John Thune

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, today I recognize the hard work of my Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee intern Kathryn Albert. Kathryn hails from Ellicott City, MD. She is an economics major and a cadet in the Air Force Reserve Officers' Training Corps at the University of Maryland, College Park. While interning for the Commerce Committee, Kathryn assisted the Subcommittee on Consumer Protection, Product Safety, Insurance, and Data Security. She is a dedicated worker who was always willing to take on new projects. I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Kathryn and wish her continued success in the future.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, today I recognize the hard work of my Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee intern Francis Simmons. Francis hails from Charleston, SC. He is an international relations and economics major and rising sophomore at Tufts University. While interning for the Commerce Committee, Francis assisted the Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet. He is a dedicated worker who was always willing to tackle new projects. I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Francis and wish him continued success in the future.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, today I recognize the hard work of my Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee intern Patrick Binder. Patrick hails from Yankton, SD. He is a rising senior history major at Yale University. While interning for the Commerce Committee, Patrick assisted the Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, Safety, and Security. He is a dedicated worker who was always willing to tackle new projects. I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Patrick and wish him continued success in the future.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, today I recognize the hard work of my Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee intern Carson Zubke. Carson hails from Waubay, SD. He is a rising sophomore finance major at the University of South Dakota. While interning for the Commerce Committee, Carson assisted the Subcommittee on Consumer Protection, Product Safety, Insurance, and Data Security. He is a dedicated worker who was always willing to tackle new projects. I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Carson and wish him continued success in the future.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, today I recognize the hard work of my Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee intern Ryan Udell. Ryan hails from Ponte Verde Beach, FL. He is a rising sophomore mechanical engineering major at Rice University. While interning for the Commerce Committee, Ryan assisted the Subcommittee on Space, Science, and Competitiveness, as well as the Subcommittee on Aviation Operations, Safety, and Security. He is a dedicated worker who got the most out of his internship. I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Ryan and wish him continued success in the future.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, a lot of praise has flowed in for Judge Kavanaugh since his nomination, but I think the tribute that has struck me the most is the letter from his law clerks. These individuals have worked closely with Judge Kavanaugh and have a special insight into his temperament and philosophy. Here is what they have to say: It is in his role as a judge on the D.C. Circuit that we know Judge Kavanaugh best. During his time on the D.C. Circuit, Judge Kavanaugh has come to work every day dedicated to engaging in the hard work of judging. We never once saw him take a shortcut, treat a case as unimportant, or search for an easy answer. Instead, in each case, large or small, he masters every detail, and rereads every precedent. He listens carefully to the views of his colleagues and clerks, even--indeed, especially--when they differ from his own. He drafts opinions painstakingly, writing and rewriting until he is satisfied each opinion is clear and well-reasoned, and can be understood not only by lawyers but by the parties and the public. We saw time and time again that this work ethic flows from a fundamental humility. Judge Kavanaugh never assumes he knows the answers in advance and never takes for granted that his view of the law will prevail. Those are the words of 34 of Judge Kavanaugh's law clerks. Every one of Judge Kavanaugh's clerks who was not prohibited by his or her job signed this letter. These clerks represent a diverse group. They wrote: Our views on politics, on many of the important legal issues faced by the Supreme Court, and on judicial philosophy, are diverse. Our ranks include Republicans, Democrats, and Independents. But we are united in this: Our admiration and fondness for Judge Kavanaugh run deep. For each of us . . . it was a tremendous stroke of luck to work for and be mentored by a person of his strength of character, generosity of spirit, intellectual capacity, and unwavering care for his family, friends, colleagues, and us, his law clerks. This letter is a pretty significant tribute, and it confirms what has been clear from the beginning, and that is that Judge Kavanaugh is the type of judge who should sit on the Nation's highest Court. His clerks describe a judge who takes the weight of his responsibility seriously; a judge who is committed to reaching the right decision in every case and who does the hard work necessary to get to that decision; a judge who approaches each case with an open mind, looking for what the law says, not the outcome he wants. As Chief Justice John Roberts famously said, ``Judges are like umpires.'' Their job is to call the balls and strikes, not rewrite the rules of the game. As Justice Roberts said, ``Umpires don't make the rules; they apply them.'' It is essential that a judge understand this. If you are a judge, your job is to rule based on the law and the Constitution and nothing else. Your job is not to make policy. It is not to revise the law according to your personal feelings or your political principles. Your job is to figure out what the law says and to rule accordingly. Why is this so important? Well, it is because the rule of law and equal justice under the law