Mark Udall

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I rise to speak about bipartisan legislation I am introducing today with Senator Alexander to provide much needed help to our Cold War patriots. In 2000, Congress passed the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program to help Cold War workers like those from Rocky Flats in my home state of Colorado and other nuclear weapons facilities around the country. This effort was designed to get these patriots the help they need to treat cancer and other illnesses they developed as a result of exposure to radiation. Since then, the program has been plagued by procedural inconsistencies and delays preventing former nuclear workers from accessing the benefits they are owed. In March 2010, the U.S. Government Accountability Office issued a report on the efficacy of EEOICPA, confirming workers' ongoing frustrations with the program and recommending that Congress consider creating an advisory board. More recently, in March 2013, the Institute of Medicine issued a report recommending that an external advisory panel be created to review the health effects of the Department of Labor's approach to awarding benefits. Today, Senator Alexander and I are reintroducing our bill requiring the President to establish an independent advisory panel to do just that. This advisory board would add much needed transparency and certainty to decisions made affecting workers' compensation and access to benefits. Some 600,000 Cold War era workers, including thousands of workers at Rocky Flats, put their health on the line to preserve our national security during one of the most uncertain times in our nation's history. They were exposed to radiation and are sick and dying. Our country made a commitment to these patriots, but so far that promise has not been kept. Coloradans find that unacceptable. We cannot let another family suffer through the uncertainty of delays caused by bureaucratic red tape or see their loved ones denied the benefits they deserve. It is time for us to do right by these workers. I urge my colleagues to join me and Senator Alexander in this fight by cosponsoring this important legislation.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing legislation designed to help promote the cleanup of abandoned and inactive hard rock mines that are a great detriment to the environment and public health throughout the country, but especially to the West. I want to thank my colleague Senator Bennet for joining me in this effort. For over one hundred years, miners and prospectors have searched for and developed valuable ``hard rock'' minerals--gold, silver, copper, molybdenum, and others. Hard rock mining has played a key role in the history of Colorado and other states, and the resulting mineral wealth has been an important contributor to our economy and the development of essential products. Too often, however, the miners would abandon their work and move on, seeking riches over the next mountain. The resulting legacy of unsafe open mine shafts and acid mine drainages can be seen throughout the country and especially on public lands in the West where mineral development was encouraged to help settle our region. Unfortunately, many of our current environmental laws designed to mitigate the impact from operating hard rock mines are of limited effectiveness when applied to abandoned and inactive mines. As a result, many of these old mines continue to pollute streams and rivers and pose a risk to the health of people who live nearby or downstream. The bill I am reintroducing today will help address this impediment and make it easier for volunteers, who had no role in creating the problem, to help clean up these sites and improve the environment. It does so by providing a new permit program under the Clean Water Act whereby volunteers can, under an approved plan, reduce the water pollution flowing from an abandoned mine. At the same time, volunteers will not be exposed to the full liability and ongoing responsibility provisions of the Clean Water Act. I would be remiss not to thank the Environmental Protection Agency for its work in addressing this issue. Most recently, EPA issued a memorandum on December 12, 2012, to reduce the Clean Water Act legal vulnerability faced by ``Good Samaritans'' by clarifying that parties who volunteer to clean up these abandoned sites are generally not responsible for obtaining a permit under the Clean Water Act both during and following a successful cleanup. While this was an important step forward, my legislation will provide binding legal protections for Good Samaritans, allowing them to move forward--knowing the long-term certainty of their rights--with the imperative work of mine cleanup. The new permits proposed in this bill would help address problems that have frustrated federal and state agencies throughout the country. As population growth continues near these old mines, more and more risks to public health and safety are likely to occur. We simply must begin to address this issue--not only to improve the environment, but also to ensure that our water supplies are safe and usable. This bill does not address all the concerns some would-be Good Samaritans may have about initiating cleanup projects and I am committed to continue working to address those additional concerns, through additional legislation and in other ways. However, this bill can make a real difference, and I think it deserves approval without unnecessary delay.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. I welcome this opportunity to speak on the floor about the National Security Agency surveillance programs, their effectiveness, and their future. I am proud to be joined by my colleague from Oregon, Senator Wyden, who will comment as well after my remarks. He has been a stalwart leader on these issues, and it has been my honor to join forces with him and to draw attention to this very important discussion President Obama recently welcomed. He called for a public debate on finding the right balance between national security and privacy in the context of NSA's surveillance programs. His call is long overdue, and it is an opportunity we should not squander. As I have said time and time again to Coloradans and as they have said back to me as well, we owe it to the American people to have an open, transparent debate about the limits of the Federal Government's surveillance powers and how we reconcile the need to keep our families safe while still respecting our hard-won constitutional rights to privacy. Although I would have preferred that this debate would have been kicked off by more transparent actions by the White House instead of by unauthorized leaks, we are nonetheless presented with a unique opportunity--an opportunity to finally have an open dialog about the limits of our government's surveillance powers, particularly those relating to the vast dragnet of Americans' phone records under section 215 of the PATRIOT Act. This is a debate in which I feel privileged to take part. It is a debate that Senator Wyden has been a part of since before I was elected to the Congress and one that I have been engaged in for a number of years now. I want to be clear. I have acted in every possible way that I could within the confines of our rules that protect classified information to oppose these practices and bring them to light for the American people. I have fought against overly intrusive sections of the PATRIOT Act and the FISA Amendments Act and registered objections repeatedly with the administration. I believe these efforts are critical for protecting our privacy and also ensuring our national security. I serve on both the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Senate Intelligence Committee, and in those assignments I focus every day on keeping Americans safe, at home and abroad. I recognize that we still live in a world where terrorism is a serious threat to our country, to our economy, and to American lives. Make no mistake, our government needs the appropriate surveillance and antiterrorism tools to combat the serious threats to our Nation. But it is up to the White House and Congress to ensure that these tools strike the right balance between keeping us safe and protecting our constitutional right to privacy. This is a balance I know we can achieve, but, in my view, the PATRIOT Act's bulk phone records collection program does not achieve that balance. That is why I am here on the Senate floor with my colleague Senator Wyden to call for an end to the bulk phone records collection program, as we know it today. Two years ago we were here on the Senate floor considering extending certain PATRIOT Act provisions. At that time I argued that the sweeping surveillance powers we were debating did not contain sufficient safeguards to preserve the privacy rights of Americans. In particular, I argued that the PATRIOT Act's business records provision--or section 215--permits the collection of records on law-abiding Americans who have no connection to terrorism or espionage. As I said at that time, we ought to be able to at least agree that an investigation under PATRIOT Act powers should have a terrorist- or espionage-related focus. We all agree that the intelligence community needs effective tools to combat terrorism, but we must provide those tools in a way that also protects the constitutional freedoms of our people and that lives up to the standard of transparency our democracy demands. The Bill of Rights is the strongest document we have. Another way to put it: It is the biggest, baddest weapon we have. We need to stand with the Bill of Rights and in this case the Fourth Amendment. Following Mr. Snowden's actions and the subsequent declassification of information concerning the NSA's surveillance programs, Americans in recent weeks are coming to understand what it means when section 215 of the PATRIOT Act says the government can obtain ``any tangible thing'' relevant to a national security investigation. That is the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court's way of saying that section 215 permits the collection of millions of Americans' phone records on a daily, ongoing basis. As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, I have repeatedly expressed concern that the FISA Court's secret interpretation of this provision of the PATRIOT Act is at odds with the plain