Jeanne Shaheen

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I come to the floor this afternoon to pay tribute to our good friend Senator Johnny Isakson of the great State of Georgia. I say ``ours'' because I know he is a friend to everyone in this Chamber. It was a real blow to me and, I know, to all of the Senators to hear that Senator Isakson wouldn't be seeking another term and that he would be leaving early. Over the years, Johnny and I have had a chance to partner on a number of bipartisan initiatives. He has established a reputation in this body as an honorable and hard-working Senator who cares deeply about his constituents. Beyond that, he is just a kind person. As we think about the accolades we could say about somebody, somebody who is kind to everyone they meet, that is about as nice a thing, I think, as you can say. What Johnny does has been demonstrated time and again in Congress. He develops trust and good working relationships, and he gets things done. As chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee and a veteran himself, Johnny has taken on the difficult but critical task of making reforms to the VA to better deliver care to those who have fought for our country. Having been through some of those challenges with veterans in New Hampshire and seeing what they are facing with getting the care they need, to be able to go back to them and say that because of the work of Senator Isakson and Senator Tester, we now have the MISSION Act--which is bipartisan legislation to expand care and services to veterans--has been very reassuring. We also know that Senator Isakson is a fierce advocate for local priorities in his home State. I have a sister in Georgia, in Atlanta, and when I ask her about Senator Isakson, she speaks very positively about what she has seen that he does in Georgia. Of course, many of us here have been reminded time and again of the importance of the Port of Savannah and its dredging needs. I can especially identify with those since we have small ports--much smaller than Savannah's--in New Hampshire, but they consistently have dredging needs, so I know how important it is to have an advocate who is there all the time, making sure that the needs of those ports are being seen to. One of the many areas where Senator Isakson and I have found common ground is reforming our budget process. I think it is not a secret to anybody in this body that the Federal budget process is broken. Since 2011, I have worked with Senator Isakson, who had been working on trying to get a biennial budgeting process for the Federal Government. That is something that I think makes sense. Nineteen States, including New Hampshire, operate on a biennial budget. We believe that taxpayers would be better served by a process whereby Congress budgets for 2 years rather than 1 and is able to use the second year for oversight. As we know, it is not easy to change things in Washington. I couldn't have asked for a better partner in this effort. One of the things I have especially appreciated about Johnny is that he has very little time for partisan sniping, which has too often characterized much of what we do here. One of the gestures that mattered to me and that has stood out about what his character is and how he has operated in the Senate has been the fact that he came to New Hampshire to advocate for our biennial budgeting efforts in 2013, a year when I was in cycle for reelection. It didn't matter to him. What mattered was that we were working on this issue, and it was important to the American people. I had the opportunity to go the following year to Atlanta, and we did the same presentation in Atlanta to again show that we could work in a bipartisan way to try and address what wasn't working in New Hampshire. I have especially appreciated that he has taken that approach on everything we have worked on together. I know Senator Isakson also cares deeply about the institution of the Senate. He served as chairman of the Senate's Ethics Committee, a committee I have also been a member of, though not nearly as long as he has. I have seen closeup how he has faithfully and honorably conducted the committee's business and, again, how partisanship has not been any part of how he has approached his duties on the Ethics Committee. What has been important has been preserving the integrity of the Senate and the responsibility that each of us has as a Senator. There have been so many ways in which Johnny Isakson has bridged the partisan divide. One of those is through food, and I think all of my colleagues would agree with me that one of the highlights of our year is when Senator Isakson has his bipartisan barbecue lunch, which features not just the dishes his home State is known for but, as he points out, the best barbecue in America. In New Hampshire, we don't have a lot of barbecue, so I don't have much basis on which to judge, but I certainly would agree it is very good barbecue. I think, as somebody who has served in the Army, he understands that the way to our hearts is through our stomachs, and we know if we keep our troops eating well that they do better, and I think the same is probably true of Senators. If we can keep eating well and collaborate when we are doing that, it is great for our morale, and it is a great way to help work better together. In closing, I just want to say that throughout his time in Congress, Johnny Isakson has been a statesman, and he has been a gentleman of the highest order. They say that we remember people not by what they say as much as by how we feel we are treated, and I know it is fair to say, whether it is the person operating the elevator, the person who is serving us lunch, each of us as Senators, or his constituents, Johnny Isakson has made all of us feel very important, and he recognizes the value that each individual in the Senate contributes to this body. For that, I am very appreciative, and I will miss you, Senator Isakson. Thank you for everything you have done for all of us.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

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

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Reserving the right to object, let me say that I agree with my colleague that we need more transparency in healthcare pricing. I would argue that one of the places we most need that transparency is when it comes to the price of prescription drugs. As I am sure my colleague knows, the cost of prescription drugs is probably the biggest cost driver right now in increases in healthcare. Yet we in Congress and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid are stymied because they can't negotiate with the big drug companies to lower the prices of prescription drugs and to make that more transparent to consumers. The Veterans' Administration can negotiate for the cost of prescription drugs. If you talk to any veteran about the cost of their prescription drugs and compare them to what people are paying in the marketplace, there is a huge difference because they have that ability to negotiate. I am sure that at some point we could probably find some agreement on transparency that would make sense. I think what my colleague is proposing is not something that has had a chance to go through the HELP Committee and, therefore, would need a further look. I would want to know what hospitals in New Hampshire, the doctors, consumers, and the insurance department in my State would have to say about that. Until I find that out, I would have to object to what my colleague is proposing, but I hope we could work together to address the challenges that my constituents--and I am sure his constituents--are facing because of the cost of healthcare. He talked about the failure of the Affordable Care Act. Actually, in New Hampshire, we have over 90,000 people who have now gotten coverage for health insurance because of the Affordable Care Act. Through the expansion of Medicaid, we have reduced the number of uninsured in New Hampshire to half the number we had before we passed the Affordable Care Act. What my legislation would do is help people understand what the filing period is and how to sign up for the Affordable Care Act and health insurance. In fact, under the Affordable Care Act as it exists now, according to estimates from the administration, approximately 54 percent of Granite Staters who are shopping for coverage on healthcare.gov are eligible for a plan with net monthly premiums of less than $75, after accounting for tax credits, and nearly 40 percent of Granite Staters shopping on healthcare.gov can find a plan with net monthly premiums under $10. Now, the cautionary note is that when constituents of mine or in Indiana or anywhere else in the country are shopping for plans, they need to watch out for those short-term, limited-duration insurance plans--what are commonly called junk plans--because they are not required to cover preexisting conditions. I was pleased to hear my colleague from Indiana say that for existing conditions, coverage is important. Those junk plans are not required to provide coverage for essential health benefits, like maternity care, prescription drugs, and mental health services. If you don't pay very careful attention when you go on the healthcare.gov website, you can be redirected to third-party insurance broker sites that sell both junk plans and ACA-compliant marketplace plans. That creates further confusion for customers. What we heard is that those insurance brokers are able to charge multiple times the price for those plans for their fee than they are for plans under the Affordable Care Act. The administration has been allowing these links to redirect consumers to sites that sell junk plans, even though the ACA expressly prohibits any health insurance exchange from making available any plans that are not qualified health plans under the Affordable Care Act. A number of my colleagues and I have been pressing the administration to conduct better oversight of brokers to ensure that healthcare.gov customers are not being sold junk plans. I urge consumers, when they go on the website, to make sure they stay on the healthcare.gov website or their State's official health insurance exchange website when they are shopping for coverage. Be careful when you click on links that provide assistance from third- party insurance brokers. I encourage Granite Staters and people across this country who need health insurance coverage to take a look at their options between now and December 15, during this year's open enrollment period. There is still time to enroll. It is important to tell your friends and neighbors and your family members who may not know about open enrollment because the amount of money available for outreach has been reduced so dramatically. When the administration was trying to repeal the Affordable Care Act and this Senate voted, Americans across the country made their voices heard. Now we need that same level of engagement to raise awareness of this year's open enrollment and overcome this administration's sabotage of the ACA. Thank you. And if it was not clear earlier, I object.