[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 144 (Thursday, September 11, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8339-S8342]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009--Continued

  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the growing 
rate of suicide among Iraq and Afghanistan-era veterans. For all that 
is being done in this country to support our troops in battle, we must 
remember this truth: For many veterans, their battles do not end when 
they return from the war. Instead, war returns home with them and 
within them. That is a truth. Instead, they face an enemy that is hard 
to understand and harder to defeat. Their wounds and their enemy are 
unseen, but the reality and sometimes the deadly consequences of these 
invisible wounds cannot be ignored.
  I am deeply troubled by the latest information we have received from 
VA. The number of veterans lost to the enemy of suicide is rising. 
Suicide among Iraq and Afghanistan-era veterans is at an alltime high. 
The most recently recorded year--2006--saw 113 Iraq and Afghanistan-era 
veterans lost to suicide, almost as many as we lost in the years 2002 
to 2005 combined. This is disturbing.
  Iraq and Afghanistan veterans are not the only ones suffering from 
service-related mental health injuries. Indeed, the number of veterans 
found to have service-connected PTSD is not just rising, it is rising 
several times faster than service-connected disabilities overall. Nor 
are suicide and mental health only a matter of concern among discharged 
veterans. Recent news reports show that suicides among Active-Duty 
soldiers are positioned to reach an alltime high, exceeding last year's 
record number.
  Much is being done to protect and heal veterans with mental health 
issues. VA has expanded mental health outreach. The Vet Centers, run 
largely for vets and by vets, offer a safe haven and readjustment 
counseling. For those in desperate need, VA now operates a 24-hour 
suicide hotline. In the 1 year it has been operating, they have 
received tens of thousands of calls and performed over a thousand 
rescues of veterans about to take their own lives.
  Unfortunately, these efforts are not enough. Veterans are committing 
suicide at a higher rate than their civilian counterparts. A recent 
RAND study found that nearly three out of four veterans in need of 
mental health care receive inadequate care or no care at all. This 
cannot be acceptable to a nation intent on protecting those who wear 
its uniform. More must be done in the days ahead, and not just by VA.
  This Congress took an important step by passing the Joshua Omvig 
Suicide Prevention Act. But in the final weeks of this session, 
comprehensive veterans mental health legislation is still waiting for a 
vote in the House. Through S. 2162, the Veterans' Mental Health Care 
Improvement Act, which passed the Senate with unanimous support, 
Congress can do more to prevent veteran suicide. Congress can 
strengthen veterans' mental health care, outreach, support the 
homeless, services for families, and leverage community resources. I 
hope this critical legislation will become law before this Congress 
ends.
  PTSD and other service-related invisible wounds are real injuries. 
They are also an enemy to veterans, to the families who support them, 
and to all Americans. It is not enough to bring our troops home; we 
must support them when the battle follows them home. It is unacceptable 
that veterans who come home safely later lose their lives to the enemy 
of suicide. We must do more to support those who have served us.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a 
quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the 
quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 5413

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I rise today to speak to amendment No. 
5413. I hope at some point to be able to call up that amendment and 
perhaps have it either included as part of the managers' package or 
have it debated and voted upon. Let me explain a little bit about the 
history of this and why I think this is so important to our Nation's 
military.
  The Defense Department authorization bill we have before us is a 
critical piece of legislation that we need as a Congress to deal with 
before Congress adjourns. We have done that for the past 42 years. It 
sets the policy and the framework and funding for matters that are 
important to our men and women in uniform and important to making 
America safe and secure as we head into the future. I believe this 
amendment fits right in with that overall objective. The amendment to 
which I speak today will advance innovative Air Force programs that are 
already positively affecting the critically important and complex issue 
of energy policy. As I said, that is a national security issue as well.
  Furthermore, this amendment will expand these valuable programs to 
other Department of Defense services.
  As we all know, the issue of fuel prices has significant implications 
not only for our economic security, but also for our military. In fact, 
the Department of Defense is the largest single consumer of fuel in the 
United States.
  Consider this: In the last 4 years, the Air Force fuel bill has 
tripled. Furthermore, the Air Force spent over $6 billion buying energy 
last year, even though they used 10 percent less than the year before. 
This is a substantial sum, and I can almost guarantee it will cost the 
Air Force more next year to buy the same amount of energy. As the lead 
paragraph in an article headlined ``Worries of Rising Fuel Costs Extend 
to DoD's Budget'' published in Defense News on May 19, 2008, noted:

       The skyrocketing cost of fuel isn't just hitting U.S. 
     drivers in the pocketbook--it's blowing a bit of a hole in 
     the Pentagon's budget as well.