meaning of the law. This secrecy has prevented Americans from understanding how this law is being implemented in their name. In my view and the view of many Americans, this large-scale collection of information by the government has very significant privacy implications for all of us. What do I mean by that? Information about our phone calls--or, as it is known, ``metadata''--may sound pretty simple and innocuous, but I believe that when law-abiding Americans call up their friends, family, doctors, religious leaders, or anyone else, the information on whom they call, when they call, and where they call is private information and should be subject to strong privacy protections. I have heard it said that the bulk phone records program collects nothing beyond what you could find in a phone book. But let's be clear about exactly what this program does. It collects the very personal details of our phone calls--the who, where, when, and how long--and stores them in a database. This doesn't just happen for those who are suspected of having some connection to terrorism; this program collects the phone records of literally millions of Americans. This is a far greater intrusion into our privacy than being voluntarily listed in the Yellow Pages, and it is the reason why I am calling on the White House and Congress to immediately reform this program. Let me reiterate that it is absolutely possible to have both privacy and security. Yet, in the case of the bulk phone records collection program, Senator Wyden and I believe we aren't getting enough of either. Not only does this program unreasonably intrude on Americans' privacy, but it also does so without achieving the alleged security gains. For instance, in recent weeks the intelligence community has made new assertions about the value of recently declassified NSA surveillance programs, but in doing so they have conflated two programs: section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act regarding foreigners' Internet communications and section 215 of the PATRIOT Act regarding bulk phone records. It appears, however, that the bulk phone records collection program alone played little or no role in disrupting terrorist plots--I say this as someone who has been fully briefed on these terror-related events--nor has it been demonstrated that this program even provides any uniquely valuable intelligence. Therefore, saying, as the intelligence community has, that ``these programs'' together have disrupted ``dozens of potential terrorist plots'' is misleading. While the intelligence community has been conflating these two programs, some of my colleagues in Congress in recent days have been going even further to say that the phone records program alone has been greatly successful. They have said it has saved lives and prevented dozens of terrorist plots. As someone who has been presented with the same information as my colleagues on the much-discussed 54 terror- related events, I have to say I disagree. Again, I have seen no evidence that the bulk phone records collection program alone has played a meaningful role, if any, in disrupting terrorist plots. I have yet to see any convincing reason why agencies investigating terrorism cannot simply obtain information directly from phone companies using a regular court order. It may be more convenient for the NSA to collect phone records in bulk rather than asking phone companies to search for specific phone numbers, but convenience alone cannot justify the collection of the personal information of millions of innocent, ordinary, law-abiding Americans, especially when the same or more information can be obtained using less intrusive methods. A few hundred court orders per year would clearly not overwhelm the FISA Court, and the law already allows for emergency authorizations to get these records quickly in urgent circumstances. Senator Wyden and I are not alone in believing there is a more effective and less intrusive way to collect this information. Even before the nature of the bulk phone records collection program was declassified, there was support for narrowing the language of section 215 from many Members of Congress of both political parties. In fact, when the PATRIOT Act reauthorization passed the Senate in 2005 by unanimous consent, it included commonsense language that would have limited the government's ability to collect Americans' personal information unless there is a demonstrated link to terrorism or espionage. That language was designed to, among other things, protect our Fourth Amendment constitutional rights and put a check on government power. While that language did not make it into the final conference bill, it demonstrated that bipartisan agreement on reforms to section 215 is possible. Let's fast forward to 2011, when the Senate again took up the extension of a number of expiring provisions of the PATRIOT Act. I offered an amendment drawn directly from language in the 2005 Senate- passed bill to narrow the application of this provision. That amendment, unfortunately, did not receive a vote. But this Congress I introduced bipartisan legislation with Senator Wyden based on that same language and principles, and we are now joined by a strong bipartisan group of our colleagues from across the country and all along the political spectrum, including Senators Durbin, Murkowski, Begich, Tom Udall, Merkley, Lee, and Heinrich. Our bill will responsibly narrow the PATRIOT Act's section 215 collection authority to make it less intrusive on the privacy of law-abiding Americans. Our legislation would still allow law enforcement and intelligence agencies to use the PATRIOT Act to obtain a wide range of records in the course of terrorism- and espionage-related investigations, but it would require them to demonstrate that the records are in some way connected to terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities--which is not the case today. This past week there was a strong bipartisan vote in the U.S. House of Representatives to curtail NSA's bulk phone records collection. Although the legislation didn't pass, the American people are demanding action and those who share our concerns are on the march. It is time to take action. It is common sense that our law enforcement agencies should have reason to suspect a connection between the records they are seeking and a terrorism or espionage investigation before using these broad authorities to collect the private information of Americans. If the government can use these powers to collect information on people who have no connection to terrorism, then where does it end? Is there no amount of information that our government can collect that would be off limits? What is next--our medical records? We must be able to put in place reasonable measures that allow our law enforcement agencies to pursue enemies who would try to harm us, while protecting our rights as Americans. That is why I believe if an investigation cannot assert some nexus to terrorism or espionage, then the Government should keep its hands off the phone records of law-abiding Americans. These are the kinds of reasonable, commonsense limits on the Government's powers that Coloradoans tell me are necessary to keep us safe while also respecting our privacy. That takes me back to the statement I made at the outset. I believe it is time to end the bulk collection program as we know it. Tonight I am calling on the White House to begin to make the administrative changes to end the bulk collection of Americans' phone records and to conduct the program instead through direct queries to phone companies where there is a connection to terrorism or espionage. Under this targeted approach, our Government would retain its broad authorities to investigate terrorism while ordinary Americans will be protected from overly intrusive surveillance activities. Congress should support the administration's move in this direction by passing our legislation to end bulk collection. Passage of our bipartisan bill would prevent unwarranted future breaches of Americans' privacy rights and focus on the real threats to our national security. Taking into account the serious privacy concerns raised by the bulk collection program, the lack of demonstrated unique value of the program, and our ability through direct queries to the phone companies to collect the data in the same but less intrusive way, I believe the administration--I hope the administration will see the value in working with Congress to end the bulk collection of phone records conducted under the PATRIOT Act's section 215 authorities. I pledge to work with the administration and all of my colleagues to see this through. Let me end on this note. We need to strike a better balance between protecting our country against the threat of terrorism and defending our constitutional rights. The bulk records collection program as we know it today does not meet this balance test, and that is why I believe it must end. I yield the floor.