[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 151 (Thursday, December 11, 2014)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6585-S6602]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 PROTECTING VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS AND EMERGENCY RESPONDERS ACT OF 2014

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
resume consideration of the message to accompany H.R. 3979, which the 
clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       Motion to concur in the House amendment to the Senate 
     amendment to H.R. 3979, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 to ensure that emergency services volunteers are 
     not taken into account as employees under the shared 
     responsibility requirements contained in the Patient 
     Protection and Affordable Care Act.

  Pending:

       Reid motion to concur in the amendment of the House to the 
     amendment of the Senate to the bill.
       Reid motion to concur in the amendment of the House to the 
     amendment of the Senate to the bill, with Reid amendment No. 
     3984 (to the amendment of the House to the amendment of the 
     Senate to the bill), to change the enactment date.
       Reid amendment No. 3985 (to amendment No. 3984), of a 
     perfecting nature.
       Reid motion to refer the message of the House on the bill 
     to the Committee on Armed Services, with instructions, Reid 
     Amendment No. 3986, to change the enactment date.
       Reid amendment No. 3987 (to (the instructions) amendment 
     No. 3986), of a perfecting nature.
       Reid amendment No. 3988 (to Amendment No. 3987), of a 
     perfecting nature.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Dakota.


                         farewell to the senate

  Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, in 1986 the people of 
South Dakota elected me to serve them in the 100th Session of the 
Congress in the House of Representatives. In 1996 they gave me the 
honor and privilege of being their junior Senator.
  When I ran for the House in 1986, I told the people of South Dakota 
that neither party has all the answers, and that both parties have good 
ideas, as well as men and women of good will. My job, as I understood 
it, would be to work in a bipartisan manner, listening to all parties 
and reaching a good fit--also known as a compromise. That is what I 
still believe.
  However, in each year of my 28 years of service this has become more 
difficult to achieve. Each party, rather than working cooperatively for 
the American people, is more and more focused on winning the next 
election. Today, days after the 2014 election, you can walk into the 
call center for either party and find Members dialing for dollars for 
2016. Tonight there will be fundraisers across DC where Members will 
discuss policy not with their constituents but with organizations that 
contribute to their campaigns. We have lost our way.
  My thoughts are not original. My colleague and dear friend from South 
Dakota, Senator Tom Daschle, in his farewell called for finding common 
ground that ``will not be found on the

[[Page S6586]]

far right or on the far left. That is not where most Americans live. We 
will only find it in the firm middle ground based on common sense and 
shared values.''
  Ohio's Senator Voinovich in his 2010 farewell speech said that his 
greatest frustration was the difficulty in finding common ground on 
significant issues, saying that ``it doesn't happen enough.''
  In fact, the need for bipartisanship and the lack of it in the Senate 
is a hallmark of Senate farewell speeches. Rather than expounding on 
this topic, I would like to share the instances where I have 
experienced it.
  I found it working with my colleague Senator John Thune, as we put 
aside our political differences and worked as our constituents expected 
two Norwegians to work. We worked side by side as we pushed for farm 
bills, highway funding, emergency relief from droughts and from floods. 
We successfully fought the proposed BRAC closing of Ellsworth Air Force 
Base. However, honoring our Norweigian heritage, we never hugged.
  I found it on the banking committee, working closely with Ranking 
Member Crapo. Together, we reached middle ground on reforms in which 
both parties gave up significant priorities, compromising, finding the 
middle ground to pass bills out of committee.
  My best and most enduring memory of this magnificent body occurred 
during my 9-month absence following my AVM, a long and humbling 
journey. During this journey my committee assignments were respected 
and my friend from Rhode Island Senator Jack Reed graciously accepted 
extra responsibilities until my return. Senator Harry Reid told me that 
during my long absence my colleagues on the other side of the aisle 
never once tried to take advantage of my absence. More importantly, in 
so many ways the kind words and prayers from you and your spouses, on 
both sides of the aisle, supported both Barbara and me and gave us 
strength during my long and continuing recovery.
  I was grateful and humbled by your support on September 9, 2007, the 
day I returned to the Senate when almost every chair in this Chamber 
was filled. Senator Reid and Senator McConnell, I thank you for your 
welcome back to the Senate family.
  In the years ahead, I will miss this family--not the bickering that I 
mentioned earlier, but the blessings that you have all been to Barbara 
and me.
  I would also like to thank another family that has been critical to 
my work for South Dakota--a family that goes by the name ``Team 
Johnson.'' This team is composed of highly talented and caring 
individuals. They have worked tirelessly in the halls of Congress, in 
South Dakota, and on campaigns to make our State and our country a 
better place to live.
  I wish I could thank each one of you for your service. Please know 
how much I appreciated the long hours and late nights that you put in. 
In the years ahead I hope we will continue to celebrate the friendships 
we have forged.
  To my friend and chief of staff for 30 years, Drey Samuelson, thank 
you for joining my fledgling, uphill race for Congress in 1986 and for 
staying with me until we close the Senate office in a few days. Few 
Members of Congress have been as fortunate as I have been to have the 
loyalty, friendship, and thoughtful guidance that you have given me.
  My legislative directors have all been remarkable, but time limits me 
to noting the services of two individuals who have served the longest. 
Dwight Fettig started with us in the House as a young man fresh from 
his internship with Senator Byron Dorgan of North Dakota. Dwight rose 
through the ranks to legislative director and then became my first 
director on the banking committee. Todd Stubbendieck is my current LD, 
and his legislative guidance for over 10 years has guided the staff in 
moving critical legislation through the Senate. Todd and Dwight have 
worked on legislation for projects that now deliver water to hundreds 
of thousands of people across South Dakota, country of origin labeling 
bills, farm bills, national historic sites for Lewis and Clark and the 
Minute Man Missile, numerous projects for Ellsworth Air Force Base and 
the South Dakota National Guard with efficiency and collegiality. To 
Todd and Dwight, thank you for your outstanding legislative teams.
  Our No. 1 researcher, humorist, historian, and go-to person, Luci 
Weigel, has been with us since we opened the first offices. Thank you, 
Luci.
  To my South Dakota State director, Sharon Boysen, thank you for 
leading the three State offices, for ensuring that we were responsive 
to South Dakotans, and for coordinating with the DC office.
  Sharon Stroschein, who directed the Aberdeen office, and Darrell 
Shoemaker, who managed the Raid City office, have been outstanding 
leaders for 28 years. You and all the State staff have been great 
advocates for South Dakota. You made sure that I always knew what was 
on the minds of South Dakotans, that I visited crisis situations, 
nonprofits, local and tribal governments, promising businesses, 
schools, and much more. Thank you.

  Linda Robison, thank you for your dedication, willingness to go the 
extra mile, and your outreach to and service for our State's veterans 
for 28 years.
  The Senate office only needed one office manager for the last 18 
years. Nancy Swenson is the most efficient, precise, and insightful 
person I know. The University of South Dakota will be forever grateful 
when they receive the archives Nancy assembled. Thank you.
  To the Senate standing committees on banking and MILCON, you have 
served our Nation well, and I know you will continue to do so in the 
future. Thank you for your leadership on important issues.
  I am looking forward to the years ahead and the time we will share.
  To my wife Barbara and our three children--Brooks, Brendan, and 
Kelsey--thank you for your unwavering support, for putting up with 
late-night dinners, for accepting that my work demanded that I be away 
so many weekends, and for working side by side with me on challenging 
campaigns. Without your understanding, love, and support, I could not 
have done the work I love.
  Finally, to the people of South Dakota, thank you for the honor and 
privilege of serving you in our State legislature, the House of 
Representatives, and the United States Senate. Thank you for working 
side by side with me to improve the lives of South Dakotans and our 
Nation.
  Pilamayaye.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  (Applause, Senators rising.)
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Dakota.


                         Tribute to Tim Johnson

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I rise today to bid farewell to my 
colleague and friend Senator Tim Johnson.
  Tim has deep roots in South Dakota and in the towns of Canton and 
Vermillion in particular. He has served our State for more than 35 
years, first in the State legislature and then, after winning a highly 
competitive primary against two well-known Democratic opponents, in the 
Halls of Congress. In 1996, after a decade in the U.S. House of 
Representatives, Tim won his first of three terms in the U.S. Senate. I 
am well acquainted with his second election because I came out on the 
short end of that stick. But I have had the privilege of serving with 
Tim now in the South Dakota delegation for over 16 years, and the last 
10 have been here in the Senate. Today I want to pay tribute to his 
many years of public service and all he has done for our home State.
  I would also like to take a moment to thank Senator Johnson's staff 
for their dedicated work. They have worked closely with my staff for 
many years, and I am grateful for their efforts.
  Like many South Dakotans, I will always remember Tim as a fighter. 
South Dakotans are tough, rugged folks, and Tim has exemplified that 
spirit every day in the Senate. A big part of his legacy as a public 
servant will be his tenacity, his work ethic, and his unwavering focus 
on the policies he believed to be in the best interest of South Dakota.
  Tim and I haven't always seen eye to eye on every issue, but we have 
always been able to come together and work with South Dakotans in times 
of crisis. From drought relief, to flood and tornado responses, to 
protecting the Black Hills from wildfires, Senator Johnson and I have 
always been able to quickly

[[Page S6587]]

respond to the needs of our State regardless of party differences or 
past disagreements.
  Mr. President, when you represent a State like South Dakota--what 
some people like to call a flyover State, a State some of our 
colleagues here in the Senate occasionally mix up with North Dakota--
there are days when it can seem as though the concerns of rural 
Americans aren't given fair consideration and the needs of rural 
America are not being heard by the administration or the more densely 
populated areas of our country.
  I have had the great pleasure of working with Tim to bring a voice to 
the concerns of rural America and those of us who hail from the middle 
of the country. To highlight just one of the many examples I could 
bring up, since his first term in Congress Tim has fought tirelessly 
for water infrastructure to deliver clean drinking water to families in 
South Dakota and throughout the Great Plains. Water is a vital resource 
in the rural expanses of South Dakota, and Tim's efforts have helped 
meet this basic need in underserved Indian reservations, small towns, 
and rural areas across the State. These investments will pay dividends 
well beyond his tenure in the Senate.
  Throughout Tim's long career in public service--from his beginnings 
in the legislature to his ascension to the chairmanship of the Senate 
banking committee--he has had a hand in numerous efforts that will help 
South Dakotans and Americans alike for generations to come.
  I know I speak for all South Dakotans when I say thank you, Tim, for 
your dedication and your service to our great State. It has been an 
honor to serve with you here in the United States Senate. Thank you for 
your example, your efforts on behalf of our beloved South Dakota, and 
most of all for your friendship. On behalf of my wife Kimberly and me, 
I wish you, Barbara, and your family the very best as you begin your 
retirement.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York.


                   Unanimous Consent Request--S. 2992

  Mrs. GILLIBRAND. The DOD just reported that in 2014 almost the same 
number of servicemembers--19,000--reported unwanted sexual contact as 
in 2010. Still, fewer than 3 out of 10 are willing to report. The 
overall percentage of those who are reporting openly and seeking 
justice is declining, and a striking 62 percent retaliation rate went 
unchanged from 2012. Despite retaliation having been made a crime in 
last year's NDAA, the Pentagon reports no indication of progress on 
that front. Despite the Pentagon's spin, these numbers do not show an 
increased trust in a system that simply isn't working for the men and 
women in uniform.
  I wish to draw attention to comments made earlier this year by the 
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, GEN Martin Dempsey. He said:

       We are currently on the clock, if you will . . . the 
     President of the United States said to us in December, you 
     know what, you've got about a year to review this thing and 
     show me you can make a difference . . . we understand that 
     just because Senator Gillibrand's vote was defeated yesterday 
     doesn't mean that a year from now it may not be reintroduced, 
     and if we haven't been able to demonstrate making a 
     difference, you know, then we deserve to be held to the 
     scrutiny and standard.