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to raise awareness about the open enrollment period for health insurance marketplace coverage. Between now and December 15, Granite Staters and Americans across the country can enroll in healthcare plans for 2020 through the Affordable Care Act's health insurance marketplaces. Tens of thousands of Granite Staters and millions of Americans will be eligible for Federal premium tax credits to help pay the cost of monthly premiums as well as financial assistance to reduce the cost of annual deductibles. I am sad to say the Trump administration refuses to be a reliable partner in helping to spread the word about open enrollment. For the third year in a row, we have an administration that has focused on sabotaging the Affordable Care Act instead of raising awareness for open enrollment. This administration is even focusing resources on promoting enrollment and junk health plans that don't provide coverage for preexisting conditions and that don't meet the Affordable Care Act's comprehensive coverage requirements. After failing to repeal the Affordable Care Act in the Senate, the Trump administration is making an end-run around Congress, trying to dismantle the ACA through regulations, administrative actions, and lawsuits in the Federal court. As we can see in this chart, 2 years ago, the administration cut funding for advertising and outreach efforts to promote open enrollment by 90 percent. The administration went from $100 million--we can see on that bar--down to $10 million in 2017 and $10 million in 2018 and $10 million in 2019. These advertising cuts are pennywise and pound foolish. They are part of the administration's concerted attempt to keep Americans in the dark about what their insurance options are. Federal advertising on television and through digital platforms and other media is critical to drawing a healthy and balanced mix of consumers into the marketplace. In fact, research shows that California's State-level investments in marketing and advertising for open enrollment generated a 3-to-1 return on investment through lower premiums from a more balanced risk pool. By refusing to adequately promote open enrollment, the administration is forcing our insurance markets to miss out on an opportunity to improve the markets, to lower premiums for consumers, and to ensure a healthy health insurance market--no pun intended--throughout this country. That is why I introduced the MORE Health Education Act--to restore those health insurance marketplace advertising dollars and to increase outreach funding back to the $100 million a year. My bill would also prohibit the administration from using any of these funds to promote short-term plans or junk plans--plans that don't comply with the Affordable Care Act's requirements for preexisting condition protections among many other provisions that provide real insurance coverage for people who need it. The Congressional Budget Office projects that approximately 500,000 more people would enroll in the health insurance marketplace or Medicaid coverage each year as a result of my legislation. That is half a million people who would be insured and be able to better take care of themselves and their families, and they would have access to primary care, to preventive services, and to a wide variety of other services they need and that they would be afforded under the essential health benefits of the Affordable Care Act. My bill would also result in a reduction in marketplace premiums thanks to the increased enrollment from a more balanced risk pool. It would be a win-win all around. Mr. President, at this time, as in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the HELP Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. 455 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I rise on behalf of the New Hampshire congressional delegation--Senator Maggie Hassan, Congresswoman Ann McLane Kuster, and Congressman Chris Pappas--to pay tribute to Dr. William ``Ed'' Kois, a passionate and caring provider at the Manchester Veterans Affairs Medical Center, whose life was tragically cut short in July of this year. Dr. Kois was relentless in making sure that each patient coming through the hospital doors received the best medical care possible. He was often described, especially by the many veterans he served, as the quintessential ``patient's doctor.'' Dr. Kois began his work at the Manchester VAMC in 2012 after two-and- half decades of private practice in Nashua, NH. He specialized in physiatry, a branch of medicine devoted to the treatment of medical conditions affecting the brain, spinal cord, nerves, and joints. His expertise made him a natural fit for the Manchester VAMC's Spinal Cord Clinic, and he began to treat many veterans whose mobility and well- being were impacted by spinal cord injury or dysfunction. Dr. Kois sought to provide a standard of care consistent with the core values of the Veteran's Administration--integrity, commitment, advocacy, respect, and excellence--and his own strong moral compass. This fierce devotion to his principles compelled Dr. Kois to lead a team of 11 whistleblowers alleging inadequate care at the Manchester VAMC. Although soft-spoken among friends and colleagues, he became a powerful voice and a public face in the effort to expose substandard treatment and demand better care for America's veterans. The advocacy of Dr. Kois and his colleagues caught the attention of the Boston Globe Spotlight investigative team, which published a story in July 2017 that directed public attention to the shortcomings at the Manchester VAMC. It prompted a top-to-bottom review that delivered needed changes and improvements at the site. As with any whistleblower complaint, Dr. Kois undertook significant risk in bringing these subjects to light. Yet, with an uncompromising spirit that many attribute to his amateur boxer father, he was willing to sacrifice his livelihood if it meant that veterans would receive the care they need and deserve. And he was eager to sit down with hospital administration and work with them to develop policies that fulfill that promise. His efforts benefited countless men and women in the Granite State and across the country. Dr. Kois is survived by his wife of 29 years, Pamela Greenley, as well as many loving family members, treasured colleagues, and cherished friends. Ms. Greenley will be on hand next week to accept the First Amendment Award on her husband's behalf from the Nackey S. Loeb School of Communications. This distinction honors Granite Staters who go above-and-beyond in their use of the freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. We join the Loeb School, as well as the Boston Globe Spotlight team, in saluting the work and the life of a deserving recipient, Dr. William ``Ed'' Kois.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Mr. Grassley from Iowa on the floor today to talk about important legislation that we are cosponsoring that built upon previous efforts that both of us were engaged in to protect survivors of sexual assault in the criminal justice system. The efforts to extend rights to sexual assault survivors across the country is critically important, and I am hopeful that, once our legislation is known to our colleagues, that they will join us in passing this important bipartisan bill. Amanda Nguyen of the Rise organization initially contacted our office in 2015. I know she also worked with Senator Grassley. When she came to us and detailed her harrowing story of sexual assault, she was raped, and then she felt like she was raped again by a criminal justice system that was not responsive to the challenges of survivors of sexual assault. Amanda described the system that further traumatized survivors and provided scarce protections for their rights. Evidence of assault was being destroyed without survivors' consent, and survivors were forced to periodically follow up with law enforcement to preserve that evidence. The broken process that survivors were forced to endure resulted in a system where they were often re-victimized. Instead of a process that helped them move forward with their lives as they pursued justice, survivors were confronted with the trauma of reliving their attack each time they sought to preserve evidence or gather information about their case. Well, because of Amanda's efforts, the Sexual Assault Survivors' Rights Act was created. It was legislation that provided for the first legally recognized set of rights for survivors that could be enforced in a court of law. Senator Grassley took that legislation, he included it in the Adam Walsh Reauthorization Act, and it was signed into law. It has provided survivors with greater protections in Federal cases because of focus on notice, on access to evidence, and on the preservation of sexual assault evidence collection kits. By creating this set of court enforceable rights at the Federal level, Congress established a model for the States to adopt similar legislation to protect the rights of survivors. So far, 21 States, including my home State of New Hampshire, have adopted that legislation to guarantee survivors certain basic rights in the criminal justice system. Now, unfortunately, we are trying to figure out how to encourage other States to follow the lead of Congress, States that have not yet adopted legislation protecting survivors. That is why the bill that Senator Grassley and I are here to discuss today is so critically important. The Survivors' Bill of Rights in the States Act, the legislation we are cosponsoring, would establish a grant program accessible to States that have in place a law which guarantees the rights contained in the Sexual Assault Survivors' Rights Act. The grand amount would be a percentage of the funding that the State receives under the Stop Violence Against Women Formula Grant Program. States could then use the funds to implement survivor rights, preserve sexual assault evidence collection kits, reduce the backlog of kits, and provide support for victim services. Congress has previously passed legislation using the Stop Formula Grants to incentivize States to adopt legislation, and this is the perfect example of why that kind of an approach would be successful. No survivor should be compelled to bear the indignity of petitioning law enforcement merely to ensure that they are given a fair shake in the criminal justice process. It is my hope that this legislation will lead to an increase in States passing bills to protect survivors' rights. I think it is important that Congress again show survivors that we are behind them, that we will stand up with them for their rights. The Survivors' Bill of Rights in the States Act would do just that. I am so pleased to be joining Senator Grassley in this effort. I think, with this bipartisan support, we can get support from all of our colleagues to enact this follow-on legislation into law and provide the additional support that survivors need. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield to my colleague, Senator Grassley.