Thom Tillis

Mr. TILLIS

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

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

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, we do have Senator Alexander scheduled briefly. Could I have a moment before the Senator seeks recognition?

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

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

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I wish to speak briefly on an amendment I have filed regarding a crisis we are experiencing in the H-2B visas. In North Carolina, we have a very large seafood industry, and we have a crisis that is shared by a number of other States that have the seafood industry with respect to the availability of H-2B visas, and the busy time is just about to start in a couple of weeks. It is the worst possible time for this industry. We literally have jobs that have been created by people such as Don Cross and his brother and their Pamlico Packing Company in Grantsboro, NC. They simply can't find workers to do this job. It is going to ruin their business, and it is unacceptable. These are jobs these folks have created, like the Crosses, and they can't be filled. The jobs are waiting to be filled. It is affecting other businesses we have in the shrimp and crab industries, but it is also affecting other businesses--will affect other businesses--such as grocery stores, restaurants, and other industries, like tourism, across the country. The problem I have--and the nature of the amendment I will speak to briefly--but I have reached out to the Department of Homeland Security to ask a series of questions, and I simply haven't received answers. That is why I decided to offer an amendment--or to file the amendment. DHS has refused to issue more work visas, even though the statutory cap of used visas has most likely not been reached. DHS claims the cap has been reached, and that is really odd because it is unusually early for them to take that position. This is what I think the real truth is. Not every business applying for these visas is using them. DHS normally approves more visas so we make it more likely that we reach the cap, but we don't believe they have done that this year. That is why we have asked for an audit, to make sure we know how many applications were actually approved, how many visas are actually used by the State, within the State, and how many of those visas are actually putting legal, migrant, immigrant workers into these jobs. This year, they haven't even done an audit. We simply want to know why. I think DHS is playing games with the numbers, and I demand answers. DHS seems eager to help the illegal population get acclimated, but they don't seem to place a priority on American businesses that need these people to come and work in our seafood processing facilities, not only in North Carolina like Don Cross's Pamlico Packing Company but packing companies across the coast. I have had a discussion with a number of Members on the other side of the aisle. They share our concerns, and we are all working trying to simply get the answers. So what my amendment does is--until we get the answers, until we solve the problem, we want to suspend the travel for all DHS employees to government conferences and symposiums until the Agency provides more transparent data as to how the H-2B program is being administered for this fiscal year and for the three previous fiscal years. I want answers and I want action. We have businesses in North Carolina and across the country in the coastal States that need these workers, and we want answers now. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce legislation to direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to designate one city each year as a World War II city, beginning with Wilmington, NC, as America's first World War II City. The names of the 10,000 Tarheels, who paid the ultimate price in World War II are memorialized on the bulkhead of the battleship USS North Carolina in downtown Wilmington. During World War II, the USS North Carolina, known affectionately throughout the Navy as the ``Showboat'', ``participated in every major naval offensive in the Pacific area of operations and earned 15 battle stars. She steamed over 300,000 miles. Although Japanese radio claimed six times that North Carolina had been sunk, she survived. After serving as a training vessel for midshipmen, North Carolina was decommissioned June 27, 1947 and placed in the Inactive Reserve Fleet in Bayonne, New Jersey, for the next 14 years. In 1958 the announcement of her impending scrapping led to a statewide campaign by citizens of North Carolina to save the ship and bring her back to her home state. The Save Our Ship, SOS, campaign was successful and the battleship arrived in her current berth on October 2, 1961. She was dedicated on April 29, 1962, as the State's memorial to its World War II veterans At home, North Carolina's coast was a war zone. On April 13-14, 1942, the first U-boat, German U-85, was sunk off the North Carolina Coast. Mr. President, 397 ships were sunk or damaged and nearly 5,000 people were killed within sight of our shores. For 6 months at the beginning of America's war, 65 German U-boats hunted Allied merchant vessels practically unopposed. The greatest concentration of these attacks came off North Carolina. During World War II, Wilmington was the home of the North Carolina Shipbuilding Company. The shipyard was created as part of the U.S. Government's Emergency Shipbuilding Program. Workers