David Vitter

Mr. VITTER

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, last month we all learned with great sadness of Justice Antonin Scalia's passing after nearly 30 years on the Court. He would have turned 80 years old on Friday, March 11. In recent weeks, foremost on people's minds as they reflect on Justice Scalia's legacy and his life is his dedication to the letter of the law, his respect for constitutional and statutory text, his view that the U.S. Constitution is a sacred document which must be read and adhered to. His decisions and opinions were aimed to follow the Constitution wherever it took him, even if it may not have been to a place where he would agree politically. Justice Scalia not only understood the importance of not legislating from the bench, but he also cared deeply about the lesson being taught by the work of the Court. Through his writings, his opinions, including his dissents, he taught us great lessons. Now all of this is very important and relevant, ironically, as we consider our role and path forward in the decision to fill his vacancy. Instead, unfortunately, we have seen rhetoric and arguments which fly in the face of that dedication to the text, to the Constitution, to statutory law and rules, and following that letter. My esteemed Democratic colleagues have taken to the Senate floor, and they have encouraged outside groups to storm committee rooms--all arguing that somehow there is a legislative or constitutional mandate that the Senate have hearings, take a vote now, and not allow the American people to weigh in through the election. They argue that somehow the Senate is constitutionally obligated to hold hearings and vote right now before the election, but as Justice Scalia would surely point out: Read the text. Look at the Constitution. Look at all relevant statutes and rules. That is not the case. It is clear, otherwise. In fact, it is crystal clear. So let's do that in homage to Justice Scalia. He wrote many opinions arguing for exactly what I am saying: Read the clear language that is at issue--either the Constitution or a statute or whatever is at issue. He wrote opinions against what before his time was rampant use of so-called legislative history, looking at the history of how a law was passed really to give people fodder to make it up as they go along and reach almost any conclusion and interpretation they want to. Justice Scalia taught us--and he had a real impact on the Court through his decisions--that we need an unwavering commitment to principle and respect to statutory text as written. As he often said in so many different ways, ``Legislative history is irrelevant when the statutory text is clear.'' In one opinion he noted that ``if one were to search for an interpretive technique that, on the whole, was more likely to confuse than to clarify, one could hardly find a more promising candidate than legislative history.'' He said directly that ``our cases have said that legislative history is irrelevant when the statutory text is clear.'' Again, that is a big part of his legacy and very relevant in this discussion about how the Senate should fulfill its duties. Let's look at the text of the Constitution and any relevant text like our rules below the Constitution. In the U.S. Constitution, article II, section 2, clause 2 says clearly: The President ``shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law.'' That is what it says on the issue. That is all it says on the issue. Those words are straightforward, and those words do not mandate a hearing or a vote in any certain timeframe. It is very clear from the Founders and from numerous Court decisions since then that within the constraints of those words, the Senate sets its rules of how to proceed on all Senate matters, including confirmations. So another very important and very clear text that we should read word for word and adhere to are the standing Senate rules. Senate rule XXXI states: ``When nominations shall be made by the President of the United States to the Senate, they shall, unless otherwise ordered, be referred to appropriate committees; and the final question on every nomination shall be, `Will the Senate advise and consent to this nomination?' which question shall not be put on the same day on which the nomination is received, nor on the day on which it may be reported by a committee, unless by unanimous consent.'' It only says when the vote cannot be taken. It doesn't say that a hearing has to happen or a vote has to be taken within a certain amount of time. Another part of rule XXXI is even more direct on this point: ``Nominations neither confirmed nor rejected during the session at which they are made shall not be acted upon at any succeeding session without being again made to the Senate by the President.'' So this is even more direct and makes crystal clear that there is no requirement of a hearing or a vote on any particular nomination in any particular timeframe during a session. Again, that is very straightforward, very crystal clear, but the Congressional Research Service has a report which validates and confirms the obvious. Upon their review of all of this text, they say: A committee considering a nomination has four options. It can report the nomination to the Senate favorably, unfavorably, or without recommendation, or it can choose to take no action. So they say the obvious from reading the relevant text. Those are the options. There is no requirement for a hearing or for a vote within any certain timeframe. There are other ``authorities''--I will put that in air quotes--which confirm this view, and ironically those authorities I am referring to are Democrats who are taking exactly the opposite view now. When the shoe was on the other foot, time and time again, they said: There is no requirement to move forward on any certain timeframe. The minority leader, Harry Reid, said: ``Nowhere in [the Constitution] does it say the Senate has a duty to give Presidential [nominees] a vote. It says appointments shall be made with the advice and consent of the Senate. That is very different than saying every nominee receives a vote.'' That is a direct quote. In June of 2003, Senator Patrick Leahy--he is significant because he is ranking member of the Judiciary Committee--said clearly: The Constitution divides the appointment power between the president and the Senate. It expects senators to advise the President, not just rubber stamp his choices. It says advise and consent, not nominate and rubber stamp. Even further back, in June of 1992, then-Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, now-Vice President Joe Biden argued for the need to set aside partisanship and work to bring unity forward in the Senate by saying: ``President Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not name a nominee until after the November election is completed.'' He said that during a Presidential election year, just like we are in the midst of a Presidential election year right now. Chuck Schumer, another leader of the Judiciary Committee, said much the same thing in the past, making crystal clear that there is no requirement--in fact, he said 18 months before the expiration of President Bush's term. So not during his last year, but 18 months before the end of that term that the Senate shouldn't confirm any Bush nominee, except in extraordinary circumstances. It is very clear from their own words that there is no obligation to use any certain timeframe to have any absolute committee hearing or vote within a certain period of time. So then the question is, What is the best thing to do for the American people? I firmly believe the best thing to do for the American people is to put the American people in charge, to put them in the lead, to maximize their role, their power, and their vote. That is what the opportunity of a major Presidential election gives us. Of course, if you have a vacancy early on in the term of a President, you are not going to have another big election for some time, but that is certainly not the case right now. We are in the midst of a huge election with enormous consequences for the future, and it is very clear the choices--whatever the final two choices may be--would offer very different options in terms of the type of Supreme Court Justice they would appoint. I think we best serve the American people in almost all cases-- certainly in this case--by maximizing their voice, their role, and their power. They often feel absolutely shunned, put to the side, ignored by Congress, by Washington now. We need to put them in charge, and in this Presidential election year we have a unique opportunity do that. That certainly is what I am committed to doing. I can tell you, as I travel Louisiana, the huge majority of my fellow citizens whom I have talked to agree with that approach. I just finished doing four townhall meetings in all different parts of the State. In a few weeks I am going to do four more, all different parts of the State. That is not a scientific survey, but nobody came to those townhall meetings who didn't agree with that path forward. A great majority of calls and emails and letters from my fellow Louisiana citizens on this issue absolutely confirm and support that path forward. Let's put the American people in charge. They are crying for a voice. They are crying with frustration over not being listened to by Washington. This is a major decision. Let's put them in charge. Let's let them lead in this Presidential election year on this very important issue. Of course, whoever is elected, the next President will have a big impact on our country. That person will serve for 4, maybe 8 years and make decisions that are enormous on a whole host of issues, but this appointment to the Supreme Court could have an even more lasting impact, could have an impact for decades to come, and it is even more important in that frame of mind, in that viewpoint, to put the American people in charge, to maximize their role and their voice about what direction we should take. So many Louisianians feel as I do. The Court has strayed from Justice Scalia's proper philosophy of actually reading the Constitution and reading statutory text and applying it as written. So many Louisianians feel as I do; that they are making it up, in many cases, as they go along; that they are legislating from the bench; that they are using clever techniques, such as looking to legislative history--something Justice Scalia, as I noted, railed against--as ammunition to get to whatever endpoint they desire to get to. That is not the role of any court, certainly not the role of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court should apply the Constitution and the law as written, not make it up as they go along, not legislate from the bench, not get to some political endpoint through clever legal arguments--just as we in understanding our role should read the Constitution, should read the Senate rules and not suggest what is clearly not the case; that somehow there is a mandate to have a hearing, to have a vote in some set period of time. I urge my colleagues to put the American people in charge. This is a big decision, and I think we will do far better putting them in charge than allowing some insider Washington game to control and manipulate the process without hearing their voice, which we have every opportunity to properly hear through this important election this year. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. VITTER