  There is no other mission in the world for our military where this 
much failure would be allowed. Based on General Dempsey's own timeline, 
our men and women in uniform deserve a vote on this broadly bipartisan 
reform because the military has not been able to demonstrate that they 
have made a difference; therefore, they should be held to the scrutiny 
this year.
  Throughout last year we continued to see the evidence of how much 
further we have to go to solve the problem of sexual assaults in our 
military. We saw BG Jeffrey Sinclair--one of the highest ranking 
officers ever charged with sexual assault--walk away with a slap on the 
wrist, reportedly over fears that the commanding officer had rejected a 
plea deal on lesser charges for political reasons despite stated 
concerns over evidence.
  That case brings up the very important issue of undue command 
influence--another reason why an independent justice system is needed. 
We should all be able to agree that our brave men and women in uniform 
deserve blind justice. The scale should not be tipped in either 
direction--in favor of a victim or an accused. Why should our 
servicemembers enjoy a lesser standard of justice and fairness than you 
and I, whose freedoms they risk everything to protect?
  According to a recent story in the New York Times, an attendee of a 
sexual assault prevention seminar was asked if things were improving. 
She said:

       We all laughed. Sinclair was happening then. He proved that 
     it was a joke.

  The Times also chronicled the story of a survivor they called Kris, 
from Ellsworth Air Force Base. On April 12, 2013, about two dozen male 
officers of the 37th Bomb Squadron gathered at a strip club at the 
beginning of a pub crawl--including her commander. She was assaulted 
later that night. According to the Times:

       What Kris encountered since reporting the assault was the 
     same kind of cold-shouldered skepticism on the part of her 
     commander that Christensen had seen in a vast majority of 
     sexual assault cases--behavior that was supposed to have 
     changed with the military's recent vows to support those who 
     reported sex crimes.

  Further, she was retaliated against, which is now supposed to be a 
crime, and was told by a commander, ``It's illogical for you to think 
that there won't be negative consequences to your reporting.''
  She said: ``I was put on a shelf.''
  Why in the world would we want this commander who takes his team to a 
strip club and retaliates against a sexual assault victim to have the 
authority to decide if a crime was committed? It is insane, and it is 
beneath our military members.
  I could read many more troubling cases, but perhaps the most eye-
opening instance showing the ongoing lack of accountability was 
revealed in testimony by a witness at a court-martial on September 24, 
2014--just 2 months ago. In this case, former Fort Leonard Wood drill 
sergeant Angel Sanchez was found guilty on multiple accounts of 
sexually assaulting female trainees. According to the witness, the 
command sergeant major at Fort Leonard Woods said--and remember this 
was just 2 months ago--``If any more sexual assault cases come 
forward'' the whole company of soldiers won't graduate--not ``I don't 
want to see any more sexual assaults''; rather, ``I don't want to see 
any more reports.''
  Here is how we really know the system is broken: When a cadet is 
instrumental in obtaining the first sexual assault convictions in over 
a decade at the Air Force Academy, he is expelled. When a chief 
prosecutor is too good at his job and briefs Members of Congress, he is 
retaliated against and forced out. When a survivor comes forward, she 
is put on a shelf.
  Time is short, but there is more than enough left for this Congress 
to actually do its job. We should not have more calls for just a little 
more time. The DOD has failed on this issue for over 20 years now, and 
the scandals of the last 12 months and the latest data show they still 
don't get it.
  As USA Today said:

       Over the decades, sexual scandals have spurred cycles of 
     Pentagon apologies, congressional handwringing, half-baked 
     attempts at action and nibble-around-the-edges changes. Isn't 
     it time that women and men who serve their country so nobly 
     have a justice system that will serve them when they are 
     victims of crime?

  I agree. Congress should vote to remove the chain of command from 
these crises before year's end. Our servicemembers deserve no less.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at a time to be 
determined by the majority leader, after consultation with the 
Republican leader, the Senate proceed to the consideration of Calendar 
No. 644, S. 2992, the Military Justice Improvement Act, that there be 
up to 1 hour equally divided between the proponents and opponents of 
the bill prior to a vote on passage of the bill; that the vote on 
passage be subject to a 60-affirmative vote threshold; finally, that 
there be no amendments, points of order, or motions in order to the 
bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. INHOFE. I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I think it might be appropriate for the 
ranking member of the appropriate personnel subcommittee to be heard on 
this. In

[[Page S6588]]

my opinion, he is the most knowledgeable person on this subject at this 
time, and that would be Senator Graham.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
  Mr. GRAHAM. I join in the objection with Senator Inhofe. I appreciate 
what Senators Inhofe and Levin have done over the last couple of years, 
working in a bipartisan fashion, to make sure we deal with a problem in 
the military that is a problem in society, sexual assault, sexual 
harassment, and to set a zero-tolerance policy, but at the same time 
keep the military in a position to defend this country.
  What can we say about our military? We heard Senator Gillibrand's 
view. My view is that this is the finest military in the world--great 
people. But within that construct, you have people doing things that 
are criminal, wrong. But is it any different in the military than it is 
anywhere else?
  My argument is this is a societal problem, and in the military it is 
a problem that is being addressed in, I think, a very aggressive 
fashion. Contrary to what the Senator from New York offers the Senate, 
I like where we are headed.
  In March, we rejected her approach. Her approach was to fire every 
commander and replace the commander with a bunch of military lawyers to 
make decisions not just about sexual assault but about aspects of 
military life far beyond that.
  I know the Presiding Officer has been a military commander, and 
barracks theft is a very big deal in the military. When you are in the 
military and you find out someone has stolen from another member of the 
unit, and you are all living together on top of each other, side by 
side, that is a very big deal, and the commander responsible for that 
unit needs to make sure something happens fairly.
  The last matter I will ever agree to is the following: Sir, or 
ma'am--this is the first sergeant going to the commander--last night we 
think there may have been a rape in the barracks, and the commander 
says, well, that is no longer my problem, send that over to the 
lawyers. What a terrible thing to do to a military unit. The commander 
needs more accountability, not less. The commander is the person whom 
we choose to send people to war.
  It is odd, to me, that we will give the commanders of the American 
military the power of life-and-death decisions, but somehow they are so 
morally corrupt or incapable of rendering justice in a situation such 
as this.
  All I can say is that I respect the passion of the people who are 
behind this to a point, but you are going too far. Members on the other 
side of the aisle have been threatened with money being cut off if they 
vote against this idea. This is no longer about reforming a system, 
this is a political cause going out of control.
  In my view, the good thing about the Armed Services Committee is that 
we have always been able, for the most part, to work out problems that 
affect our military.
  And I say to Senator Levin, through the Chair, above all others, I 
appreciate my colleague's maturity and leadership to make sure we get 
the right answer. The right answer is to purge the military of the 
heinous crime of sexual assault, sexual harassment, clean up this mess, 
but do not destroy the structure that makes it the finest military on 
the planet, and we are well on our way.
  Senator Gillibrand's bill last year did not make it through the 
Senate, but another bill did. Senator Ayotte, Senator McCaskill, 
Senator Fischer, along with the chairman, and others, came up with a 
reform package that I think was passed unanimously last March.
  What do we now know from the recent report? You would have to have 
such a bias about your view to believe that this report doesn't show 
progress. By any objective measurement, the reforms we have been 
working on in a bipartisan fashion are beginning to bear fruit.
  I will give an example of some of those reforms. Every victim of a 
sexual assault or of sexual harassment allegations in the military is 
to be assigned an individual lawyer--a judge advocate--to represent 
their interests.
  I don't know about other States, but in South Carolina, we are miles 
away from that. The goal of the Senators that I have just mentioned, 
and myself, is to make sure that the military is the most victim-
friendly legal system in America, but a person can still get a fair 
trial. That should be the goal of all of us, to ensure that every 
victim has a lawyer.
  I have been a judge advocate for 32 years now. I have thought long 
and hard of the times that I have known a lawyer in the legal community 
recommend to the commander: Go forward on a sexual assault case, and 
the commander says no. There is literally a handful, or less, that I 
can think of. However, I do know that there are a lot more cases where 
the lawyer says: Sir, or ma'am, we don't think we have enough here to 
prove this beyond a reasonable doubt, and the commander will say: Go 
for it anyway. I want to make sure we air this out. That is the most 
common use of a commander's discretion vis-a-vis their lawyer.
  But to those who are worried about making sure the commanders and 
lawyers understand where we are coming from, we made a wholesale change 
of how they report and dispose of these cases. If a judge advocate 
recommends to the military commander in question to go forward and the 
commander says no, that commander's decision to say no is reviewed by 
the Secretary of the Service. In my case, it is the Secretary of the 
Air Force. If an Air Force commander is given legal advice by their 
JAG, informing us that we have a good case in the area of sexual 
assault, and the commander says no, it goes all the way up to the 
Secretary of the Air Force. As anybody who has ever been in the 
military knows, that is a very big deal. That is the ultimate sign that 
we expect people to treat these allegations seriously.
  If the JAG and the commander say no to the prosecution, it goes to 
the next step in the chain of command. What did this report say--and I 
will let Senator Levin detail some of the results. The big takeaway is 
that more people are coming forward, which is a good thing. More people 
are telling us they feel better able to come forward because the system 
is more understanding. The lawyer who has been provided to the victim 
has been received very well.
  The number of reports, restricted reports--where a victim says, I am 
going to tell you about what happened to me, but I don't want to go 
through the process of prosecuting somebody because I don't want to go 
through that process myself--that are now unrestricted has gone up 
fairly dramatically, meaning that the victim believes there will be 
somebody there helping them through the system.
  Retaliation is a problem all over society. I don't know of any law in 
South Carolina that makes it a specific crime in the eyes of the victim 
to retaliate against bringing an allegation forward.
  Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, it is a crime to 
retaliate against someone making an assault complaint. The retaliation 
portion of the report--where 62 percent felt retaliation--mostly came 
from peer, lower level members of the unit, not the commander.
  Here is what I would say: Once the commander goes forward and gives 
his blessing to the allegation, retaliation is going to be less likely 
because it was the commander who made the decision in that unit and not 
a far-off lawyer.
  I will now turn this over to Senators Inhofe and Levin.
  There are so many more reforms that are paying dividends. So many of 
them have not even started yet.
  I have to say we are on the right track. Let's give this a chance. We 
are taking this seriously. The military is responding in a positive 
fashion and now is not the time to retreat from these reforms. I do 
believe what we have done today will help us tomorrow, and our goal is 
common--to eliminate the scourge of sexual assault and sexual 
harassment, but keep the military command structure the way it is 
because it is necessary to hold our commanders more accountable.
  I will end with this thought. There is no problem in the military 
that can be solved without commander buy-in. That is the role of the 
commander. To everybody who wonders about what is going on in the 
military legal community, this colonel who feels put upon--if I am the 
head of the subcommittee--will get a chance to come to our committee 
with Senator Gillibrand and