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I rise today to mark a somber milestone. Nearly 1 year ago, Colorado and the Nation were shocked by the horrific scene at an Aurora movie theater. Even before the sun rose that Friday, July 20, 2012, we began hearing of a senseless mass shooting that took the lives of 12 people and injured 70 more. Today I want to mark the anniversary of this tragedy and to honor the strength that so many Coloradans have shown--both on that day and in the weeks and months since. The Aurora theater shooting shook us, it shocked us, it outraged us, but, as I said one year ago, it did not break us. Even today we are seeing that the legacy of this terrible tragedy is not the horror of that day but, rather, the courage and resilience of the people who have refused to let this event define their lives. Take, for example, 18-year-old Zack Golditch, who endured surgery and weeks of recovery so he could continue with his football career and become a repeat state discus champion. The Denver Post recently named him the winner of their Adversity Conquered through Excellence award and this fall he will begin his freshman year as an offensive lineman at CSU. Or Marcus Weaver, who was shot twice but now hosts a weekly radio show in Denver that spotlights great Americans who are making a difference in the community. Marcus also works with his church to help people who have struggled through addiction or incarceration and now travels the country inspiring others with his story and pushing them to take charge of their lives. These are just two of the countless examples of the perseverance of people who were affected by the Aurora shooting. Zack and Marcus's strength defines us as Americans. That is something in which we can take great pride. It is the kind of strength we honor in remembering this tragedy now a year later. In particular, we look back and honor young men like 26- year-old Jon Blunk and 24-year-old Alexander Teves who sacrificed their lives to protect their friends. And then there were the countless police and other first responders who rushed to the scene to care for the wounded and to stop the shooter before he could injure others. Colorado has known too many tragedies these past several years. From the Aurora theater shooting to wildfires in Colorado Springs, Fort Collins and elsewhere that have threatened and destroyed entire communities and left hundreds of our friends and neighbors without homes. We have seen the same spirit of sacrifice and resilience, as firefighters and community members have banded together to fight the Black Forest Fire, the West Fork Complex Fire and the other blazes that have threatened entire communities across Colorado this year. This Saturday, on the 1-year anniversary of the Aurora theater shooting, let's take time to remember those we have lost and to honor the resilience of our neighbors who press on with their lives, undaunted by this terrible act. In that spirit, I want to read into the Record the names of the twelve people who lost their lives one year ago. We must never forget these names: Matt McQuinn, Micayla Medek, Jessica Ghawi, Gordon Cowden, Jesse Childress, John Larimer, Jonathan Blunk, Veronica Moser-Sullivan, Alex Sullivan, Alexander Teves, Rebecca Wingo, and Alexander Boik. I hope that we can draw strength from the tragic loss of those 12 wonderful, beautiful people and that it leads us to redouble our efforts to be better people--to be more understanding to our friends and more loving to our families and to aspire to live our lives with the courage that the people of Aurora and Colorado have shown over the course of this last year. I think that the leaders here in Washington could learn from their courage. The victims of Aurora have not let setbacks stop them from achieving great things and making their community a better place to live. They, in fact, have refused to allow the word ``victim'' to define them. Of course, we still have work to do to prevent future mass shootings. There are many commonsense steps that we can and must take to reduce senseless gun violence. But today is not a time for a policy debate. Today is a day to remember the victims, to honor the heroes from that terrible day last year, and to commit ourselves to never forgetting their memory.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. I thank the Senator.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Madam President, I rise today to talk about the balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution that I recently introduced with several of my colleagues. These cosponsors include Senators Manchin, Begich, McCaskill, Heitkamp and Tester. Debates over the merits of balanced budget amendments have occurred for decades, and there is a wide range of conflicting thought on the topic. Proposing to amend the Constitution is something I do not take lightly. But after much thought and consideration, and having conversations with fellow Coloradans, I came to the conclusion that fundamental budgetary reform like this is necessary to restore Americans' confidence in our government and ensure long term fiscal health and stability. I introduced the same balanced budget amendment in 2011 when there was still a great deal of uncertainty about our economy and its recovery. Although there has been economic progress, it is clear that we have not yet completely emerged from the downturn that began in 2008. It therefore remains critical that Congress continue to focus--in a bipartisan fashion on ways to promote job growth and economic recovery. It is to that end that I am proposing the idea of a balanced budget amendment to enforce budgetary discipline. The proposal I am introducing requires the President to submit a balanced budget each year and ensures that our Federal Government spends no more money than it takes in, while allowing for exceptions in times of emergency. But most importantly my proposal takes steps to ensure that Congress doesn't make some of the same budgetary mistakes that got us into the mess we are in now. For example, my amendment prohibits deficit- busting tax breaks for Americans who earn $1 million or more per year unless the Federal Government is running a surplus. That is a commonsense approach that makes sense to Coloradans. And importantly, this amendment would shield Social Security in order to keep Congress from taking money from the trust fund to mask budget deficits. It is my hope that this amendment would prevent the unwise budgeting we have seen too often over the last decade while upholding the principle that we should pay for our government in a responsible manner, with waiver authority to be used only in exceptional circumstances. I think most Americans can agree to that. Coloradans certainly do. As we all know, Congress will again debate spending and revenue issues very soon as we approach a new fiscal year and an imminent need to raise the debt ceiling if we are to avoid default on our debt obligations. The total national debt is projected to reach over $16.8 trillion at the end of 2013 and over $17.5 trillion in 2014. Coloradans find those figures alarming. We are on an unsustainable path and it is critical that Congress consider--as one tool--the type of discipline this balanced budget amendment would require. I would not suggest to my colleagues that this measure will solve all of our existing problems unilaterally, but it will help prevent the country from amassing massive debt in the future. I know some of my colleagues are skeptical about any form of balanced budget amendment out of concern that it could be used to dismantle critical programs or force uncomfortable budgeting decisions that purportedly pick winners over losers. However, I truly believe a balanced approach such as the one I am introducing today will not require a slash-and-burn approach to programs that are the backbone of our national agenda, help grow our economy, and benefit hardworking American families. In fact, I believe the only true way to preserve the core programs that support America's seniors and provide care for the most disadvantaged members of our society, for example, is to ensure that we have the resources needed to fund them over the long term. Without fiscal reform, our social safety net programs will disappear. This result worries Coloradans. The last time I introduced this amendment, I quoted progressive Senator Paul Simon, a Democrat from Illinois who championed the concept of a balanced budget amendment. I am going to do so again today-- because his words carry such resonance. In debating the balanced budget amendment in 1993, Senator Simon said, ``I am here to tell you that the course we are on, unless it is changed soon, absolutely threatens all of the programs that you and I have fought for and believe in so strongly. The fiscal folly that we have followed for more than a decade has brought us to a crossroads. We face a basic decision, whether through default or through our actions to choose wisely the course that will lead us away from the brink.'' Senator Simon continued: If we do not act, interest payouts will spiral upward until they consume not only Social Security but health care, education, transportation investments--every other need on our national agenda. My warning to you today is that a rising tide of red ink sinks all boats. Senator Simon's caution is even more timely today, and I have the same concerns about the budgetary path we are on. We have a structural deficit and the only way to fix it is to fundamentally change the spending and revenue picture. I have not given up hope that Congress may find common ground on a comprehensive plan to cut spending, reform the tax code, and shore up programs like Social Security and Medicare, which are critical to our Nation's middle class. For example, I laud the efforts of Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles and the many other advocates who are putting real ideas on the table to reduce deficits and debt. These are people working across the aisle every day to find common ground to reduce our national debt. With that spirit in mind, last fall I led a majority of members of the Colorado delegation both Democrats and Republicans on a letter to our respective leaders in the House and Senate to support a balanced, comprehensive debt deal, which includes spending cuts, new revenue, and responsible reforms to shore up our entitlement programs. Because we have got to have the fortitude to ``go big,'' I endorse the general approach of the so-called Simpson-Bowles plan, which reforms all aspects of the budget. And I know many of my colleagues support that same framework. Finding agreement on comprehensive reform is the best possible action Congress can take to send a strong signal to main street businesses, financial markets and the American people that we are serious about stabilizing our budget for the long term. Similarly, this balanced budget amendment would chart a path toward long-term fiscal health and promote the kind of confidence and certainty we need to spur job creation, economic growth and prosperity for a growing middle class. With that said, I am convinced we will need additional tools that force long-term fiscal discipline. That is why throughout the years I have supported many policies to combat deficits such as a Presidential line item veto, establishing a committee to reduce government waste and a ban on earmarks. Today, I ask my colleagues to consider my reasonable proposal for a balanced budget amendment. The proposal may not be perfect, it may benefit from my colleagues' suggestions to improve it, and it may be just one piece of the larger fiscal puzzle. But I do hope that my colleagues will give this proposal serious consideration as we continue to debate the best way to eliminate the debt and deficit.