only exist as long as judges rule based on the law. Once judges start ruling based on their political opinions or their feelings about what they would like the law to be, then we will have replaced the rule of law with the rule of individual judges. As the testimony of his clerks and many others makes clear, Judge Kavanaugh understands the role of a judge. He understands that his job is to interpret the law, not make the law; to rule based on the plain text of the statute, not his personal opinions or political beliefs. In a 2017 speech at Notre Dame Law School, Judge Kavanaugh said: I believe very deeply in those visions of the rule of law as a law of rules, and of the judge as umpire. By that, I mean a neutral, impartial judiciary that decides cases based on settled principles without regard to policy preferences or political allegiances or which party is on which side of a particular case. I will say it again: That is the kind of Justice we want on the Supreme Court. I hope this Senate will take very seriously the responsibility we have to give fair consideration to this nominee. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, today I recognize Austin Eggl, an intern in my Aberdeen, SD, office, for all of the hard work he has done for me, my staff, and the State of South Dakota over the past several weeks. Austin is a graduate of Bishop Ryan High School, in Minot, ND. Currently, he is attending Presentation College in Aberdeen, SD, where he is majoring in business. 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 Austin for all of the fine work he has done and wish him continued success in the years to come.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, if there is one thing we have been able to rely on over the past half century or so, it is Democratic hysteria over Republican Supreme Court nominations. No sooner does a Republican President announce a nomination than the Democrats are off and running. It doesn't matter who the nominee is--the playbook is the same. The Democrats warn that equal rights are in jeopardy; that our system of government may not survive; in fact, that Americans may not survive. That is right. In the lead-up to Justice Gorsuch's confirmation, the head of one liberal organization stated that there was ``substantial evidence'' that if Gorsuch's ``egregious views were to become law, Americans' lives . . . would be put at risk in untold ways.'' I am happy to report that a year into Justice Gorsuch's tenure on the Supreme Court, Americans seem to be doing OK. Fast-forward to Judge Kavanaugh's Supreme Court nomination, and once again, Democrats are predicting that the sky will fall if a Republican President's Supreme Court nominee is confirmed. Faced with an eminently well-qualified, mainstream nominee, they have been forced to resort to distortions or outright conspiracy theories to make their case. Their statements have been so extreme that they have already been called out more than once by the mainstream media. The New York Times--not exactly known as an apologist for the Republican Party--published a fact check with the headline ``Democrats Overstate Kavanaugh's Writings on the Affordable Care Act.'' The Washington Post published a fact check that described a Democratic characterization of Kavanaugh as ``extreme distortion.'' Two tweets offering a truly absurd conspiracy theory about Justice Kennedy's resignation received four Pinocchios from the Washington Post--a rating that qualifies the tweets as ``whoppers.'' At the root of Democrats' frenzy is their belief that the only good Supreme Court Justice is a Supreme Court Justice who shares their political beliefs and who will rule in support of them. That is a very disturbing point of view. Our system of government is based on the rule of law, but the rule of law depends on having judges who will rule based on the law and the facts, not on their personal opinions. Once judges start ruling based on their political opinions or their feelings about what they would like the law to be, then we will have replaced the rule of law with the rule of individual judges. That is exactly what Democrats are pushing for. They are looking for Supreme Court Justices who will rule based not on the law but their personal beliefs. More specifically, they are looking for judges who will rule based on Democrats' beliefs. Just look at the Democrats' statements since Judge Kavanaugh's nomination. Democrats aren't interested in whether Judge Kavanaugh is qualified or will rule in accordance with the law; instead, they are concerned about his views on specific issues and whether those views line up with Democrats' opinions. Democrats want a Supreme Court that will ratify the opinions of the Democratic Party, whether or not those opinions are in line with the law or the Constitution. Of course judges have political opinions. Of course judges have personal feelings. When you are a judge, your job is to leave those things at the courtroom door. Your job is to judge based on the law and the facts, even when you don't like--especially when you don't like the outcome. As Justice Gorsuch has said, ``A judge who likes every outcome he reaches is very likely a bad judge--stretching for results he prefers rather than those the law demands.'' I don't know how Judge Kavanaugh would rule on the cases he would face as a member of the Supreme Court, but I do know that in each and every case, he would look not for the results he prefers but for those the law demands. In a 2017 speech at Notre Dame Law School, Judge Kavanaugh said: I believe very deeply in those visions of the rule of law as a law of rules, and of the judge as umpire. By that, I mean a neutral, impartial judiciary that decides cases based on settled principles without regard to policy preferences or political allegiances or which party is on which side in a particular case. That is it. That is the job of a judge--to serve as the umpire, to call the balls and strikes, not rewrite the rules of the game. When you are considering a candidate for Congress, political opinions, like those the Democrats are demanding, matter. When it comes to judges, there are really only two important questions: First, is this judge well qualified? Second, does this person understand the proper role of a judge? When it comes to Judge Kavanaugh, the answer to both questions is yes. His qualifications are outstanding. He is a graduate of Yale Law School. He clerked for a Supreme Court Justice. He is a lecturer at Harvard Law School. Most importantly, as a judge on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, he has handed down thoughtful, well- respected decisions that reveal his deep respect for the law and the Constitution and his understanding that it is a judge's job to interpret the law, not to legislate from the bench. It is unfortunate that Democrats' belief that the only good judges are liberal judges is preventing them from giving an outstandingly qualified nominee like Judge Kavanaugh a fair hearing. There is still time for them to abandon their partisan political opposition and take a real look at Judge Kavanaugh's qualifications for the Supreme Court. I hope they will. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, today I recognize Shannon Duffy, 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 over the past several weeks. Shannon is a graduate of St. Thomas More High School in Rapid City, SD. Currently, she is attending Georgetown University in Washington, DC, where she is pursuing degrees in operations and information management and finance. She is a hard worker who has been dedicated to getting the most out of her internship experience. I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Shannon for all of the fine work she has done and wish her continued success in the years to come.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, today I recognize Kallie Carey, an intern in my Rapid City, SD, office, for all of the hard work she has done for me, my staff, and the State of South Dakota over the past several weeks. Kallie is a graduate of Wolsey-Wessington High School in Wolsey, SD. Currently, she is attending Black Hills State University in Spearfish, SD, where she is majoring in political science. She is a hard worker who has been dedicated to getting the most out of her internship experience. I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Kallie for all of the fine work she has done and wish her continued success in the years to come.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, today I recognize Trevor Gunlicks, 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 over the past several weeks. Trevor is a graduate of Lincoln High School in Sioux Falls, SD. Currently, he is attending South Dakota State University in Brookings, SD, where he is pursuing degrees in political science and legal studies. 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 Trevor for all of the fine work he has done and wish him continued success in the years to come.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, today I recognize Jordann Krouse, 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 over the past several weeks. Jordann is a graduate of Harrisburg High School in Harrisburg, SD. Currently, she is attending Boston University in Boston, MA, where she is pursuing degrees in international relations and environmental analysis. She is a hard worker who has been dedicated to getting the most out of her internship experience. I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Jordann for all of the fine work she has done and wish her continued success in the years to come.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, today I recognize Caroline Moriarty, 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 over the past several weeks. Caroline is a graduate of Roosevelt High School in Sioux Falls, SD. Currently, she is attending the University of Missouri-Kansas City, where she is majoring in political science. She is a hard worker who has been dedicated to getting the most out of her internship experience. I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Caroline for all of the fine work she has done and wish her continued success in the years to come.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, there are a lot of things you need to know when you are considering voting on a candidate for Congress--for example, what are his or her views on healthcare, taxes, the military, the economy, the First Amendment? The list goes on and on. When it comes to judges, there are only two important questions: One, is this individual well-qualified, and two, does this person understand the proper role of a judge? Unlike legislators' opinions, judges' political opinions should be irrelevant because a good judge will leave his or her political opinions outside the courtroom door. A good judge knows that her job is to judge based on the law and the facts, not political opinions or personal feelings. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, whom we lost in 2016, had this to say about the proper role of a judge: If you're going to be a good and faithful judge, you have to resign yourself to the fact that you're not always going to like the conclusions you reach. If you like them all the time, you're probably doing something wrong. Current Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch has said more than once that ``a judge who likes every outcome he reaches is very likely a bad judge.'' Last night, the President nominated Judge Brett Kavanaugh to be the next Supreme Court Justice. This is another outstanding pick from President Trump. Like Justice Scalia and Justice Gorsuch, Judge Kavanaugh understands that the job of a judge is to interpret the law, not write it; to judge, not legislate; to call balls and strikes, not rewrite the rules of the game. His qualifications are outstanding. He is a graduate of Yale Law School. He clerked for a Supreme Court Justice. He is a lecturer at Harvard Law School. Most importantly, he has had an outstanding career as a judge on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, where he has handed down thoughtful, well-reasoned decisions that reveal his deep respect for the law and the Constitution. His opinions have been endorsed by the Supreme Court more than a dozen times and are regularly cited by courts around the country. I am looking forward to sitting down with Judge Kavanaugh during the confirmation process. We are going to follow regular order on this nominee, just as we did with Justice