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to express my concern and my disappointment over the decision by the President to formally withdraw the United States from the Paris climate agreement. Though the President announced this decision over 2 years ago, this past Monday marked the first day his administration could send a letter to the United Nations formalizing the year-long withdrawal process. Of course, we know that they did that. American leadership on climate action is being ceded to other countries before our very eyes. With this move, the President is betraying the trust of the American people and betraying the trust of our international allies in the fight against climate change. Climate change is a very real and present threat to our environment, to our national security, to our economy, to our health, and to our very way of life. That is why I introduced the International Climate Accountability Act, to prevent the President from using funds to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate agreement. This bipartisan bill would also require the administration to develop a strategic plan for meeting the commitments we made in Paris in 2015. We can see on this chart that the House passed legislation over 6 months ago. It has been 188 days since the House passed their legislation, the Climate Action Now Act. Yet in the Senate the majority leadership has refused to call up this bill for a vote. The administration's withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement and the general refusal to bring climate change legislation to the floor is out of step with the desires of the American people. Approximately two out of every three Americans believe it is the job of the Federal Government to combat climate change, according to a recent poll from the Associated Press. The same poll found that 64 percent of Americans disapprove of the President's climate change policies. Unfortunately, the Senate majority leadership continues to refuse to act on climate change. Yet what we hear from our scientists and experts is that they tell us that we need to act and act now on climate change before it is too late. This poll shows us, as others have, that a supermajority of the American public wants us to do just that. I have come before this body a number of times in the past to highlight the impact of climate change in my home State of New Hampshire. We see very directly the effects of climate change. The farther north you go, the more you see those impacts. Our fall foliage season is shortened. Our maple syrup production season is disrupted. Our outdoor recreation industries are hampered. Our ski and our snowmobiling industries are hampered. Our lobsters are moving north to colder waters. Our moose population is down 40 percent, and Lyme disease is on the rise. But today what I really want to highlight are the revelations that have been made clear in recent weeks by our national security experts. A report entitled ``Implications of Climate Change for the U.S. Army,'' which was commissioned by the current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, GEN Mark Milley reads: ``The Department of Defense is precariously unprepared for the national security implications of climate change-induced global security challenges.'' The Pentagon's ``Report on Effects of a Changing Climate to the Department of Defense'' reads, as we can see right here: ``The effects of a changing climate are a national security issue with potential impacts to Department of Defense missions, operational plans, and installations.'' When former Secretary of Defense James Mattis was before the Senate Armed Services Committee for his confirmation hearing in 2017, his testimony read, in part: ``Climate change is impacting stability in areas of the world where our troops are operating today.'' I had the chance to ask him in that hearing: ``Do you believe climate change is a security threat?'' He responded this way: ``Climate change can be a driver of instability, and the Department of Defense must pay attention to potential adverse impacts generated by this phenomenon.'' He went on to say: ``Climate change is a challenge that requires a broader, whole-of-government response.'' I could go on detailing the calamitous conclusions of our national security experts, but, instead, I ask unanimous consent that a letter addressed to the President from nearly 60 national security and military leaders be printed in the Record.

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I am not surprised by my colleague's objection. I am, however, disappointed, and I have to disagree, to some extent, with the rationale because in fact this was not a treaty. It was a voluntary, nonbinding agreement that the United States entered into voluntarily. I am not saying President Trump doesn't have the authority to withdraw from the agreement. I am saying he is wrong to withdraw because it is not in the U.S. national interest to withdraw from this agreement. There is an international race to develop clean energy technologies and practices that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and this race exists, in large part, because of the goals that were established in the Paris climate agreement. Instead of leading the pack in this race, which the United States should be doing, the President has chosen to put us on the sidelines. We are going to watch our allies and our adversaries clamor to fill the void he has created. After decades of American leadership in clean energy technology innovations, other countries are now poised to develop new low-carbon technologies to help countries throughout the world meet their Paris commitments. Those could be American technologies. Those could be American jobs. Instead of being developed in the United States, too many of these new technologies and the jobs that go with them will be developed outside of our shores. This is a missed opportunity for the United States. It is a setback for the American economy and for American workers. The scientists are in agreement worldwide. Climate change is the single greatest environmental public health and economic challenge our world has ever faced. Right now, watching this President withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement, sitting idly by, this Congress is surrendering American leadership in the fight against climate change. I hope that as time goes by, the President and our Republican colleagues will rethink the position and acknowledge the need to do something to address the climate challenge we are facing and to make sure the United States is in line for those jobs and the new energy economy that is being created. With that, I yield the floor.

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, yesterday a bipartisan group met with seven Fortune 500 companies. They were all on the cutting edge of new energy technologies, and everyone around the table said what they need is to see policies at the Federal level that encouraged the development of new energy technologies and what we can do to address climate change. I like what my colleague said about being able to work together to address this. I hope we can do that, and I am ready to sit down anytime he is to look at things we might be able to agree on that will help us move forward to address climate change. I appreciate his willingness to work in a bipartisan way. I yield the floor.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I rise today to commemorate the life and legacy of Christa McAuliffe. Christa McAuliffe was born on September 2, 1948, in Boston, MA. She grew up in suburban Massachusetts, and she studied American history and education in college and graduate school. After some time teaching high school in Maryland, she moved in 1978 with her family to New Hampshire, where she started work as a teacher at Concord High School. She was a passionate and dedicated teacher. She taught a variety of subjects, including history, economics, and law. Her former students describe her enthusiasm and her creativity in planning lessons and activities for students. She even developed an original course, called ``The American Woman.'' One of her former students says, ``She was very exuberant in her teaching and excited about what she was teaching. She was always willing to help outside of the classroom if you needed it. I remember her constantly, every day that I stayed late after school to make up work that I'd missed for other classes. . . . checking in to see if there was anything she could do to help me.'' Christa believed strongly in the importance of the teaching profession and in working creatively to help students understand the human side of historical events. When NASA launched its Teacher in Space Program in 1984, Christa seized the opportunity and applied for what she called the ``ultimate field trip.'' She wrote in her application to NASA: In developing my course, The American Woman, I have discovered that much information about the social history of the United States has been found in diaries, travel accounts and personal letters. This social history of the common people . . . gives my students an awareness of what the whole society was doing at a particular time in history. They get the complete story. Just as the pioneer travelers of the Conestoga wagon days kept personal diaries, I, as a pioneer space traveler, would do the same . . . My perceptions as a non-astronaut would help complete and humanize the technology of the Space Age. Future historians would use my eyewitness accounts to help in their studies of the impact of the Space Age on the general population. Her application was chosen out of more than 11,000 applications submitted by teachers from around the country. Even during her busy NASA training schedule and newfound public attention, she remained dedicated to her students back home in New Hampshire. She flew all the way back from Houston, in the middle of training, in order to be there for the first day of school at Concord High. She even somehow found the time to write college recommendations for her students on the day before the Challenger launch. She planned to keep a journal and teach lessons from space. She wanted to humanize space travel and make the experience accessible to regular people. She said that she hoped her experience and the public attention would inspire more people to become teachers. Tragically, on January 28, 1986, the Challenger shuttle exploded just 73 seconds after launching, killing Christa as well as the rest of the crew: Gregory Jarvis, Ronald McNair, Ellison Onizuka, Judy Resnik and Dick Scobee. Many people know that Christa's motto was ``I touch the future, I teach,'' and that statement remains as true today as it ever was. More than 30 years later, Christa McAuliffe continues to inspire new generations of students and teachers. In fact, a number of Christa's former students have gone on to become teachers themselves. One in particular says she at times turns to the question ``What would Christa do?'' for guidance. Schools and science centers across the country are named for her. In New Hampshire, we have the McAuliffe-Shepard Discovery Center, an air and space museum and planetarium, as well as the Christa McAuliffe School, an elementary school in Concord. There have even been an asteroid and a crater on the moon named after her. The Christa McAuliffe Commemorative Coin Act was signed into law by the President on October 9. The enactment of this legislation means that a commemorative coin in Christa's honor will be minted by the U.S. Treasury in 2021. Proceeds from the sale of this coin will go to support science, technology, engineering and math, STEM, education. Christa McAuliffe demonstrated throughout her life how to make the world a better place, not only through once-in-a-lifetime feats of bravery but also through her everyday actions and interactions with those around her. I hope we can all continue to look to her example for inspiration and ask ourselves ``What would Christa do?''