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 10 minutes.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Madam President, I rise again to talk about the critical importance of passing comprehensive immigration reform such as my good friend from Arizona Senator McCain has advocated. When I look at my State, Coloradans from all walks of life--business leaders, religious leaders, our agricultural community, and our civic leaders, regardless of political party--agree our immigration system is broken. Now we have run out of excuses to sit on our hands. I see this problem as an opportunity, and I want to discuss why I see it as an opportunity. It has touched every corner of our society, and this call for action has become too loud to ignore. But despite such widespread agreement on the need to move forward, there remains a vocal minority in our Chamber--and across the country--concerned about the consequences of reform. There is a worry, and that worry that persists is that immigrants will somehow steal the American opportunity, that immigrants will take our tax dollars and take our jobs. But let me say this. All of us here in the Senate agree strongly we should not be writing policy in Washington that would endanger American jobs, and I want to speak to that. Ever since the economic downturn, Coloradans who have been fortunate enough to keep their jobs or recently find employment as we dig out of recession are holding on tightly to those opportunities. Coloradans who have been laid off or who have lived through the bitter desperation of extended unemployment look with increasing concern at anything that might stand between them and opportunity. In the context of these worries, some people look at employed immigrants and see only unemployed Americans. To see things in that light misunderstands this legislation as well as our roots as a country and our long tradition of opportunity. This bill--the idea of fixing our broken immigration system and providing millions of Americans a pathway to citizenship, which is earned--is not a zero-sum game. In fact, it is built off of one of the reasons our Nation is so exceptional: The broad spirit that any man or woman can pull themselves up from the most challenging circumstances and succeed. This bill is carefully crafted and balanced. It will extend the American dream to millions now living in the shadows. Important for Coloradans, this legislation creates certainty for businesses and residents already legally here today. This is exactly the sort of certainty our labor markets need. It is true--maybe except for the great State of North Dakota--that we have made steady progress, but overall unemployment remains too high. We all want to be similar to North Dakota, with a very low unemployment rate. Our economy--the American economy--continues to grow, with Colorado growing at the fourth fastest rate in the Nation. In doing so, many of our business sectors, economic sectors, and industries are experiencing higher labor demand than there is available domestic supply. Taking agriculture, for example, which is important to the Presiding Officer's State as well, the demand for labor on farms and ranches across the Nation far exceeds the supply of Americans who are willing to fill those jobs. That labor shortage has resulted in crops left to rot in the fields and, therefore, unacceptable economic losses to our communities. Farmers and ranchers tell me that today they are often left to hire undocumented workers to fill this labor gap. This unregulated, under- the-table hiring hurts immigrants who experience frequent exploitation, constant fear, and often debilitating poverty. It also hurts Americans who experience depressed wages and higher unemployment as a result of competition with this cheap underground workforce. That doesn't make sense. This immigration reform bill eliminates this unfair competition and ensures that all Americans receive fair wages. Our current labor supply challenges extend to many other sectors as well. Jobs in science, technology, engineering, and math are growing at three times the rate of other jobs in the United States. With that in mind, and in spite of high levels of unemployment, nearly 100,000 valuable American-based positions in critical high-tech firms, such as IBM, Microsoft, and Intel, have been left unfilled. By 2018, estimates are that this number will increase to 230,000. This bill, which we are so close to getting across the finish line, focuses heavily on breaking down barriers in our current immigration and visa system to help fill this staggering labor gap and spur our economy in the process. The more flexible market-based system for visas included in this bill will ensure our immigration system only brings workers businesses need. Moreover, this bill will ensure that Americans get a first pass at jobs before foreign workers are eligible to fill them. That is an important element, one that Coloradans have told me they demand. But it is not only about ensuring that the bill before us doesn't displace current U.S. citizens, I would point out to my friends who are skeptical of this effort that immigrants in this country also have an incredible and phenomenal history of creating jobs. Let me share a couple numbers with everybody. Between 1990 and 2005, immigrants started 25 percent of the highest growth companies in this country, directly employing over 200,000 people. Since 2007, immigrant- founded small businesses have provided employment for 4.7 million people and generated almost $800 billion in revenue. Big-time American companies, such as Intel, Google, eBay, and Sun Microsystems, were all created by immigrants--companies that helped to form the very roots of our thriving tech industry. I wish to take a minute to thank the Gang of 8 specifically for their efforts to include a section in the bill that creates the INVEST Program, which focuses on incentivizing entrepreneurs, such as the founders of these iconic companies, to come to the United States. This program, which draws on the bipartisan Startup Visa Act I introduced with Senator Flake--and includes the work of Senators Moran, Warner, and others--will ensure that the next generation of entrepreneurs and job creators can stay in the United States and create good American jobs. Last week, after listening to advocates, Senator Warner and I filed an amendment that we think will bolster these provisions even further, and we certainly hope our colleagues will think it is a good enough idea to include in the final legislation. Programs in the underlying bill, such as INVEST, will help supercharge our economy by helping to create thousands of jobs over the next decade. Ralph Waldo Emerson once said: ``America is another word for opportunity.'' We take pride in our rich history of being a country where the key to earning a valued place in society is through ability and determination, where immigrants from all over the world--alongside third-and fourth-generation Americans--can earn an honest living or start a business. It is incumbent on us, as Members of Congress, to actively ensure that America remains the land of opportunity. As the Presiding Officer knows, that starts with our children, including undocumented children, our DREAMers, who know of no other place but here as their home. I wish to close by talking about a DREAMer. His name is Oscar. I wish to make the case for Oscar and his family. Oscar and his brothers, Juan and Hugo, are the children of parents who illegally immigrated into the United States and brought their kids with them. They now live in my State of Colorado. Throughout their entire lives, they lived in fear of the black cloud of deportation that has hung over them. I had the pleasure of meeting Oscar here in Washington a couple of months ago. He had a very simple request for a kid who grew up in the United States. He wanted the opportunity for himself and his brothers to come out of the shadows and become someone. Where are Oscar and his brothers right now? They are in college pursuing degrees in engineering and psychology. Let's design a commonsense policy that will allow them to work after they graduate. Let's give Oscar, and the millions like him, the opportunity to come out of the shadows and become the next generation of American leaders, innovators, and job creators. This week we are faced with a choice: We can put into place a bill that was negotiated by Members of both sides of the aisle, one that takes historic and far-reaching steps to secure our borders and provides a tough but fair pathway to legal status and an exit from the shadows for those who are here illegally. This bill will help crack down on employer exploitation and help give American businesses the secure and stable workforce they deserve. The other option would be to try and delay this bill and continue on with a broken system that continually undermines our economy by keeping millions in the shadows. We could keep the system that denies the best and the brightest a viable path to citizenship and instead would encourage them to create jobs abroad for our global competitors such as China and India. Let's not deny Oscar and his brothers the opportunity to come out of the shadows and be the next generation of American workers. Let's continue to work on amendments, and let's pass this comprehensive immigration reform bill this week. I thank the Presiding Officer for her patience, for her forbearance. I yield the floor.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I was unable to return to Washington, DC, prior to the vote this evening due to unavoidable weather-related delays of my airline flight, which were beyond my control. I was therefore unable to cast a vote for rollcall vote No. 160, the motion to invoke cloture on Leahy amendment No. 1183 to S. 744, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill. Had I been present, I would have voted yea.