Mr. VITTER. Madam President, I rise today with enormous pride, but also real sadness, to honor one of my most talented and longest serving staff members, Zak Baig, as he departs the Senate and starts an exciting new career. Zak has worked his way up the ranks in my office. He started working for me on the House side and in the process has filled almost every role in sight, starting with chief bottle washer and going up from there. He actually started in 2001, shortly after I was elected to the U.S. House, as an intern back in Hammond, LA. He did a great job there. In 2002, he was an intern in DC and showed even greater progress and promise, and then he came on full time as a legislative correspondent at the end of 2002. In 2004, I ran for the U.S. Senate. It was a big undertaking and an enormous challenge to take on a statewide campaign. Zak moved onto the campaign side and was in charge of the grassroots effort, which was enormously important and helped lead to our success. He truly helped guide us to victory that year. After that, as we started working in the Senate, he became an integral member of the Senate staff. In those first 3 years, he served as our projects director and then in 2008 became legislative director. In 2013, Zak served as a Republican staff director for the EPW Committee, while I was the ranking Republican. In 2015, after we took the majority and I became chair of the Small Business Committee, Zak became the full staff director there, as well as acting chief of staff for a period of time. As I said, he has absolutely worked his way up the ranks and merited each and every step of the way, doing a better and better job as he progressed. You can tell that in his body of work, which is very impressive and which, of course, I benefited from. At the EPW Committee, as a Republican staff director, Zak helped navigate the legislative waters and shepherd through some major infrastructure legislation in the Senate. At the staff level, he was able to lead the negotiations of the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014, starting from drafting bipartisan legislation with Senator Barbara Boxer and her staff--the chair of the committee--to negotiating with the House of Representatives in conference, to ultimately getting the bill signed into law. It was a major legislative accomplishment. Shortly after that, he turned around and helped do the same thing with the highway bill reauthorization. Under his leadership, we also conducted some really important oversight of the administration, particularly the EPA, the Department of Transportation, and other agencies under the jurisdiction of the EPW Committee. When we moved to the majority and chairmanship of the Small Business Committee, Zak served as staff director, just as, if not more, effectively. He helped lead the way as we passed 22 bipartisan bills out of the committee in just 1 year, 8 of which have become law. To put that in some perspective, our predecessor on the committee only passed 10 bills out of the committee over 5 years. So it really was making the committee work in an effective, bipartisan way--as it should. And just in general, in the office Zak was behind a lot of our major efforts and achievements and was always effective at whatever he put his mind to. A lot of that success is directly attributed to his never-ending energy, his drive to see things through from start to finish, and, maybe even more importantly, his personality, his attitude, his sense of humor, his being able to do tough things and always getting along with those he was occasionally battling with because he always did it with a smile and a friendly attitude, and he probably had a friendly joke or two mixed in. It is at that personal level that I am most saddened to say goodbye to Zak--at least working with him day to day professionally--although we will obviously keep in close touch. I have been honored to have been a mentor to so many younger folks who have worked in the Senate office. I have been honored to mentor Zak through the years, and it really has been a personal privilege and honor. Through those years, I have literally seen him grow up from a young student--a boy, really--to a consummate professional, a wonderful husband, and a great father. I like to think I had a little bit to do with that as well, because Zak met his wonderful wife Wendy when they both worked for me in the Senate office. In fact, their marriage is one of four that came out of our Senate office, which, as I look back at my service in the Senate, is probably the statistic and fact I will be most proud of--the young people I helped mentor and served with and those marriages that directly came out of the office. In that sense--through that mentoring and through those years--I gained not just a great staff leader but a true and dedicated friend, and for that I will always be grateful. It is at that personal level that I will think back about fights, struggles, work, challenges, and a lot of jokes and fun we had along the way. In that spirit, I want to leave Zak with three parting gifts. One has to do with a day when I carried something with me from committee hearing to floor activity and then to actually giving a speech on the floor with it next to me. It is a funny photograph which will not be described in more detail. It is perfectly PG-rated, but it is an inside joke. After that day, Zak got a hold of that framed photograph, and I think it has been completely destroyed. But there was a file of the originals involved, and so I will hand that to him as a parting gift as part of the inside joke. On another occasion, commemorating his enormous devotion to Syracuse sports--he went to Syracuse as an undergraduate--a prized basketball of his was hijacked. This was a basketball signed by Coach Jim Boeheim after their national championship season in 2003. It was hijacked and moved locations. It sent ransom notes from all around the country for quite a protracted period before Zak got it back. I was going to have the basketball with me to help tell the story today only to find out that it has been hijacked again. So my second parting gift to Zak is to get in contact with the abductors and return the prized basketball for yet a second time. The third, and probably the most important parting gift, is to give Zak the true credit he deserves. One fight I took on in the last several years is to have Members and staff health care handled appropriately as was intended under ObamaCare--the so-called Washington exemption of ObamaCare--ending that. I just want to give Zak full and public credit that that crusade and idea was really his and his alone-- not. I just wanted to give him one last heart attack, thinking for a split second that his promising lobbying career had just ended before it even began. I know that Zak's Senate peers and our constituents in Louisiana will miss his tireless service, but no one will miss that and his camaraderie, good humor, and friendship more than my wife Wendy and our four children. We have all become very close with him and his wife Wendy and their two sons. We also know his parents very well and are friends with them back home in Louisiana. We wish them all the best. I know Zak's greatest achievements are ahead of him, not behind, and I can tell him to count me in as a cheerleader and fan as he takes on those new challenges. With that, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. VITTER