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Madam President, I have come to the floor to pay tribute to Thomas Iverson, Jr., a longtime New Hampshire resident and law enforcement official who passed away recently at the age of 72. Although he was born in Massachusetts and lived briefly in Maine, George was in many ways a quintessential Granite Stater. He had big personality and a passion for public service that brought him to posts across our great State. After an honorable discharge from the U.S. Navy during the Vietnam war, Tom began his long career in law enforcement with the Manchester Police Department. He served in New Hampshire's Queen City for 6 years before, at the age of 26, becoming chief of police for the town of Bradford, a small community of roughly 1000 residents west of Concord. He continued his commitment to protecting communities across New Hampshire as lieutenant with the Merrimack Police Department, chief of police in Pembroke, and finally serving as chief of the Litchfield Police Department. Following a law enforcement career that spanned three and a half decades with service in five towns, Tom retired in 2004. Though a full retirement would have been well-deserved, Tom wanted to continue dedicating his life to public service. His next move took him to Maine, where he was named the director of the Emergency Management Agency for Piscataquis County in 2005, acting as a link between communities and the State in responding to natural and manmade disasters in Maine's least populous county. He returned to the Granite State in 2012 and became involved in courthouse security for the New Hampshire Judicial Branch's facilities in Manchester. Throughout his career, Tom was a strong proponent of what we now know as community policing. He knew the value of police officers building trust and forging strong ties with the people they serve. When he served as chief in Bradford, Pembroke, and Litchfield, Tom was a reliable and approachable presence in the community. His commitment to this community-based approach did not surprise those who knew him and his commitment to helping and enjoying the company of others. At many local potlucks, he was known to bring his trademark Norwegian meatballs with pasta. Although incredibly giving of his time and wisdom, Tom kept this recipe a closely-held secret. The Granite State and the many communities he served are grateful for his many gifts and acts of selfless service. In the last month, family and friends have gathered to share and cherish their many fond memories of him. I am with them in spirit as they reflect on the life of this good and generous man.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I rise to honor the life and legacy of my friend and former colleague, Senator Kay Hagan of North Carolina. There have been several eloquent tributes to Kay. I am sure we will hear many more in the days to come. They all note her profound grace, her fighting spirit, her charm, and of course, I agree with all of those remarks. I want to especially extend my very sincere condolences to her husband, Chip; to her children, Jeanette, Tilden, and Carrie; and to her father Joe. The news of her death on Monday was deeply felt here in the Senate. Kay and I were in the same class of freshmen Senators. We came in, in 2008, and as the only two women in that class, we became fast friends. But of course, it wasn't hard to make friends with Kay Hagan. She never met a stranger. She had contagious optimism and joy, and she drew everyone in with her smile and kindness. Kay was first in the Senate, not as a Senator, but as an intern, where she had the job of operating the elevators. Of course, those were the days when women Senators were few, and they were often appointed to fill temporary vacancies. So I am sure it was a very powerful moment when Kay took the elevator here in the Capitol for the first time as a United States Senator, only the second woman from her State, North Carolina, to do that. Kay and I often compared notes about our new roles as Senators. We talked about our families and the challenges of commuting to and from DC. I remember Kay showing me and the other women in the Senate pictures of her daughters' weddings and beaming with excitement. She was so tremendously proud of her children and so appreciated the support she received from them and from Chip during her campaigns for public office. Of course, in addition to her character, Kay had boundless energy. Growing up, she studied ballet, and she aspired to be a professional dancer. And I remember she told me about her ``magic bag'' that she took with her everywhere, so she could exercise in the morning. It carried a yoga mat and everything else she needed to exercise. She recommended that I get one, and of course, I was never quite energetic enough to do that. In addition to yoga, Kay loved early morning runs, Pilates, and swimming. It was that swimming that brought Kay some early ``notoriety.'' I use that term in quotes because Kay wanted to use the Senator's swimming pool in the mornings, but when she first got here, there was a sign on the door that said it was for men only. What we learned, after Kay did a little bit of investigating, was it was because some of the male Senators were not interested in wearing appropriate swimming attire when they swam. Well, Kay put a quick stop to that, and it wasn't long before all of the men were wearing swim trunks, and Kay was swimming laps in the pool with them. That was Kay. She was incredibly kind, but she was also tough. When she was falsely accused of being an atheist during her first Senate race, Kay didn't miss a beat. She responded immediately with an ad that set the record straight. She demonstrated to her supporters and to her detractors alike what she was made of. I have fond memories of our calls when we were both up for reelection in 2014. Kay would call and buck me up. I remember she called me after her last debate to say she was finished. She didn't have to do any more debates. Since I was still looking at having to do two of them, she was very encouraging to me. With Kay, the glass was always half full. When she arrived in the Senate, it didn't take long for her to make her mark on the issues of greatest importance to North Carolina and the Nation. She applied her skills as a pragmatic legislator, which were honed in the North Carolina Senate, and she got to work on the pressing issues of the day. She fought tirelessly for jobs and the economic well-being of her constituents. She was a champion of small businesses, for expanding rural broadband, for developing regional infrastructure. She helped pass the historic reforms to Wall Street following the financial crisis because she served on the Banking Committee. We worked together, along with the rest of the members of the class of 2008, to try and improve the Affordable Care Act as it was being drafted. Kay took a tough vote in favor of the ACA, but she did it because she knew it was going to help her constituents get insurance coverage and healthcare and that it would provide protections for millions of Americans. Kay and I served together on the Armed Services Committee in the Senate. She fought for our servicemembers, for their families, and for improving the defense of our nation. Kay's husband, father, and brother all served their country in uniform. The challenges that servicemembers and military families face were always top of mind for Kay. In my office here in the Capitol, there is a photo of me and Kay. It is on our first trip to Afghanistan. We had only been in the Senate about 5 months at that point. We were smiling from ear to ear, even though it was over 100 degrees, we were wearing body armor, and we were in a helicopter with the doors open heading to a Forward Operating Base. We were smiling because we were so excited and because it was always so fun to travel with Kay. There wasn't a better partner than Kay for these trips. She was diligent. She was inquisitive. She always held herself with grace and kindness and resolve. That was her trademark. Serving her country and her beloved home State in the United States Senate was a profound honor for Kay, as it is for all of us. I feel fortunate to have known and worked alongside her. She will be dearly missed, not just by all of us in the Senate, but by so many of her constituents whom she represented in North Carolina. I want to again extend my deepest condolences to the Hagan family and to the State of North Carolina. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Madam President, the substitute amendment to H.R. 3055 contains the Appropriations Committee-reported versions of four bills: Agriculture; Interior; Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, one bill; and Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies. I was very excited to see today's earlier cloture vote, which passed 88 to 5, which means that we can see those four bills to help fund government move forward. The Commerce-Justice-Science portion of this minibus, or CJS, was reported out of the Appropriations Committee on a unanimous 31-to-0 vote. I particularly care about this bill as ranking member on that subcommittee. The CJS bill provides $70.8 billion to protect the Nation from criminals and terrorists, warn us about violent storms and climate change, enable fair trade, promote manufacturing and sustainable fisheries, partner with State and local law enforcement, and provide resources for the census to count every person in the United States fairly and accurately. CJS Subcommittee Chairman Moran and I took a collaborative approach to drafting this important bill. The CJS Subcommittee held substantive hearings, considered 1,564 individual and group requests from 75 Senators, and worked in a bipartisan way to meet the needs of the Nation and our individual States. Under the Constitution, since 1790, every 10 years the United States has conducted the census, and we only get one chance every 10 years to get it right. In addition to determining the number of Representatives each State will have, Federal programs rely on census data to distribute more than $900 billion annually, nearly $4 billion of which goes to my home State of New Hampshire. Chairman Moran and I have worked together to make sure the census has the resources it needs. The bill provides $7.6 billion for the Bureau of the Census--nearly double the amount provided in fiscal year 2019. This fully funds the life-cycle estimate for the 2020 census, along with contingencies that have been recommended by Secretary Ross but were not requested in the budget. The bill also directs the Census Bureau to invest in partnership and communication efforts in hard-to-count areas in order to increase self- response rates and offset the need for expensive door-to-door followup. Once again, the subcommittee has provided increases to law enforcement and grant programs that fight gun violence and violent crime. The bill includes at least a 3-percent increase for Justice Department law enforcement agencies--more than $476 million higher than the fiscal year 2019 level for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the FBI, and the Marshals Service. Especially important, we have provided $131 million for the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System, NICS--$24 million more than last year. This system is the key to making sure firearms are purchased legally and helping keep weapons out of the hands of those who wish to do harm. The bill includes increases for States to improve record submission to NICS and for mental health courts. We continue to provide the full $100 million authorized for STOP School Violence Act grants. But as we know, gun violence isn't just happening in schools, so we have included funding for other grant programs, like $8 million for community-based violence prevention and nearly 10 percent more for the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention to help keep children and their families safe in their neighborhoods. We are also addressing another form of violence facing our law enforcement officers, and that is police suicide. I would really like to provide more statistics regarding this important issue of police suicide, but unfortunately I can't, and neither can anybody in this body because no Federal agencies collect data on the subject. That is why in the CJS bill, we direct the Justice Department to begin a national data collection to report on police suicide so we can all better understand the scope of the problem. We also direct the Department to report on best practices for officer mental health and wellness programs, including peer mentoring. One thing we do know about police suicides, though, is that we lose more police officers to suicide each year than we do to officers killed in the line of duty. Our police officers need help now, so we have been able