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, earlier this month, we lost one of our Nation's most beloved public servants. Senator Frank Lautenberg was a World War II hero, a successful businessman, a statesman--and above all else, a kind and generous man, one that I am honored to have called a friend. Frank will be greatly missed by New Jerseyans, his colleagues in Washington and his family and friends across the Nation. Much can be said about Frank and the priorities he championed. But what struck me most is that Frank fought for the little guy. His public career was built on the foundation of being a champion for a safe, clean, healthy and economically stable America. In the U.S. Senate, he championed efforts to preserve America's landscape and natural beauty. Like me, he believed that America's precious land and resources should be protected and conserved for future generations to honor and enjoy. Frank knew that we don't inherit the land from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children. And Frank believed in a sustainable American energy system--one that increases energy independence and prioritizes renewable energy efforts such as wind, solar and geothermal. As a leading voice in Congress on climate change, Frank was acutely aware of the harmful effects global warming has on our planet, and he led the charge to ensure Americans--and his colleagues--were aware that the overwhelming science should spur us to reverse this dangerous trend. Frank's contribution to his State and our Nation extends far beyond his environmental accomplishments. He led policy reforms that are too numerous to catalogue here. For example, Frank fought hard to establish health and safety standards and ensured that public health in America was a priority for legislators. A key player behind landmark legislation establishing a federal blood-alcohol level limit and banning smoking on airplanes, Frank's public health initiatives have improved the lives of millions of Americans. Generations to come will benefit and live longer and healthier lives because of this great American statesman. Frank was a real champion for the people of New Jersey, but what many people may not know is that he is also a true friend to the state of Colorado, my home State. From the initial planning stages to the final product, the existence of Denver International Airport can be largely attributed to Frank Lautenberg. DIA received an unprecedented amount of Federal financial help, largely in part to Frank's unwavering support of the project. He also publically supported the construction of C-470, maintaining that the major highway was an essential addition to Colorado commerce and industry. Throughout the country, he supported the development of urban public transportation and pushed to strengthen Amtrak. Without Frank's dedication, our national transportation system would have not kept pace with our growing population. After casting his 9000th vote in 2011, Majority Leader Harry Reid recognized Senator Lautenberg as one of the most productive Senators in the history of this country. Frank's wisdom and tenacity made him an influential figure in the U.S. Senate for nearly 30 years. I am grateful to have served alongside him. His enduring spirit and strong character will not be forgotten within the halls of Congress. My sincerest condolences go out to Frank's family, including his wife, Bonnie Englebardt; six children and their spouses, Ellen Lautenberg and Doug Hendel, Nan and Joe Morgart, Josh and Christina Lautenberg, Lisa and Doug Birer, Danielle Englebardt and Stuart Katzoff, Lara Englebardt Metz and Corey Metz; and 13 grandchildren.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I rise today in observance of World Refugee Day. Established by the United Nations on June 20, 2001, World Refugee Day honors the courage, strength, and perseverance of those forced to leave their homes under threat of persecution and conflict, as well as those escaping extreme poverty or environmental degradation. This annual commemoration recognizes the tremendous challenges faced by millions of displaced persons throughout the world and pays tribute to their invaluable contributions to the communities that have provided them shelter. Ongoing violence and the harmful effects of climate change have forced millions of people across the globe to make the impossible decision between risking their lives at home and leaving behind everything in search of safety. Refugees are individuals and families whose lives have been uprooted, whose communities have been destroyed, and whose future remains unclear. While these displaced people struggle for the most basic services, they are also looking for an opportunity to lay down new roots and provide for themselves and their families. For over 30 years, Coloradans have welcomed refugees into their communities, offering safety, security, and a place to call home. Our great State has provided them with an opportunity to use their diverse skills and expertise to make meaningful contributions to our way of life in the West. Today, we have over 48,000 refugees who have settled in Colorado from countries all across the globe. I would like to acknowledge this population for adding to our rich cultural heritage, for expanding our understanding of the world, and for strengthening our economy. While we will never be able to fully understand the sacrifices made by these vulnerable individuals and families, it should be a top priority to remember their struggles and recognize their strength. As a U.S. Senator, I reaffirm the commitment of Colorado and our Nation to the refugees, and I pledge to continue to work to address the underlying causes of refugee flows. On behalf of a grateful nation and State, I commend those who have risked their lives working individually, or with the multitude of dedicated nongovernmental organizations, to provide life-saving assistance and shelter to those displaced around the world. Let today serve as a reminder of our international responsibility to help our neighbors and of the importance of our shared humanity.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I rise today to re-introduce the bipartisan Target Practice and Marksmanship Training Support Act with my friend Senator Risch of the great state of Idaho. We are proud to be joined by a long list of original co-sponsors including Senators Bennet, Hagan, Klobuchar, Tester, Barrasso, Crapo, Thune, Begich, Pryor, Enzi, and Heller. I thank my colleagues for joining me in this bipartisan effort. This bill would amend the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act to adjust certain funding limitations and provide states with greater flexibility over the use of funds available for the creation and maintenance of public shooting ranges--designated public lands where people can both safely engage in sport shooting and responsibly sharpen their marksmanship skills. The Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act established an excise tax on sporting equipment and ammunition, which provides each state with funds for a variety of wildlife restoration and hunter education and safety programs. Pittman-Robertson funds can also be used for the development and maintenance of shooting ranges. Unfortunately, however, current restrictions in the Pittman-Robertson Act disproportionately underfund the creation and maintenance of shooting range opportunities in comparison with other programs funded by the Act. In addition, opportunities for American sportsmen and women to safely engage in recreational shooting on public lands have significantly declined in recent years. In an effort to reverse this trend and establish, maintain and promote safe spaces for target practice and sport shooting, this legislation would allow states to allocate a greater proportion of their federal wildlife funds for these purposes. To be clear, the bill would not allocate any new funding, it would not raise any fees or taxes, nor would it require states to apply their allocated Pittman-Robertson funds to shooting ranges. Rather, this bill gives states the flexibility to allocate their existing Pittman- Robertson funds in the manner they deem most beneficial by reducing the amount of other matching dollars States would have to raise and permits states to ``bank'' Pittman-Robertson funds for 5 years so that they can save enough money to build new shooting ranges. Hunting and recreational shooting are an integral part of the Colorado way of life. The Target Practice and Marksmanship Training Support Act is designed to promote our western way of life, acknowledging not only the need for safe places for hunters and sportsmen to responsibly practice their sport, but also the jobs and economic growth supported by sport shooters in Colorado and throughout the nation. Hunting and outdoor sports generate billions of dollars each year and support countless American jobs. In addition to the improvements this bill contains, it is my hope that the public land management agencies will continue to work with the states, sportsmen and women, recreational shooting interests, local communities, and others so that these opportunities are safe and available.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I rise today to re-introduce the bipartisan Target Practice and Marksmanship Training Support Act with my friend Senator Risch of the great state of Idaho. We are proud to be joined by a long list of original co-sponsors including Senators Bennet, Hagan, Klobuchar, Tester, Barrasso, Crapo, Thune, Begich, Pryor, Enzi, and Heller. I thank my colleagues for joining me in this bipartisan effort. This bill would amend the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act to adjust certain funding limitations and provide states with greater flexibility over the use of funds available for the creation and maintenance of public shooting ranges--designated public lands where people can both safely engage in sport shooting and responsibly sharpen their marksmanship skills. The Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act established an excise tax on sporting equipment and ammunition, which provides each state with funds for a variety of wildlife restoration and hunter education and safety programs. Pittman-Robertson funds can also be used for the development and maintenance of shooting ranges. Unfortunately, however, current restrictions in the Pittman-Robertson Act disproportionately underfund the creation and maintenance of shooting range opportunities in comparison with other programs funded by the Act. In addition, opportunities for American sportsmen and women to safely engage in recreational shooting on public lands have significantly declined in recent years. In an effort to reverse this trend and establish, maintain and promote safe spaces for target practice and sport shooting, this legislation would allow states to allocate a greater proportion of their federal wildlife funds for these purposes. To be clear, the bill would not allocate any new funding, it would not raise any fees or taxes, nor would it require states to apply their allocated Pittman-Robertson funds to shooting ranges. Rather, this bill gives states the flexibility to allocate their existing Pittman- Robertson funds in the manner they deem most beneficial by reducing the amount of other matching dollars States would have to raise and permits states to ``bank'' Pittman-Robertson funds for 5 years so that they can save enough money to build new shooting ranges. Hunting and recreational shooting are an integral part of the Colorado way of life. The Target Practice and Marksmanship Training Support Act is designed to promote our western way of life, acknowledging not only the need for safe places for hunters and sportsmen to responsibly practice their sport, but also the jobs and economic growth supported by sport shooters in Colorado and throughout the nation. Hunting and outdoor sports generate billions of dollars each year and support countless American jobs. In addition to the improvements this bill contains, it is my hope that the public land management agencies will continue to work with the states, sportsmen and women, recreational shooting interests, local communities, and others so that these opportunities are safe and available.