built 243 ships in Wilmington during the five years the company operated. The city was the site of three prisoner-of-war, POW, camps from February 1944 through April 1946. At their peak, the camps held 550 German prisoners. The first camp was located on the corner of Shipyard Boulevard and Carolina Beach Road; the old Confederate post Fort Fisher housed German prisoners and also served as a training site for the Coastal Artillery and anti-aircraft units. A smaller contingent of prisoners was assigned to a smaller site, working in the officers' mess and doing grounds keeping at Bluethenthal Army Air Field, which is now Wilmington International Airport. Bluethenthal Army Air Field was used by the United States Army Air Forces' Third Air Force for antisubmarine patrols and training. I want to thank my colleague Senator Burr for bringing this idea to establish a process to recognize Wilmington and other American cities for their efforts during the war years, to the Senate. But I also wish to single out Wilbur Jones, a Wilmington native and military historian who has poured so much of his time and soul into ensuring that the people of southeastern North Carolina never forget the contributions of our state to victory in the Atlantic and the Pacific.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce legislation to direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to designate one city each year as a World War II city, beginning with Wilmington, NC, as America's first World War II City. The names of the 10,000 Tarheels, who paid the ultimate price in World War II are memorialized on the bulkhead of the battleship USS North Carolina in downtown Wilmington. During World War II, the USS North Carolina, known affectionately throughout the Navy as the ``Showboat'', ``participated in every major naval offensive in the Pacific area of operations and earned 15 battle stars. She steamed over 300,000 miles. Although Japanese radio claimed six times that North Carolina had been sunk, she survived. After serving as a training vessel for midshipmen, North Carolina was decommissioned June 27, 1947 and placed in the Inactive Reserve Fleet in Bayonne, New Jersey, for the next 14 years. In 1958 the announcement of her impending scrapping led to a statewide campaign by citizens of North Carolina to save the ship and bring her back to her home state. The Save Our Ship, SOS, campaign was successful and the battleship arrived in her current berth on October 2, 1961. She was dedicated on April 29, 1962, as the State's memorial to its World War II veterans At home, North Carolina's coast was a war zone. On April 13-14, 1942, the first U-boat, German U-85, was sunk off the North Carolina Coast. Mr. President, 397 ships were sunk or damaged and nearly 5,000 people were killed within sight of our shores. For 6 months at the beginning of America's war, 65 German U-boats hunted Allied merchant vessels practically unopposed. The greatest concentration of these attacks came off North Carolina. During World War II, Wilmington was the home of the North Carolina Shipbuilding Company. The shipyard was created as part of the U.S. Government's Emergency Shipbuilding Program. Workers built 243 ships in Wilmington during the five years the company operated. The city was the site of three prisoner-of-war, POW, camps from February 1944 through April 1946. At their peak, the camps held 550 German prisoners. The first camp was located on the corner of Shipyard Boulevard and Carolina Beach Road; the old Confederate post Fort Fisher housed German prisoners and also served as a training site for the Coastal Artillery and anti-aircraft units. A smaller contingent of prisoners was assigned to a smaller site, working in the officers' mess and doing grounds keeping at Bluethenthal Army Air Field, which is now Wilmington International Airport. Bluethenthal Army Air Field was used by the United States Army Air Forces' Third Air Force for antisubmarine patrols and training. I want to thank my colleague Senator Burr for bringing this idea to establish a process to recognize Wilmington and other American cities for their efforts during the war years, to the Senate. But I also wish to single out Wilbur Jones, a Wilmington native and military historian who has poured so much of his time and soul into ensuring that the people of southeastern North Carolina never forget the contributions of our state to victory in the Atlantic and the Pacific.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I am introducing the Route to Opportunity and Development Act of 2015, which would amend the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, ISTEA, of 1991 to begin the process toward eventually making the Raleigh to Norfolk Corridor in North Carolina and Virginia part of the Interstate system, and to help fully upgrade the corridor to interstate standards. My colleagues, Senator Richard Burr, Senator Tim Kaine, and Senator Mark Warner have agreed to cosponsor the bill. In addition, Congressman G.K. Butterfield has introduced a companion bill in the House of Representatives. The Route to Opportunity and Development Act of 2015 would designate the following as high priority: the Raleigh-Norfolk Corridor from Raleigh, NC, through Rocky Mount, Williamston, and Elizabeth City, NC, to Norfolk, VA. If the Raleigh-Norfolk corridor becomes part of the Interstate system, it would connect vital centers of commerce in the Raleigh and Norfolk/Hampton Roads region. Raleigh and Hampton Roads are two of the largest east coast metropolitan regions served by a single primary interstate route and this act proposes a second primary interstate route for the two areas. This act helps advance the North Carolina Department of Transportation's Strategic Transportation Corridors Vision, which aims to provide North Carolina with a network of high priority corridors to promote economic development and enhance interstate commerce. It is also an important part of the future vision for transportation in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Federal High Priority Corridors are eligible for Federal funds to assist states in the coordination, planning, design and construction of nationally significant transportation corridors for the purposes of economic growth and international and interregional growth.