[[Page S6589]]

myself, if I am there, to give an accounting of what they think went 
wrong with the system and how they were treated, and the Air Force will 
be required to respond.
  Every judge advocate of every branch of the service opposes the 
Gillibrand approach. Every commander and every member of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff oppose what Senator Gillibrand is proposing, for very 
good reason. Give these reforms a chance.
  To all of those who worked on this, congratulations. We are moving in 
the right direction, but we have a long way to go.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
  Mr. LEVIN. We are going to vote soon on cloture on--by the way, I 
understand there was an objection to the unanimous consent request by 
Senator Gillibrand.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
  Mr. LEVIN. It is an objection which I join. I understand she wishes 
to respond for 1 minute. I have no objection, as long as we can really 
do it in 1 minute because I would like to close the debate prior to the 
vote on cloture. My friend from Oklahoma, the ranking member, also 
wants to make a comment.
  Mrs. GILLIBRAND. I ask for 1 minute.
  Mr. LEVIN. I will yield for 1 minute.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York.
  Mrs. GILLIBRAND. I wish to clarify a few things that are very 
misleading about this debate.
  First of all, we are not making commanders less responsible. They are 
the only ones who can prevent retaliation from happening, whether it is 
by them or lower ranks, and they are failing in that right now. The 
only difference this bill makes is that 3 percent of commanders--the 
highest ranking commanders, generals--will no longer make this 
decision, but instead trained military prosecutors should make that 
decision. Ninety-seven percent of commanders' jobs do not change. They 
have to train their forces, bring them into battle, instill order and 
discipline, and make sure these victims are not retaliated against, and 
that is where they are failing. We are making commanders more 
responsible, not less responsible.
  What I want is not the most victim-friendly place in the world. I 
want no victims, and that is where we are failing.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
  Mr. LEVIN. We are going to vote on cloture on H.R. 3979 soon, which 
represents the agreement between the Armed Services Committees of the 
Senate and the House on the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2015.
  I urge my colleagues--I know my good friend from Oklahoma, the 
ranking member, joins in this urging--to support cloture so we can 
enact this important bill into law.
  The Armed Services Committee approved the defense authorization bill 
by a 25-to-1 vote in May.
  In June, Senator Inhofe and I came to the Senate floor to urge 
Senators to begin to file amendments to the bill so we could work on a 
package of cleared amendments and try to identify relevant amendments 
that would need votes. We made the same request in July.
  When our efforts failed to bring about a unanimous consent to bring 
the committee-reported bill to the floor with an opportunity to offer 
relevant amendments, we began to meet with the House Armed Services 
Committee in an effort to reach a bipartisan agreement that could be 
presented to the two Houses for approval in the form of a new bill.
  We also established an informal clearing process pursuant to which we 
were able to clear 44 Senate amendments--roughly an equal number of 
Democratic and Republican amendments--which are included in the bill 
that is now before us. The process is far from ideal, but it was the 
best we could do under the circumstances.
  We now have before us a bill that is the product of a bipartisan, 
bicameral agreement between the Armed Services Committees of the Senate 
and the House of Representatives.
  The House has already passed this bill by a vote of 300 to 119.
  This bill includes hundreds of important provisions to authorize the 
activities of the Department of Defense and provide for the well-being 
of our men and women in uniform and their families. The bill will 
enable the military services to continue paying special pays and 
bonuses needed for recruitment and retention of key personnel. It 
strengthens survivor benefits for disabled children of servicemembers 
and retirees. It includes provisions addressing the employment of 
military spouses, job placement for veterans, and military child 
custody disputes. It addresses military hazing, military suicides, 
post-traumatic stress disorder, and mental health problems in the 
military. It provides continued impact aid to support military families 
and local school districts.
  The bill includes 20 provisions to continue to build on the progress 
we are starting to make in addressing the scourge of sexual assault in 
the military. It provides continued funding and authorities for ongoing 
operations in Afghanistan and for our forces conducting operations 
against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria--ISIS. It takes important 
steps to respond to Russian aggression in Ukraine. It adds hundreds of 
millions of dollars in funding to begin to restore the readiness of our 
Armed Forces. And it begins to make some of the structural changes that 
are needed to enable DOD to perform its essential missions in an era of 
tight budgets.
  The process may have been flawed, but we have done everything we 
could to overcome those flaws and produce a defense bill that does the 
right thing for the national defense and for our troops.
  I urge my colleagues to vote for cloture on the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015.
  We have produced a defense bill that does the right thing for our 
national defense and for our troops. I hope our colleagues will vote 
for cloture. I hope I have a minute left to yield to the ranking 
member.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. INHOFE. I know we are out of time. The vote is going to take 
place in 1 minute and we all appreciate that.
  I will repeat what I think is most significant: We have to pass this 
bill. The House is going to go home. There is no way of making any 
changes at this point. It has to pass. If it doesn't pass, when 
December 31 gets here, there will be 1.8 million enlisted personnel 
throughout the country at all of our establishments who are going to 
lose their benefits. I am talking about pilots' pay, flight pay. I am 
talking about the SEALS who have extraordinary duties and all the rest 
of them. These benefits will be taken away from our enlisted personnel 
if we don't pass this bill. In order to pass this bill, we have to pass 
this procedural vote that will take place right now.
  So I encourage everyone to keep in mind, if my colleagues truly want 
to help our enlisted personnel, they have to have this bill and this 
bill has to pass now.


                             CLOTURE MOTION

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before 
the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

                             Cloture Motion

       We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the 
     provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, 
     hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to 
     concur in the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 
     3979.
         Harry Reid, Carl Levin, Brian Schatz, Martin Heinrich, 
           John E. Walsh, Patty Murray, Jack Reed, Tom Udall, 
           Sheldon Whitehouse, Amy Klobuchar, Christopher A. 
           Coons, Debbie Stabenow, Robert Menendez, Tom Harkin, 
           Richard J. Durbin, Charles E. Schumer, Robert P. Casey, 
           Jr.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum 
call has been waived.
  The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the 
motion to concur in the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 
3979 shall be brought to a close?
  The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Iowa (Mr. Harkin) is 
necessarily absent.

[[Page S6590]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 85, nays 14, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 322 Leg.]

                                YEAS--85

     Alexander
     Ayotte
     Baldwin
     Barrasso
     Begich
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Blunt
     Booker
     Boozman
     Boxer
     Brown
     Burr
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Chambliss
     Coats
     Cochran
     Collins
     Coons
     Donnelly
     Durbin
     Enzi
     Feinstein
     Fischer
     Flake
     Franken
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hagan
     Hatch
     Heinrich
     Heitkamp
     Heller
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johanns
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson (WI)
     Kaine
     King
     Kirk
     Klobuchar
     Landrieu
     Leahy
     Levin
     Manchin
     Markey
     McCain
     McCaskill
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Nelson
     Portman
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Scott
     Sessions
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Thune
     Toomey
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Vitter
     Walsh
     Warner
     Warren
     Whitehouse
     Wicker

                                NAYS--14

     Coburn
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Gillibrand
     Lee
     Merkley
     Moran
     Paul
     Risch
     Rubio
     Sanders
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--1

       
       
     Harkin
       
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 85, the nays are 
14.
  Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn having voted in 
the affirmative, the motion is agreed to.
  Cloture having been invoked, the motion to refer falls as being 
inconsistent with cloture.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, 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. COBURN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                         Farewell to the Senate

  Mr. COBURN. Mr. President, following in the traditions of the Senate, 
I come to the floor to speak about my experience in the Senate. 
Unfortunately, this will not be the last time I speak, much to the 
chagrin of many of you, as I have some adamant opposition to some of 
the things we are doing.
  But I nevertheless will try to put in context some of my feelings and 
thoughts about the great privilege that has been granted to me by the 
people of Oklahoma. We hear a lot of speeches in this place. As Members 
who are elected, it gets reflected on us, but nothing could be further 
from the truth. Because the things that really make this place operate 
are the people who work with us, the people who support us, the people 
who help guide us, the people behind the scenes who are both brilliant 
and committed and dedicated to the founding principles of this country.
  We all have them working for us. Yet they are rarely recognized. So 
whether our accomplishments are big or small, those accomplishments 
come through the work, efforts, and labors of those who join with us as 
we come here to try to make a difference. So I first wanted to say 
there are a lot of people I need to say thank you to; from our 
Parliamentarian Elizabeth to all of the staff who work in the Senate, 
to the people who work at GAO, wonderful people, CRS, the IGs, 
legislative counsel--they have written thousands, I mean literally 
thousands of amendments for me. They probably are going to have some 
real mixed feelings about my departure. Then I have personal staff, one 
of whom--all tremendous--but one of whom I found to be a phenomenal, 
brilliant person. His name is Roland Foster. There is not anything he 
has ever forgotten. You can ask him anything. He will find it. He knows 
it. So I mention him. I have hundreds of others whom I could equally 
speak about, from my former chief of staff Mike Schwartz, who passed 
away from Lou Gehrig's disease, to those in my office and staff who 
each knows what a difference they make--they did--the cloakroom staff 
and the help we get from Laura Dove and David Schiappa and Mr. Duncan 
on our side--same on the opposite side. We are only able to function 
because of all of the people who enable us to do that. So with those 
thank-yous, I actually wanted to move to a different topic. The topic 
is believing in our country. I tell people wherever I go: We do not 
have one problem we cannot solve. There is nothing too big for us. They 
are all solvable.
  To prove that is my chairman, Tom Carper, on homeland security. He 
has been a phenomenal chairman. He is not in my party. We do not agree 
on everything, but the one thing we agreed on was that we were going to 
work together to solve problems. We have. We did not solve them all, 
but I would suggest if we look at what has come through this place, 
even in this dysfunctional place at this time, we will see more coming 
out under his leadership than any other pieces of legislation. Why is 
that? It is because the focus was not about him, it was not about me, 
it was about solving the problems of our country.
  To those of you through the years whom I have offended, I truly 
apologize. I think none of that was intended because I actually see 
things differently. You see, I believe our Founders were absolutely 
brilliant, far smarter than we are. I believe the enumerated powers 
meant something. They were meant to protect us against what history 
says always happens to a Republic. They have all died. They have all 
died.
  So the question is, What will happen with us? Can we cheat history? 
Can we do something better than was done in the past? I honestly 
believe we can, but I do not believe we can if we continue to ignore 
the wisdom of our founding documents. So when I have offended, I 
believe it has been on the basis of my belief in article I, section 8. 
I think we can stuff that genie back into the bottle.
  E pluribus unum. ``Out of many, one.'' But you do not have one unless 
you have guaranteed the liberty of the many. When we ignore what the 
Constitution gave us as a guideline, to protect the individual 
liberties, to limit the size and scope of the Federal Government so the 
benefits of freedom and liberty can be expressed all across this land, 
that is when we get back to solving our problems.
  I think about my father--he had a fifth-grade education--a great 
believer in our country. He would not recognize it today. The loss of 
freedom we have imposed by the arrogance of an all-too-powerful Federal 
Government, ignoring the wisdom and writing of our Founders that said: 
Above all, we must protect the liberty of the individual and recognize 
that liberty is given as a God-given right.
  So my criticism isn't directed personally, it is because I truly 
believe that freedom gains us more than anything we can plan here. I 
know not everybody agrees with me, but the one thing I do know is that 
our Founders agreed with me.
  They had studied this process before. They know what happens when you 
dominate from a central government. This didn't mean intentions are 
bad; the intentions are great. The motivations of people in this body 
are wonderful, but the perspective on how we do it and what the long-
term consequences are of how we do it really do matter.
  We see ourselves today with a President whom we need to be supporting 
and praying for, with an economy that is not doing what it could be 
doing, and we need to be asking the question, Why? Is there a 
fundamental reason? And there is.
  We are too much involved in the decisionmaking in the economy in this 
country that inhibits the flow of capital to the best return, which 
inhibits the growth of wealth, which leaves us at a standard of living 
the same as what we had in 1988. That is where we are, yet it doesn't 
have to be that way.
  I am going to read some words we have all heard before, but they are 
worth rereading.

       WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are 
     created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with 
     certain unalienable Rights . . .

  All of us.

     . . . that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of 
     Happiness--

  I look at legislation and say how does that have an impact on those 
two things, and too often it has a negative impact.

     . . . That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted 
     among Men, deriving

[[Page S6591]]

     their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that 
     whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these 
     Ends, it is the right of the People to alter or abolish it.

  I don't know where we are on that continuum, but I know we are not 
where we were intended to be in the vision of our Founders, and we are 
suffering, no matter where you are in the country, as a consequence.
  We established the Constitution to try to protect those rights and to 
delineate those rights. We put in the limitation of the government and 
outlined the rights of each individual citizen upon which the 
government shall not infringe. Yet what comes out of this body and this 
Congress every day, to my chagrin, infringes those guaranteed rights.
  Every Member of the Senate takes the same oath and this is where I 
differ with a lot of colleagues. Let me read the oath, because I think 
it is part of the problem.

       I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and 
     defend the Constitution of the United States against all 
     enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith 
     and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation 
     freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; 
     and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of 
     the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

  Your State isn't mentioned one time in that oath. Your whole goal is 
to protect the United States of America, its Constitution and its 
liberties. It is not to provide benefits for your State. That is where 
we differ. That is where my conflict with my colleagues has come. It is 
nice to be able to do things for your State, but that isn't our charge. 
Our charge is to protect the future of our country by upholding the 
Constitution and ensuring the liberty that is guaranteed there is 
protected and preserved.
  The magic number in the Senate is not 60, the number of Senators 
needed to end debate, and it is not 51, a majority. The most important 
number in the Senate is one--one Senator. That is how it was set up. 
That is how our Founders designed it, and with that comes tremendous 
amounts of responsibility, because the Senate has a set of rules or at 
least that gives each individual Member the power needed to advance, 
change, or stop legislation. That is a tool that has to be mentored and 
refined and wise in its application.
  Most of the bills that pass the Senate never receive a vote. We all 
know that. It is a vast majority of the bills. They are approved by 
unanimous consent. It only takes a single Senator to withhold consent 
to stop most legislation.
  There are many other rules and procedures a Member can use. They are 
often referred to as arcane, but that is only because they are rarely 
used. They are not arcane. They were designed to protect liberty, to 
secure liberty, to make sure that we don't all follow history and fail.
  Every Senator has the power to introduce legislation and, until 
recently, offer amendments.
  No single Senator should be allowed to decide what the rights of 
another Senator should be. That is tyranny. It has nothing to do with 
the history and classics of the Senate.
  To exercise the rights we have been entrusted with, we must respect 
the rights of others. That is the true power of our Constitution. That 
is also the true power of the Senate. It is what binds our Nation 
together, and it is what is needed to make the Senate work properly 
again.
  The Senate was designed uniquely to force compromise, not to force 
gridlock--to force compromise. One Senator had the power to stop 
everything for the first 100 years, but it didn't because compromise 
was the goal.
  Our Founders understood there were many differences between the 
States--in size, geography, economy, and opinions. They united the 
States as one country based upon the premise that the many are more 
powerful than the one. As Senators, we have to follow this example. I 
have not always done that; I admit that freely to you. I should have. 
As Senators, we must follow the example, stand for our principles, but 
working to find those areas of agreement where compromise can be found 
to unite and move our country forward. My colleague Senator Carper has 
my admiration because he has worked tirelessly the past 2 years to try 
to accomplish that.

  Not all of the powers of the Senators are exercised on the Senate 
floor. Each Member of the Senate has a unique role to participate and 
practice oversight, to hold the government accountable, and that is 
part of our duties, except most often that is the part of our duties 
that is most ignored.
  To know how to reach a destination, you must first know where you 
are, and without oversight--effective, vigorous oversight--you will 
never solve anything. You cannot write a bill to fix an agency unless 
you have an understanding of the problem, and you can only know this by 
conducting oversight, asking the tough questions, holding the 
bureaucrats accountable, find out what works and what doesn't, and know 
what has already been done.
  Effective oversight is an effective tool to expose government 
overreach and wasteful spending, but it also markedly exposes where we 
lose our liberty and our essential freedoms.
  I have had some fun through the years, taken some criticism for the 
waste vote--and it is opinion, I agree. Everybody who has seen the 
waste book has a great defense of why it is there. But the real 
question is will we become efficient at how we spend the money of the 
American people? This is a big enterprise. There is no other enterprise 
anywhere close to it in size in the world. It is not manageable unless 
we all try to agree to manage it and have the knowledge of it.
  I think there ought to be 535 Wastebooks every year, and then we 
ought to have the debate about where we are not spending money wisely 
and have the information at our fingertips so we make great decisions 
because, quite frankly, we don't make great decisions because we don't 
have the knowledge. Then what knowledge we do have we transfer to a 
bureaucracy to make decisions about it when we should have been guiding 
those things.
  True debates about national priorities would come about if we did 
effective oversight. It is the Senate, once hailed as the world's 
greatest deliberative body, where these differences should be argued. 
Our differences should be resolved through civil discourse so they are 
not settled in the street.
  Just as the Constitution provides for majority rule and our democracy 
while protecting the rights of the individual, the Senate must return 
to the principles to bring trust of the electorate, and it can. Our 
Founders believed that protecting the minority views and minority 
rights in the Senate was essential to having a bicameral legislature 
that would give us balance and not move too quickly against the very 
fundamental principles upon which this country was based--and not out 
of guessing, but out of thorough knowledge of what had happened in the 
past. We have to be very careful to guard both minority rights and the 
rule of law.
  There is no one who works in the Senate who is insignificant, whether 
it is the people who serve us when we have lunch, to the highest of the 
high. They all deserve our ear. Each of us has value.
  I would end with one final comment. The greatest power I have not 
used as a Senator, which I would encourage you to use in the future, is 
the power of convening. You have tremendous power to pull people 
together because of your position.
  To convene the opposite opinions--Chuck Schumer has been great at 
that for me. When we have a difference, he wants to get together, 
convene, and see how we work. That power is the power that causes us to 
compromise, to come together, to reach consensus. So my encouragement 
to you is to rethink the utilization of the power of convening. People 
will come to you if you ask them to come.
  Again, I end by saying a great thank you to my family for their 
sacrifice, a great thank you to the wonderful staff I have, and a thank 
you to each of you for the privilege of having been able to work for a 
better country for us all.
  I yield the floor.
  (Applause, Senators rising.)


                         Tributes to Tom Coburn

  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Booker). The Senator from Georgia.
  Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, we have all just heard a very moving, a 
very inspirational and what I considered a motivational speech from our 
dear friend Tom Coburn.

[[Page S6592]]

  Twenty years ago, in 1994, there were a bunch of wild and crazy folks 
who got elected to the U.S. House of Representatives. The Republicans 
took the majority for the first time in 42 years. They ran on a 
Contract with America and were led by a group of firebrand leaders. Tom 
Coburn was in that group of folks who got elected in 1994 to the U.S. 
House. I was in that group. Senator Graham was in that group. Senator 
Burr was in that group. Senator Wicker was in that group.
  There were a few Members of that class who became known as real bomb 
throwers. Tom Coburn was a bomb thrower. Tom Coburn would object for 
the sake of objecting to anything that was going on. It didn't make any 
difference which side of the aisle it was coming from. But let me tell 
you, Tom Coburn matured into a class act, No. 1, which he always was; 
and No. 2, he matured into a legislator second to none.
  Tom did not hesitate to object to any spending bill that came from 
either party if Tom Coburn believed that was not provided for in the 
Constitution and was something the U.S. taxpayer should not be paying 
for. There is nobody who has guarded the pocketbook of the taxpayers of 
the United States like Tom Coburn.
  It is remarkable that those of us who were elected with Tom have had 
the opportunity to see him over the last 20 years take on major 
subjects that most veterans said, you know, in the end, we are going to 
prevail. But guess what. They never did. Tom Coburn, even though he may 
have lost a vote from time to time, in the end, Tom Coburn prevailed.
  Tom is one tough guy too. He has been through a lot physically and, 
boy, what a survivor. I mean we think we have issues to deal with. None 
of us can imagine what Tom has gone through. When somebody comes up to 
me as I am walking through an airport--and they will have seen Tom 
Coburn on TV--and they say: What about this guy Coburn, there are two 
things that immediately come to mind when I think of Tom Coburn, family 
and faith.
  First, family. Tom and Carolyn have had such a solid marriage. He 
tried to date her as an eighth grader and she wouldn't go out with him. 
But he kept pestering her long enough that she finally did and what a 
great marriage they have had. They have three beautiful daughters and a 
household of grandchildren whom he absolutely loves to death and likes 
to spend time with, as opposed to being here.
  Secondly, Tom's faith. There is nobody I have ever met who has a 
stronger faith than Tom Coburn. He exhibits it on the floor, he 
exhibits it one-on-one, he exhibits it in the Prayer Breakfast every 
Wednesday morning. He is one person who has probably counseled more 
people in this body, on both sides of the aisle, than anybody other 
than the Chaplain.
  On top of that, he is just a class act. He has been a dear friend. We 
have spent many hours on the road together, many hours on the golf 
course together and socializing together. There is no finer individual 
who ever served in the Senate than Tom Coburn. He is one of the things 
I am truly going to miss about leaving here. But actually, as we have 
already talked, we will probably now spend more time together than ever 
since both of us are retiring.
  But, Tom, to you, I thank you for that great friendship but also 
thank you for what you have done for my children and my grandchildren. 
You are a great American and you have served this country well.
  God bless you.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority leader.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, along with many of my other colleagues, 
I pay tribute to one of the most decent and principled men I have ever 
met, Senator Tom Coburn.
  Washington is going to miss Tom, but the irony of that is Tom really 
can't stand Washington. When he first got here, the feeling appeared to 
be mutual. Some just didn't know what to make of this doctor from 
Oklahoma--so frequently on the losing end of lopsided votes, so often 
pressing ahead on his own and never giving up. That was apparent from 
his days in the House, when we hear he led the only ``filibuster'' in 
the House anybody can ever remember. He may have placed more holds than 
any equivalent Senator in history. He apparently held his own bill 
once.
  Fast forward to today. The pundit class has declared Tom Coburn a 
card-carrying member of the establishment. The rebel who once described 
himself as a kamikaze pilot has now been branded, incredibly, with a 
scarlet ``E'' right on his forehead. It may seem contradictory, but Tom 
always fought smart battles--the kind you might lose today but win 
later--and he forged an amazing bond with the people he represents. For 
Tom that meant spending as much time away from Washington as possible 
and making himself available when he was home.
  Tom published his address, and Oklahomans were never shy about coming 
over to share their opinions. Tom was never shy about sharing how he 
felt either. He believed his constituents deserved the truth. He gave 
it to them absolutely unvarnished, but he did it in a respectful way.
  It reminds me of the two posters he has framed on either side of his 
desk. One says: ``NO,'' N-O. The other says ``KNOW,'' K-N-O-W. That is 
Tom in a nutshell. It is why Tom has made so many friends on both sides 
of the aisle. It is why you can't flip on MSNBC most mornings without 
seeing him.
  I think Tom actually prefers these settings. It is a challenge he 
relishes. Not only is Tom confident enough to tangle with anyone, he 
usually wins, and he rarely--rarely--makes lasting enemies. It is a 
trait that has served him well, particularly at the beginning of his 
career.
  Tom first came to Washington representing a district that was heavily 
Democratic. He won a close race that year. I am told he also gained a 
friend, and that friend was the Democrat he defeated. His opponent's 
grandson actually ended up joining Tom's staff, which obviously is a 
great honor.
  But it is no picnic being on Tom's staff. Tom works his staff hard. 
It is difficult even to take a sick day over there. Tom has always got 
the stethoscope nearby. If the doctor is in, so are you. Yet the people 
on Tom's team seem to love him. ``Once a member of Coburn's family, 
always a member.'' That is their motto.
  It doesn't mean they love everything about him. Take his handwriting; 
it is just what you would expect from a guy named Dr. Coburn. It is 
absolutely awful--a mix of chicken scratch, hieroglyphics, and vocab 
from the extra credit section of an MCAT.
  Back in the 1990s one staffer made the mistake of letting Tom take a 
yellow highlighter back to Oklahoma. Tom spent the entire weekend 
marking up a massive bill. There were handwritten notes and questions 
in nearly every margin. It took literally days to decipher any of it. 
It was like something out of a Dan Brown novel. Needless to say, an 
office ban on yellow highlighters was quickly implemented.
  So the legacy of Tom's former profession gets him in trouble 
sometimes, but it remains the job he enjoyed most: helping to deliver 
new lives into the world. It brings a unique perspective to Tom's work 
in the Senate. It instilled a lasting appreciation for life too.
  Even though Tom has stopped delivering babies these days, he still 
travels back to Oklahoma a lot. There is nowhere he would rather be 
than his hometown of Muskogee, and there is almost nothing he would 
rather be doing there than mowing his lawn or eating a sandwich at his 
favorite barbecue joint or sipping a cold Coors with olives. He prefers 
these things over almost anything else, except spending time with his 
grandkids and of course his wife Carolyn.
  Tom has known Carolyn since grade school. She has always been the one 
to keep him balanced and grounded. She doesn't care that he is a 
Senator. She frequently reminds him of that too.
  Carolyn is also the reason Tom is such good friends with President 
Obama. Both men came to the Senate the same year. At freshman 
orientation, Carolyn spotted Michelle Obama from across the room. ``She 
looks like fun,'' Carolyn said. ``Let's sit next to her.'' The rest, as 
they say, is history, and it is also remarkable. Because when Tom 
announced his retirement, warm sentiments poured in from across the 
political spectrum. It was a day--listen to this--when Barack Obama and 
Jim DeMint found something to agree on. It must have brought some joy 
to Tom at such a difficult time.
  As he departs the Senate, Tom will leave one battle behind to 
confront another. We are sending him every best