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I thank Senator Cassidy. Mr. President, I also rise in strong support of this amendment, the Cassidy amendment, which would increase revenue sharing for States for offshore and oil and gas development. Revenue sharing is a critical issue that I have advocated with others for many years, certainly including Senator Cassidy, his predecessor, and Committee Chair Murkowski. I am pleased that our coalition in support of this strong, positive concept has grown in recent years and it now includes colleagues from the mid-Atlantic States. I am particularly pleased that that is evidenced by this amendment being supported and coauthored by the two Senators from Virginia and Senator Scott. Revenue sharing with oil and gas producing States is, No. 1, fair to those States that incur real environmental and other costs due to production activity that benefits the Nation; and, No. 2, it is good, positive pro-American energy policy. It is fair because, again, energy-producing States incur costs and impacts from that production, including environmental costs. Those States need to be properly compensated to deal with those real costs and impacts. Secondly, and just as importantly, this is positive, productive policy that furthers pro-American energy agenda. It encourages the production of American energy. It incents domestic drilling and activity and domestic energy production over the long term. That energy production is essential to job creation and an overall healthy economy. If it weren't for the oil and gas jobs that accompanied the energy sector boom earlier this decade, we would still be in a technical recession. One point I wish to emphasize is that many of those jobs have been created by small firms in the oil and gas services industry and support sectors. These small business jobs are something I have highlighted in my role as chair of the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. This amendment before the Senate, the Cassidy amendment, would increase revenue sharing for gulf States, and it would establish revenue sharing for new production from Alaska, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. This is a clear gain for those States and those regions. But, more importantly, it is a clear gain for the country because in the medium and long term, we will get more American energy production and be more self-sufficient. Let me be clear what revenue sharing means for States such as my home of Louisiana. In Louisiana we spend 100 percent of those revenues on valid environmental works, specifically coastal restoration. We lose a football field of land in Louisiana's coastal area--just in coastal Louisiana--every 38 minutes. Think about that. Close your eyes, and picture a football field losing that amount of Louisiana coastal land every 38 minutes, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year, with no time off for holidays or weekends. This is our most significant environmental issue by far in Louisiana, so our State has committed itself to spending all of the money we receive from revenue sharing to restoring, rebuilding, and stabilizing our coast. This is vitally important for us. It is also vitally important for the rest of the country because Louisiana supplies so much energy to the rest of the country--so many fisheries, fish, and seafood to the rest of the country. Our ports in the midst of that coastal area are vital to trade and commerce for the rest of the country. What this amendment does is expand revenue sharing to Alaska and the mid-Atlantic States. Between 2027 and 2031, those States would receive 37.5 percent of revenue sharing from oil and gas production off of their coasts, which is what Louisiana and the Gulf States receive now. The amendment would also lift the cap on revenue sharing that the gulf States are burdened with under the GOMESA act of 2006. Under that law, revenue sharing with gulf States is capped arbitrarily at $500 million a year, but in those operative years of this amendment, that would be increased to $1 billion a year. Revenue sharing is vital when it comes to adequately compensating the States that incur costs and impacts, so it is vital for fairness. But, again, it is vital to encourage more American energy production and more self-sufficiency. For our Nation--not just the States impacted-- that means growth, and that means energy independence. That is a win, in fact, for our foreign policy--less dependence on unstable and sometimes very unfriendly nations in the Middle East. We want to continue to play a critical role in meeting America's energy needs. We want to do that in Louisiana; other States want to do that. This amendment and this concept will very much encourage us to do that and continue to forge a path of American energy independence, which is great for economic growth. I wish to briefly take a moment to compliment my colleague from Louisiana, Senator Cassidy. He has worked very hard on this issue, this amendment, and other critical energy issues as a member of the energy committee and also before that as a Member of the House of Representatives. I am very grateful for this opportunity to work with him on this amendment and this concept that we have been working on and furthering for some time. I urge all of my colleagues to support this commonsense, pro-American energy, pro-American jobs amendment. This will move us in the right direction for energy independence, for economic growth, and for a sound foreign policy that decreases our reliance and dependence of any sort on nations in the Middle East. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. VITTER