to add $3 million for grants to allow State and local law enforcement to provide improved mental health services, training to reduce the stigma of officers seeking help, and programs to address resiliency for departments and officers to handle repeated exposure to stress and trauma. This is an issue, sadly, we know all too well in New Hampshire, where in the last couple of months, in the city of Nashua--our second-largest city--we lost a very much appreciated, well-respected, and loved police officer to suicide. We were lucky because the chief of the Nashua Police Department and the family of that officer were willing to talk about that suicide to raise concern about this issue so that we can know and try to address it. Another area of funding in this bill that will help our first responders, in addition to the support to our State and local governments and community organizations, is the $505 million in dedicated grant programs to fight substance abuse, including opioids, and to fight drug trafficking. This amount is $37 million higher than the fiscal year 2019 level and $127.5 million higher than the budget request. In part because of the resources we have brought to bear on the opioid crisis in New Hampshire and throughout New England, the substance use disorder epidemic is developing and changing, and we are now seeing a rapid rise in the use and trafficking of meth amphetamines. When efforts are focused on preventing and stopping one drug, sadly, we see others gain traction, and that is what is happening. After hearing from local law enforcement and community organizations, this bill provides more flexibility to allow communities to respond to a variety of substance abuse issues in addition to opioids in the Comprehensive Opioid, Stimulant, and Substance Abuse Program. Communities should not be turning away individuals who have substance use disorders because we have a narrow definition of the programs that can help. Another way this bill seeks to keep Granite State communities vibrant--and this helps other communities that depend on coastal economies--is we reject the elimination of grants that help our coastal communities and their economies. The bill keeps key weather satellites on track and provides an increase for job-supporting coastal programs like Sea Grant, Coastal Zone Management Grants, the National Oceans and Coastal Security Fund, and the National Estuarine Research Reserve System. The bill includes continued funding to prevent a burdensome and costly at-sea monitoring fee from being imposed on New Hampshire and other New England fishermen. I have heard directly from our fishermen in New Hampshire that without this support, they would have to stop fishing and declare bankruptcy. So many seacoast communities rely on a strong fishing industry. That is why the bill also includes $2.5 million for New England groundfish research, including looking at measures to improve stock assessments. Beyond the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, the bill also supports strong investments in research and development at the National Science Foundation; the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA; and the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST. The bill includes a 5-percent increase for NIST, which is an agency that promotes U.S. innovation and competitiveness through scientific and technological standards and measurement. I am pleased that the bill provides $2 million for NIST to study whether firefighters are subject to PFAS exposure, a chemical that has been linked to serious adverse health implications. What we have seen is that--we think the actual equipment that is used by so many firefighters has PFAS chemicals in that equipment, so that while risking their lives fighting fires, firefighters also may be exposed to a dangerous chemical that can affect their health. The last thing our firefighters need when they are on duty is to be concerned about the safety of their own firefighting gear. Within NASA, we have provided balanced funding that enables science supported by decadal surveys, supports the International Space Station, continues developing and flying new transportation systems, and allows for an eventual return to the Moon by humans. We have also provided more than $900 million to restore widely supported programs that the administration proposed to eliminate-- programs like Space Grant; EPSCoR; the Wide Field Infrared Telescope or W-FIRST; the Plankton, Aerosol, Cloud ocean Ecosystem mission, PACE; and Restore-L. What is important about these programs is that they allow young people--students in every State--to be involved with NASA and implement high-priority science objectives and to get excited about space and the opportunities space investment offers us. These are some of the highlights of just the Commerce-Justice-Science portion of this minibus. I believe it is a strong, comprehensive bill. I am proud it is on the floor. I hope it is going to pass with as strong a margin as we saw this morning's vote give us, and I hope we will be able to enact this bill into law before the current continuing funding resolution expires on November 21. I want to give credit to all of the members of both the majority and the minority on the Appropriations subcommittee that helped negotiate our CJS bill and all of the bills that are on the floor. They do tremendous work, and they deserve our credit for all of their effort. I yield the floor.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

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

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, since President Trump was sworn in, he has made it his mission to dismantle the Affordable Care Act. Last Congress, time and again, we saw the House and Senate majorities try-- and fail--to repeal the law of the land, the Affordable Care Act. After their attempt to repeal the Affordable Care Act failed in the Senate, the Trump administration made it abundantly clear that they would do everything possible to sabotage the act through regulations and administrative action. Through this sabotage, the administration has undermined the critical protections healthcare provides for people with preexisting conditions. I just want to reiterate my support for the Congressional Review Act disapproval resolution that I worked on with Senator Warner, and I congratulate him for his leadership. What that resolution points out is that preexisting conditions and short-term insurance plans, also known as junk plans, are inconsistent. I am proud to support the disapproval resolution that we will vote on this week that would reverse this administration's so-called 1332 waiver rules. Those rules allow for the use of taxpayer dollars to subsidize junk insurance plans. These waiver rules are part of the Trump administration's ongoing attempt to make an end run around Congress and dismantle the Affordable Care Act through the regulatory process. I think it is important to understand the shortcomings of these junk plans that the administration is promoting. These plans are allowed to deny coverage to someone who has a preexisting condition. They also allow insurance companies to charge higher premiums if somebody has a preexisting condition. They are not required to cover the Affordable Care Act's essential benefits, such as maternity care, substance use disorder treatment, or prescription drugs. In New Hampshire, where we have a real challenge with the opioid epidemic, without coverage for substance use disorders, we have thousands of people who would not be able to get treatment for their substance use disorders. These plans are allowed to place arbitrary limits on the dollar value of services that will be covered annually, and they also don't have to comply with the Affordable Care Act's caps on how much insurers can require that patients pay out of pocket. In short, these junk plan policies are often not worth the paper they are written on, but for some reason, these are plans that are favored by this administration. The administration's 1332 waiver rules effectively rewrite the law to allow the Affordable Care Act premium tax credits to be used to purchase junk plan coverage. So rather than help subsidize comprehensive healthcare coverage as was intended in the act--coverage that will actually allow people to get the healthcare services they need--what the Trump administration waiver does is have those taxpayer subsidies cover junk plans that generally do not provide the care that people need. Allowing taxpayer dollars to subsidize junk plan coverage is not only dangerous for consumers, who can be duped into purchasing junk plans, but it also poses a threat to the stability of the insurance market. By aggressively pushing enrollment in junk plans, this administration is seeking to split the insurance market into two: one market for younger and healthier individuals and a second, much more expensive market for older individuals and people with chronic health conditions. This is not the outcome that people in New Hampshire and patients across this country want or deserve. That is why I intend to vote in favor of the Congressional Review Act resolution, which will overturn these rules that are sabotaging the Affordable Care Act. Unfortunately, the waiver rules are not the only grave threat that this administration is posing to access to healthcare coverage and protections for people with preexisting conditions. In addition to the sabotage of the ACA that is going on, the Department of Justice--our Nation's highest law enforcement authority--continues to refuse to defend the law of the land, the Affordable Care Act, in Federal court. Instead, the Justice Department has argued that the Affordable Care Act should be struck down, resulting in the loss of coverage for millions of Americans. The estimate is that if the Affordable Care Act is struck down, 20 million Americans will lose their healthcare. In New Hampshire, approximately 90,000 Granite Staters have obtained health insurance coverage through either the Affordable Care Act or Medicaid expansion. Across the country, more than 17 million Medicaid expansion enrollees and 11 million people in the marketplace health plan depend on the ACA for their coverage. So these families can see their coverage ripped away if the Department of Justice gets its way in the courtroom. If the Department is victorious in its litigation, they will also take away the best tool we have for combating the opioid epidemic--the Medicaid expansion. In New Hampshire, more than 11,000 people have substance use treatment thanks to Medicaid expansion. Access to those services will be gone without the Affordable Care Act. At a time when so many families are struggling with sky-high prescription drug prices, a victory by the Department of Justice in this case would increase prescription drug costs for Granite State seniors, who currently save an average of $1,100 a year thanks to the ACA's Medicare Part D drug discount program. That is not all. If the courts strike down the Affordable Care Act, insurers would once again be able to exclude coverage for prescription drugs, and the FDA's approval pathway for less expensive biosimilar medication would be invalidated. I have been watching these ads on behalf of President Trump and the administration that talk about his commitment to lowering prescription drug prices and the importance of the pathway for biosimilar medications that are basically generic drugs for biologics. Yet this pathway to approve those less costly biosimilar medications would be invalidated if the Affordable Care Act gets struck down. The stakes are really just too high for us to continue the partisan bickering around the Affordable Care Act. We should be coming together to tell the Justice Department to defend the law of the land. That is why I filed an amendment to the Commerce, Justice, Science appropriations bill that would prohibit the Justice Department from using Federal funds to argue against the Affordable Care Act in court. That is why we need to support the Congressional Review Act vote that we will have this week, which would ensure that people with preexisting conditions are not going to be cut off of their health insurance when they are tricked into buying junk plans through this administration's deceptive advertising. This Friday is the start of the 2020 open enrollment season for the Health Insurance Marketplace coverage under the Affordable Care Act. At this important juncture, we should be sending a very clear message that the Department of Justice should defend the law of the land and that the administration's promotion of junk plans should not continue. If we fail to do so, we are going to be endangering vital access to care for millions--tens of millions--of Americans. I yield the floor.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak before the vote.