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I am introducing the Route to Opportunity and Development Act of 2015, which would amend the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, ISTEA, of 1991 to begin the process toward eventually making the Raleigh to Norfolk Corridor in North Carolina and Virginia part of the Interstate system, and to help fully upgrade the corridor to interstate standards. My colleagues, Senator Richard Burr, Senator Tim Kaine, and Senator Mark Warner have agreed to cosponsor the bill. In addition, Congressman G.K. Butterfield has introduced a companion bill in the House of Representatives. The Route to Opportunity and Development Act of 2015 would designate the following as high priority: the Raleigh-Norfolk Corridor from Raleigh, NC, through Rocky Mount, Williamston, and Elizabeth City, NC, to Norfolk, VA. If the Raleigh-Norfolk corridor becomes part of the Interstate system, it would connect vital centers of commerce in the Raleigh and Norfolk/Hampton Roads region. Raleigh and Hampton Roads are two of the largest east coast metropolitan regions served by a single primary interstate route and this act proposes a second primary interstate route for the two areas. This act helps advance the North Carolina Department of Transportation's Strategic Transportation Corridors Vision, which aims to provide North Carolina with a network of high priority corridors to promote economic development and enhance interstate commerce. It is also an important part of the future vision for transportation in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Federal High Priority Corridors are eligible for Federal funds to assist states in the coordination, planning, design and construction of nationally significant transportation corridors for the purposes of economic growth and international and interregional growth.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, we have reached a tipping point in President Obama's quest for a ``legacy''. Ukraine is on fire; Senior Chinese generals openly boast of their desire to settle millennial scores with their neighbors; Al Qaeda is stronger than ever; ISIS is massacring Christians with a genocidal savagery the likes of which we have not seen since World War II; and Israel feels abandoned. American foreign policy is rudderless, bringing to mind Lewis Carroll's comment from Alice Through the Looking Glass, ``If you don't know where you are going any road can take you there.'' Now the President has staked his name on reaching a deal with the Ayatollahs no matter how dangerous or destabilizing the final accord is. If the Iranians agree to this, and from their own hegemonic interest they would be foolish not to, the Israeli hand will be forced as it was with the Iraqi Osirik reactor in 1981; or at the least, a Middle East nuclear arms race, that pulls in Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the Gulf States, will begin. Mr. Obama has turned his back on decades of assurances from Presidents of both parties that Iran would not acquire nuclear weapons. He has willfully ignored 40 years of hostility from Tehran. If the President does not recognize that we are at war, the mullahs certainly do. They are the chief sponsor of global terror. They have never stepped back from their desire to obliterate Israel and to destroy the United States. Our Arab friends see Iran creating a satellite ``Shia Crescent'' stretching to the Mediterranean and consisting of Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. To their south and west, they see Iran gaining control of Yemen. Shia Iran is so obsessed with its race to dominate the Middle East that it is funneling millions of dollars to the Sunni terrorist group Hamas, to fund their war against Israel, even though the Sunnis are religious enemies. Tehran has a 9-figure line item in its budget to support terrorism, sending hundreds of millions of dollars to various groups each year; the payments to Hezbollah alone are as much as $200 million annually. According to Canadian intelligence, ``[I]n February 1999, it was reported that Palestinian police discovered documents that attest to the transfer of $35 million to Hamas from the Iranian Intelligence Service (MOIS), money reportedly meant to finance terrorist activities against Israeli targets.'' Illustrating how such support is part of official government policy, from 2001 to 2006, Iran transferred $50 million to Hezbollah fronts in Lebanon by sending funds from its central bank through Bank Saderat's London office. Mr. President, 40 years ago, Richard Nixon confronted Soviet incursions into the Middle East. The so called Nixon Doctrine laid the foundation for a peaceful pro-Western resolution of the various crises in the region. Nixon made it clear to everyone that the United