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, small businesses have the unique ability to tackle issues in their communities head on through thoughtful, innovative solutions. This week I am proud to recognize Marsh Dog of Baton Rouge, LA, as being small business of the week for their commitment to preserving and protecting Louisiana's vulnerable coastlines. In 1998, the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries placed a bounty on the nutria rat in an effort to curb the reproduction of the invasive species, which has wreaked environment havoc on Louisiana's vulnerable coastal habitats. In response to the bounty, businesses across the State began inventing creative ways to recycle byproducts of the rodent. During this time, Hansel Harlan, the future founder of Marsh Dog, became increasingly concerned with the ingredients he found in mass market dog food products. After reading about the many recalls and the harmful ingredients circulating within the dog food industry, Harlan began toying with the idea of creating custom treats for his canine companion. After a few trial runs and on the suggestion of his sister Veni, Hansel included nutria rat meat into his recipe, creating an all- natural, eco-conscious snack his dog immediately enjoyed. Harlan and Veni, with the blessing of their K-9 taste tester, began developing and marketing the innovative product. Today Marsh Dog enjoys great success and praise from their customers and environmental groups across the State. In addition to receiving a grant from the Barataria-Terrebonne National Estuary Program in 2011, which proved to be the endorsement that catapulted their success, Marsh Dog was also named Conservation Business of the Year by Louisiana Wildlife Federation. Hansel and Veni embody what it means to be innovative entrepreneurs. They created a solution for two impactful problems in their community, while also growing a successful small business, is a remarkable feat that deserves celebration. Congratulations again to Marsh Dog of Baton Rouge, LA, this week's small business of the week, and I look forward to having my rescue dog Ranger try your treats.