Gorsuch. The Judiciary Committee will vet Judge Kavanaugh, and Senators of both parties will have the chance to sit down with him before the full Senate votes on his nomination this fall. Unfortunately, a number of Senate Democrats have already made it clear that they are going to make this process as partisan as possible. One Democratic Senator--the senior Senator from Pennsylvania--put out a statement yesterday announcing his intention to oppose the President's Supreme Court nominee before the President had even made his announcement. That is right--the Democratic Senator from Pennsylvania decided he wasn't even going to pretend to examine the nominee's qualifications. Instead, he announced his intention to oppose the nominee before he even knew whom he was opposing. That is, unfortunately, par for the course for the Democratic Party. If one thing has been clear since Justice Kennedy announced his retirement, it is that Democrats are not interested in a nominee's qualifications or commitment to the rule of law; they are interested in a nominee's political opinions. They are ready to disqualify any nominee who doesn't share their political views. Democrats' apparent belief that the only good judge is a judge who will use his role to advance their agenda is deeply disturbing. It betrays Democrats' failure to understand or their decision to ignore the fundamental purpose of the judiciary. Our judicial system was designed to secure the rights of citizens under the law, not to serve as the arm of a particular political party. Nobody's rights can be secure when judges start ruling based on political ideology instead of on the law. Fortunately for the rule of law, President Trump doesn't believe in nominating judges based on their agreement with his personal opinions. Instead, he believes in nominating judges who understand that their job is to rule based on the law and the Constitution. That is exactly what he has done with Judge Kavanaugh. I look forward to the process the Senate will undertake, starting with examining this judge's record, having hearings in the Judiciary Committee, and ultimately having a debate on the floor of the U.S. Senate and eventually a vote on this judge, this nominee's nomination to the Supreme Court. It is an important matter, one that the Constitution charges the Senate with and one that we need to take very seriously. I intend--as I hope most of my colleagues do--to give fair consideration to this very qualified nominee, to examine his record, have him answer the hard questions, and then to have an opportunity to vote up or down. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, today I recognize Logan Aukes, an intern in my Sioux Falls, SD, office, for all of the hard work he has done for me, my staff, and the State of South Dakota over the past several weeks. Logan is a graduate of Sioux Falls Christian High School in Sioux Falls, SD. Currently, he is attending Dordt College, where he is majoring in business administration. 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 Logan for all of the fine work he has done and wish him continued success in the years to come.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, today I recognize Josh Brown, an intern in my Sioux Falls, SD, office, for all of the hard work he has done for me, my staff, and the State of South Dakota over the past several weeks. Josh is a graduate of Dell Rapids St. Mary High School in Dell Rapids, SD. Currently, he is attending Morningside College, 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 Josh for all of the fine work he has done and wish him continued success in the years to come.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate that endorsement. Again, I thank you for your hard work and that of your staff in helping to structure this in a way that we could get the broad support you mentioned from the commodity groups and the wildlife groups. I think this is a win-win for conservation and certainly a win-win for the CRP program and for the farmers and ranchers in South Dakota who--and not just in South Dakota but all across the country who make use of this important and vital resource. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I rise in support of my amendment, No. 3134. By providing haying and grazing flexibility, this amendment would offer commonsense and effective land management options for land enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program, or what we refer to as CRP. There are CRP contracts today that are typically 10 to 15 years in duration. As it stands, some CRP contracts only allow for vegetative cover to be removed once or twice during the life of the contract--a practice that is referred to as ``mid contract management.'' Even in areas that have experienced a drought or feed shortage, CRP mid contract management rules have required vegetative cover on CRP land to be destroyed--a practice I have never understood and one about which I get a lot of feedback from farmers across South Dakota who don't understand it either. The amendment before us today would allow haying and grazing under terms agreed to between the USDA and State technical committees, with safeguards in place that would protect the CRP cover when long-term droughts occur. Specifically, the amendment would allow haying and grazing on one-third of a producer's CRP contract acres on a rotating basis, which would be coupled with a reduction in the CRP rental payment. CRP is important for so many reasons. After more than 30 years, it remains the cornerstone of the conservation programs the USDA administers. In my opinion, we need more than the 24 million acres the current CRP acreage cap allows. In order to raise this cap in the current budget environment, in both the House and the Senate farm bills, the CRP cap is raised, and annual CRP rental rates are lowered to 80 and 88.5 percent of normal rental rates, respectively. In other words, to get an additional cap, you have to reduce the rental rate in order to offset the cost of raising the cap. The House found a way to do that. It raised it to 29 million acres in its version of the bill, but it lowered rental rates to 80 percent of normal. In the Senate version of the bill, it only goes up 1 million acres, from 24 million acres to 