[[Page S6593]]

wish in that fight. We are keeping him in our prayers. We know he will 
prevail, but he is really going to be missed around here. He is just 
the type of citizen legislator our Founders envisioned.
  Tom has poured over more oversight documents than anyone cares to 
imagine. His ``Wastebook'' has become an annual phenomenon. It helps 
drive the conversation on spending. He has led on issues like HIV and 
malaria.

  The Senate will lose a critical leader on intelligence oversight when 
he leaves. Tom played an invaluable role on the Intelligence Committee, 
where he brought a unique blend of integrity, analytical rigor, and 
dogged determination. He served our Nation selflessly, toiling for 
hours every week in a secure hearing room, learning many sensitive 
matters he could not discuss with others.
  He worked closely with another extraordinary departing colleague, 
Vice Chair Saxby Chambliss, to ensure that our Nation's intelligence 
community retains the tools necessary to defend our country.
  If anyone thinks our Nation's classified programs aren't overseen 
rigorously, they certainly haven't met Tom Coburn. He brought a 
skeptic's eye and a professional determination to the task. His probing 
lines of questioning earned the respect of his colleagues and helped 
the intelligence community craft stronger programs, while also 
reminding us of the value of many other intelligence activities.
  Now, Tom has obviously done a lot to earn his reputation as a hawk on 
the budget, too. His interest there was never about the baubles of 
office. It is about solutions. That is why Tom actually volunteered for 
Simpson-Bowles. That is why he lobbied me to actually take him off--
believe it or not--of the Finance Committee.
  You always know where Tom stands. I am told he was overseas with a 
couple of other Senators when a government minister launched into a 
finger-wagging harangue about our country. Tom couldn't take it after 
he listened for a few minutes. He cut him off, told the minister what 
he thought of him, and caught the next flight home. So Tom is literally 
one of a kind. We are not likely to see another one like this guy.
  Here is what former Senator Kyl had to say about him:

       Tom's like your conscience. You can try to ignore him, but 
     you know he's right even when you wish he weren't.

  Some people may think Tom is a member of the establishment now, but 
the truth is Tom never changed. Washington changed. America changed.
  People recognize the wisdom of his ideas--about leaving a better 
country to the next generation, about giving Americans the freedom and 
the opportunity to achieve real meaning and lasting happiness in their 
lives.
  We are going to miss the Senator who actually likes to get his hands 
dirty, who actually likes to legislate. We are going to miss the 
Senator who is so devoted to procedure that he sleeps next to Marty 
Gold's book, and we are going to miss a friend who understands that 
honest compromise is necessary to achieve anything in a pluralistic 
society. We are all going to miss Tom a lot. But he can retire with 
pride, and he should know that we are sending him our best wishes for a 
speedy recovery and a joyful retirement.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maine.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I was not at all surprised as I listened 
to the words of our colleague Senator Tom Coburn that he quoted 
extensively from the Declaration of Independence and he referred to our 
Constitution--the founding documents of our great country.
  When America's Founders conceived of a nation of citizen legislators, 
they had leaders like Senator Tom Coburn in mind. Indeed, throughout 
his service in Congress, he has remained a compassionate physician, a 
devoted husband and father, a fierce defender of the rights enshrined 
in our Constitution, and an unwavering opponent of excessive spending.
  Senator Coburn may be best known as our most diligent fiscal 
watchdog, relentlessly hounding wasteful spending. His annual 
``Wastebook'' report is a call for transparency and accountability in 
the Federal Government that has guided oversight investigations and 
policy debates.
  The aspect of his service in the Senate that deserves just as much 
acclaim is his work on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental 
Affairs Committee and the Select Committee on Intelligence. Serving 
with Senator Coburn on both of those committees for many years, I have 
seen firsthand his brilliance, his tenacity, and his determination to 
strengthen our Nation and the safety of our people. He has a keen 
understanding of the grave and ever-evolving threats that our Nation 
faces.
  As a citizen legislator, Senator Coburn leads by example and with 
compassion. With his expertise as a physician, he has been a leader in 
promoting wellness, disease prevention, combatting HIV/AIDS, and 
advancing biomedical research. When it comes to fiscal responsibility, 
he walks the walk, having returned more than $1 million from his Senate 
office budget to the American taxpayers.
  We have heard many descriptions of Tom Coburn today, but the word I 
most associate with him is ``integrity.'' He is a man of the utmost 
integrity, who always stands tall for his principles and for what he 
believes in. He sets an example for all of us who seek to serve the 
public.
  On a personal note, I want to thank Senator Coburn for hounding me 
into joining a women's prayer breakfast that meets each week and has 
introduced me to a number of wonderful women from the House of 
Representatives who have become my close friends as well as colleagues. 
And I use the word ``hound'' appropriately. He mentioned it to me so 
many times that eventually I gave in and went to one of those 
breakfasts, and, indeed, it has been a spiritually enriching experience 
that I never would have had but for Tom continuing to press me to 
attend.
  This past January Senator Coburn announced his intention to leave the 
Senate, due in part to his deepening health problems--problems he has 
faced with extraordinary courage. This somber news was counterbalanced 
by his overarching concern, not for himself, but for his family and for 
the people of his State and our Nation.
  As he now returns to the life of a private citizen, I wish him every 
success in combatting his illness, and I thank him for his truly 
extraordinary service to our country. To quote from Scripture, I think 
everyone would agree with these words when it comes to Tom Coburn: 
``Well done, good and faithful servant.''
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware.
  Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I have no prepared remarks. I am trying to 
speak right from my heart, and my heart is full.
  I want to start off by thanking Tom for the very kind comments he 
made about serving with me. We met 10 years ago. He was that bomb 
thrower--still is a little bit--that Saxby talked about when they were 
elected 20 years ago. I was one of the people who came up, along with 
Lamar Alexander, George Voinovich, and Mark Pryor, for an orientation 
for new Senators so that when they got here we could actually spend 
some time and teach the new guys and gals the ropes.
  I remember the first day we convened and put them all in a big circle 
in Ted Stevens' office, a beautiful office here in the Capitol, and out 
of those 3 days Tom and Carolyn and Michelle and Barack began to bond 
and became friends. I didn't know how close friends they were until 
about 4 or 5 years ago. Barack Obama had given the State of the Union 
address. I was sitting on the Republican side. There was a time when we 
actually went back and forth to try to mix things up. The President 
finished his speech, and there is no rope line at those speeches. The 
President came along to shake hands with people. I was sitting next to 
Tom, and we walked down so we could say hi to the President.
  I will never forget what the President said to him. In just the quiet 
between the two of them--they embraced, and the President said to him: 
Are you still praying for me? And very quietly, Tom Coburn said: Every 
night.
  Just like that--they didn't agree on everything, but they were 
friends. They are friends, and they will always be friends. I hope Tom 
and I will be as well.
  I remember sitting up there where Cory Booker, our new Senator from

[[Page S6594]]

New Jersey, is sitting now, listening to Mike Enzi talking about how he 
worked so well with Ted Kennedy--Ted Kennedy, one of the most liberal 
Democrats in the Senate, and Mike Enzi, one of the most conservative--
and how they got extraordinary amounts of stuff done.
  I just want to say that the legislation coming out of our committee--
and Senator Collins has led that committee before--is moving through 
this body and the House--it is really pretty amazing--to strengthen our 
cyber defenses, to take the chemical facility antiterrorism law that 
Susan Collins authored and to make it better and make it real, to 
better protect our Nation's information from attacks from all over the 
world, to try to make our Postal Service not just relevant and not just 
hanging on but actually vibrant and real.
  But that day, Mike Enzi talked about the 80/20 rule with Ted Kennedy. 
He said: Ted Kennedy and I agree on about 80 percent of the stuff, and 
we disagree on 20 percent. He and I decided to focus on the 80 percent 
we agreed on and set aside the 20 percent we didn't agree on to another 
day.
  I call that the ``Enzi Rule,'' and that has helped guide me here in 
the Senate, and it certainly has helped to guide me in the work I have 
been privileged to do with Dr. Coburn.
  When I became chairman of the committee about 2 years ago and Dr. 
Coburn was going to be the ranking member of the committee, somebody 
asked me what it was going to be like. How are you going to work with 
this guy?
  I said: It is going to be a little like a marriage. You have to work 
at it every day. Everybody has to give and meet somewhere in the 
middle.
  I love to ask people who have been married a long time what the 
secret is for being married a long time. Some of you have maybe heard 
me talk about this. I get some really hilarious answers but also some 
really terrific and insightful answers.
  I think the best one I have ever gotten when I asked what is the 
secret for being married 40, 50, 60, 70 years is the two c's. It is not 
Coburn and Carper. It is the two c's: communicate and compromise. That 
is not only the secret for a vibrant, long marriage for two people; it 
is a secret for a vibrant democracy.
  I believe the reason why Tom and I have had this partnership that I 
think has been productive is, one, we surround ourselves with people--
certainly for me--smarter than us. The second thing is we believe in 
communicating, we believe in compromising, and we believe in 
collaborating. I think the American people are the beneficiaries of 
that.
  We have a reception later today for Tom, and I hope he comes. We will 
have the opportunity to say some more things, as well. He is not the 
kind of person who likes to be praised, so this is probably punishment. 
There is a verse in the Scriptures talking about heaping with praise, 
pouring praise all over. This is probably a little like that. But I 
want to close with this. His words on the Bowles-Simpson Commission are 
for the ages, and I hope we will never walk away from the lessons he 
showed us with his courage in supporting that work and helping to craft 
that work.