States would not abandon Israel. Israel would be backed by the power of the United States in any conflict with its Soviet backed Arab neighbors and against the Soviet Union itself. One by one, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the Emirates, recognized the futility of armed hostility to Israel and backed away from Moscow and made peace, an imperfect peace but peace nonetheless. Golda Meir called President Nixon ``the best friend Israel ever had.'' In the region's west, Nixon promoted a secular pro-Western Iran, albeit under the imperfect leadership of the Shah. Nevertheless, the Shah bottled the Soviet Navy from entering the Persian Gulf and Iran's economy took off--until Jimmy Carter decided to aid the transfer of the Ayatollah Khomeini from his Paris exile back to Iran--in the name of human rights. We have reaped the whirlwind. Now we have the Obama Doctrine. America is the problem. Israel is viewed as an obstacle to peace and Iran is treated as another oppressed constituency with legitimate grievances against the West, so much so that when millions of Iranians took to the streets against the mullahs, President Obama did nothing and said nothing--strengthening the hand of the clerics. When the Egyptian generals overthrew the Muslim Brotherhood, who were waging war against Coptic Christians and openly spoke of renewing the fight against Israel--the State Department condemned them as ``undemocratic.'' The old American alliances are collapsing in confusion and fear and the only answer from the administration seems to be to clear Iran's path toward a nuclear weapon. The greatest concession in the current negotiations has been the abandonment of the original U.S. position of preventing Iran from having a nuclear-weapons capability. This was the stance of the Bush administration. It was also the position of the Obama administration until November 2013. This is a disaster. Here is what we know as acknowledged by the Obama administration negotiators including the Secretaries of State and Energy: There will be no limits on Iran's ballistic-missile force, the means for delivering its nuclear weapons. The U.S. position of seeking limits on the missile force was abandoned when the Supreme Leader objected and Obama conceded. There will be no resolution of Iran's weaponization activities. Iran will promise once again to cooperate with the IAEA, but no one expects anything other than more Iranian obstacles. A resolution of weaponization activities was also a precondition for an agreement. Inspections will be based on managed access but only on Iran's terms. At one point, the U.S. insisted that effective verification required full access to facilities and people. Under the Obama plan there will be no inspections of military sites much less suspected covert facilities such as the Lavizan-3 site or the Fordow weapons complex buried deep in the Iranian mountains. Obama will allow the Arak heavy-water reactor to be modified but not in any way that prevents Iran from using it to produce plutonium for weapons. Again, the initial Obama position was that the reactor must be dismantled. The economic sanctions, particularly the banking freeze that wrecked the Iranian economy will be lifted. In fact, Tehran has already received billions of dollars just for continuing the negotiations. It has already freed the Russians to sell the advanced S-300 air defense system. As agitation against the mullahs was growing we have given them a lifeline. Squeezing Iran economically, aided by the fall in worldwide oil prices, was the surest way to force concessions. Once the sanctions are lifted it will be nearly impossible to go back. The restrictions on Iran's nuclear program will reportedly be phased out after 10 years, a period shorter than the time it has taken to negotiate the agreement. The original U.S. position was that restrictions would be permanent. As Henry Kissinger said, far from enabling the President's goal of disengaging from the Middle East, the framework will necessitate a deepening involvement in the region under a complex ``new order'' dictated by a nuclear Iran. Iran will be allowed to operate thousands of centrifuges to enrich uranium and to pursue research and development of more advanced systems. The original U.S. position--backed by multiple U.N. Security Council resolutions demanding complete suspension of all enrichment activities--was zero enrichment and zero centrifuges. Under President Obama, zero was abandoned as unrealistic, and the number of permitted centrifuges moved up, according to the Secretary of Energy from 1,000 to 4,000 to 6,000. Iran has rejected each offer as insufficient, only to be rewarded with a better one. That is how the administration negotiates--from behind. In his 1987 State of the Union Address, Ronald Regan warned us: Our approach is not to seek agreement for agreement's sake but to settle only for agreements that truly enhance our national security and that of our allies. We will never put our security at risk or that of our allies just to reach an agreement . . . No agreement is better than a bad agreement. There you have it. Our allies--Israel, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, Jordan, and Egypt--are worried. Tehran is on the march and moving closer to nuclear status. As Charles Krauthammer noted, ``the one great hope for Middle East peace, the strategic anchor for forty years'', is giving the green light to both. That is not a legacy of which to be proud.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Yes, Mr. President.