  I ask unanimous consent that the entirety of this Defense News 
article be printed in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. (See 
exhibit 1.)
  Mr. THUNE. We are at a moment in our history when we must move toward 
more secure, domestic energy sources.

[[Page S8340]]

One need look no further than the embargos of the 1970s or the recent 
oil price spikes or the Russian-Georgian conflict to see the negative 
implications of relying on foreign sources for the preponderance of our 
energy needs. Additionally, continuing to fund unfriendly foreign 
regimes grows increasingly untenable by the day, and we should look to 
produce lower cost domestic alternatives that stop this capital flight.
  It is well past time that we further the development of these lower 
cost domestic alternatives through responsible public policy.
  Given this context, I am proud to report that the U.S. Air Force has 
already become a model for Government leadership in these areas. We 
should now expand these Air Force programs to the other Department of 
Defense services, as these valuable programs will undoubtedly pave the 
way for increased public-private cooperation.

  One example of Air Force leadership in this area is evident in 
existing programs to find alternatives to increasingly expensive 
aviation fuel. Not only has the Air Force already flight tested the B-
52, B-1, C-17, KC-135, F-15, and F-22s on a 50 percent synthetic fuel 
blend, it has plans to certify its entire inventory on this synthetic 
fuel blend by 2011. Moreover, the Air Force is dedicated to procuring 
at least half of its fuel needs from environmentally friendly, 
domesticaly produced, synthetic fuel blends by 2016.
  We should now call for the other services to do the same. We should 
seek to understand how the Department of the Army and the Department of 
the Navy can also use these fuels and how the buying power of the 
entire Department of Defense can achieve efficiencies and decreased 
costs due to large economies of scale.
  Because they are the largest user of fuel in the Department of 
Defense, this amendment specifies that the Air Force continue to be on 
the leading edge in finding lower cost, domestically produced 
alternatives to conventional aviation fuels. The amendment dictates 
that the Air Force continue to certify its entire fleet on a synthetic 
fuel blend and to press forward in its efforts to acquire half of its 
domestic fuel requirement by 2016 from a domestically sourced 
alternative fuel blend.
  To protect the American taxpayer, it is important to note this 
acquisition would only occur if the price is less than or equal to the 
market prices for petroleum based fuels.
  To protect the environment, the amendment specifies the fuel is 
``greener'' than conventional petroleum based fuels. On this second 
point, it is important to note there has been recent uncertainty over 
section 526 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. The 
intent of this amendment is that the lifecycle emissions of these fuels 
will be lower than pending Department of Energy and Environmental 
Protection Agency baselines for conventional petroleum fuels.