  There are words in the Scriptures, in Matthew 25, that talk about the 
least of these in our society. When I was sick, when I was hungry, when 
I was thirsty, when I was naked, when I was in prison--those are the 
questions. The answer: If you have done it to the least of these, you 
have done it also to Me.
  Senator Coburn believes we have a moral responsibility, a moral 
obligation to the least of these in our society. He also believes we 
have a fiscal obligation, a fiscal imperative to meet that moral 
obligation in a fiscally responsible way. And I think those two ideas 
guide him in his work, and, frankly, it is an inspiration to me.
  Last word. Leaders should be humble, not haughty. Leaders should lead 
by our example, not ``do as I say'' but ``do as I do.'' Leaders should 
have the heart of a servant. Leaders should have the courage to stay 
out of step when everyone else is marching to the wrong tune. Leaders 
ought to be committed to doing what is right, not what is easy. Leaders 
should treat other people the way they want to be treated. Tom has 
offended just about everybody in this body, but he always comes back 
and apologizes, and he has already done it here today. Leaders should 
focus on excellence in everything they do. If it isn't perfect, make it 
better. It is in the preamble of the Constitution--``in order to form a 
more perfect Union.'' That defines him. Finally, if you think you are 
right and you know you are right, never give up. That is what a leader 
should be about.
  For the years he served here and for a long time before that and for 
a long time to come, he has been that leader, and I feel lucky to say 
he is my friend.
  God bless you.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina.
  Mr. BURR. Mr. President, I feel surrounded by friends and colleagues 
who are getting ready to leave, and being part of that original class 
20 years ago, there is one thing that I have learned is extremely 
unique in Washington. I am next to two people who are voluntarily 
leaving. The toughest decision a Member of Congress ever makes is to 
leave this institution voluntarily. And I know that for my two friends 
and my third one, Mike Johanns, this was not easy. It is not easy to 
stand here and know that in January they are not going to be here any 
longer, because they are truly friends, and that is tough.
  To say that Tom Coburn can be intimidating I think is an 
understatement, and I think that comes because his breadth of knowledge 
based upon his experiences in life enable him to be an expert on a lot 
of issues.
  With that in mind, I remember the day Tom sat down--we were leaving 
that week, and I said: What are you going to do this weekend? And he 
said: Well, Sarah's future fiance is coming to sit down with me to find 
out whether he can marry my daughter. And I looked at him and thought, 
I would hate to be that young man.
  Well, the truth is that Tom is a very intimidating guy. He plays 
hard, and he plays to win.
  There is not an individual I know who is more fair and more 
compassionate than Tom Coburn. I remember the day the Bush 
administration wanted to extend the PEPFAR Program--the AIDS in Africa 
program--and when Tom found out that they were going to relax the 
requirement on how many people were treated and that more money would 
go to education than to actually saving lives, he grabbed me and he 
said, ``We can't let this stand. We've got to fight it. We've got to 
change it.'' And it was Tom Coburn who blocked the reauthorization of 
President Bush's PEPFAR plan for 6 months--a Republican President, a 
Republican Senator. Why? On principle.
  Tom Coburn, if you didn't know it before this speech today, has never 
done anything in this institution or in life that wasn't based upon 
principle. No Member of Congress should ever question whether he thinks 
he is right because if he didn't think he was right, he wouldn't fight 
so hard.
  It is particularly difficult for me to say goodbye to Tom. We truly 
are legislative partners. We fought a lot of battles for a long time, 
and inherently we have a level of trust in each other that I would 
actually sign on to legislation that I had no idea what it did; I just 
knew that in that foxhole he needed somebody he could count on, and I 
knew when he signed on to something that I needed, that there was 
always somebody there to cover my back.
  The institution is losing something significant when we no longer 
have that legislative expertise Tom Coburn represents.
  There are a lot of descriptions that people have used today and that 
people will use in the future to describe Tom Coburn, but I would boil 
it down to two words that I think best describe him: Tom Coburn is a 
good man. In every sense of the word, he is a good man. This 
institution will lose a great leader when Tom Coburn retires.
  Godspeed, Tom.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York.
  Mr. SCHUMER. I will be very brief. I know people are waiting to 
speak.
  I guess it would surprise the world in general to know that Tom 
Coburn and I are true friends, but we are. He is a man of integrity 
above all.
  You don't have to agree with someone--we probably disagree on 90 
percent of all the issues--to trust someone's integrity, to trust 
someone's

[[Page S6595]]

handshake, to trust someone that if you make a good argument, 
understanding their values, they will come along. That is just what Tom 
Coburn has done time and time again with this Senator from New York and 
countless others on the other side of the aisle.
  On so many issues where Tom was opposed, I said: Let's just sit down 
and let me give you the logic and then you will make your own judgment. 
And I knew that would be good enough. Sometimes it didn't work. 
Sometimes he disagreed. But he always sat and listened. He always asked 
perceptive questions, not ``gotcha'' questions. He was trying to figure 
it out.
  Of course the most well known was when we negotiated on the Zadroga 
bill. Thousands of New Yorkers had rushed to the towers and gotten 
poison in their lungs and their gastrointestinal systems, and we wanted 
to help them. We thought they were just like our veterans. Tom knew it 
was a big expense. He sat with us, listened, made suggestions to make 
it leaner and trimmer, and then supported the bill. So right now there 
are people alive throughout the New York area, heroes, because of the 
integrity of that man from Oklahoma.
  Tom, I will miss you. This body will miss you. Regardless of our 
ideological views and perceptions, we will miss you. You are a great 
American.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
  Mr. MANCHIN. First of all, there is not a whole lot that needs to be 
said that hasn't been said, but one thing I want to say to my dear 
friend Tom Coburn is that he made Washington happen for me, if you 
will. He made it more tolerable. I had a hard time in transitioning. 
Tom reached out. He saw that. We talked about this before, but Tom made 
this place more palatable.
  Tom, you have expanded my area of friendships with more people than 
you know and the right type of people, and I appreciate it I think more 
than you even know.
  I will end with this, and I don't mean to say a lot. I have been 
asked about Tom Coburn. How would I explain him? Tom Coburn's got soul. 
Tom Coburn's got soul. And I mean that from the bottom of my heart, 
brother. You have soul, and I thank you for what soul you brought to 
this place.
  God bless.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. FLAKE. Fourteen years ago I entered the House of Representatives. 
I had been elected, but before I took office, I traveled to Washington, 
and Matt Salmon, the Congressman I was replacing, said: Is there 
anybody you want to meet? And I said: Tom Coburn. I had watched from 
afar what he had done on the Appropriations Committee and the stands he 
had taken, and I admired him. I went and visited with him in his office 
while he was packing up his stuff. I will never forget that. And I have 
to say that today I admire him even more than I did then, having 
watched him go back into the private sector and then enter the Senate.
  Columnist George Will said Tom Coburn was the most dangerous creature 
that could come into the Senate. Why? Because he is simply uninterested 
in being popular. I think that is certainly true. But if he didn't care 
about it, it happened anyway. I have news for Tom. As you can see 
around, he has become popular. But one thing he never managed to 
achieve, if he sought it, was becoming partisan. When you hear those 
across the aisle lavish praise on this man, realize that was never one 
of his goals and never happened, much to his credit.
  I thank you and your staff for your generosity over the years to me 
and my staff and for what you have done for this institution, for your 
colleagues, and for me personally.
  I yield back.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maine.
  Mr. KING. Mr. President, I probably have known Tom for the least 
length of time of anybody in this Chamber, and I want to offer some 
comments from the perspective of only 2 years and really more like a 
year and a half since we became friends and colleagues.
  I have seen Senator Coburn in two contexts--one is intelligence and 
the other is faith. He and I serve on the Intelligence Committee. We 
sit directly across from each other. That committee is generally a non 
partisan one, but it is also one where all the meetings generally are 
closed. There is no press. You can really take the measure of someone 
when they ask questions and participate in a debate in that forum.
  His questions always struck me as the questions I wished I had asked, 
and they struck me as the questions I am sure the people of America 
would have wanted asked. They were penetrating, they cut through 
obfuscation, and they were always meaningful and helped us move toward 
the important work that committee has to accomplish.
  I have also become acquainted with him through our faith and 
participation in the Wednesday Prayer Breakfasts, and more recently, 
for reasons that I am not entirely sure, he has invited me to join him 
on Tuesday evenings for dinners on the other side of the Capitol that 
have been very meaningful.
  For the 9 years before I came here, I taught a course called 
``Leaders and Leadership,'' and I taught it at a couple of colleges in 
Maine. I taught it really as much for myself as for my students because 
I wanted to try to understand what leadership was, and I thought if I 
signed on to teach it, I would have to learn something about it. Every 
year what we did was go through and discuss the stories of great 
leaders throughout history, some well known and some not so well known. 
We always started with Ernest Shackleton. We talked about Eleanor 
Roosevelt and Margaret Thatcher and Martin Luther King and Lincoln and 
Churchill. We always tried to define the qualities that make a leader, 
and there are lots of them--perseverance, communication, vision, team 
work, trust--but the last one on the list and the one that brings me 
back to Tom is always character. It is an indefinable quality. You 
cannot really put a specific definition to it, but people like Lincoln 
had it, Ernest Shackleton had it, Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain from 
Maine had it, Eleanor Roosevelt had it. It involves a combination of 
qualities that Tom embodies, and almost all of them have been mentioned 
here today--integrity, intelligence, honesty, faith, belief in 
principle, and daring to stand for principle. It is the hardest thing 
to teach, but it is the easiest thing to see. And the reason I felt so 
privileged to get to know this man for such a short period of time is 
that he has shown me what character is all about.
  Tom, it is one of the great joys of my life to have had these 2 years 
to get to know you, if only slightly. It is one of the great sadnesses 
of my life that it has only been 2 years.
  Godspeed, Tom. You have made a difference for this country that we 
all love and honor and respect. Thank you for your service and for 
sharing your great character with all of us.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia.
  Mr. ISAKSON. I was elected in a special election 16 years ago. I was 
No. 435 in the House of Representatives, so I did what my father told 
me to do when I went into business. He said: Son, sit in the back of 
the room, listen to people who are smart, pay attention to them, and do 
what the smart people do.
  After 2 weeks of listening to Tom Coburn, I said no human being could 
know as much about everything as this guy named Coburn. In 16 years, I 
have come to believe, yes, there is one who knows about everything he 
speaks of, and that is Tom Coburn.
  Senator Coburn has been a great role model for me. The Senator from 
Oklahoma has taught me many great lessons, and I have learned a lot 
from him.
  The greatest evangelists in life are those who witness their faith, 
and Tom Coburn is a true witness for his faith and has changed the 
lives of many people. I have enjoyed, as much as anything, our walk 
with faith at the Prayer Breakfasts, in private meetings, and what we 
have shared together.
  Lastly, every Christmas I try to give my grandchildren who can read 
something to read as a little treasury to put in their book to save so 
that when they grow up, they can refer to great things and great 
historical statements that have been made. I doubt if there has ever 
been a better statement made on the floor of the Senate about our 
heritage, our country, our future, and our