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, with the limited time, first, I am concerned now that we have gone away from President after President saying that Iran could never have a nuclear weapon, to the words of: Well, Iran shouldn't be able to have one at least for 10 years. Or, if they do get one before 10 years, we will know about it a year in advance. That is a fundamental change in the direction of negotiations with this hostile regime. That is the other thing in my limited time that I wish to point out. I think those of us who are voting for this bill today are voting in large part because of a distrust we have for the Supreme Leader and the regime in Iran. This is not about the Iranian people. There are tens of millions of Iranians that I believe are concerned with this deal as well. They are concerned that this is going to enable the Iranian government to continue to fund terror throughout the world through the Iran terror network. They are funding even Hamas, a natural enemy, to destabilize the region. We need to worry about what the Prime Minister of Israel said just a few months ago here in this Chamber: This represents a dire threat. Does anyone think that Israel can stand by on their own and allow Iran to continue to be unfettered and potentially move forward with a nuclear program? I don't think so. But I also want to make sure that the Iranian people know we are also concerned that we have a President who is willing to negotiate with a regime that is guilty of human rights violations, that is guilty of spreading terror through the world, that is guilty of meddling in the affairs of other Middle Eastern nations. And we are sitting along the sidelines and saying maybe we can still move this deal through, because at least knowing when Iran gets a nuclear weapon is better than the current state. I think the current state is working. Sanctions are working. Pressure on Iran to respect human rights, to get out of the terror business is very important. The last slide I wanted to show and that I wanted to spend more time on--how on Earth does anyone think that a nation that is not intent on launching a nuclear missile at some time would invest in this sort of infrastructure to reach different parts of the globe? It is only a matter of time. Now, we have heard that maybe it will only be 10 years or maybe a year from when we find out about it. But make no mistake about it. If Iran is left alone, they are going to have the ability to deliver this sort of terror anywhere in the world. That is why I will be supporting the bill, and hopefully, we can defeat any bad deal that comes from the administration.

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, it is interesting that I am not a Senator from Florida but I am a Senator who was born in Florida. With due respect to my friend, Senator Nelson, there was something the Senator said that I had not thought to talk about, but I think we have to. It has to do with a bit of a shift in the thinking of this President, unlike any other President in the last 40 years, since the Ayatollahs have come into power. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for not more than 5 minutes.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I thank Chaplain Milner for being here. I want to talk about a friend. He is somebody who blessed our legislature during the time I was speaker of the house. I will not repeat all of the things Peter has done for the community. I want to speak specifically about what he has done for the State chamber and the general assembly, the part where I was speaker. He was a calm presence in an otherwise chaotic environment called the legislative body--not unlike the one we have here. He is always somebody you can look to for guidance, support, and for inspiration, and for that, I thank him. I will also say--you notice he is a little bit tall. He played basketball at Wake. We have this rivalry with South Carolina. We play basketball every year. We get together and we either travel down to South Carolina or the legislature comes here. I played on that basketball team for 4 years. In each of those 4 years, we were hopeful that Peter would play with us, but for some reason he didn't. Now, the only thing that I see differently--he is playing this year, since my departure. I hope your decision to play isn't because of my exit, Peter. I thank you for being here and for your contribution to the community. I welcome your family, who I believe is in the Chamber today. I hope you enjoy today. On behalf of all Members who benefit from your guidance and your spiritual presence and guidance in the State of North Carolina and the general assembly, thank you, and welcome.