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I rise to express my outrage with regard to President Trump's decision to withdraw U.S. troops from northeast Syria. This decision is dangerous, premature, and wholly inconsistent with what the facts on the ground in Syria and the advice from everyone--from our diplomats to our military advisers. In just 1 week, President Trump has managed to undo 5 years of hard- fought stability in northeast Syria. Just 1 week ago, over 10,000 ISIS fighters, including high-value prisoners who targeted American victims, were secured in prisons throughout northeast Syria. We face, today, a very different picture. Several ISIS prisons are already unmanned as a result of Turkey's incursion, and it is estimated that over 100 ISIS prisoners have been released already. We don't know what will happen in those other detention centers that have housed ISIS prisoners. One week ago, a limited U.S. troop presence of 1,000 Special Forces stabilized a population that was once terrorized by the Syrian regime and later by ISIS. These forces secured a region of Syria that controls over two-thirds of Syria's natural resources. American troops have, today, either left or are preparing to leave this area, and the Syrian regime is moving in. Russian troops have moved into U.S. military bases, and over 160,000 Syrian civilians have already fled their homes as a result of the spike in violence that has been instigated by Turkey. It is so hard to watch the videos on television that show Turkey-affiliated fighters assassinating Kurdish forces--Kurds with their hands tied behind their backs. I traveled to Syria a year ago last summer. Lindsey Graham and I saw firsthand the work of the combined joint task force, Operation Inherent Resolve. We saw the work its partner forces, the Syrian Democratic Forces, were doing, and it was truly remarkable. The United States owes a huge debt of gratitude to the men and women of the SDF who sacrificed over 11,000 of their own lives in fighting ISIS so we didn't have to sacrifice our own. Because of this sacrifice, when we were in northeast Syria last summer, we witnessed communities like Manbij steadily recover and rebuild after 3 years under ISIS's brutal occupation, and the widespread appreciation of the U.S. presence among local, multiethnic residents was a testament to the importance of our partnerships and our willingness to lead in times of crisis. As we drove down the roads, we saw kids flashing victory signs at our troops. When we were in the marketplace, we had people come out and tell us how relieved they were that the United States was there to help ensure that peace was being kept. We saw local governance taking place on the ground. So it is incredibly difficult now to see images coming out of Manbij and the other places we visited in northeastern Syria. The Syrian regime has already moved troops back into this region, and Turkey's proxies, who are seemingly undeterred by the Syrian presence, continue to move into the city of Manbij with heavily armed vehicles. Meanwhile, Russia has spent the last few days touring and posting videos of abandoned, taxpayer-funded U.S. bases. What is taking place in Manbij and in so many cities across northeast Syria is an insult to the thousands of American servicemembers who have risked their lives to help stabilize that region and support the fight against ISIS, and it could have all been avoided. This really began in December of 2018 when the President said he planned to withdraw troops from Syria. That was after holding up for months the stabilization dollars that could have been used to make it very clear that we were committed to the region--to ensuring that ISIS wouldn't rebuild there and that there would be stability in northeastern Syria. We were committed to making sure the United States was at the table when Russia and Iran and Assad moved in and carved up Syria. I ask unanimous to have printed in the Record the recommendations on the best way forward in Syria that were issued last month by the bipartisan Syria Study Group, which I helped to create.

Mrs. SHAHEEN. The report read that the United States should make the most of its gains and hold this critical piece of land until a negotiated settlement was reached between all parties. Moreover, the report, which was bipartisan--that had Representatives appointed by Members of Congress and by the administration--read that withdrawing U.S. troops would not make ISIS less likely to regroup or Iran less likely to entrench itself. President Trump's ill-informed and hasty decision will not only breathe new life into the terrorist groups--into ISIS, which is really just al-Qaida by another name--and cede America's hard-fought gains in the region to Russia, Iran, and Assad, but it will erode U.S. credibility in the long term. It will cede America's hard-fought gains in the region. I wish there were alternatives that we as a country could pursue. Sadly, I don't think we can put the genie back in the bottle. Here in Congress, though, I hope we will look at ways to hold Turkey and President Erdogan accountable for his actions. I certainly hope President Trump will revoke his invitation to President Erdogan to visit the United States. President Erdogan needs to hear an unequivocal message of opposition to this incursion from the United States, and it makes no sense to extend hospitality and niceties during this moment of crisis. Republicans and Democrats must come together and ensure that the administration understands the consequences of these actions. We have to do more to ensure that such mistakes never happen again. I yield the floor. S.J. Res. 53

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I rise today on behalf of the New Hampshire congressional delegation, Senator Maggie Hassan and Representatives Ann McLane Kuster and Chris Pappas, to salute the New Hampshire Police Association Pipes and Drums on its 25th anniversary. For a quarter century, NHPA Pipes and Drums have brought their distinct sound to memorial services and community events in the Granite State and across the country. They honor their brothers and sisters in uniform with each performance. The beginnings of NHPA Pipes and Drums are rooted in tragedy. In October of 1994, Sergeant James Noyes of the New Hampshire State Police SWAT Team responded to a barricaded subject in Gilford, NH. Trained in hostage negotiations, he was trying to dissuade a clearly distraught man from harming himself when the man suddenly opened fire. Sergeant Noyes was struck by a bullet under his arm and succumbed to his injury, leaving behind a wife, daughter, and two sons. At his funeral days later, his fellow troopers and law enforcement officers listened to the Boston Police Gaelic Column pay tribute to Sergeant Noyes. Their bagpipes and drums gave expression to their shared grief. A few officers quickly initiated a search for anyone interested in a New Hampshire-based police pipes and drum band. Several individuals from various departments answered the call, and they held their first practice 2 months later. After 2 years of trainings and rehearsals, the New Hampshire Police Association Pipes and Drums gave its maiden performance at the New Hampshire Police Memorial in Concord. The band's current roster has honed a difficult craft, and their performances give special meaning to both somber police memorials as well as more cheerful community events. They are frequent marchers in Forth of July and holiday parades around the region. They are mainstays at the New Hampshire Highland Games. They bring their talents to send- offs for Honor Flights, which flies veterans to Washington, DC, at no cost to see war memorials. They have played at Fenway Park, as well as in the Nation's Capital during National Police Week, and at our annual Congressional Law Enforcement Awards, they play a crucial role in our efforts to honor officers who go above and beyond the call of duty. On behalf of the people of New Hampshire, we ask our colleagues and all Americans to join us in congratulating NHPA Pipes and Drums on 25 years of service and wishing its pipers and drummers all the best in the coming years.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

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

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, for the past couple of weeks, New Hampshire and many other States across the country have been flooded with millions of dollars' worth of dark money advertisements. These ads have been all over TV and social media. Let me just be clear. They haven't been running just against me in New Hampshire; they have been running against Democrats and Republicans in competitive races across this country. We have also had flyers that have been jammed in the mailboxes all across New Hampshire. I even got several of the flyers myself. This is an example of one. I will read it in just a minute. I want to point out that the goal of this campaign has been to stop Congress from acting to address surprise medical bills. For example, this flyer makes the dishonest claim that addressing surprise medical bills would lead to hospital closures and doctor shortages. In fact, you can see, it says: Imagine if the care we needed wasn't there when we needed it the most. Rate setting is a healthcare nightmare--hospital closures, doctor shortages, windfall profits for big insurance. Say no to rate setting. Don't put big insurance companies in charge of our healthcare. Stop surprise medical bills. Then you turn it over, and it says: Tell Jeanne Shaheen to stop rate setting. Say no to putting big insurance in charge of our healthcare. Say no to making it harder to see our chosen doctors when we need them the most. Say no to big insurance profits at our expense. Tell Senator Jeanne Shaheen to put patients first. You read that, and you think I am all about trying to put insurance companies ahead of patients. It doesn't tell you who is sending it. But you look at it--and we did a little digging, and we found out that the ads say that they are paid for by an organization called Doctor Patient Unity. You read that, and you think, well, they are worried about patients. You look at that, and you think