great Nation, how truly fortunate we are to live in the greatest country in the world. We are protected by the best military that has ever existed and that, in turn, allows us to live freely here at home, to focus on our God- given rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. In my home State of South Dakota, we cherish these rights. We have the opportunity to make our dreams come true because we have these rights and because we have a commonsense value system to guide us. When I was elected, I promised to bring South Dakota common sense to Washington and to work to solve problems for the good of every South Dakotan and every American. But, unfortunately, when I travel back home, I continue to hear from my fellow South Dakotans about the Federal Government infringing on these rights and values. You see, our great Nation has been bogged down in recent years with what I believe is one of the greatest hindrances to job growth and economic productivity; that is, the overregulation of our citizens. Overregulation is not a Democratic or a Republican issue, it is an issue that affects every single one of us. But I believe it is a challenge we can solve through cooperation and perseverance. It doesn't matter if you are talking about a doctor or a small business owner or a farmer or a rancher, overregulation has affected every single sector of our society. The regulatory burden on this country is nearly $2 trillion annually, and this is in addition to the tax burden already placed on our American citizens. That regulatory burden is larger than Canada's entire economy. In fact, the cost to comply with Federal regulations is larger than the entire GDP of all but only eight other countries in the entire world. Even more staggering, just a few years ago, we surpassed 1 million Federal regulations in America--1 million Federal regulations. Regulations are stifling economic growth and innovation and hurting the future of this country by crushing the can-do American spirit that founded our Nation, settled the West, won two World Wars, and put a man on the Moon--and every year more than 3,500 new Federal regulations are added. This just does not make sense, and it certainly is not South Dakota common sense. What alarms me is not only the volume of regulations being thrust upon our citizens but also the process for creating them. The purpose of Congress is to be the voice of the people when making laws. Unfortunately, the voice of the people in the rulemaking process has been cut out and replaced by unelected government bureaucrats who think they know better than the farmer or the scientist or the entrepreneur. Our Founders recognized the need for making laws, granting the power to create laws to Congress and only Congress. They meant that process to be difficult so our government would not overburden citizens and restrict their freedom, freedom that those Founding Fathers had just fought so hard to obtain. Through Congress, every citizen should have a voice, but unfortunately that is not what is happening today. Our Founding Fathers created three branches of government with checks and balances for each one. They could never have imagined that we would have a regulatory process in place today where unelected bureaucrats would both write and have the final approval of the rules and regulations under which our people must live. This regulatory regime, which is responsible for the 3,500 new rules each year, has essentially become a fourth branch of government and a de facto legislative body. The problem is exacerbated because these bureaucrats in Washington have this misperception that they know how to run our lives better than we do. While working as a business owner, a State legislator, as a Governor, and now as a Senator, I have seen just how detrimental this ``Washington knows best'' mentality is on the daily lives of South Dakotans and Americans. Many of my friends on both sides of the aisle have come to the Senate floor in recent weeks and months with some great ideas and legislation to limit or stop or repeal or remove some of the worst regulations currently on the books. I applaud them for these efforts, many of which I also support. I look forward to working with the senior Senator from South Dakota, my friend John Thune, as well as anyone who is willing to work with me to remove these burdens that are stunting American greatness and, well, bring a little South Dakota common sense back to our regulatory environment. The regulatory system in America has run amok. Too often, burdensome, costly regulations are crafted by bureaucrats at the highest level of government, behind closed doors, with little input from everyday Americans who disproportionately feel the effects of these one-size- fits-all policies. It is regulation without representation--and it is wrong. The American people are being squeezed out, their voices falling on deaf ears in Washington. Small businesses, which drive our economy and create the majority of jobs in America, are especially hurt by overregulation because they, too, have to hire lawyers and employees to comply with these rules. This takes away capital that could be used to hire new production employees and expand their businesses. People in my home State of South Dakota feel victimized by their own Federal Government. It is keeping crops from getting to market, and it is keeping businesses from growing. The idea that unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats should be allowed to make sweeping rules and regulations with no recourse should be a concern to every American, regardless of political affiliation, because it impacts everyone. No party has a lock on the American dream, and American innovation doesn't have a party affiliation. From the stack of paperwork required to process a bank loan to the regulatory price of putting food on the table, the cost of Federal regulations are ultimately passed down to each and every American. Without excessive regulation, imagine how much more money American families could have in their pockets to spend on what they want, instead of what the government wants. If we cut our redtape, families can stop having to cut their budgets. The regulatory regime is a dark cloud over our entire economy. I am not saying there isn't a place for rules in our society; there is. Rules are meant to keep us safe and to promote the greater good, and I do believe there are some good rules and regulations which are on the books today. The problem I have is with the bad rules that keep good people from going about their daily lives. Unfortunately, there are too many of these bad rules that are hindering our freedoms and stifling our growth. These are the regulations which we should have a process in place to reexamine. Today, I come to the floor to discuss bipartisan legislation, which we have already introduced, to permanently end regulation without representation. It takes a giant leap forward in restoring the people's role in the rulemaking process. After all, if the American people don't like the laws we make, they can vote us out, but they have no such power with unelected bureaucrats. They are stuck. You see, the bipartisan legislation we have submitted, S. Con. Res. 17, would create a Joint Select Committee on Regulatory Reform, whose purpose includes reviewing regulations currently on the books and proposing a new rules review process that includes the elected representatives of the American people. It is rooted in South Dakota common sense and the principles that have made this country great, making government work for Americans, rather than against them. Madam President, this committee would make several