Mr. VITTER

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, oftentimes small businesses grow from the humblest of beginnings, providing livelihoods for hard-working entrepreneurs and their families. In rare cases, these small businesses defy all odds, building successful establishments that integrate into their adopted communities, all while supporting local economies and traditions. This week I am proud to recognize Patton's Western Wear of Ruston, LA, as small business of the week for their perseverance in building a solid and successful family-owned and operated retail group that has left its mark across the State of Louisiana. In 2007, Robert, Patrick, and Thomas Patton used their farming background and extensive experience in retail to open their own western store in Ruston, LA. Catering to the western and oilfield communities of north central Louisiana and southern Arkansas, the Patton brothers began building a reputation for providing a diverse selection of products and quality customer service. One year later, the brothers experienced such success that they expanded their small business and opened a second western-style store in Lake Charles, LA. In choosing Ruston and Lake Charles, which lie on opposite sides of Louisiana, the Patton brothers have since acquired a loyal clientele that includes everyone from cowboys to college students. Today the Patton brothers manage their small business by remaining true to their western roots. They are active in the rodeo community, supporting over 100 individual rodeos each year, and have also sponsored a bull rider in the National Finals Rodeo in Las Vegas, NV, for 4 years in a row. Recognized as a Best of the Delta business, the group now operates four locations throughout Louisiana, having most recently opened the doors to their newest location in Shreveport in June 2015. The Patton brothers continue to show entrepreneurs across the country that it is possible to turn a passion into a business--even from the humblest of means. Through dedicated service to their community, exceptional commitment to customer service, and an excellent retail strategy, the Patton brothers have made their mark across Louisiana and into Arkansas and Texas. Congratulations again to Patton's Western Wear for being selected as small business of the week, and I look forward to your continued growth and success.