they are worried about hospital closures. This is from Doctor Patient Unity, so this must be someone who cares about patients. Don't believe it. The truth is, these flyers and the ads that have been running in New Hampshire and across the country are paid for by two private equity firms on Wall Street. They don't care about patients. They care about profits. They have spent over $2 million in New Hampshire. If you look across the country, they have spent tens of millions of dollars. Just imagine that instead of trying to pad their own bottom line and worrying about surprise medical billing, they had put those tens of millions of dollars into improving healthcare for the people of this country. The public doesn't know this because they have been left completely in the dark. Due to the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision, special interests can spend unlimited amounts of money and stay anonymous. So the average person throughout the country who gets one of these flyers is not going to know who paid for these ads. They are not going to know who is getting the benefit of the costs from surprise medical billing. This ad campaign is not only confusing to voters; it is exhibit A in how our campaign finance system is broken. The voices of Granite Staters who are struggling to pay surprise medical bills are being drowned out in this case by private equity firms on Wall Street that are making billions off of the status quo. Here is how these private equity firms are exploiting patients. First, surprise medical bills usually occur when a patient visits an in-network hospital. Let's say my insurance says that I can go to the hospital in my hometown. As part of the treatment, I go to the hospital, but the doctor who sees me is not a doctor who is in the network of my insurance company. So unbeknownst to me, as I go into the emergency room, that doctor is what is called out of network. These doctors often are working for physician staffing companies that have gone out of network so they can aggressively pursue surprise medical bills. These physician staffing companies are also using these surprise medical bills to negotiate--to command in-network payments from insurers that are often twice as high as the average, which can result in higher premiums for everybody. So they have these surprise medical bills, and you pay more for those. The insurance companies and the physician staffing companies go to the insurers and say: Look, these doctors are getting paid this much from surprise medical bills, so you have to raise your payments for doctors in your network, and everybody is going to pay more as the result of that. Again, this is frequently done at the behest of private equity firms that own the physician staffing companies. Surprise medical bills can be a tremendous shock to patients. This is what happened to Donald and Kathy Cavallaro. They live in Rye, NH. Don works at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard. When Kathy needed emergency surgery, Don's insurance covered the hospital costs, but the doctor performing the surgery was out of their insurance network. The result was that they got a surprise medical bill for $5,000. Now they are appealing that cost. Unfortunately, what the Cavallaros are going through isn't a rare occurrence. One in six emergency room visits in New Hampshire results in a surprise bill for Granite Staters who have large employer coverage. Nationally, the average cost of a surprise bill from an emergency room visit is more than $600, and the average surprise bill for inpatient care is over $2,000. So we can see what is happening as a result of surprise medical bills. Surprise bills like these can easily put a family budget in the red, and Congress desperately needs to put a stop to them. Today, I strongly encourage my colleagues in the Senate to move this effort forward. The special interests that are pushing these surprise medical bills and pushing up all of our healthcare costs have to be tuned out. This is about making sure that when a Granite Stater or any American goes to a hospital, they can have faith that their insurance is going to cover their costs. We should not--we must not--let private equity firms on Wall Street bully Congress or derail the bipartisan efforts that are taking place in this body to address surprise medical bills. These advertisements should also serve as a reminder that Congress has to reform our broken campaign finance system. Special interests shouldn't be able to hide behind nice-sounding front groups like Doctor Patient Unity. We know these private equity firms are responsible for these ads only because of investigative reporting that was done by Bloomberg, the New York Times, and some others. Sadly, this is the exception rather than the norm because usually dark money never gets exposed. In closing, I want to send a very clear message: I don't care how many ads these special interests run, how many mailers they send out, or how many millions they spend. Granite Staters who have had their family budgets upended by surprise medical bills must be prioritized over the special interests who want to profit off of them. Healthcare costs are out of control, and tackling surprise medical bills must remain at the top of the Senate's agenda. Thank you. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Madam President, I am pleased to join my colleagues and very much appreciate Senator Udall's leadership on the joint resolution we are speaking to today. This is the resolution that would end the President's unconstitutional emergency declaration, which is diverting money from critical military construction projects to fund a costly and ineffective border wall. Congress has made it abundantly clear that we did not provide funding for the President's border wall and that we don't approve of raiding military resources to fund his campaign promise--which, by the way, the President vowed Mexico would pay for. It is important to note that Congress works on a bipartisan basis to provide funding to secure the southern border. According to the Constitution, it is Congress and not the President who holds the power of the purse. Just 6 months ago, in a strong bipartisan vote, a majority of this body--59 Senators--successfully passed the resolution disapproving of the President's emergency declaration. Unfortunately, President Trump chose to veto that legislation, which is why we have brought it to the floor again for a vote. It is imperative that this legislative body--this Senate--defend its authority as derived from the Constitution and protect funding that is vital to our troops and to our national security. I think it is difficult to overstate the critical role military construction projects play in maintaining military readiness and supporting our national defense. Yet this administration is treating funding set aside for our national security like a slush fund. Take military construction, for instance. At the Portsmouth Naval shipyard in New Hampshire and Maine--it is on the border between New Hampshire and Maine--any disruptions for funding in construction projects can result in costly delays to our military's carefully crafted plans to upgrade aging infrastructure. Delays in projects that support the shipyard's mission threaten to exacerbate the Navy's already high demand for submarine maintenance and the projected submarine shortfall in the coming years. In addition, New Hampshire's National Guard readiness centers are in desperate need of modernization, and they can't afford further delays to readiness center improvements. All those projects are funded through the military construction program. While New Hampshire's and Maine's shipyard and National Guard were spared from President Trump's latest money grab, the same can't be said for 127 other important military construction projects across this country. The 552 middle school children at Fort Campbell in the majority leader's home State of Kentucky will have to wait for a new school as President Trump diverts construction funding to the border. Critical projects in Virginia that would improve a cyber operations facility and replace hazardous materials in warehouses are another casualty of President Trump's political games. The Child Development Center in Maryland, the missile field in Alaska, the weapon maintenance shop in Alabama--the list of projects that are affected by the President's unconstitutional mandate just goes on and on. It includes hundreds of millions of dollars for critical infrastructure to support the Defense Department's European Deterrence Initiative. What message does that send to our European allies on our efforts to deter Russian aggression? The impact of the President's actions and Congress's own complacency is painfully real to the men and women who serve our Nation. These are the same men and women who are being deprived of the resources they need to complete their mission. Perhaps not surprising, there are now reports indicating that the Trump administration is again planning to take military construction funds appropriated by Congress to build the border wall. According to the Washington Post, you can see this pretty clearly. The administration plans to pitch its appropriations request to Congress as replenishment money to the Department of Defense for the money they took this year to fund the border wall. A Trump administration official said: The plan is to sell it as replenishment money. . . . Then once they got it from Congress, they would take it again. This isn't just a one-time deal. We are talking about the administration setting us up to do this again and again and again. This type of deception from the administration makes funding the government extremely difficult for Congress because we can't trust--we don't know if the President is negotiating in good faith. The Members of the legislative branch are endowed by the Constitution with the power to fund the government. We must be sure that the resources we provide in spending legislation are being used as they were intended by the Congress. This constitutional duty is particularly salient when the President has shown such a flagrant disregard for congressional intent and the constitutional separation of powers. The authority of the Congress is very clear: The power of the purse is held by the legislative branch. Those powers were enumerated for the very reason that we are here today--to shield against an overreaching Executive. This isn't about Democrat versus Republican; this is about whether Congress votes to uphold its powers and responsibilities--powers and responsibilities that are enshrined in the Constitution. We must take action now in defense of both our Constitution and our national security. I would urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to protect our constitutional authority as Members of Congress, to defend our national security, and to support the resolution to terminate President Trump's emergency declaration. I yield the floor.