  A binding authorization for the Air Force to acquire this fuel will 
have a dramatic effect on the domestic aviation and fuels industries. 
With the Air Force and the other services of the Department of Defense 
leading the way, it is likely commercial airlines and fuel producers 
will see the increasing viability of these fuels and wish to build on 
these efforts. To further civil-military cooperation, the amendment 
also encourages the services to partner with the commercial aviation 
industry to engage in further research and development.
  To encourage feedstock diversity, the language in the amendment is 
not specific regarding fuel source, and producers could use anything 
from cellulosic ethanol to biodiesel.
  Ultimately, this amendment positively impacts energy policies in this 
country at no additional cost to the American taxpayer. Simply put, if 
the alternative fuels cost more than conventional fuels, the Department 
of Defense doesn't have to buy them. In actuality, it is likely to 
actually lower the cost of these fuels by inducing market based 
competition among synthetic fuel producers.
  Some may argue this amendment is a Government giveaway program or 
that it is specially tailored to benefit a specific industry. This is 
simply not true. This amendment does not specify a specific feedstock 
from which to make fuels, nor does it offer loan guarantees or tax 
incentives to any specific industry.
  We are at the beginning of a long energy crisis which is already one 
of the defining issues of our time. If Government agencies are going to 
be part of the solution, we need sound, responsible public policy that 
allows them to partner with industry and solve these important 
problems. This amendment is exactly this type of policy.
  I hope my colleagues will support it. I hope, before we complete 
action on the Defense authorization bill, that we will have an 
opportunity to call up some of these amendments, to have them debated, 
have them voted on or, at a minimum, to have them accepted as part of a 
managers' package. But, in one way or another, I hope this very 
important issue of energy security can be addressed in the Defense 
authorization bill through the acquisition of fuels our services use to 
supply their energy needs and addressed in a way that not only helps 
America's energy security with regard to lessening this addiction we 
have to foreign sources of energy, but I also believe it will make our 
country safer because I think this is a national security issue that 
forces us to rely upon countries around the world that are hostile to 
our interests.
  I believe that becoming energy independent means we have to lead by 
example. Our Air Force has stepped up to that challenge. I hope the 
other services will follow.
  As I said before, this amendment does not require any particular 
feedstock. It is neutral with regard to the whole issue of whether that 
comes from cellulosic or whether that comes from biodiesel or whether 
that comes from coal to liquids.
  At the end of the day, we need to adopt this amendment. It will be a 
savings to our military services and a savings to the taxpayer. As I 
said before, there is a requirement in this amendment that, whatever 
that source is, it be greener than petroleum-based fuels used today.
  It has already been tested on a number of aircraft. The Air Force 
intends to move in the year 2016 to 50 percent, and I hope the other 
services will follow. This amendment will see that happens. I hope my 
colleagues will adopt it.

                               Exhibit 1

                   [From Defense News, May 19, 2008]

          Worries of Rising Fuel Costs Extend to DoD's Budget

                (By William H. McMichael and Rick Maze)

       The skyrocketing cost of fuel isn't just hitting U.S. 
     drivers in the pocketbook--it's blowing a bit of a hole in 
     the Pentagon's budget as well.
       DoD officials have asked Congress to appropriate another 
     $3.69 billion for all fuels--an increase of $2.2 billion from 
     their initial request--according to a revised request for 
     supplemental war funding for fiscal 2009, submitted May 2.
       That, of course, looks far ahead and could still prove to 
     be inadequate. According to Pentagon budget documents, the 
     request would support a crude oil price of $97.19 per 
     barrel--and also assumes the military's overall fuel costs 
     will drop by 4.8 percent.
       The current world price, however, has climbed to and is 
     hovering around $120 per barrel, and many analysts think 
     rising global demand and other factors will keep prices high.
       And 2009 isn't the only concern; the Pentagon needs more 
     money for fuel to cover the remaining five months of this 
     fiscal year.
       This would come by way of the $108 billion war supplemental 
     appropriation request, which has yet to be approved.
       The Pentagon has asked for a total of $1.9 billion for 
     fuel, an increase of $281.4 million over its original 
     supplemental request.
       All told, that's an additional $2.48 billion on top of the 
     amounts included in the Pentagon's 2008 and 2009 base 
     budgets--and Defense officials already acknowledge the 2009 
     supplemental request won't cover that entire fiscal year.
       That would buy the Air Force another 19 F-22 fighters, or 
     the Marine Corps 36 MV-22 Ospreys.
       In the seven months ending in March, the Pentagon's average 
     monthly cost for its most-used jet fuel, JP-8, rose 34 
     percent, from $2.34 to $3.13 per gallon, according to the 
     Defense Logistics Agency (DLA).
       The cost of JP-5, used primarily by Navy jets operating 
     from the sea, increased from $2.22 to $2.94 per gallon.
       Regular gasoline jumped from $2 to $2.79 per gallon, or 40 
     percent, over the same period. Only diesel fuel's rise was 
     negligible, increasing just 5 cents per gallon.
       The Pentagon's prices normally do not fluctuate much 
     because DLA's Defense Energy Support Center (DESC) buys in 
     bulk and sells fuel to the individual services at a 
     ``standard price'' based on market projections for the 
     ensuing year, according to DLA spokesman Jack Hooper.
       In September 2007, for example, DESC set the standard price 
     of JP-8 at $2.31 per gallon.
       In a less volatile market, that price might have been good 
     for the next 12 months. But the market forced a change and in 
     December, DESC raised its price for JP-8 to $3.04 per gallon.