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, on June 19, 1865--2 years after President Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation Union soldiers arrived in Galveston, TX, with news that the Civil War had finally ended and the African Americans were free from slavery. This day marked the first time news of the emancipation had reached the southern-most tip of the old confederacy. One hundred and forty-eight years later, in Colorado and across the country, we remember the importance of providing liberty and justice for all and how embracing tolerance has helped our country to move away from the terrible legacy of slavery. The impact of Juneteenth in 1865 has certainly reached beyond Galveston, TX. Across Colorado and the Nation, communities celebrate Juneteenth by recognizing the important progress our country has made towards equality and acknowledging how far we still have to go. We do this by remembering the heritage and struggles of African Americans and commemorating their many achievements and contributions to our country. In my home State of Colorado, for example, Pueblo celebrates its 33rd annual Juneteenth celebration by honoring active servicemembers and military veterans, and Denver hosts the Juneteenth Music Festival one of the largest celebrations of Juneteenth in the country. Celebrating this holiday is an important reminder of how our differences make us stronger. Juneteenth brings people together to reflect on our past and look forward to our future where we will all finally achieve the dream Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., laid out almost 50 years ago--of being judged not by the color of our skin, but by the content of our character.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. I am here to speak to what is a historic debate here on the floor of the Senate; that is, the debate we are having with regard to comprehensive immigration reform. We have a major opportunity here in the Congress to finally pass meaningful, strong, bipartisan legislation. Immigration reform is something Congress has grappled with in fits and starts for over a decade. In fact, I remember the summer 7 or 8 years ago when this Senate came very close to passing comprehensive immigration reform and fell just short of that goal. Today the need to act has become imperative. We cannot ignore it. There are constituents in Colorado from across the spectrum who are hard-working. They are small business owners, religious leaders, farmers, and citizens. They believe that now is the time. If we look at our economy, it is beginning to gain strength. Our economy is beginning to get its legs under it. Our economy also needs the labor market certainty that would come from immigration reform. So let's seize this opportunity to pass commonsense legislation that our constituents expect. I am looking right over the dais. Above the dais, I see ``e pluribus unum,'' which translates to ``out of many, one.'' That is a simple motto which is engraved in this great Senate Chamber, and it is one of the daily reminders that we are a nation of immigrants. Throughout our history, millions of immigrants--including my ancestors and the Presiding Officer's--braved hardship and great risks to come here. Why was that? They sought freedom, opportunity, and a better life for their families. Today's immigrants, in that same spirit, continue to brave great risks and hardships to obtain the American dream. We have heard from fellow Americans who are opposed to fixing our broken system. There are those among us who unfortunately see immigrants as a burden on our country or want to enact overly punitive measures to punish undocumented immigrants. I ask that they remember that our country was built and forged by immigrants whose blood and sweat built the America we know today. To oppose this legislation, with all due respect, is to deny the promise our ancestors and even the Framers expected us to extend to those outside our borders. Yes, we are a nation of laws, and we don't take lightly the violation of our laws, but we are also a nation that welcomes foreigners who want to build the American dream. I would like to challenge my colleagues to remember that we are a better, stronger country because of our immigrants whose first glimpse of America was the Statue of Liberty emblazoned with the words of poet Emma Lazarus: Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free. Our country and our economy were built from the ground up by the hard work and ingenuity of immigrants and their families. In recent years, one in four of America's new small business owners has been an immigrant. One in four high-tech startups in America was founded by immigrants. And 40 percent of Fortune 500 companies--when they started--were created by first- or second-generation immigrants. If we look at our system today, unfortunately, because it is broken, it has made it harder for would-be business owners as I just described to create jobs and help spur our Nation's economic development. Let me give another example. Right now our system invites the best and brightest from all over the world to come and study at our top universities. Once they have the training they need to create a new invention or build a new business--listen to this--our system tells them to go back home. That is not right. I am pleased, honored, humbled, and a little bit proud that I have worked for years with Coloradans at my side to solve this problem and to make the United States a place where entrepreneurs are encouraged to stay, build businesses, and grow our economy. In that vein, I want to thank the Gang of 8 for their hard work in crafting a bill that is built upon those principles. Entrepreneurs embody the American dream. Fixing our broken system is about more than businesses and startups; it is principally about families. To say that our current broken immigration system is bad for our families would be an understatement. Thousands of fathers--myself included--gathered with their families this past weekend to celebrate Father's Day. I couldn't help but think of the thousands of fathers our immigration system has separated from their loved ones or the countless fathers living today in Colorado who struggle with the fear every day that they could be separated from their families. There are fathers like Jorge, who has been living in the United States for 23 years. He is the proud father of four U.S. citizen children, including a U.S. Army corporal. He has been contributing to our economy in Colorado and therefore to the American economy and his community for many years. With immigration reform, Jorge will be able to come out of the shadows, where he will finally be able to realize the American dream without the constant fear of being deported and separated from his children. As I have suggested, unfortunately Jorge's situation is not unique. The fact that our current system has brought us to the place where at any moment thousands of families can be ripped apart is just not right. This bill would give Jorge and millions of others like him a tough but fair shot at earning legal status and eventually citizenship. Make no mistake. This process will not be without significant cost, and it will not be easy. Let me explain how I draw that conclusion. In order to get earned legalization, Jorge will have to pass a background check, pay back taxes, penalties, and fees, demonstrate work history, learn English, and go to the back of the line behind others who have also gone through the process. This is a tough but fair road ahead. It is a path negotiated by Senators of both parties and supported by the American people. Today there are an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States. Some cross the border illegally, others have overstayed their visas. Regardless of how they came, the overwhelming majority of these folks, just like Jorge, are trying to earn a living and provide for their families. There are thousands of immigrants in Colorado who are working in the shadows, where they are vulnerable to exploitive employers paying them less than minimum wage, making them work without overtime, and denying them any of the benefits given to their other employees. That pushes down standards for all workers. What I am saying is that our current immigration system has fostered an underground economy that exploits a cheap source of labor while depressing wages for everyone else. My conclusion is that this bill will ensure that businesses are all playing by the same set of rules, and it includes tough penalties for businesses that do not. The underlying bill implements an effective employment verification system that will prevent identity theft, the hiring of unauthorized workers, and send a clear message that will help prevent future waves of illegal immigration. It is a commonsense solution. It is the kind of solution I have heard Coloradans ask for. I will now turn my attention to the