recommendations to Congress to rebalance this broken regulatory scheme. First, the committee would be tasked with exploring options for Congress to review regulations written by agencies before they are enacted, providing much needed oversight through the possibility of a permanent joint rules review committee, which would be tasked with reviewing rules with a cost of $50 million or more. This permanent joint rules review committee would have the ability to delay the imposition of these rules for not more than a year from the time the agency submits the rule for a review to enable Congress to act on the rule if they do not care for the rule. Second, the committee would examine an option for agencies to submit each regulation with a $50 million or more impact to the appropriate committees of Congress for review before the rule is enacted. Finally, the joint select committee could recommend ways to reduce the financial burden regulations place on the economy as well as sunsetting onerous and outdated ones. This joint select committee would not be a permanent one, but it would be bipartisan, bicameral, and hold meaningful hearings so that a permanent solution to our overregulation problem can be properly addressed. This legislation also offers a starting point for the committee by requiring certain possible solutions to our regulatory problem to be considered. I firmly believe that regulations should be reviewed by elected officials, those who are accountable to the American people through the democratic process. This is not a new concept. It is not rocket science. It is a common practice at the State level. In fact, 41 of the 50 States, including my home State of South Dakota, have a rules review process to make sure the executive branch is faithfully executing the laws they seek to implement. It is worth repeating that regulations are estimated to cost $1.88 trillion annually in the United States, and that is above and beyond the tax burden our citizens already share. That amounts to just under $5 billion every single day, and it just doesn't make sense. It is unfair to those who still believe in and are working to achieve the American dream. Whether Americans are seeking to buy a car, take out a mortgage on a house, start a business, or see the doctor, regulations obstruct them. When I think of those who sacrificed everything so that our children and grandchildren could create their own version of the American dream, I think about the freedoms and liberties they fought so bravely to defend. They fought so that we could pursue life, liberty, and happiness and trust that our government would not hinder these lifelong endeavors. It is not Washington that will continue to make this country great; rather, it is the collective spirit of individual Americans who want to work hard to be successful for their families and their communities. But they need the heavy hand of government to be lifted. Here in Washington, it is not our job to dictate how Americans run their lives but to allow them to achieve their dreams, not make them into nightmares. The phrase ``Washington is broken'' is far too common. It seems as though whenever we go home, there is someone who suggests that Washington is broken. We hear it regularly. People use it to describe the current state of our Federal Government. ``Washington'' is now used in a derogatory manner. This city, the Capital of our Nation, named after our very first Commander in Chief, the man who led us to victory in the Revolutionary War and birthed this great Nation, has become, over time, the same as a four-letter word. Remember, George Washington left the Presidency voluntarily after two terms in office. He wanted to get away from the monarch style of government in which rulers held their positions for life. And now this city that bears his name is full of lifelong bureaucrats--and even worse, they are unaccountable to the people. It is a far cry from the Republic our Founders envisioned. Madam President, in the year 2026 our country will celebrate its 250th birthday. That is just over a decade away. When we get to that point, I hope to join my fellow Americans in looking back with great pride in all we have accomplished and all we have to pass on to future generations. President Kennedy challenged our Nation to put a man on the Moon before the decade of the 1960s had passed--less than 10 years. I am not asking us to do anything as tough as putting a man back on the Moon, but I think we should commit ourselves to removing the barrier of government regulations that is weighing on the American spirit and again set free the American economy before the decade preceding our 250th birthday. I have not submitted legislation to start a new committee that exists in name and does no deed. Americans want us and expect us to be up to this challenge, and I believe we are. We can lift the heavy hand of government. The Founding Fathers did not anticipate thousands of regulators and a million regulations when they created this country. It is time to end this regulation without representation and restore the lawmaking process to the people. I thank my friends on both sides of the aisle who have cosponsored RESTORE and encourage the rest of my colleagues to sign on to this commonsense approach to addressing the issue of overregulation so we can work to make this country even greater and safer than we found it. Then, during our 250th birthday celebration, we can be proud that we restored a little South Dakota and American common sense for our children and their children. With that, Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. ROUNDS

Mr. ROUNDS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported amendment be agreed to; the bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed; and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. ROUNDS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 91, S. 802. The PRESIDING OFFICER pro tempore. The clerk will report the bill by title.

Mr. ROUNDS

Mr. ROUNDS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider all nominations placed on the Secretary's desk in the Foreign Service; that the nominations be confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order; that any statements related to the nominations be printed in the Record; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's actions, and the Senate then resume legislative session.

Mr. ROUNDS

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

Mr. ROUNDS

Mr. ROUNDS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 89, H.R. 2353.

Mr. ROUNDS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be made and laid upon the table.

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

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

Mr. ROUNDS

Mr. ROUNDS. Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. ROUNDS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the HELP Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 156 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. ROUNDS

Mr. ROUNDS. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. ROUNDS

Mr. ROUNDS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until the following dates and times to convene for pro forma session only, with no business being conducted; further, that following each pro forma session, the Senate adjourn until the next pro forma session: Tuesday, May 26, 4 p.m., and Thursday, May 28, 8:30 a.m.; further, that the Senate adjourn on May 28 until 4 p.m., Sunday, May 31; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; that following leader remarks, the Senate resume consideration of the motion to proceed to H.R. 2048.