Roger Wicker

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 19, 2015, at 2:45 p.m., to hold a hearing entitled ``Nominations.''

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 19, 2015, 10 a.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 19, 2015, at 10 a.m., in room SD-215 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing entitled ``No Place to Grow Up: How to Safely Reduce Reliance on Foster Care Group Homes.''

Mr. WICKER. 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 19, 2015, at 10 a.m., in room SR-253 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing entitled ``FAA Reauthorization: Air Traffic Control Modernization and Reform.''

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 19, 2015, at 2 p.m., in SR-428A Russell Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing entitled ``An Examination of Proposed Environment Regulation's Impacts on America's Small Businesses.''

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Water, and Wildlife of the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 19, 2015, at 10 a.m., in room SD-406 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``S. 1140, The Federal Water Quality Protection Act.''

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism, be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 19, 2015, at 2:30 p.m., in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``Body Cameras: Can Technology Increase Protection for Law Enforcement Officers and the Public?''

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. I thank the Presiding Officer. Mr. President, there are a couple of objectives this McCain amendment would accomplish. For one thing, it was in the 2008 farm bill. The current move to change the inspection from the FDA to the Department of Agriculture is in the current farm bill, and it is about to take place, so it would revisit the last two farm bills. I do not think we should be doing that in a trade promotion authority piece of legislation. Also, it is absolutely not duplicative. It can be said on the floor of the Senate 100 times, but the fact is that the USDA Catfish Inspection Program is not duplicative. It transfers inspection from the FDA to the USDA and the USDA has testified before Congress that when the program is operational, as it is about to be, the FDA program would be eliminated. Why move it from the FDA to the USDA? Here is the reason: There are a few of us--under controlled situations--who grow most of the catfish that is produced in the United States on farms, including the State of Mississippi and the State of Arkansas. My distinguished colleagues from Arkansas and Mississippi will speak on this issue in a few moments, I hope. This is about food safety for Americans in 50 States who deserve to know that the fish they are eating--the product they are eating--is unadulterated. Here are the facts: Under the current FDA program, only about 2 percent of the billions of pounds of imported catfish are inspected-- only about 2 percent. The other 98 percent of this large quantity come in uninspected. Now, that gives me pause as a consumer. It should give residents of all 50 States pause that 98 percent of the catfish which comes into our country is not inspected. Here is what we do know about the 2 percent we look at under the FDA program: An alarming volume of the catfish inspected by the FDA already failed to meet standards. They failed to meet consumer safety standards. Many overseas productions are simply not operated under the sanitary conditions that we insist upon in the United States with our farm-raised catfish. The FDA program does not ensure that trade partners have sufficient health standards nor does it inspect any overseas agriculture operations. They don't go over to Vietnam and look at the operations there and see the safety standards that cause the health risks. What kind of health risks are we talking about? We are talking about cancer. I have in my hand a page from a draft rule by the Department of Agriculture, dated February 10, 2009. This is a draft rule from the Food Safety and Inspection Service. It turns out--and the GAO has been mentioned here--that the GAO got OMB to ask the FSIS to rework this statement and make it a little softer so we would not go so hard on imported Vietnamese catfish. Here is what the Department of Agriculture report, which has now been buried, says as to whether or not the Agency used random or risk-based samplings: Applying the Food Safety Inspection Service program to imported catfish yielded a reduction of approximately 175,000 lifetime cancers for Americans--I want that kind of reduction from carcinogens coming into the United States--and 0.79 percent acute toxicities. Using random sampling in the Agency's program yielded a reduction of 91.8 million exposures to antimicrobials and 23.28 million heavy metal exposures. We are talking about carcinogens, we are talking about improper antimicrobials that the USDA program would catch, and over 23 million exposures to heavy metals that we don't need in the United States. Using risk-based sampling yielded a reduction of 95.1 million exposures to antimicrobials. We are talking about a program that is not going to be duplicative because it is going to move--according to the last two farm bills--from the FDA to the USDA. This excessive government waste we have heard about will not exist, but we will have better safety for the consumers of the United States of America. That is why we do not need to revisit this issue, and that is why the McCain amendment should be rejected. That is why we should take every precaution we can to protect the American consumer, whether in their home kitchens or restaurants. I yield the floor. Perhaps other of my colleagues would like to address this issue.