border. This legislation contains historic resources and measures to better secure our borders. Last week I heard time and time again: Borders first, borders first. To the Coloradans who expect border security, as I do, I say the best thing we can do for border security is pass a comprehensive immigration reform bill. We have made significant progress over the past several years. We have put $17 billion in resources into protecting our borders. As a result, illegal border crossings are at their lowest levels in decades. Let's be clear. There is still room for significant improvement, and the strong border security provisions in this bill help us get there. In fact, the underlying bill would be the single biggest commitment to border security in our Nation's history. Why? It would put another $6.5 billion on top of what we are already spending toward stronger, smarter, more innovative security along our borders. It would also direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to submit to Congress a comprehensive border security plan and a southern border fencing strategy. Moreover, the legislation would delay the process of granting legal status to immigrants until the plan and strategy have been deployed, a mandatory employment verification system has been implemented, and an electronic biographic entry-exit system is in place at major airports and seaports. Finally, this legislation would hold employers more accountable if they knowingly hire undocumented workers. We are saying that no longer will we tolerate an underground market of workers who are illegally employed and many times exploited. As I begin to close, I would like to turn to a special group of Coloradans who would be helped. This is a group about whom we all should care and about whom I deeply care, and that is our students. I am very pleased and excited that the provisions for the DREAM Act are included in the comprehensive immigration reform bill we are considering. I have stood alongside a steadfast group of my colleagues as we fought for passage of the DREAM Act for many years. Along the way I have talked to and more importantly listened to countless Colorado students who have looked me in the eyes and asked for their government to help give them status, opportunity, and potential so they can go on to be the next generation of American leaders without the daily fear of deportation. We are talking about thousands of Colorado students who were brought to the United States at a very young age. It wasn't their decision to be brought here, but they came here with their parents. That cohort-- literally thousands of these wonderful, enthusiastic, energetic Coloradans--is poised to graduate college or join the military and in the process strengthen our country and grow our economy. Let's do the right thing by the DREAMers. I say and implore my colleagues, let's not stand in the way of what Americans want and what our economy needs. Our Nation will be stronger when our borders are secure, when employers are held accountable for the workers they have hired, when jobs are filled with qualified and documented workers who contribute to the economy and undocumented workers who are currently here are held accountable and given an opportunity to earn their legal status and then citizenship. So for my colleagues who are here today and are serious about fixing our broken immigration system, let's actually have a serious debate to improve this legislation. Let's vote on amendments with a sincere intent to really improve this bill. Let's work productively to find a bipartisan solution to this huge national issue in the same way the Gang of 8 has worked for the past many months. As I said in my opening remarks, we have a historic opportunity to finally pass comprehensive immigration reform. We have an extraordinary opportunity to show the Senate at its best. Having the opportunity to openly and honestly debate this legislation is one of the many reasons we ran to serve in the Senate in the first place. The public has placed their trust in us to get this right, and we can. I yield the floor.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I rise to speak on an issue that is critical to our constitutional rights and our national security. The revelation and subsequent declassification of the National Security Agency's intelligence gathering programs have shocked Americans in ways that I long ago had telegraphed. We are having a spirited and critical debate about what the right balance between privacy and security ought to be. With regards to NSA activity, I am introducing bipartisan legislation today, with several senators of both parties, designed to narrow Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act, known also as the ``business records'' provision, to better balance the authorities we give the federal government while protecting our constitutional rights. More specifically, my legislation would prevent the federal government from collecting millions of law-abiding Americans' phone call records without first establishing some nexus to terrorism. We all expect the NSA to target terrorists, but the revelations in the past few weeks have made clear that the information of millions of law-abiding Americans is being swept up in the process. Let me start by saying that I continue to feel that a number of the permanent PATRIOT Act provisions should remain in place to give our intelligence community important tools to fight terrorism. But I also believe, as I stated two years ago when offering this same legislation as an amendment to the PATRIOT Act reauthorization bill, that Section 215 of this Act fails to strike the right balance between keeping us safe and protecting the privacy rights of Americans. Indeed, my concerns about this provision of the law have only grown since I was first briefed on its secret interpretation and implementation as a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee. From the recent leaks and information since declassified about the Section 215 collection program, we know that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court has interpreted this provision of the PATRIOT Act to permit the collection of millions of Americans' phone records on a daily, ongoing basis. As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, I have repeatedly expressed concern that the interpretation of this provision of the PATRIOT Act, which allows the government to obtain ``any tangible thing'' relevant to a national security investigation, is at odds with the plain meaning of the law. This secrecy has prevented Americans from understanding how these laws are being implemented in their name. That is unacceptable. Even before the nature of the bulk phone records collection program was declassified, there was support for narrowing the language of Section 215 from many in Congress and many Americans who feel strongly about their constitutional right to privacy. In fact, the PATRIOT Act reauthorization that passed the Senate in 2005 by unanimous consent included language that would limit the government's ability to collect Americans' personal information without a demonstrated link to terrorism or espionage. While that language did not prevail in conference, it demonstrated that bipartisan agreement on reforms to Section 215 is possible. In 2011, as the Senate took up the extension of a number of expiring provisions of the PATRIOT Act, I offered an amendment drawn directly from language in the 2005 Senate-passed bill to narrow the application of this provision. That amendment unfortunately did not receive a vote. But today, along with my colleague Sen. Wyden and others, I am back at it again--introducing bipartisan legislation drawn from that same language. Our bipartisan bill would narrow the PATRIOT Act Section 215 collection authority to make it consistent with what most Americans believe the law allows. While this legislation would still allow law enforcement and intelligence agencies to use the PATRIOT Act to obtain a wide range of records in the course of terrorism- and espionage- related investigations, it would require them to demonstrate that the records are in some way connected to terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities--which is not the case today. I don't think it is unreasonable to ask our law enforcement agencies to identify a terrorism or espionage investigation before collecting the private information of American citizens. Many Coloradans share my belief that we need to place common-sense limits on government investigations and link data collection to terrorist- or espionage-related activities. If we cannot assert some nexus to terrorism, then the government should keep its hands off the phone data of law-abiding Americans. Let me be very clear: our government must continue to diligently and aggressively combat terrorism. We all agree with that critically important goal. But I do not think that it is unreasonable to ask that collection of phone data be limited to investigations that are actually related to terrorism or espionage. And I do not believe that we need to sacrifice national security to strike this balance. In fact, as a member of the Intelligence Committee who has studied our surveillance programs closely, it has not been demonstrated to me that the bulk phone records collection program has provided uniquely valuable information that has stopped terrorist attacks, beyond what is available through less intrusive means. But if we are going to continue providing this authority to collect phone data from Americans' communications, let's at least limit it to require a link to terrorism or espionage. This is a commonsense step that we can take to strike a better balance between keeping our country safe and respecting constitutional rights. I thank my colleagues who have cosponsored this legislation, and ask other colleagues to give it a close look. I will continue to press for the PATRIOT Act to be reopened for debate, and when that occurs, I will push for passage of this bipartisan bill that strikes a better balance between keeping our nation safe and unduly trampling our constitutional rights.