[[Page S8341]]

       The House Armed Services subcommittee on readiness approved 
     legislation May 8 to require the secretary of Defense ``to 
     consider the full burdened cost of fuel and energy efficiency 
     in the requirements development and acquisition process,'' 
     said Rep. Randy Forbes of Virginia, the panel's ranking 
     Republican.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Salazar). The Senator from North Carolina 
is recognized.


         honoring fallen salisbury, north carolina firefighters

  Mrs. DOLE. Mr. President, it is with a heavy heart that I rise today, 
on this solemn anniversary, to pay my respects to all of the dedicated 
emergency responders who have made the ultimate sacrifice to protect 
our citizens. We all remember with great sadness the horrendous loss of 
life at the Twin Towers and the Pentagon on that fateful morning, 
including the tragic loss of so many firefighters, police officers, and 
other first responders who heroically rushed into danger, risking their 
own lives to save the lives of others.
  Nationwide, the men and women of our emergency response forces, like 
the comrades in arms of those New York and Washington first responders, 
share a common sense of purpose and dedication to defending their 
communities in times of peril.
  Today, I would also like to honor the memories of two brave 
firefighters from my hometown of Salisbury, NC who died in the line of 
duty this year.
  In March, the Salisbury Fire Department lost two of its finest, 
Justin Monroe and Victor Isler, while they were battling a blaze that 
may have been the worst in our town's history. Both men left behind 
many heartbroken family members and friends--and a grieving community.
  Our thoughts have also been with several other Salisbury firefighters 
who suffered burns and other injuries while trying to rescue their 
comrades and contain the fire. As they continue to heal from that 
tragic day, I hope they know that our thoughts and prayers are 
continuously with them.
  As a young boy, Justin Monroe dreamed of fighting fires. While in 
high school, he enrolled in the Millers Ferry Volunteer Fire 
Department's junior firefighter program, and in June of 2007, he 
accepted his dream job at the Salisbury Fire Department. Justin was 
proud of his work and looked forward to each and every day at the 
department. He was even studying for his fire technology degree at a 
local community college.
  Justin's mother Lisa was working at Salisbury's Rowan Regional 
Medical Center when she learned that at least one firefighter had 
perished and that several others had been injured fighting the fire at 
Salisbury Millwork, a manufacturer of custom woodwork. Her greatest 
fear as a parent was realized when the body of her 19-year-old son, who 
had been living with her at home, was brought into the hospital. One of 
Lisa's colleagues summed up the emotion by saying, ``It's devastating 
when one of your coworkers loses a family member, but losing a child at 
such a young age is really heartbreaking. Children are not supposed to 
die before their parents.''
  Justin's fallen comrade, Victor Isler, joined the Salisbury Fire 
Department a few days after Justin came on board. Victor moved to North 
Carolina from New York, where he served as a medic with the New York 
City Fire Department and helped save countless lives when our Nation 
was attacked on September 11. At age 40, Victor decided to head south 
and join the Salisbury department. A devoted husband to his wife Tracy 
and the proud parent of two teenagers, he quickly became a father 
figure to many of the department's younger firefighters.
  Victor's childhood best friend, Chris Damato, also served in the 
Salisbury department. On the day after Victor gave his life, Chris' 
wife gave birth to a little boy, named Nicholas Victor as a tribute to 
their dear friend.
  Our firefighters are always there in times of need. Very sadly, our 
communities sometimes lose some of their finest public servants like 
Justin Monroe and Victor Isler. Their sacrifice serves as a somber 
reminder of the dangers these men and women face each and every day. We 
owe all of our courageous firefighters and first responders a 
tremendous debt of gratitude for their selfless commitment to keeping 