Mr. VITTER

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, today my colleague Senator Bill Cassidy and I are honored to have the opportunity to acknowledge and express gratitude to the Louisiana Municipal Association, LMA, in recognition of their 90th anniversary. Founded in 1926, the Louisiana Conference of Mayors was created with the purpose of providing a forum for mutual consultation and discussion of various topics affecting municipal government. The organization also aided the growth and development of each municipality through education about best practices and problem solving. Shortly after the Louisiana Conference of Mayors was created, the Great Depression swept the Nation. In 1937, a handful of resilient mayors met to revive the organization, giving it new life as the Louisiana Municipal Association. They may not have foreseen that their tenacity in overcoming adversity during the Great Depression and taking proactive steps to keep Louisiana municipalities united and strong would form the basis for the core values to which the LMA still adheres today. From its inception, the LMA has focused on helping local elected leaders create and maintain efficient and effective municipal governments. In 1987, the nonprofit, nonpartisan LMA created Risk Management, Inc., RMI, to address the insurance and liability demands of member municipalities through its inter-local risk pool. In 1999, the Louisiana Municipal Advisory and Technical Services Bureau, Inc., LaMATS, was created with the purpose of providing essential services to assist municipalities in their day-to-day operations. In addition to these wholly owned subsidiaries, the LMA has three political subdivisions--Louisiana Municipal Gas Authority, Unemployment Compensation Fund, and Louisiana Community Development Authority; four advisory organizations--Louisiana Association of Chiefs of Police, Louisiana Rural Water Association, Louisiana Conference of Mayors, and Louisiana Municipal Black Caucus Association; and nine affiliate organizations--Municipal Employees Retirement System, Louisiana City Attorneys Association, Louisiana Association of Municipal Secretaries and Assistants, Louisiana Recreation and Parks Association, Louisiana Association of Tax Administrators, Louisiana Municipal Clerks Association, Building Officials Association of Louisiana, Louisiana Airport Managers and Associates, and Louisiana Fire Chiefs Association. To fulfill its mission of educating its membership and providing a forum for discussion about common issues, solutions, and problem solving, the LMA holds an annual convention, a midwinter conference, 10 district meetings, a municipal day during the State's legislative session, and 15 or more webinars. For decades, the LMA has had tremendous legislative success on both State and Federal levels. In the Louisiana Legislature, the LMA has been a strong voice for Louisiana municipalities in efforts to fight blight, promote law enforcement, maintain funding, and enhance economic growth. On the Federal level, the LMA joined forces with the National League of Cities and other coastal State municipal leagues to lead the charge in lobbying Congress to enact the Homeowners Flood Insurance Affordability Act of 2014, which enacted critical reforms to the Biggert Waters Act of 2012, thereby facilitating affordable homeowner flood insurance in Louisiana and across the country. For 90 years, the LMA has worked to strengthen the backbone of Louisiana through support and empowerment of municipal government. The organization has launched a yearlong celebration of this anniversary by naming 2016 the Year of Education. Opening festivities for this theme will commence at the midwinter conference in February under the auspices of the 2016 LMA Executive Board officers--President Mayor Carroll Breaux of Springhill, First Vice President Mayor Barney Arceneaux of Gonzales, Second Vice President Mayor Lawrence Henagan of DeQuincy, Immediate Past President Mayor David Camardelle of Grand Isle, and District A Vice President Mayor Jimmy Williams of Sibley. The executive director is Ronnie Harris, former 28-year mayor of Gretna. What started out as a collection of 29 forward-thinking mayors seeking to empower their communities has evolved into a praiseworthy organization that has earned the esteem and trust of local, State, and Federal elected officials, as well as fellow municipal leagues. We would like to congratulate the LMA on its 90th anniversary and wish them many more years of strength and excellence.

Mr. VITTER

Mr. VITTER. 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 January 20, 2016, at 10:30 a.m., in room, SR-253 of the Russell Senate Office Building.

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 20, 2016, at 10 a.m., in room SD-406 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 20, 2016, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing entitled ``The Middle East after the JCPOA.''

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 20, 2016, at 10 a.m., in room SD- 403 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing entitled ``Improving the Federal Response to Challenges in Mental Health Care in America.''

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 20, 2016, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing entitled ``Inside the Mind of ISIS: Understanding Its Goals and Ideology to Better Protect the Homeland.''

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 20, 2016, at 2:30 p.m.

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 20, 2016, at 10 a.m., in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``The Adequacy of Criminal Intent Standards in Federal Prosecutions.''

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 20, 2016, at 11:30 a.m.

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 20, 2016, at 2:30 p.m., in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``Why is the Biometric Exit Tracking System Still Not in Place?''

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support of the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 20, 2016, at 2:30 p.m.

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 20, 2016, at 10 a.m., in room 328A of the Russell Senate Office Building.

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 20, 2016, at 9:30 a.m.