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I rise to speak on an issue that is critical to our constitutional rights and our national security. The revelation and subsequent declassification of the National Security Agency's intelligence gathering programs have shocked Americans in ways that I long ago had telegraphed. We are having a spirited and critical debate about what the right balance between privacy and security ought to be. With regards to NSA activity, I am introducing bipartisan legislation today, with several senators of both parties, designed to narrow Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act, known also as the ``business records'' provision, to better balance the authorities we give the federal government while protecting our constitutional rights. More specifically, my legislation would prevent the federal government from collecting millions of law-abiding Americans' phone call records without first establishing some nexus to terrorism. We all expect the NSA to target terrorists, but the revelations in the past few weeks have made clear that the information of millions of law-abiding Americans is being swept up in the process. Let me start by saying that I continue to feel that a number of the permanent PATRIOT Act provisions should remain in place to give our intelligence community important tools to fight terrorism. But I also believe, as I stated two years ago when offering this same legislation as an amendment to the PATRIOT Act reauthorization bill, that Section 215 of this Act fails to strike the right balance between keeping us safe and protecting the privacy rights of Americans. Indeed, my concerns about this provision of the law have only grown since I was first briefed on its secret interpretation and implementation as a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee. From the recent leaks and information since declassified about the Section 215 collection program, we know that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court has interpreted this provision of the PATRIOT Act to permit the collection of millions of Americans' phone records on a daily, ongoing basis. As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, I have repeatedly expressed concern that the interpretation of this provision of the PATRIOT Act, which allows the government to obtain ``any tangible thing'' relevant to a national security investigation, is at odds with the plain meaning of the law. This secrecy has prevented Americans from understanding how these laws are being implemented in their name. That is unacceptable. Even before the nature of the bulk phone records collection program was declassified, there was support for narrowing the language of Section 215 from many in Congress and many Americans who feel strongly about their constitutional right to privacy. In fact, the PATRIOT Act reauthorization that passed the Senate in 2005 by unanimous consent included language that would limit the government's ability to collect Americans' personal information without a demonstrated link to terrorism or espionage. While that language did not prevail in conference, it demonstrated that bipartisan agreement on reforms to Section 215 is possible. In 2011, as the Senate took up the extension of a number of expiring provisions of the PATRIOT Act, I offered an amendment drawn directly from language in the 2005 Senate-passed bill to narrow the application of this provision. That amendment unfortunately did not receive a vote. But today, along with my colleague Sen. Wyden and others, I am back at it again--introducing bipartisan legislation drawn from that same language. Our bipartisan bill would narrow the PATRIOT Act Section 215 collection authority to make it consistent with what most Americans believe the law allows. While this legislation would still allow law enforcement and intelligence agencies to use the PATRIOT Act to obtain a wide range of records in the course of terrorism- and espionage- related investigations, it would require them to demonstrate that the records are in some way connected to terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities--which is not the case today. I don't think it is unreasonable to ask our law enforcement agencies to identify a terrorism or espionage investigation before collecting the private information of American citizens. Many Coloradans share my belief that we need to place common-sense limits on government investigations and link data collection to terrorist- or espionage-related activities. If we cannot assert some nexus to terrorism, then the government should keep its hands off the phone data of law-abiding Americans. Let me be very clear: our government must continue to diligently and aggressively combat terrorism. We all agree with that critically important goal. But I do not think that it is unreasonable to ask that collection of phone data be limited to investigations that are actually related to terrorism or espionage. And I do not believe that we need to sacrifice national security to strike this balance. In fact, as a member of the Intelligence Committee who has studied our surveillance programs closely, it has not been demonstrated to me that the bulk phone records collection program has provided uniquely valuable information that has stopped terrorist attacks, beyond what is available through less intrusive means. But if we are going to continue providing this authority to collect phone data from Americans' communications, let's at least limit it to require a link to terrorism or espionage. This is a commonsense step that we can take to strike a better balance between keeping our country safe and respecting constitutional rights. I thank my colleagues who have cosponsored this legislation, and ask other colleagues to give it a close look. I will continue to press for the PATRIOT Act to be reopened for debate, and when that occurs, I will push for passage of this bipartisan bill that strikes a better balance between keeping our nation safe and unduly trampling our constitutional rights.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I was unable to return to Washington, DC, prior to the votes this evening due to unavoidable travels delays that were beyond my control and was therefore unable to cast a vote for rollcall votes No. 144 and 145, Leahy amendment No. 998 and final passage of the farm bill, S. 954. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on each.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, today, I wish to speak about a very special Coloradan on the occasion of his 70th birthday-- Mr. Norm Brownstein. I am joined by two of my esteemed colleagues, who associate themselves with these remarks today: Majority Leader Harry Reid and my fellow Colorado senator Michael Bennet.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from Maine Ms. Collins, and I be permitted to engage in a colloquy for up to 10 minutes.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Madam President, Senator Collins and I are here today to underscore the timeliness of a bipartisan solution we have been pushing since March. While I firmly believe we should replace the sequester with a balanced and comprehensive plan that delivers the same deficit-reducing punch, it appears to me, and to all of us, the sequester is here to stay for at least the remainder of the fiscal year ending September 30 of this year. We need deficit reduction, but the way in which we are doing it under the sequester is terrible policy and it is time to fix it. Just after the fiscal year 2013 sequester was triggered, with Senator Collins' leadership, she and I introduced a commonsense plan that would empower Federal departments and agencies to replace the indiscriminate cuts of sequestration with more strategic cuts. One only has to look at the way in which sequestration has endangered critical programs for working families, our senior citizens, and the middle class to know we have to do more than we are doing today. Throwing up our hands and doing nothing is poor governing. Senator Collins and I believe we have a responsibility here as leaders to inject some measure of common sense into the process. With that, Madam President, I wish to turn to my colleague Senator Collins for her thoughts on the necessity of the Collins-Udall legislative proposal.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. The Senator from Maine has it exactly right, and I commend her for her leadership. I want to point out to those who were critical of what we did when it came to the FAA, it is not just elite business travelers or Members of Congress who use our air transportation. It is families, it is seniors, it is businesswomen, and every American possible using our air transportation system. We see the egalitarian nature of our air transportation system when we are in our airports. Senator Collins brokered a sensible compromise that kept our airports running, flights on time, and commerce flowing smoothly. I remember Senator Collins standing here on the floor, somewhat late at night, appealing to both of our leaders. So Senator Collins led the way. We also moved in the furloughs for meat inspectors. If we can deal with these small corners of sequestration, we can go all in. We have proven we can find consensus. It is time to finish that job. I want to turn back to my colleague for any final thoughts she might have to make about our bill and the importance of this effort we have underway.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Madam President, I believe our time has expired or is beginning to expire, but I wish to underline what Senator Collins has said. We are passionate about this. Some say a passionate problem solver is an oxymoron or a passionate moderate is an oxymoron. That is not the case here. We want to solve this. We both have private sector experience. This is not how you would run a concern in the private sector. We can do this. We have shown we can do this. Let's move forward and provide certainty, not just to the Federal agencies but to the people in this country. At a time of tough economic challenges with a fragile recovery underway, we need to create more certainty and need to budget in a wiser, smarter way. I thank the Senator from Maine for her leadership. I value our partnership, and I know we are going to see this to a successful conclusion.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. I ask unanimous consent the Senator from Maine be recognized for 4 minutes.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 22, 2013, at 2:30 p.m. in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Senate Building.