us safe.
  As we join together as a Nation to remember September 11, and the 
courage and sacrifice demonstrated by countless Americans on that day, 
my thoughts and prayers are also with Justin and Victor's loved ones 
and everyone who has been affected by these tragedies. I join with my 
neighbors and the entire Salisbury community in mourning their loss, 
and pray that they find solace in the knowledge that these men are 
remembered as heroes of the highest order, an inspiration to us all.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, in the fiscal year 2009 Defense 
Authorization Act, S. 3001 is section 256, Assessment of Standards for 
Mission Critical Semiconductors Procured by the Department of Defense.
  The objective of this provision is to provide the DOD with assurance 
of dependable, continuous, long-term access to trusted, mission 
critical semiconductors from both foreign and domestic sources. In 
order to assure trust, the provision recommends the use of verification 
tools and techniques on commercially procured semiconductors.
  The manufacture of semiconductors has continued to migrate to off-
shore foundries, particularly to foundries in China. The few high end 
semiconductor manufacturers in the U.S. are driven by commercial 
interests and cannot be depended upon to supply the needs of the 
Deptartment of Defense for the long term. The U.S. military now 
comprises only 1 percent of the overall market and therefore no longer 
drives that market.
  The DOD is currently depending on a single company, IBM, for high end 
semiconductors through the DOD Trusted Foundry Program. This program 
was put in place in 2004 as a stop-gap measure. The February 2005 
report by the Defense Science Board Task Force on High Performance 
Microchip Supply stated that the Trusted Foundry Program is an interim 
source of high performance ICs and a good start in addressing the 
immediate needs for trusted sources of IC supply. The Trusted Foundry 
Program does not address critical design software and design systems 
which are also subject to tampering. It is strongly recommended that 
the Trusted Foundry Program continue to be a key part of the overall 
strategy and the volume of parts that go through it increased. However, 
since that report was written, the trend of migration of semiconductor 
manufacturing overseas has continued, and it is now urgent to augment 
the Trusted Foundry by a more comprehensive approach for the 
procurement of trusted parts that includes acquisition of parts from 
``nontrusted'' sources.
  There are several issues which need to be addressed and they are the 
drivers for this legislative provision. First, the DOD must have 
assurance of dependable, continuous, long-term access to mission 
critical semiconductors from both foreign and domestic sources for its 
potentially vulnerable defense systems. Such access needs to be 
independent of the commercially driven decisions made by individual 
companies and foundries. DOD needs for integrated circuits include high 
end semiconductors, custom application specific integrated circuits, 
ASICs, and field programmable gate arrays, FPGAs. Second, there must be 
assurance of trust of the semiconductors installed on systems procured 
through Defense contractors and subcontractors from ``nontrusted'' 
sources. Assurance of trust means assurance that the semiconductor has 
not been tampered with or modified in any way, and performs the 
functions required--and no other functions. It also requires assurance 
that the design and design systems, fabrication, packaging, final 
assembly, and test of semiconductors are free from tampering. The 
legislative provision addresses each of the concerns stated above. It 
is recommended that the Department of Defense inventory and implement 
the best methods currently available for assuring trust. It needs to 
put in place an overall policy and direction, as well as a plan for the 
procurement of semiconductors that assures continuous access and trust 
as described above. It also needs to assure that there is sufficient 
oversight in implementation of the plan for the acquisition of critical 
semiconductors, employing new or improved techniques and approaches as 
they become available through technological advances.

[[Page S8342]]