[[Page S6596]]

hopes than Tom Coburn has said today. It will be required reading for 
my grandchildren this Christmas, and I can assure you that I am a 
better man for having served with Tom Coburn, the great Senator from 
the State of Oklahoma.
  God bless you, Tom.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. INHOFE. The other Senator from Oklahoma.
  I wish to make some unscripted comments, but sincere and from the 
heart. I hope I am accurate when I say this, that I think in some 
respect I discovered Tom Coburn. I suspect that Tom and I are the only 
two who have ever been to Adair, OK. I remember hearing that there was 
a conservative doctor from Muskogee. I remember calling him up at that 
time and asking him to run for the House of Representatives, which he 
did. He kept his commitments and did everything he was supposed to do. 
I always remember that day.
  As Senator Coburn knows, we have a place my wife and I built on a big 
lake in Oklahoma back in 1962--a long time ago. When I drive up there, 
I go through Adair, and I go by that little sheltered area that is half 
torn down now. They tore down the biggest bank in town. Every time I go 
by there, I have to say I recall meeting for the first time with a 
young doctor named Tom Coburn.
  I regret to say there are times in our service together when we have 
not been in agreement on specific issues, and I think we have a 
characteristic in common. I think we are both kind of bullheaded, which 
has created some temporary hard feelings, but there is one thing that 
overshadows that. Jesus has a family, and His family has a lot of 
people in it. Some are here in this room. Tom Coburn and I are 
brothers.
  In the 20 years I have been here in the Senate, I don't believe I 
heard a speech that was as touching and sincere as the speech I heard 
from my junior Senator a few minutes ago.
  I really believe that in spite of all the things that have happened--
and there were some differences, but they were minor--that he never 
ceased to be my brother, and I want to ask the Senator right now to 
forgive me for the times I have perhaps said something unintentionally 
that was not always right and was not always from the heart. But I want 
my junior Senator to know that I sincerely love him and am going to be 
hurting with him with the troubles he has right now, or might have in 
the future, and will sorely miss him in this body.
  I ask that the Record show that I sincerely love my brother, Senator 
Coburn.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana.
  Mr. COATS. I have been sitting here listening to the respect and the 
emotion of people recognizing the service of Tom Coburn. I don't have a 
prepared speech, but I second everything that has been said about Tom.
  My emotions well up in me when I think about Tom. Tom exhibits the 
conviction that I wish I had more of, Tom exhibits the commitment I 
wish I had more of, and he exhibits the courage I wish I had more of.
  I remember my very dear friend Chuck Olson made this statement: Lord, 
show me the kind of person You would like me to be and give me the 
strength to be that person.
  I feel like God has given a gift to the Senate, and certainly a gift 
to me, by simply saying, take a look at Tom Coburn. Look at the 
qualities he exhibits and his commitment to faith. He is a pretty good 
model to follow.
  Thank you, Tom.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
  Mr. BEGICH. I came down to give my farewell remarks, but before I do, 
I have to make a comment about Senator Coburn. Senator Coburn is 
absolutely what many people said about his word. Yesterday was an 
example of that when he resolved an issue.
  There is always activity after the Senate, and I wish my friend from 
Oklahoma the best.


                         Farewell To The Senate

  I thank the Presiding Officer for allowing me to speak on my 6 years 
of serving in this body. It has been a true honor to serve with the 
Presiding Officer in the short time he has been here and to serve with 
all of my colleagues, but it has been an even bigger honor to serve my 
fellow Alaskans.
  Alaska is a huge State--660,000 square miles. More than--to my 
friends from Texas and California, please don't take this personally--
double and triple the size of States such as Texas and California.
  But Alaska is a very small place in many ways. People make personal 
connections with their elected official. At the end of the day, we 
pretty much know everybody one way or another. Alaskans will more than 
likely will see me at a checkout stand at Andy's Hardware or Home Depot 
or hanging Christmas lights at my wife's store or doing errands with my 
son Jacob that at times he is not very anxious to do. It is a small 
State, and they will more likely see me doing that than on the floor 
making speeches or on C-SPAN.
  When Alaskans contacted me with an idea or complaint or problem, we 
made sure we responded. After 6 years in the Senate, I am most proud of 
the work with helping Alaskans and their families. My office responded 
to more than 360,000 individual letters and emails and phone calls from 
Alaskans. To put it in perspective, 360,000 is roughly half the 
population of the State.
  Much of my staff is here with me on the floor today. I thank them for 
their unwavering service to their fellow Alaskans. Truly I have the 
best of the best. Some of them worked with me when I was mayor and are 
now working for me as a Senator. Many will go on and continue to do 
incredible work not only for Alaskans but for this country. I thank 
them.
  We took on 3,000 individual casework cases to help Alaskans navigate 
the Federal Government. We helped them get their Social Security 
checks, made sure the local post office actually delivers the mail, and 
in Alaska that is important. We fought for benefits for individual 
veterans.
  I am also proud of the great policy work we did. When I say we, it is 
because sometimes ideas came from Alaskans, sometimes they came from 
this body, sometimes I would have a crazy idea I would write down on a 
sheet of paper, but at the end of the day it was my staff that did the 
work.
  Opening Alaska's arctic lands and waters to responsible resource 
development--NPR-A, CD-5, Beaufort and Chukchi. We also helped to 
convince the EPA to free up permits for Kensington and Greens Creek 
mines.
  The Arctic. When I first came to the office, I have to say that not 
everybody knew where the Arctic was. Some didn't even know it was an 
ocean, to be frank with you, but that is not the case today. Some of my 
colleagues probably got tired of hearing me always talk about Alaska no 
matter what they were discussing.
  I see my friend Al Franken is here, and I know he remembers this 
story. He draws incredible maps of the United States, and he does it 
all freehand. I remember him drawing a map one day, and I said: You 
missed two things, Alaska and Hawaii.
  He said: Well, when I drove around the country with my parents, they 
were not States, they were just territories, and the maps they bought 
were maps of the lower 48. So I sent him a dot-to-dot of Alaska, and he 
sent me back a nice letter with a map of Alaska he had drawn.
  No matter what conversation my colleagues might be having on an 
issue, I would manage to weave in Alaska.
  The Arctic has unbelievable potential. We just touched the tip of the 
iceberg and there is more work to be done.
  Working on defense is important to Alaska. It is important that we 
keep our military bases secure by saving F-16s at Eielson and getting 
F-35s next. We need to make sure that the benefits for those who are 
serving continue to be there for them.
  It is incredible to hear stories from veterans when they talk about 
the new model of care we developed over 2\1/2\, 3 years ago. Our State 
has 77,000 veterans. When I was campaigning in 2008, I had an idea that 
I called the Hero's Health Card, and I remember when I got into office, 
people said it will never happen. People who know me know that when you 
say never or no, that means yes, they just didn't spell it properly, 
and I have to figure out what to do.
  Today in Alaska, it doesn't matter if you are a veteran in the 
smallest rural communities or the biggest cities, you

[[Page S6597]]

will get health care and access to it through our tribal health care 
delivery system--the first in the Nation.
  One time when I was in Bethel, this gentleman who was a veteran came 
up to me when I was in the VFW Hall. A lot of us have been in VFW 
halls, and you know that when someone comes at you at an aggressive 
pace, it is probably not a positive situation, but you have to engage 
them in a conversation. He held his hand out and showed me his scars, 
and he said that he had to go to Anchorage to get this taken care of, 
and you told me I could go down to my clinic and get it taken care of, 
but it didn't happen. I was about to say something, but before I could 
get a word out, he said: Do you know what I get to do because of what 
you did? Every single week now when I need therapy, I can go down the 
street in Bethel instead of flying to Anchorage to get it done. That is 
a model of how to do the right thing.
  Alaska is well known for fisheries. I don't mean to pick on Senator 
Franken, but I remember him coming up to me because we coined a phrase 
on modified engineered fish which we called the ``Frankenfish.'' It was 
not about the Senator, but it was about this fish that was chemically 
enhanced and would really destroy the fisheries in Alaska and would be 
bad for the market and bad for consumers. We fought over that issue 
because Alaskans brought it to our attention every single day.
  I just mentioned some of the things we did for native rural health 
care, which was not just about Alaska. When we discussed an issue in 
our office, we asked: Can we do it for Alaska, and does it have an 
international impact? Will it impact the rest of the United States in a 
positive way?
  I remember hearing and reading about the money the Federal Government 
owed to our tribes which had not been paid for two decades. It was 
money for clinical services they produced. We did some things, and the 
net result was Alaska received over $500 million in settlements over 
the last year. On top of that, many tribes across the country now have 
almost three-quarters of a billion dollars, money owed by the 
government for services delivered to individuals. And earlier this week 
we were able to pass another piece taking away the restriction on our 
tribes in Alaska so they can now, under the Violence Against Women 
Act--and we hope the House passes it--to be able to dispense and do 
tribal government in the sense of our justice system improving the 
situation on the ground when it comes to sexual assault, domestic 
violence, and substance abuse.