25 million acres, but the rental rate is at 88.5 percent. My assumption is that in the conference with the House, when we get there, this will be an issue that will be negotiated. Yet, as I said before, it makes sense, in my view, to raise that cap because the cap today is not sufficient for what the demand is out there and for the importance of the program in terms of its impact on production and agriculture in our farming and ranching communities. The haying and grazing flexibility provisions in this amendment will help to offset these lower rental rates and make CRP a viable choice for a producer's less productive land in today's very tough agriculture economy. This amendment is a win for farmers and ranchers, and it is a win for conservation. I thank Senator Klobuchar, my neighbor from Minnesota, for cosponsoring this amendment. I think she will be here, at some point, to talk about this as well. I thank Chairman Roberts and Ranking Member Stabenow for following through on the commitment that they made at the Ag Committee markup, when we were debating this, to work with me on this amendment to improve the CRP program. I also thank the stakeholder organizations and majority and minority committee staff, who worked with my staff over the past 2 weeks to reach agreement on the amendment before us today. In my view, this strengthens the farm bill, and it strengthens the CRP program in a way that many producers, farmers, and ranchers across my State have sought for a long time. It allows that added flexibility so that they can, on a 3-year basis, rotate and allow a certain amount of those CRP acres to be harvested and to do away with this crazy mid contract management practice requirement that, as I mentioned earlier, has very little support out there in the farm community. It also does away with another issue that comes up frequently in States like mine when we have a drought. We had one in 2012, and we had one last year, in 2017. We had to plead with the USDA to allow emergency haying and grazing. This also would eliminate the need for that and, on a periodic basis, when we would face those conditions in States like South Dakota and in other States across the country. I see that the distinguished committee chairman of the Ag Committee is here. As I said, I appreciate his leadership on this and on so many issues in this farm bill. I hope we get a good, strong, big vote in the end.

Mr. THUNE. Absolutely. I am happy to yield to the chairman of the Ag Committee, Senator Roberts.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, agriculture is the lifeblood of my State of South Dakota. More than 43 million of our State's roughly 50 million acres are given over to farming and ranching. In fact, cattle actually outnumber people in South Dakota. We have more than four times as many cattle in our State, which is a pretty good example of just how fundamental ranching is to South Dakota life. We routinely place in the top 10 States for production of a number of crops, including soybeans, corn, and wheat. Agriculture isn't just part of the South Dakota way of life, it is the South Dakota way of life. While I am one of those South Dakota residents who doesn't farm a ranch, I have always considered it one of my great privileges to know South Dakota farmers and ranchers and get to represent them in the U.S. Congress. That is why, when I was in the House of Representatives, I chose to serve on the House Agriculture Committee, and that is why I serve on the Senate Agriculture Committee today. Our biggest job as members of the Senate Agriculture Committee is to work on producing farm bills. These bills set the rules of the road for farmers and ranchers. They govern safety net programs like crop insurance and livestock disaster programs, which are so essential for individuals working in an industry where bad weather can wipe out a year's work and place a family farm at risk. They set the rules for conservation programs. They cover farm loan programs and much more. This year's farm bill is particularly important as farmers and ranchers are facing a tough ag economy. Commodity prices have plunged, and net farm income is half of what it was 4 or 5 years ago. Now more than ever, farmers and ranchers need to know with certainty what the rules of the road will be so they can plan well for the future. The farm bill we are considering this week is the fourth farm bill I have had the chance to work on during my time in Congress. While there are a handful of things I would like to improve further, I am pleased with the product we have on the floor today. Given the variety of programs and priorities they cover, farm bills are always a big production. That is why I got a head start on this year's farm bill last March when I introduced legislation that created a new income protection program for farmers. That bill was the first of nearly a dozen pieces of legislation I introduced over the past year. I figured that starting the process early would allow us to not just reauthorize agricultural programs but to strengthen and improve them, and I am pleased the bill before us today does exactly that. I am also pleased several of my proposals are included in the bill, although the credit for that goes to the farmers and ranchers who helped inspire these much needed policies and policy changes. The fact is, nobody knows more about what works and what doesn't work when it comes to agriculture policy than the people out there every day working to make a living at farming and ranching. That is why I make it a point to meet regularly with South Dakota farmers and ranchers to hear how things are going directly from them. They let me know which agriculture programs are working, which aren't, and which can be improved. Many of my proposals for this year's bill are the direct result of conversations with farmers and ranchers back in South Dakota. Perhaps the prime example of that is my proposal to help improve the accuracy of the U.S. Drought Monitor. In April of this year, I held an agricultural roundtable in Rapid City, SD. During this event, several ranchers shared their concerns about accurate precipitation measurement. Accurate precipitation measurements matter to ranchers because this data is used to determine whether ranchers qualify for