Deliverables from the DARPA trusted circuits project, supplemented by 
procedures to assure trust in design, packaging and assembly need to be 
employed. It should also be recognized that a comprehensive strategy 
needs to include acquisition of mass-produced commercial parts which 
have low risk of sabotage.
  The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and 
Logistics is requested to be available to brief Congress on its 
assessment of methods and standards no later than December 31, 2009. 
These need to be done in consultation with the intelligence community, 
private industry, and academia.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, the right to vote is one of the most 
cherished civil rights, enshrined in the 15th, 17th, and 19th 
amendments of the Constitution. It is the cornerstone of democratic 
government, and it is what makes us a government ``of the people, by 
the people, and for the people.''
  Throughout our history, whenever we have seen people deprived of this 
right, whether by law or by practice, brave Americans have stood up to 
fight for their right to vote. Today there is a significant portion of 
our population that has been disenfranchised.
  Today, the very men and women who have joined the military to defend 
our right to vote have been effectively cut out of the democratic 
process. Make no mistake; this is one of the most important civil 
rights issues we face today, and we cannot afford to delay action to 
address it.
  The Secretary of Defense has delegated the responsibility for 
safeguarding the voting rights of our troops to an office called the 
Federal Voting Assistance Program. Unfortunately, as our troops serve 
on far-away bases overseas and fight in foreign theaters of conflict, 
the Department of Defense's Federal Voting Assistance Program has 
failed to protect their most basic right as American citizens. This 
failure is twofold.
  First, the DOD's voting office has failed to adequately educate our 
men and women in uniform about how to vote. Second, it has failed to 
take adequate steps to put in place a system that provides our troops a 
reasonable opportunity to vote--one which ensures their votes are 
counted.
  Already, the DOD is required by law to provide troops with voting 
assistance, and information on how to get ballots, and how to cast 
their votes. But, its efforts have fallen woefully short. A recent 
survey found that less than 60 percent of troops knew where to obtain 
voting information on base.
  Of our overseas troops who did ask for mail-in ballots, less than 
half of their completed ballots actually arrived at the local election 
office. What is worse, many of those arrived late, resulting in them 
being rejected and thus not counted at all.
  It is absolutely shameful that so many of our troops and their 
families have been cut out of the democratic process through 
bureaucratic inefficiency.
  In order to prevent this disenfranchisement from happening again, I 
introduced the Military Voting Protection Act, or MVP Act, to require 
the DOD to collect our overseas troops' completed ballots and expedite 
their delivery through express shipping. Electronic tracking would be 
required as well, so our troops would have the peace of mind of knowing 
their ballots actually arrived at the election office. The MVP Act 
would markedly improve the current system and help protect our troops' 
right to vote.
  But yesterday, when I asked to bring this important, time-critical 
legislation forward as an amendment to the DOD authorization bill, the 
majority objected, saying they needed to hear from the Rules Committee 
first. My legislation would apply only to military servicemembers. We 
are working on the DOD authorization bill, so I am not sure why members 
of the Armed Services Committee need to wait and see what the Rules 
Committee thinks of an amendment this important. I am left scratching 
my head.
  Rather than even considering this legislation, and debating how best 
to fix our broken military voting system, Democrats cited weak excuses 
for blocking this amendment. With a national election looming, and a 
disgraceful track record over the past two election cycles of our 
widespread troop disenfranchisement, I am dumbfounded as to why my 
colleagues would put off this civil rights issue and effectively cheat 
our troops out of a better, more reliable system for voting from 
overseas.
  Last night, the Rules Committee offered me a counterproposal, which 
seeks to make the implementation of these important improvements to our 
troops' voting system optional. In essence, by making the 
implementation of this program optional, the Democrats are saying to 
our troops that their civil rights are not guaranteed but an option. 
That is an outrage.
  I am afraid this is going to be just another item on a long list of 
critical issues the majority has put off, despite calls for action from 
the American people. Another notable example is gas prices--we have 
been waiting for over 2 years to address gas prices, but still no 
meaningful action from the majority leadership. Democrats have 
stonewalled and delayed qualified judicial nominees and have yet to 
pass a single appropriations bill for the fiscal year that starts in 
less than 3 weeks.
  The rights of our troops to vote cannot fall victim to politics. Our 
military men and women stand vigilant in the defense of freedom and 
help safeguard the personal liberties of their fellow Americans. Now, 
we must be every bit as vigilant in defense of their personal liberties 
and civil rights. They willingly step into harm's way to ensure the 
safety of their fellow Americans at home, and they deserve better than 
a broken voting system and a refusal by their elected leaders to fix 
it.
  Mr. President, I subject the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Nelson of Nebraska). The clerk will call 
the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. HARKIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Klobuchar). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________