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I understand that Senator Wyden has priority recognition at this time. I have been informed he does not object to me entering into the debate at this moment. May I proceed on this amendment?

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, earlier this year, Senator Casey and I had the honor of serving as the cochairs of the National Prayer Breakfast. The annual event is a longtime tradition that celebrates the importance of faith and fellowship in our lives. This year's breakfast featured moving prayers, songs, and speeches from a number of notable guests, including race car legend Darrell Waltrip.

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Casey and I be permitted to engage in a colloquy.

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I rise in strong support of the underlying bill. I thank the leadership on both sides for coming to a bipartisan agreement, and I thank the leadership for agreeing to take the Wicker amendment by a voice vote. My amendment does two things. Simply, it extends the statute of limitations to allow child victims to file civil lawsuits against perpetrators up to 10 years after they reach the age of 18, rather than 10 years after the cause of action arises. Secondly, my amendment creates a Department of Justice data base for education and outreach. Trafficking is a complex issue, and it will take a comprehensive approach to facility adequate support for victims. That is what the Wicker amendment does. I urge an ``aye'' vote when we take it by voice.

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, the distinguished Senator from Vermont is quite welcome, and I am glad we were able to accommodate each other.

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to discuss the gravity of the current situation with regard to the administration's negotiations with Iran for a nuclear agreement. I believe it is important to note that we received some important information today in the Senate Armed Services Committee that is helpful to us in this regard. This morning the Armed Services Committee heard from ADM Bill Gortney. He gave us his assessment of Iran's capabilities and ongoing efforts to thwart international agencies. Admiral Gortney is the commander of the U.S. Northern Command. He is personally responsible for defending Americans in the United States mainland. He is an appointee of President Obama, and here are the words given to us today by Admiral Gortney: Iran has ``committed considerable resources to enhancing its ballistic missile capabilities and has already placed another satellite into orbit this year using a new booster that could serve as a demonstrator for ICBM, intercontinental ballistic technologies. Despite international condemnation and sanctions, Iran has failed to cooperate fully with the International Atomic Energy Agency to resolve all outstanding concerns regarding its nuclear program, particularly those concerning its possible military dimensions.'' These are the words from the head of the Northern Command in this administration, and this regime, which Admiral Gortney described, is the very regime our President and Secretary of State have confidence will live up to any nuclear agreement. As the Admiral went on to say, the hope for a diplomatic solution should not come without vigilance, and that is what Members on this side of the aisle are trying to insist upon. We cannot ignore these warning signs of noncompliance and uncooperative behavior while expecting Iran to make good on its promises. A few days ago Prime Minister Netanyahu stressed Iran's record of misconduct and sinister objectives in his powerful address to Congress. He emphasized that a nuclear Iran would have serious implications for the world, the region, and of course for Israel, one of our most steadfast allies. These concerns are important for lawmakers, and I am glad we had a chance to hear them in person. With a record of foreign policy failures, I regret to say President Obama is under intense scrutiny to hold Iran accountable at this critical moment. He is under intense scrutiny because of these foreign policy failures. Like many of my colleagues, I am concerned and I think Americans are concerned that the administration might be too generous with concessions to Iran, as it has been with deals in past. The time is running out for the President to establish his legacy--a dangerous motivation for negotiations with the unreliable and volatile nation Admiral Gortney described today. At the very least, the Senate should insist on the passage of a partisan bill to ensure that the American people have a say in any agreement between the White House and Iran. Congressional approval would add legitimacy to any agreement, and I think that is important. Any foreign nation negotiating with the United States should be mindful of our constitutional system of checks and balances. Congress should also be discussing the appropriate steps to take if an agreement is not reached by the deadline this month. The President is now threatening to veto legislation that puts tougher sanctions on Iran. But shouldn't there be consequences for Iran if they refuse to cooperate with international investigators? Mistakes are too high to make excuses for stalled negotiations or to rely on wishful thinking about Iran's intentions. As Mr. Netanyahu said in his speech, ``If Iran wants to be treated like a normal country, let it act like a normal country.'' Instead Iran continues to support terrorist groups and oppressive authoritarian regimes. We cannot afford to ignore its influence in unstable areas and how this influence could dramatically change should they be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon. Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech is a reminder that Iran has made no excuses for its belligerent aims and ties to terrorist groups. A bad deal would spell disaster for Israel, whose very existence has been threatened by Iranian leaders. Israel and the United States share an unwavering commitment to keeping Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. It is unfortunate that criticism from the Obama administration surrounded the Prime Minister's earlier visit. Meanwhile, the world is not safer. Global threats continue to multiply, posing complex challenges to America's national security issues. One looks at the unrest around the world, and it is easy to see how America is failing to lead. Another member of this administration, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, underscored the widespread instability when he testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee last month. It is important to compare Director Clapper's testimony with that of the Secretary of State earlier. Director Clapper, our Director of National Intelligence, said there were more deaths from state-sponsored mass killings, more people displaced from their homes, and a higher rate of political instability last year than we have seen in decades. In fact, 2014 was the most lethal year on record for terrorism. We are now facing unpredictable instability as the ``new normal,'' according to this administration's Director of National Intelligence. The White House's foreign policy team, however, seems unwilling to accept these harsh truths. Listen to the words of Secretary of State John Kerry, our chief negotiator with Iran, in contrast to the words of our Director of National Intelligence. Senator Kerry said: We are actually living in a period of less daily threat to Americans and to people in the world than normally; less deaths, less violent deaths today, than through the last century. It is hard to square the testimony of our chief negotiator with Iran with the words of our Director of National Intelligence. Particularly troubling is the administration's past reliance on empty promises from adversaries. Under President Obama's watch, Vladimir Putin has invaded and annexed part of Ukraine, continued to support the brutal regime of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, and violated the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. On February 27, we saw yet another troubling development in Moscow. Opposition leader Boris Nemtsov was gunned down in cold blood on the street after dinner in a secure, well-protected part of Moscow, just steps away from the Kremlin. The Russian Government has denounced Mr. Nemtsov's assassination, but this is not the first time one of President Putin's opponents or critics has been murdered. I will only note that Mr. Nemtsov is only the latest in a line of Putin critics who have mysteriously met their demise over time, and Russia's record of corruption and shameful disregard for human rights continues. In conclusion, U.S. leadership is of the utmost importance to global security and stability at this pivotal time. Director Clapper was frank in his testimony that ``pervasive uncertainty makes it all the harder to predict the future.'' That is why we must remain vigilant. America can succeed if we demonstrate the fortitude and resolve necessary to defend freedom and stop those who threaten it. This includes taking an honest look at Iran's past and present behavior before we cut a deal we will later regret. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I rise briefly today to recognize the extraordinary story of my fellow Mississippian Malcolm Butler, who hails from Vicksburg, MS, and attended Hinds Community College. Mr. Butler, a cornerback for the New England Patriots, made the game- winning interception in Super Bowl XLIX on February 1, 2015. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record an article by Rick Cleveland.

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, Rick Cleveland is the executive director of the Mississippi Sports Hall of Fame and Museum. This story appeared on February 3, 2015, in a number of newspapers, including my hometown of Tupelo's Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal. The article points out how Malcolm Butler overcame adversity, how he went from working at a Popeyes fried chicken restaurant to being the hero of this year's Super Bowl. My home State of Mississippi has a long and storied football tradition. Gridiron legends such as Archie Manning, Eli Manning, Michael Oher, Jerry Rice, Walter Payton, Brett Favre, and a host of others from the Magnolia State are included in this list. As Rick Cleveland points out in the article, Malcolm Butler now joins Mississippi's remarkable Super Bowl pantheon. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, are we in morning business?