Mr. VITTER

Mr. VITTER. Madam President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to join me in passing the House bill to improve the Syrian refugee resettlement program and take at least a first really important step toward protecting Americans here at home with regard to this refugee and homeland security question. Frankly, I think we should be going further, but given the gravity of the issue and the urgent need to address stated and documented shortfalls within the refugee program, I support passage of this bill as a start. We can't just forget--ignore--the facts, and the fact is that those responsible, for instance, for the tragic attacks in Paris just a few short months ago took advantage of the influx of Syrian refugees into France, and at least one of them got in that way. If that isn't disturbing enough, we must also remember the fact that the majority of the 9/11 attackers were granted admission to the United States on temporary immigration status. There were holes and problems in that program. Clearly, we need to update and reform the current systems in place, and I assure my colleagues that I won't stop pressing for complete and adequate safeguards as the President continues to invite additional refugees onto American soil. Voting in favor of the SAFE Act brings us one step closer to improving the security of our Nation. It would be a mistake to retreat to some sort of pre-9/11 posture or mindset. Eleven years ago, the ``9/ 11 Commission Report'' wrote that many of the vetting programs were ``dysfunctional.'' They remain dysfunctional in far too many cases, and I am not willing to take on and continue the risk of that dysfunction. We need reforms. We need a far higher standard of safety and coordination. Now, again, these are facts we need to look at. We have seen examples of the refugee situation and other situations directly impacting and threatening our security. What am I talking about? Fact No. 1: On December 2 of last year, husband and wife Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik attacked the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, and their coordinated attack inspired by ISIS caused the deaths of 14 people, and they wounded 21 others. As of now, it appears to be the most deadly terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11. Now, the wife, Tashfeen Malik, was not a U.S. citizen and was, in fact, in the United States on a visa related to her husband. Particularly troubling is the fact that the government didn't verify her address in Pakistan during the visa application process. There were reports that a full vetting was not completed, including checking for other possible signs that she had been radicalized or was a terrorist operative. Fact No. 2: A recent FBI joint intelligence bulletin has confirmed that individuals resettled in the United States as refugees have already been arrested for willfully providing material support and resources to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS. That is documented by an FBI report. Clearly, this program is a vulnerability. Fact No. 3: The National Counterterrorism Center has identified individuals with ties to terrorists in Syria who attempted to enter the United States through the refugee program. Again, it has been verified that this is an entry point for possible terrorists. Fact No. 4: The horrible and coordinated assault in Paris last fall, in the words of President Francois Hollande of France, was ``planned in Syria, organized in Belgium, perpetrated on our soil with French complicity.'' And a fact related to that is that at least one of those terrorists got in through the refugee resettlement program there. Fact No. 5: FBI Director James Comey has testified that the Federal Government doesn't have the ability to properly and fully vet 10,000 or more Syrian refugees. Recently, during a hearing before the House Committee on Homeland Security, he stated: We can only query against that which we have collected. And so if someone has never made a ripple in the pond in Syria in a way that would get their identity or their interest reflected in our database, we can query our database until the cows come home, but there will be nothing to show up because we have no record of them. Fact No. 6: The ``Reflections on the Tenth Anniversary of the 9/11 Commission Report,'' released in 2014, states that ``it is unclear whether the United States and its allies have sufficient resources in place to monitor foreign fighters' activities in Syria (and neighboring Iraq) and to track their travel back to their home countries.'' Those are documented facts, which make perfectly clear what common sense should suggest. This refugee resettlement program is a vulnerability, and we need far better security to protect our homeland. To do this, I have introduced a very strong bill to require a suspension of admissions of Syrian refugees until the Obama administration properly evaluates the protocols and procedures it has in place to relocate them here and to certify not just in the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of State but also with intelligence and law enforcement agencies that these procedures are adequate. My bill has seven cosponsors. I plan to continue to move it, hopefully, through an amendment process related to this bill so we can make sure we have proper, adequate reforms in place. So that is today's vote in simple, straightforward terms in terms of the real danger. We can't properly vet all of these refugees right now. This is documented. This is from the experts. We need to put proper measures in place before we continue accepting this flood of refugees. We need to protect American families, secure our borders, and keep out all terrorists. Voting for the SAFE Act and voting to put it on the floor and engaging in this debate is an important first step in doing that. For that reason, I urge a positive vote to put this important measure on the floor and to pass it. Thank you, Madam President. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. VITTER

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, small businesses have the unique ability to challenge members of their community physically and intellectually, expanding the horizons of their neighbors and clients. It is especially noteworthy when these small businesses have the opportunity to use these talents to influence their communities. This week, I would like to recognize Studio Geaux of Jennings, LA, as small business of the week for its ongoing commitment to engage young folks in fun, physical activity in southwest Louisiana. Louisiana native Caroline Cormier grew up dancing, and while pursuing a bachelor of arts in theatre and dance at Louisiana State University, she joined the school's elite dance team, the Golden Girls. Upon graduation, Cormier relocated to Atlanta, GA, to continue her studies at some of the most challenging and exclusive dance and fitness studios in the South. Three years later, Cormier gained the confidence and skills necessary to return to Louisiana and pursue her lifelong dream of launching her own dance studio and successfully did so, opening the doors to Studio Geaux in August 2014. Today Studio Geaux offers classes in ballet, tap, jazz, hip hop, and physical conditioning for students aged 2-18. Additionally, Cormier and her team began Dance on the Geaux, a program that provides dance classes to young students in local schools. Cormier designed the program to help increase awareness of and participation in the arts and also to help make the life of a busy parent a little easier. Congratulations again to Studio Geaux for being selected as the Small Business of the Week. Thank you for your continued commitment to the arts community in Acadiana, and I look forward to your continued growth and success.