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the Crawford Path on its 200th year of continuous operation. As the first trail to the summit of 6,288-foot Mount Washington, the Crawford Path has provided adventure, physical challenge, and fantastic alpine views of the White Mountains for two centuries of hikers and travelers. Ethan Allen Crawford, for whom the trail is named, first proposed the idea for a path to the peak of Mount Washington. Ethan and his father Abel operated the Crawford House, a modest wayside inn which provided shelter and accommodations for travelers at the inception of the tourism industry in the White Mountains. As an early entrepreneur, he realized he could make a little extra money serving as a mountain guide to these travelers. After seeing and hearing how difficult it was to move through the thick mountain brush, Ethan and Abel set out to cut some trees and build a footpath that offered better access to the Northeast's highest peak. Their path snaked through the woods, eclipsed the tree line, and traversed ridges and peaks on its way to the summit. The finished product as among the first hiking trails in the United States and established Ethan as an early mountain guide. The Crawford Path capitalized on growing interest in the wilderness, and more and more travelers viewed the mountains as an outlet for recreational experiences. On one of Ethan's guided treks to the top of Mount Washington, he led a group that named the surrounding peaks-- Mount Adams, Mount Jefferson, Mount Madison, Mount Monroe, Mount Franklin, and Mount Pleasant, now famously known as the Presidential Range. The family continued to cut trails on the mountain, including a bridle path in the 1840s that led horse riders to the summit. Abel--by then in his seventies--became the first person to ascend Mount Washington on a horse. Years later, the mountain pass where they worked was renamed ``Crawford Notch'' as a tribute to the family's contributions to the region. Generations of hikers have walked along the path first forged by the Crawfords, and generations of trail crews have maintained the 8.5-mile route for the enjoyment of the public. The Crawford Path carries day hikers as well as thru-hikers tackling the Appalachian Trail. Each is instantly connected to 200 years of experiences and adventures. The White Mountains are now a thriving, well-known, four-season tourist destination, where travelers in numbers Abel and Ethan could not have imagined come to observe unparalleled natural beauty. On behalf of the people of New Hampshire, I ask my colleagues and all Americans to join me in recognizing the Crawford Path on its 200 year anniversary and in thanking its many stewards for preserving the oldest continually-used mountain trail in the United States.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Madam President, today I would like to recognize Ms. Beth Anne Maloney of Hampton, NH, and celebrate her well-deserved retirement after 31 years of service to the students in that community as a school nurse. After beginning her nursing career in 1984, Beth joined the staff of Centre Elementary School in Hampton in the fall of 1988. Centre School serves roughly 350 prekindergarten through grade 2 students and has the distinction of being the oldest public school in the State of New Hampshire. Beth was the school's first full-time registered nurse, and she has overseen the modernizing of the school's health services. Over the years, Beth connected with thousands of students while carrying out her daily duties of assessing health, conducting vision and hearing screenings, and acting as a first responder. She developed particularly close relationships with students who had chronic conditions that required specialized care and management, including epilepsy, allergies, and asthma. Over time, she gained significant experience assisting students with type 1 diabetes, who often require daily nursing assistance with their diet, blood sugar monitoring, and medication. Beth was actively engaged in developing care plans for these students that would minimize interruptions to their daily schedules, and she continually trained her fellow staff members to prevent and respond to diabetic emergencies. In addition to her nursing duties, Beth was a tireless advocate for students in need of health-related services, which could range from immunizations or a new pair of glasses to specialized care for untreated conditions. She maintained numerous relationships with seacoast area health providers willing to help the families of students in need. Beth also took on a number of charitable causes and frequently organized the school's annual Thanksgiving food drive in partnership with the local St. Vincent de Paul Society. I thank Beth for her dedication to keeping our young people healthy and her service to the students, parents, and staff, who make up the Centre School community. I know these values will continue to guide her future endeavors. Please join me in honoring an outstanding Granite Stater, Beth Maloney.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the 50th anniversary of the moon landing and New Hampshire's role in this important moment of history. On July 20, 1969, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin completed their 13th orbit around the Moon and fired up the descent engine on the now- historic Eagle Apollo Lunar Module. With pilot Michael Collins staying behind in the command module, Columbia, these American heroes, with the entire world watching and backed by a whole generation of scientists, engineers, and specialists supporting them on the ground, began their initial descent to be the first humans to set foot on another planetary body. What many Americans may not know is that as both pilots began their historic descent, critical New Hampshire-made technology was helping them along the way. Sensors made by RdF Corporation in Hudson were a part of the lunar module propulsion system guiding them to the lunar surface. RdF sensors were also on their spacesuits as they took that first giant leap for mankind. RdF, which continues to support the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA, as it looks to return to the Moon and then Mars, is just one of the many innovative small businesses in the Granite State that have played such a critical role in our country's space program. For example, the Saturn V rocket program, which launched the Apollo crews to the Moon, benefitted from a state-of-the-art computerized system which was developed at Sanders Associates in Nashua, now a part of BAE Systems. HaighFarr in Bedford has been in business for over 50 years designing complex antennas for the space program and has played a significant role in our Mars lander and rover programs. Mikrolar, in Hampton, manufactures high precision positioning systems and is a critical piece of the James Webb Telescope, which will be the successor to the Hubble sometime in the next decade. The fact is that New Hampshire's pioneering and innovative small business community has been a mainstay in the aerospace community for decades and remains so today. As the ranking member on the Appropriations Subcommittee that oversees and funds NASA, I am supportive of NASA's efforts to get us back to the Moon and eventually Mars, particularly because I know Granite State businesses will be leading those efforts. It is not just the private sector in New Hampshire that has stepped up to keep us competitive in science and space. It is also our educational community. The University of New Hampshire, UNH, is a key contributor to NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, which has been in orbit around the Moon since 2009. The New Hampshire Space Grant Consortium, which includes nine Granite State affiliates, including UNH, Dartmouth, and our very own McAuliffe-Shepard Discovery Center, is focused on educating our future scientists and space technicians. A true accounting of New Hampshire's role in space would not be complete without calling attention to two of our State's most impressive space-faring heroes: Alan Shepard and Christa McAuliffe. Alan Shepard was from Derry and is better known to the rest of the world as the first American in space. His historic 1961 Mercury flight paved the way for the Apollo missions to the Moon. I am also reminded that, as the commander of the follow-on Apollo 14 mission, he also became the first human to golf on the Moon's surface. Christa McAuliffe's legacy as an advocate for her students and for science education continues to inspire to this day. New Hampshire and the entire country are proud of her pioneering efforts. Earlier this month, the entire U.S. Senate honored that legacy and passed my legislation authorizing the U.S. Mint to produce a commemorative coin in her honor. As we continue to celebrate these American achievements, we also celebrate the New Hampshire businesses, institutions, and people who helped make that possible and remember the pride Americans everywhere felt that day. I also hope that the 50th anniversary of the Moon landing will serve as a wake-up call to all of us, a statement of the great things our country can do when we stand united, working together, and focused on a common goal. We need more of that today. I hope we will look to heroes like Christa McAuliffe, Alan Shepard, and the Apollo 11 crew as we rededicate ourselves as a nation to achieving the impossible.