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 178

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 70

Mr. WICKER

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

Mr. WICKER

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

Mr. WICKER. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Vote on Amendment No. 17

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, these will be my first remarks of the 114th Congress. I am encouraged by the commitment of many of my colleagues, including the majority leader, to restoring the Senate as one of America's great institutions. It is time for us to get to work. We begin this Congress with a number of urgent priorities--not the least of which is job creation. More than 9 million Americans are still unemployed. More significantly, perhaps, millions more have given up looking for work. The latest jobs report from the Department of Labor shows that the labor force participation rate is only 62.8 percent--one of the lowest levels in 36 years. This number matters because it reflects the size of the U.S. workforce. It reflects how many working-age Americans have a job or are actively looking for one. Now, some people have suggested we should take heart in the latest job figures, that this points to an improving economy. I disagree with that. I am not at all satisfied with these employment numbers, particularly with the fact that only 62 percent of eligible members of the labor force actually are choosing to participate. To me, a shrinking workforce points to a weak economy. Boosting the job market is important to boosting future economic growth. I look forward to working with my colleagues to advance job-creating legislation that has a positive impact on American's daily lives. Fortunately, dozens of job bills were passed during the last term of Congress by the House of Representatives. These ideas deserve consideration and debate in this Chamber. I think in the new Congress, these ideas will receive that consideration. I am aware that there is likely to be disagreement about the details, disagreement about the merits of some of the progrowth ideas that have come over to us from the House of Representatives, as well as proposals concerning energy and health care, to name a few. But resolving our differences is part of what make this Chamber and our country unique. In a floor speech early last year, Leader McConnell said: I am certain of one thing. The Senate can be better. I think that is one of the messages from the American people in last November and last December's election. The American people believe the Senate can be better. We each have a responsibility and a role in making the Senate better. We could start by legislating through the committee process. We have begun doing that already. Instead of backroom deals, pushed through at the last minute, which has been the order of the day in past years, bills should be thoroughly debated and vetted--first in committee and then on the Senate floor. The issues of our day deserve that attention. Forging consensus takes effort, but that is how the Senate is supposed to work. Our consideration next week will demonstrate that this is a new day in the Senate. I look forward to being a part of the debate and the amendment process on the Keystone XL Pipeline proposal. Offering amendments is a way in which each of us can have input on the legislation at hand--input on behalf of our constituents, the people who sent us here. For too long the amendment tree has been filled by the majority leader, essentially limiting the right of every Member to voice the concerns and opinions of the people they represent, essentially limiting the our right to represent the people of our States who sent us here. Instead of a series of continuing resolutions, we should return to the process of 12 separate appropriations bills. In doing so, we could carefully assess Federal spending and reduce waste, and I think the American people sent that message to us also in November and December. The Federal debt has reached unprecedented levels, forcing us to make tough decisions on how to do more with less. With regard to national defense, I look forward, during the 114th Congress, to serving as chairman of the Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Seapower. Our subcommittee has a wide range of oversight responsibilities, including the procurement, sustainment, and research and development needs of the Navy and Marine Corps. From classified briefings and other hearings with senior officials in the Navy and intelligence community, I am well aware of the imminent and emerging threats facing our sea services. America should maintain its ability to project power around the world while upholding our obligations to our friends and allies. Our Navy is now the smallest it has been since World War I, demanding, I believe, a robust investment in sea power. In the coming weeks the Seapower Subcommittee will hold hearings to determine whether the President's budget proposals for the Department of the Navy are sufficient to meet our national security requirements. Following these hearings, we will draft the Defense authorization bill to deliver important capabilities and support for our sailors and marines. This support includes funding for construction of various types and classes of ships, such as aircraft carriers, amphibious ships, submarines, and large and small surface combatants. I wish to note that supporting the Department of Defense is best