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I am introducing the Military Corridor Transportation Improvement Act of 2015, which would amend the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, ISTEA, of 1991 to begin the process toward eventually making the US-70 Corridor in North Carolina part of the Interstate system, and to help fully upgrade the corridor to interstate standards. My colleague, Senator Richard Burr has agreed to cosponsor the bill. In addition, Congressman G.K. Butterfield will be introducing a companion bill in the House of Representatives. The Military Corridor Transportation Improvement Act of 2015 would designate the following as high priority: U.S. Route 117/Interstate Route 795 from U.S. Route 70 in Goldsboro, NC, to Interstate Route 40 west of Faison, North Carolina; U.S. Route 70 from its intersection with Interstate Route 40 in Garner, NC, to the Port at Morehead City, NC. If the U.S. 70 corridor becomes part of the Interstate system, it would improve access to military bases in eastern North Carolina and the Port at Morehead City, as well as ease traffic congestion between Raleigh and eastern North Carolina. This bill helps advance the North Carolina Department of Transportation's Strategic Transportation Corridors Vision, which aims to provide North Carolina with a network of high priority corridors to promote economic development and enhance interstate commerce. Federal High Priority Corridors are eligible for federal funds to assist states in the coordination, planning, design and construction of nationally significant transportation corridors for the purposes of economic growth and international and interregional growth. In midst of a sluggish national economy, North Carolina has been a bright spot for growth and innovation, and one of the keys to sustaining that economic success is through continued investment in transportation, infrastructure, and our military. The Military Corridor Transportation Improvement Act is a true bipartisan effort to support North Carolina's military installations and complement the State's 25 year transportation improvement plan, which in turn will generate economic development, provide a boost for local communities and create good-paying jobs.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I am introducing the Military Corridor Transportation Improvement Act of 2015, which would amend the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, ISTEA, of 1991 to begin the process toward eventually making the US-70 Corridor in North Carolina part of the Interstate system, and to help fully upgrade the corridor to interstate standards. My colleague, Senator Richard Burr has agreed to cosponsor the bill. In addition, Congressman G.K. Butterfield will be introducing a companion bill in the House of Representatives. The Military Corridor Transportation Improvement Act of 2015 would designate the following as high priority: U.S. Route 117/Interstate Route 795 from U.S. Route 70 in Goldsboro, NC, to Interstate Route 40 west of Faison, North Carolina; U.S. Route 70 from its intersection with Interstate Route 40 in Garner, NC, to the Port at Morehead City, NC. If the U.S. 70 corridor becomes part of the Interstate system, it would improve access to military bases in eastern North Carolina and the Port at Morehead City, as well as ease traffic congestion between Raleigh and eastern North Carolina. This bill helps advance the North Carolina Department of Transportation's Strategic Transportation Corridors Vision, which aims to provide North Carolina with a network of high priority corridors to promote economic development and enhance interstate commerce. Federal High Priority Corridors are eligible for federal funds to assist states in the coordination, planning, design and construction of nationally significant transportation corridors for the purposes of economic growth and international and interregional growth. In midst of a sluggish national economy, North Carolina has been a bright spot for growth and innovation, and one of the keys to sustaining that economic success is through continued investment in transportation, infrastructure, and our military. The Military Corridor Transportation Improvement Act is a true bipartisan effort to support North Carolina's military installations and complement the State's 25 year transportation improvement plan, which in turn will generate economic development, provide a boost for local communities and create good-paying jobs.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendment to call up my amendments Nos. 925 and 926 en bloc.