Mr. VITTER

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, oftentimes small businesses have the unique ability to tackle economic problems in their communities head on, providing hands-on solutions through hard work and ingenuity. As we begin the new year, I would like to recognize Hanko's Metal Works, Inc., of Berwick, LA as small business of the week. In the midst of economic hardship in 1985, Harry ``Hanko'' Hoffpauir opened Hanko's Metal Works with the goal of creating jobs and spurring economic activity in his community. With 27 years of experience in southern Louisiana's maritime industry, Hoffpauir began building aluminum boats, quickly developing a strong reputation for durability and remarkable craftsmanship. Having started his career as a superintendent overseeing major maritime construction efforts, including building offshore platforms drilling for oil and natural gas, Hanko and his small business were poised for success. Today Hanko's Metal Works, Inc., has grown from an operation of two employees to a team of over 35 individuals serving thousands of customers worldwide. Building upon a reputation for craftsmanship and ingenuity, Hanko's continues to develop innovative products, including developing the first oilfield gauging boats that were used to help in the recovery efforts following the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill, which devastated Louisiana's vulnerable coastal wetlands and the Gulf of Mexico. Additionally, Hanko's Metal Work, Inc., has also developed vee barges, as well as high-performance fishing and family boats that are ranked as the best aluminum boats constructed in Louisiana. Congratulations again to Hanko's Metal Work, Inc., for being selected as the small business of the week. Thank you for your commitment to economic development in the southern Louisiana region, and I look forward to your continued growth and success.

Mr. VITTER

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, today I wish to honor Tangipahoa Parish president Gordon Burgess. Gordon has selflessly served nearly 30 years as Tangipahoa's first and only parish president. A graduate of Southern Arkansas University, Burgess served 2 years in the Nike Missile Anti-Aircraft Artillery Battery of the U.S. Army, as well as 4 years on Active Reserve in the National Guard. Following his service, Gordon owned and operated a successful oil service company for more than 20 years before becoming Tangipahoa Parish president in 1986. Gordon and his wife Margaret are both members of the First Baptist Church in Independence, LA, where he serves as a deacon and she in the music ministry. As a staunch fiscal conservative, Gordon has fought to reduce taxes and to live with a balanced budget by implementing his now famous ``pay as you go'' approach. When first elected Tangipahoa Parish president, Gordon inherited a parish government nearly $12 million in the red. Under his leadership, all of that debt has been paid off, and 19 separate property taxes totaling over $96 million have been eliminated. During his eight terms in office, Gordon strengthened Tangipahoa's highway system, upgraded the drainage systems, built new governmental facilities, and invested in a higher quality health system for his Parish's citizens. Gordon's public service extends well beyond Tangipahoa Parish to State and Federal levels. His experience and vision have led to an appointment on Louisiana's Commerce and Industry Board and the Louisiana Police Jury Executive Board. On the Federal level, he serves as vice president of the Zachary Taylor Parkway Association. Gordon is also an honorary cochairman and committee member of America's Wetland Storm Warning IV Committee. He is a member of the Louisiana Federal Property Advisory Board, a member of Parishes Against Coastal Erosion, the Amite Rotary Club, the Hammond Chamber of Commerce, as well as the Ponchatoula and Amite Area chambers. Additionally he is a member of the Louisiana Cattlemen's Association. I am pleased to hereby honor parish president Gordon Burgess on his commitment to providing invaluable public service to the people of Tangipahoa Parish and the State of Louisiana.

Mr. VITTER

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, behind each of the millions of small businesses in the United States, there is an entrepreneur who is willing to put in the hard work necessary for success. In the heart of Pineville, LA, Roy W. Burr, Sr., exemplified this commitment by dedicating over 30 years to growing and maintaining this week's Small Business of the Week, Harlow's Donut and Bakery. Harlow's Donut and Bakery has been a staple in Pineville since opening its doors in 1972. When Roy W. Burr, Sr., took over in 1984, he was determined to maintain the bakery's name and good reputation. With no prior experience in the food industry, Roy would regularly begin making donuts at 2:30 in the morning. In the decades since, three generations of Burrs have created an environment where locals could start their mornings with hot coffee and a fresh pastry, while catching up with their friends and neighbors. Harlow's Bakery is widely recognized as a staple in the community in large part due to the Burr family treating both their employees and customers as members of their extended family. Over the years, Harlow's Donut and Bakery has been awarded statewide and national accolades. In 2011, Harlow's was featured as a Travelocity Local Secret, Big Find and more recently was honored by the North Rapides Business and Industry Alliance as a Small Business of the Month in March 2015. This past November, Roy W. Burr, Sr., passed away after running Harlow's for over 30 years. In remembrance of Roy and his dedication to the Pineville community, Harlow's Donut and Bakery is officially recognized as Small Business of the Week.