done when Congress legislates under regular order. The Republican-led Senate should take up a defense authorization bill and a defense appropriations bill, and we are committed to doing so. Regular order will help provide our military planners with valuable budget predictability--something they have suffered without in past years. I was very pleased to learn this week that Chairman McCain plans for the Armed Services Committee to mark up a defense authorization bill before Memorial Day. Our committee did that under the leadership of Senator Levin last year, but where this Senate fell down on its responsibility is that we didn't get the bill to the floor until December, and then it was in a rushed and unamendable form. Our goal under regular order is for us to take up the bill on the floor this summer and have a conference report between the House and the Senate reported before August. I am heartened that Chairman McCain intends to do this. I am heartened by the commitment of the distinguished majority leader that we will indeed take up that legislation before the end of the fiscal year. I should also observe that, absent congressional action, budget sequestration will return to the Defense Department in October of this year. Sequestration remains one of the greatest challenges facing our military. Unless we take action, the ability of our military and our industrial base to react to unforeseen contingencies will be severely eroded, and there will undoubtedly be unforeseen contingencies. There are always unforeseen contingencies, and we will be unprepared for them unless we take action to prevent sequestration. As a member of the Armed Services Committee and the Budget Committee, I will work to help forge a bipartisan path so we can avert a return to the across-the-board defense cuts under sequestration. I am so pleased that a bipartisan task force within the Armed Services Committee is already taking shape to discuss this issue. We will begin to have discussions beginning Monday and Tuesday of next week. With regard to commerce, I also look forward to assuming the chairmanship of the Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet. My chief focus will continue to be the deployment and adoption of broadband in rural America--something I am interested in as a Senator from Mississippi and something the distinguished Presiding Officer is interested in as a Senator from Louisiana. Broadband has become a vital economic engine in this country and around the world. In many ways, the proliferation of the Internet is like the construction of the Interstate Highway System in the 1950s. We need to ensure that people in rural areas have the same quality broadband as those in urban areas. To that end, our committee will continue to examine ways to foster broadband growth and development. We also need to find ways to make more spectrum available for wireless, which can help spur innovation and economic growth in the mobile broadband space. I also expect the Senate this year to deal with legislation regarding the Environmental Protection Agency and the Obama administration's environmental executive overreach. The administration has proposed a litany of costly environmental rules, targeting everything from coal- fired powerplants, to small streams, to small ponds. Many would cause significant economic harm, while providing little or no help to the environment--no help to the environment but significant economic harm. By EPA's own estimates, its recently proposed ground-level ozone rules could cost taxpayers as much as $44 billion per year, making it the most expensive rulemaking to date. Meanwhile, EPA's clean powerplant rule could lead to a loss of 224,000 jobs each year. These costs are staggering. I am pleased that the final omnibus appropriations bill for fiscal year 2015, which was passed in December, included limits on the controversial waters of the United States proposal, which regulates small ponds, streams, and puddles. However, I remain committed to ensuring that this rule will not be implemented at all. By broadening the definition of ``waters of the United States,'' Washington bureaucrats would potentially regulate puddles and ditches on farms and in backyards. Is this really what is necessary to protect the environment? Is this really what the American people require? These regulations would have significant impact on the State of Mississippi. Our economic growth depends on agriculture, and it depends on manufacturing and other energy-intensive industries. With each new environmental regulation, the administration is compounding the financial burden on the American people without delivering any environmental benefits. We can have clean air and we can have clean water without losing 224,000 jobs. We can have clean air and water without the cost of $44 billion per year for one single regulation. Low-cost and reliable energy is at the core of economic growth. Economic gains from the abundance of affordable energy could be lost if these rules are allowed to be put into place. In an economy desperate for growth, a regulatory onslaught is the worst way to encourage jobs and investment. The American people also want us to address the Affordable Care Act, ObamaCare. I was particularly interested in the thoughtful remarks of the Senator from Delaware, who spoke immediately before me. The remarks of my distinguished colleague suggests that Members on both sides of the aisle heard the message from the American people in November