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

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, amendment No. 925 recognizes the work that has been done by the Judicial Conference to make discovery in civil cases less cumbersome and costly. Amendment No. 926 incorporates language from the 15th Amendment--no denial or abridgement of the right to vote on account of race--into our budget instructions. I thank the Chair. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President and colleagues, in my professional life I always considered myself to be a numbers guy. As I have sat back and listened to the debate over these past 17 days since the Justice for Victims of Human Trafficking Act was reported out of the Judiciary Committee, I decided I would maybe try a different take on the numbers we should be concerned about. As I said, it has been 17 days since the bill we are considering came out of the Judiciary Committee--56 days since the bill was first introduced on January 13th. Now, some of my colleagues on the other side have said that somehow between when the bill was introduced on January 13th and when it was reported out of Committee on March 10th, there was a provision placed in the bill that they were not made aware of. This is simply not the case. My colleagues had days to review this bill, but unfortunately, some of them are in the habit of passing something and then finding out later what they were actually voting for. It has been 39 years since the Hyde language we are currently discussing was first passed into law. It was so long ago I was even young--16 years old. The Hyde language was first enacted in 1976, and since then, has become known, well-settled law. Obviously, this is not some sort of new concept. It is language that everybody who is in this body--and every staffer who has served somebody in this body--should know about. Now, with the Hyde amendment being around for some four decades, I was trying to figure out: Well, maybe we are talking about Members who are familiar with the Hyde language, but never voted for it. So I decided to go back to my numbers and take a look at the voting history of the Senators in this Chamber today, many of whom--all of whom, actually--on this graphic are now preventing this very important human trafficking legislation from moving forward. The minority leader has voted in support of the Hyde amendment 14 times, and all these other Senators on my chart at least a dozen times, with the exception of Senator Boxer who has voted in support of the Hyde language 10 times. Senator Boxer stood on the floor last week and said it was offensive language. However, Senator Boxer has voted for this language 10 times, most recently this past December when they passed the fiscal year 2015 omnibus bill. So one wonders what they are really trying to accomplish here. I hear them. My Democrat colleagues are very sympathetic to the content of the bill. I hear them say that human trafficking is horrible, and we need to do something about it. But their words do not fit their actions. Their words say we ought to move forward and end these horrible situations--and I will talk a little bit more about those numbers later--but their actions are just burning time in this body preventing us from moving on to the many other important things we need to address--such as our national security, our economic security, and our energy security. But no, we have spent 17 days on a bill that my colleagues in the Democratic caucus say we should act on, but are at the same time impeding the process. Now, as confusing as these numbers are, as confusing as it is to hear so many Senators say that this language is offensive and needs to be taken out--despite the fact that they have regularly voted for it in the past--the very sad result of their actions are what we are not getting done, and that is getting the human trafficking bill passed so we can end the horrible conditions that are imposed on the many people who are enslaved on a daily basis. I'm going to give my colleagues a couple of numbers to think about. The State Department and other agencies estimate that there are 600,000 to 800,000 people trafficked across global borders each year. That is about 1,600 to 2,200 boys, girls, men, and women being enslaved every single day in this world. Now, in our country, it is estimated that 17,500 people are trafficked across our borders into the U.S. sex trade every year and that there are about 100,000 people already here. Think about that in terms of the numbers. Every day that goes by, there are another 50 victims from overseas trafficked into the U.S. for sex trade--every single day another 50 people. This week, we have had five votes on this bill. This means, another 250 young girls, young boys, women, and men will have been trafficked into our country for sex trade. This is a good bill, and it works to stop the growth of human trafficking and free those who are currently enslaved. Colleagues, I am a freshman. I have been here fewer than 70 days. When I read the human trafficking bill, I knew that the Hyde amendment was in it. Anybody who is doing their job in the Senate should have been able to figure that out. So it raises a very interesting question--how could we come out of the Judiciary Committee, which I serve on, with a unanimous vote? As a matter of fact, there are 12 Democrat cosponsors of this bill. Certainly, those Members of the Democratic Caucus read the bill and their staffs had time to read the bill in the months that the language has been public. So, colleagues, I wonder if it is really about the human trafficking bill and the language or if it is about a strategy just to slow the process down, but what I think is so sad is the human consequences of this inaction, and we need to move forward. I just came from the Senate steps to take a picture with about 100 students from my great State of North Carolina. While I had time before the photographer arrived to let them ask me few questions, I said: I am going to have to go to the Senate floor soon and speak. They said: What are you going to speak on? I was really at a loss for words. I was wondering how I was going to tell them I am trying to help pass legislation that makes them safer, but we are having a petty fight in the Senate over process. So I really ask Members of the Democratic caucus to look into their hearts and to understand the human tragedy this legislation is attempting to correct and join with us to pass this bill and move on to the many other things we need to do for this great Nation. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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