grazing loss assistance and livestock forage loss assistance when weather conditions threaten their feed supplies and the well-being of their herds. Ranchers have been frustrated by inconsistent rainfall and drought determinations at the Department of Agriculture. This spring, after last summer's drought, for example, the U.S. Forest Service determined that some Federal grazing lands in western South Dakota were too dry and consequently reduced the number of livestock ranchers can graze on U.S. Forest Service lands. That left ranchers struggling to find sufficient grazing lands for their cattle. However, last year, the Drought Monitor classified that same area as not dry enough to trigger eligibility for the Livestock Forage Program, which provides assistance to ranchers whose pastures have suffered grazing losses due to drought. Obviously, this kind of inconsistent monitoring and resulting inconsistent Federal assistance is a problem, and the ranchers in April let me know just how much of a problem it can be. So I came back to Washington and worked with my staff to develop legislation to improve the accuracy of the Drought Monitor and to require the Department of Agriculture to use consistent precipitation monitoring data across its programs. I am happy to report that my Drought Monitor legislation was adopted as part of the farm bill that is before the Senate today. I am also proud that the farm bill includes authorization for a program I proposed that would strengthen soil health by reducing farmers' crop insurance costs. All farmers are familiar with the Conservation Reserve Program, or CRP, which provides incentives for farmers to take environmentally sensitive land out of production for 10 to 15 years, but a lot of farmers have told me they don't want to retire portions of their land for a decade or more, and they don't want to place expensive seed, fertilizer, and other inputs on their poorest land, especially now, when prices are at such low levels. To address this, in March of last year, I offered a bill to create a new program called the Soil Health and Income Protection Program. This program would provide a new, short-term option for farmers that would allow them to take their worst performing cropland out of production for 3 to 5 years instead of the 10 to 15 years required by CRP rules. In return for taking this land out of production, farmers would receive a modest rental payment and increased crop insurance premium discounts. This program would accomplish the dual goals of protecting the environment while improving the bottom line for farmers. I am very pleased that the authorization for the Soil Health and Income Protection Program was included in the farm bill we are considering today. A number of other proposals I introduced also made it into the bill, including proposals to improve the Agriculture Risk Coverage Program, proposals to provide pasture, rangeland, and forage insurance premium assistance for Native American ranchers and proposals to increase the approval rate of the Livestock Indemnity Program applications. One proposal I am still working to get included in the bill is a proposal to allow more flexibility in the Conservation Reserve Program haying and grazing policies. The CRP program plays a significant role in South Dakota's economy. It provides a major portion of the habitat for pheasants, which bring in about $200 million each year to South Dakota's economy. Farmers have spent years frustrated with the Department of Agriculture's management of the CRP program, particularly the program's sometimes excessive restrictions on land use and requirements to destroy vegetative cover under midcontract management, even in drought years when feed supplies are short. The proposal I am working to get included in the final bill will allow haying on one-third of all CRP acres and limited grazing on most CRP land. This commonsense reform, along with other CRP reforms I have proposed that are included in the bill in front of us today, will address some of the farmers' major concerns with current land use rules for acres that are enrolled in the CRP program. As I mentioned, there are a few areas where I think we could have done more or gone further to make improvements. I have proposals to further increase CRP acres and proposals to make additional improvements to the Agriculture Risk Coverage Program--or the ARC Program. I think we have a strong bill before us today. I am grateful for the leadership of our Agriculture Committee chairman, Senator Roberts, and the ranking member, Senator Stabenow. All too often these days, measures that should be collaborative fall victim to partisanship, but the debate over the farm bill was collegial and collaborative, and we produced a strong bipartisan bill as a result. It takes a special kind of person to be a farmer or a rancher. There are no set hours and no paid vacations. Bad weather isn't just an inconvenience, it jeopardizes your entire livelihood. Your job is filled with late nights and early mornings. You can sit up all night with a sick calf and then have to get out there sleepless the next morning to work a full day in the fields. The work is physically demanding, and it is performed no matter what the weather--blazing Sun, freezing cold, or blowing snow or rain. Believe me, we have all of the above in South Dakota. We don't see the backbreaking work, the sweat and tears that have gone into the production of that gallon of milk we pick up at the grocery store on our way home, but every time we go to that grocery store, we are the beneficiaries of the courage, the dedication, and hard work of our Nation's farmers and ranchers. They feed our country, and they literally feed the world. I am grateful so many farmers and ranchers call South Dakota home, and I hope the bill that is before us today will help make their jobs just a little bit easier in the future. I yield the floor.