and December in the elections. I think both sides recognize that the Affordable Care Act is not affordable and as a matter of fact is causing great hardship and pain to the majority of the American people. So I am pleased to hear Members on the other side of the aisle at least acknowledge that many major, significant changes need to be made to ObamaCare. Overall disapproval of the President's health care law is at an alltime high of 56 percent. Americans are suffering under the law's mandates and taxes. Many are faced with the financial burden of higher copays and higher deductibles. This is a reality. I must say that I appreciate the remarks of the distinguished senior Senator from New York recently when he acknowledged that passing ObamaCare in the way previous Congresses did was a mistake, that most Americans were satisfied with their coverage and it was a mistake to turn that entire system on its head to solve a problem which we very much needed to solve with regard to the uninsured and underinsured. There was a better way to provide health insurance to those individuals without disadvantaging the vast majority of people who were satisfied with their health care and who now find themselves in a much worse position. Congress has the responsibility to ease the burden of ObamaCare by repealing the law's most onerous provisions. I would like to repeal the entire act and start over with some good aspects that we could incorporate into a better bill but also start off with a better way to provide health care for Americans and provide those who were uninsured with the opportunity to get insurance. At the very least, we should pass legislation restoring the 40-hour workweek. I hope this is one of the things my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are talking about. I note that the President of the United States has threatened to veto Affordable Care Act amendments that would restore something that has become very traditional in the United States--the 40-hour workweek. It is very surprising to me that it would be on that proposal that the President of the United States would say: No, I will not even sign legislation to restore something as traditional as the 40-hour workweek. We need to repeal the medical device tax, and clearly there are well over 60 votes in this body today to do just that. We need to exempt veterans from the employer mandate, to provide relief to rural hospitals, and we need to repeal the health insurance tax. I hope we can do that, and I hope the sounds I hear from the other side of the aisle indicate that we can reach bipartisan consensus and send legislation to the President persuading him that there is such broad support for that and he should sign it. We can do better for the American people than the higher copays, the higher deductibles, and the broken promises they received under the ACA. Americans were flatly told: If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. That turned out to be a promise the administration could not or would not keep. They were told: If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan. It turned out the administration was not able to make good on that promise. We can do better. With regard to the Federal budget, the national debt now exceeds $18 trillion. During the next 10 years, interest payments on the debt will be the fastest growing budget expenditure. Interest on the debt will be the fastest growing expenditure, more than tripling to $800 billion. Put in perspective, one out of every seven tax dollars taken in by the government will be used to service the Federal debt. Why is regular order important in this regard? In returning to regular order, the Senate Republicans will enact a budget resolution each year as required by law. We haven't done this. The law requires it, but somehow Congress has waived this requirement for themselves. This contrasts sharply with the past 5 years, during which the Democratic-led Senate passed only one budget. As a result, Congress has not adopted a joint budget resolution since 2009. This will change in this new day of Congress. Under the previous majority, spending bills were not brought to the floor to be debated. Budget laws were routinely waived or ignored, and there has been no plan whatever for finally bringing the Federal budget under control. These are facts. We need to change that, and I hope we will do so in this Congress. In conclusion, we have plenty of work to do. People in my State of Mississippi, like most Americans, expect results from this Congress. The challenges of our economy, the importance of our national defense, and the negative impact of intrusive executive overreach are too great not to address. We need to meet the expectations of the American people in this regard. The distinguished majority leader reminded us earlier this week that Americans want a government that works, one that functions with efficiency and accountability, competence and purpose. I believe we can do that, but it will take a return to regular order. It will take faith in the committee process. It will take faith in returning this institution to functioning the way the Founders intended. And it will take meaningful legislation. It is time to put the priorities of the American people first. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Jane Sarnecky, a Coast Guard fellow in my office, and Rongalett Green, a Marine Corps fellow in my office, be granted floor privileges during the first session of this 114th Congress.