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, the good economic news keeps pouring in. CNBC reports that economic growth for the second quarter of 2018 is ``on track to double 2017's full-year pace.'' In April, for the first time since the Bureau of Labor Statistics began tracking the data, the number of job openings outnumbered the number of job seekers. In May, unemployment dropped to its lowest level in 18 years. Wages are growing at the fastest rate since July 2009. Retail sales are up significantly, and small business optimism has hit its second highest level ever. A recent survey from the National Association of Manufacturers reported that 77 percent of manufacturers plan to increase hiring as a result of tax reform, 72 percent plan to increase wages or benefits, and 86 percent report that they plan to increase investments, which means new jobs and opportunities for workers. Those are a lot of numbers, but they all boil down to one thing; that is, that life is getting better for American families. Yesterday, the Wall Street Journal reported: ``Economic confidence among lower-income Americans has taken a recent leap, the latest evidence that benefits of the economic expansion are reaching a broader swath of workers.'' If there is one thing that is needed to help people achieve the American dream, it is a thriving economy. What do people think about when they think about the American dream? They dream about starting a business from their kitchen table and growing it into a thriving enterprise. They dream about a secure job that will allow them to own a nice home, plus have extra to take the kids to the beach each year, and save for education, retirement, and those unexpected expenses. They dream about landing a job at their dream company and working their way up the ladder to the top; they dream about fulfilling work that can turn into a fulfilling career; and they dream about a secure retirement with extra money to treat the grandkids. Those are the types of things Americans dream about when they think about the American dream. Well, it is pretty hard to accomplish any of those dreams if the economy is stagnant or struggling. It is pretty hard to work your way up the ladder if your company is having to lay off people. It is hard to buy a house or save for the kids' college if you don't have anything left over once you have paid the bills. During the last administration, the economy did not thrive and, as a result, American families struggled. So when President Trump took office, Republicans and President Trump made reversing our economic decline a priority. Perhaps the two biggest drags on our economy during the Obama administration were burdensome regulations and an outdated tax code. So we took immediate action to roll back burdensome Obama administration regulations, and we got to work on reforming our outdated Tax Code. Six months ago this week, we passed historic tax reform. Before the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the Tax Code was not helping businesses grow and create jobs. In fact, it was doing the opposite, and that had real consequences for American workers. A small business owner struggling to afford the hefty annual tax bill for her business was highly unlikely to be able to hire a new worker or to raise wages. A larger business struggling to stay competitive in the global marketplace while paying a substantially higher tax rate than its foreign competitors too often had limited funds to expand or increase investment in the United States. So we took action to improve the playing field for American workers by improving the playing field for businesses as well. To accomplish that, we lowered tax rates across the board for owners of small- and medium-sized businesses, farms, and ranches. We lowered our Nation's massive corporate tax rate, which up until January 1 was the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world. We expanded business owners' ability to recover investments they make in their businesses, which frees up cash they can reinvest in their operations and their workers, and we brought the U.S. international tax system into the 21st century so American businesses are not operating at a disadvantage next to their foreign competitors. Now we are seeing the results. Companies have announced higher wages, better retirement benefits, bonuses, increased investment, new jobs, and more. As I mentioned above, 77 percent of manufacturers plan to increase hiring as a result of tax reform and 72 percent plan to increase wages or benefits. Meanwhile, at the end of May, the National Federation of Independent Business reported that a record-high percentage of small businesses had increased compensation for their employees. Then there are the 100-plus utility companies that are lowering rates as a result of tax reform, the companies boosting their education benefits to help employees get the skills they need for successful careers, the companies expanding parental leave benefits, the low unemployment rate, the pace of wage growth, and so much more. In short, as I mentioned earlier, life is getting better for American families. Opportunities are expanding, paychecks are increasing, wages are growing, benefits are growing, and that means more families are able to afford those car repairs or that downpayment on a house. More families are able to set aside money for their kids' education, and more families are able to boost their retirement contributions. More families are looking forward to a secure future. I am proud of the benefits the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is delivering for American families, and I am going to keep working for policies that will expand opportunities for families in this country even further. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, when we took up tax reform, we had one goal, and that was to make life better for hard-working Americans. That involved a couple of things. For starters, it involved putting more money in Americans' pockets right away by cutting their taxes, and Americans are already seeing the tax relief we passed in their paychecks. But we knew that tax cuts, as helpful as they are, were not enough. We wanted to make sure we created the kind of economy that would give American workers access to the jobs, wages, and opportunities that would set them up for security and prosperity in the long term. Since jobs and opportunities are created by businesses, that meant reforming our Tax Code to improve the playing field for businesses so that they could improve the playing field for workers, and that is what we did. I am proud to report that it is working. Since tax reform was passed, business after business has announced good news for workers: pay increases, bonuses, and better benefits, including increased retirement benefits, new and better education benefits, and enhanced parental leave benefits. A recent survey from the National Association of Manufacturers reported that 77 percent of manufacturers plan to increase hiring as a result of tax reform, 72 percent intend to increase wages or benefits, and 86 percent report that they plan to increase investments, which means new jobs and opportunities for workers. Meanwhile, a recent survey from the National Federation of Independent Business reports that 75 percent of small business owners think that the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act will have a positive effect on their businesses. A number of small businesses are increasing wages, and that has recently hit a record 35 percent. In April, for the first time since the Bureau of Labor Statistics began tracking the data, the number of job openings outnumbered the number of job seekers. For the first time since they started keeping track, the number of job openings is greater than the number of people who are actually seeking employment. Meanwhile, in May, unemployment dropped to its lowest level in 18 years, and wage growth increased at the fastest pace since July of 2009. In other words, it is a good day for American workers. There is nothing better than seeing opportunities improve for hard-working Americans. I am proud of the benefits the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is delivering for American workers. I look forward to seeing this law produce even more benefits for workers in the future. Mr. President, if there is one thing that we tend to automatically rely on, it is the strength of our military. We are accustomed to having the best fighting force in the world and assuming we can meet every threat. But military strength doesn't just spring up automatically; it has to be developed, and once developed, it has to be maintained. But in recent years, we haven't met this responsibility. While we have the very finest soldiers in the world, they don't always have the tools they need to defend our Nation. Budgetary impasses paired with increased operational demands have left our Armed Forces with manpower deficits and delayed the acquisition of 21st- century weapons and equipment. Meanwhile, other major powers hostile to the United States have been building up their militaries. As a result, our military advantage has been steadily eroding. In a 1793 address to Congress, President Washington said: There is a rank due to the United States among nations which will be withheld, if not absolutely lost, by the reputation of weakness. If we desire to avoid insult, we must be able to repel it. If we desire to secure peace, one of the most powerful instruments of our rising prosperity, it must be known that we are at all times ready for war. Ronald Reagan put it a little differently. He said: Well, to those who think strength provokes conflict, Will Rogers had his own answer. He said of the world heavyweight champion of his day, ``I've never seen anyone insult Jack Dempsey.'' There is no better way to secure peace than to make sure the U.S. military is the strongest, best equipped, most capable fighting force in the world. If we want to protect our Nation and promote peace around the world, it is imperative that we rebuild our military. Since President Trump's election, Republicans have been working to reverse the underfunding of our military and to restore our Nation's fighting force. In March of this year, we arrived at a budget agreement that contained the largest year-to-year increase in defense spending in 15 years. The fiscal year 2019 National Defense Authorization Act, which we are considering this week, is the next step in rebuilding our military. This bill invests in research and modernization to ensure that our men and women in uniform will be equipped to meet 21st-century threats, including those posed by major powers. It reforms the outdated Officer Personnel Management System to improve career flexibility and merit- based advancement. It makes reforms to the civilian leadership structure at the Department of Defense to make it more agile, especially for hiring technical talent. It implements measures to deter additional aggression from Russia and China--two of the biggest threats to the security and stability of the world in the 21st century. It provides a 2.6-percent pay increase for our men and women in uniform-- the largest pay increase for our servicemembers in nearly 10 years. I have offered a number of amendments to further the bill's mission, including one to expedite the backlog of foreign military sales. This will support the administration's efforts to balance trade deficits, support domestic industry, and permit America's security partners to make greater investments in their own capabilities. I am also working on an amendment to allow the Air Force to incorporate the B-21 bomber when determining criteria for training airspace requirements. This will build off a report I secured in last year's Defense Authorization Act on how to optimize training airspaces. My amendment will enable the Air Force to formally incorporate this future aircraft into its planning. I know the bill managers have a host of amendments before them, and I am hopeful that the Senate can come to an agreement and include many of those. If we want our Nation to be secure, if we want to promote peace and stability around the world, then we need to ensure that our military is the strongest, best equipped fighting force in the world. This year's National Defense Authorization Act will help our military regain its competitive edge and equip our men and women in uniform with the tools they need to meet and defeat the threats of the 21st century. I am grateful to Senator Inhofe for his leadership and to Senator McCain, who can't be with us today but whose tireless work is reflected throughout this bill. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this legislation this week and ultimately get this bill to the President so that the important work of defending this country can continue. I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.