  There are a lot of examples. It is hard when we talk about these 
because there are a lot of great things that have been done, not just 
individually but collectively. But in this place we spend a lot of time 
talking about doom and gloom and how the sky is falling and always the 
worst-case scenario.
  We have come a long way in the last 6 years. The people who know me 
know I don't care how bad the situation is, I am positive about it 
because there is always another day to solve these problems and make 
things happen.
  I think about where we were when I came to the Senate. I remember 
coming on this floor as a freshman in 2009, and the chaos of this 
economy was unbelievable. We were losing 600,000 jobs a month--equal to 
the whole population of my State--unemployed, boom, gone. Unemployment 
was around 10 percent. The stock market was at 6,500. Two of the 
largest automobile companies in this country were flat on their backs. 
No housing starts were happening. The market was crashing. The deficit 
was $1.4 trillion per year. As a new Member, I wasn't sure what I had 
gotten myself into, to be frank. Some of the Members who came with me 
were trying to figure out, What did we get? But we didn't sit around.
  I know we always hear this doom and gloom out there. When we look 
back over 6 years, we remember we had some battles here, and most 
people think we don't do anything. But where are we today? We are 
17,000-plus in the stock market today.
  I can tell my colleagues that Alaskans saw this because every year--I 
know I hear from other Members who ask me this question all the time--
we get a permanent fund check. It is based on investments we make, and 
it is based on revenues we receive from oil and gas. That permanent 
fund check doubled this year from $800 to over $1,900. Why did it 
double? Because it is based on the stock market average of the last 5 
years. We dropped off 2009, so the market was doing better. Every 
Alaskan felt what this economy has done. So when the naysayers are out 
there speaking, it is just not accurate.
  GM and Ford and Chrysler have added over half a million good-paying 
jobs. Unemployment is at 5.8 percent--almost a 50-percent drop. Over 10 
million new jobs and the longest stretch of private sector growth on 
record--56 months. Just last week--I know we always hear it is not good 
enough. Of course, but it is a heck of a lot better.
  I remember the chaos on this floor during those 3 or 4 months and as 
a new Member what we had to go through.
  The deficit has dropped by $1 trillion a year. We are down to about 
$480 billion now. We have sliced off $1 trillion a year from the 
deficit.
  In Alaska we have seen some incredible things. Anchorage unemployment 
is at 4.9 percent. There are more jobs in mining and timber than ever 
before. Tourism has risen to nearly 1 million visitors. There are 
78,000 people in the fishery industry.
  It is important to remember that this is just a moment in time of 
challenges we have as a body and as a country. It is important to 
remember that there is a lot of work ahead of us. But we have 
accomplished a lot. But we spend a lot of time on this floor debating 
what is bad about this country.
  A lot of us are coming to the floor and giving our farewell speeches 
and talking about good things. There are a lot of good things we should 
be proud of as a country. I am proud of what we have done over the last 
6 years. This country is back on track. We have more work to do to make 
sure people's incomes rise, but that is starting to happen now.

  The challenge for my colleagues who are still here and for this 
country is--it has been an incredible honor to be in this body, but 
what do we do to make sure we move forward so we don't have this as a 
platform of negative attitudes and views but about opportunity and 
possibilities; not about things that we sit here and try to figure out 
how to kill but what we try to do to improve and give new ideas a 
chance.
  I said it earlier: I am a very optimistic person. I believe what is 
possible today can be even better tomorrow. But it is incumbent on 
people to believe it, to want to do it, to put aside their differences 
where we can. I will tell my colleagues, that is why fewer Alaskans are 
party registered and more are nonparty registered in our State than in 
most States--because our view is that we don't care about the party; 
what we care about is getting things done. We are trying to find the 
answer to yes rather than trying to find the way to no.
  My staff has always, and it is a struggle sometimes--and I have a 
great staff, as I said earlier, some from Alaska, some from here, and 
some from across the country, people who I don't understand why they 
continue to subject themselves to working for me after the mayor's 
office, and then they came here. I always told them that what mattered 
was not who sponsored the bill but whether it is a good idea. If it is 
a good idea, then let's move forward, try to find an answer, try to 
solve the problem.
  The positive attitude we have to have is not only important for this 
body, but it is important for this country. In a weird way, they love 
us and they hate us. The poll numbers show they don't love us too 
much--13 percent. But on the flip side, they look to us. They look to 
us for certainty and guidance and where we might take them. The pundits 
are different, but the people look to us. I see it when I go to stores, 
when I am out and about. People may be angry with us, but they want to 
know what we are going to do to solve these incredible problems, and it 
will be incumbent upon the next Congress to sit down and work together. 
It is going to be tough because the politics of the day are about the 
moment in time, not about the long term. This is an incredible 
challenge that has to be dealt with in some way.
  I have spent a lot of time trying to, as I said, do what I can; it 
didn't matter whose idea it was. I listened to Senator Coburn speak. I 
remember one

[[Page S6598]]

day we were working on an issue--essential air service. Some of us have 
that in our States. Senator Coburn was against it. I remember having a 
conversation with him and trying to explain that between one airport 
and the next is 1,200 miles. There is no road. There is no way to get 
to it. At the end of the day we were able to resolve that issue and 
move forward.
  I think of all the things that have been accomplished in this body 
but how little people know about it. In an odd way, over these last few 
days more of the positive issues are out there. I hope the press covers 
them. We will see. But we live in a world where it is better to talk 
about the negative because that seems to be what thrives. I hope that 
changes.
  Let me end by sharing a couple of other quick thoughts. There are a 
lot of great stories about being here in the Senate. Someone asked me 
one day: Do you write these down? And I said no.
  I remember I was in Sitka, AK, and I was headed to the airport. I got 
to the airport, and the attendant there was checking my ticket, and he 
said: Oh, wait, Mr. Begich. We have something for you.
  It was a wrapped gift at the airport.
  I said: Great.
  Now, people who care about the TSA, please ignore what I am about to 
say. They just handed it to me. I took it. I opened it, and it was one 
of those empty books that say: Please write down your thoughts and your 
notes. They are incredible thoughts.
  I remember I was coming through--people will remember when it snowed 
like crazy. Well, people from DC thought it snowed like crazy. I did 
not. I knew one thing, and that is about how the plows work, being a 
former mayor. I thought to myself, I can't leave my car on the street 
because they will plow me in, especially in this place, or they will 
attempt to. So I and my son Jacob--we got our snow shovels, did our 
shoveling, and then drove the car to another area. Then I realized--we 
were dressed in what I call Alaska good garb. And then I realized that 
I had to get back to the house because I had this snow shovel and he 
had a snow shovel. It was on the other side of the Capitol. So what did 
we do? People who know me know I don't really follow all the rules 
around this place. We started walking through the Capitol with our snow 
shovels over our shoulders. The place was empty. I realized what an 
incredible place this is. First, we were allowed to walk through with 
snow shovels. It was dead silent. If my colleagues have never done 
that, they should. You walk through the Capitol and you just see the 
history, and in a small way, we were a part of it.
  I did break another rule. This is confession time. I am a Catholic, I 
can do that. We came into this Chamber. I had the corner desk over 
here. Why did I pick that desk? A lot of people don't know this story. 
Why did I do that? One, I was a junior Member, but No. 2, I wanted that 
desk because that is where the candy box was, and I knew every Member 
would have to go there sooner or later, and I thought I could spend 
some time talking to them. And maybe I would have a candy box, which I 
did. I had special candies from my wife's store.
  One day I came in here late at night with my son, and we sat right 
there. I know the security guards probably didn't see us. We took a 
photo. Yes, I broke the rules. I took a photo of my son sitting there, 
and I will cherish that photo forever.
  As my son once said--and I said it on this floor one time--about how 
important it is to get things done and the battle we were having--I 
remember I actually quoted my son on the floor, and I think I shocked 
somebody. I was talking to him about something, and he said: Dad, just 
suck it up. I thought, only from a young kid do you hear what you have 
to do sometimes.
  Now, I didn't forget her; I just wanted to wait until the end. I know 
I am breaking the rules, but my wife is right up there. I am pointing 
to her. Yes, I am, Sergeant at Arms. Too bad. I am acknowledging her. 
She has been incredible. She has allowed me to do my public service, to 
fly those 20 hours every weekend to and from Alaska. She has taken care 
of Jacob when I couldn't. I love her dearly. Thank you.
  To end, I will just say this: It has been a true honor to serve in 
the U.S. Senate, to serve the people of Alaska, and to know every day 
we--me, my staff, and my colleagues who work with me--contributed a 
little bit to making life better for Alaska, for Alaskans, and for this 
country. There is no experience like serving in this body and doing 
what I could to make a difference.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  (Applause, Senators rising.)
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Walsh). The Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I know a number of my colleagues are going 
to want to talk about our friend Mark Begich. When we came to the 
Senate--I see a number of folks here--we came in 2008. I see a lot of 
other Members who are newer Members as well. I think when you come in 
with a class, you get kind of confused about what is going on and you 
form a bond.
  I remember my first--our first--Senator Franken wasn't here yet, but 
Senator Merkley, Senator Hagan, Senator Bennet, and a number of others. 
And we were in Senator Durbin's office. There was still a question 
about what was going to happen in the election because there were 
thousands of votes out. So being giddy new Members, we got on the phone 
to call Senator Begich to say we wish him well and we are counting on 
him. He said: Hey, Jacob and I are leaving on vacation because I 
already know where the votes are coming from. I am going to be there.
  He knew his State that well.
  As someone who is a former chief executive and as some others here 
who are former chief executives, I remember him coming here, and many 
of us new Members were kind of scratching our heads about the notion of 
how this institution would work or didn't work sometimes. But, as 
Senator Begich mentioned and as Senator Murray mentioned at our dinner 
the other night, there are a lot of people in this body who are chronic 
optimists. I am blessed to have an optimist in my colleague Senator 
Kaine. I don't always fit in that category. But Senator Begich, week in 
and week out, would always try to remind us that it is not quite as 
bleak as it might seem at the moment, that there was good news and 
there was progress being made.
  I think, looking back, I am not sure some of us fully realized, 
particularly that first year and a half or two when so many things 
happened--controversial things and things that are still being 
relitigated in many ways but that have allowed this country to make 
progress, and Senator Begich was an incredibly important part of that.
  He was also, as one of the newer Members, liaison to management. So 
whenever anything didn't happen right with leadership, it was always 
the fault of Senator Begich.
  But I just want to say--and I know Senator Hagan was here a little 
bit earlier--I fear at times that our elections are almost becoming 
like parliamentary elections in the other countries where people are 
voting for or against a leader not based upon what a leader has done 
individually--such as Senator Landrieu and all the things she has done 
for Louisiana, Lord knows--but, as Senator Begich just mentioned, there 
was not a bill or an issue where he didn't find an Alaska connection 
and where he didn't make a difference for the people of his great 
State.
  So I know I am just the first of many who want to say to my 
colleague, to my friend, to a great Senator, Godspeed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
  Mr. FRANKEN. Mr. President, I was a part of that class. I was a 
little late getting here, my colleagues will recall. But I was part of 
that class and campaigned with the class, and I remember being with 
Mark Udall and Tom Udall and Mark Begich at a campaign event, and they 
kind of looked at me and said: So your dad wasn't like a public 
servant.
  I said: No.
  And they said: Well, that is unusual.
  No, no, that is fine.
  What a lot of people don't know about Mark is his father died very 
famously in a plane crash.
  Mark is the only Member of this body, I believe, who did not graduate 
from college, did not go to college.
  There are a lot of things about Mark--and Mark Warner just referred 
to it--he was a chief executive.

[[Page S6599]]

  We need more mayors here. Sometimes we say we need more diversity. 
Sometimes we say we need more women. God knows we need more satirists--
but mayors, wow. Having that mayor's perspective--Cory Booker looking a 
little smug--is very useful.
  Mike Enzi, a mayor--am I forgetting a mayor?
  Mr. BEGICH. Tim Kaine, Richmond.
  Mr. FRANKEN. Bob Corker.
  Whom are you pointing at? Tim, were you a mayor?
  Mr. KAINE. Richmond.
  Mr. FRANKEN. Oh, Richmond, you just kept saying Richmond. I don't 
know anybody named ``Richmond.''
  Mr. WARNER. He was also a lieutenant governor.
  Mr. FRANKEN. So he was a lieutenant governor too--OK. So he is the 
most qualified.
  This is what it is like when we are together. Being a Senator, a lot 
of people ask: Is being a Senator as much fun as working on ``Saturday 
Night Live?'' The answer of course is no. It is not close, but it is 
the best job I have ever had.
  It means so much to us what we can do for our State, and no one knows 
more about his State--and I know Mary Landrieu is sitting here, no one 
knows more than Mary and Mark--and that it is an incredibly long flight 
he took every weekend to go back to Alaska.
  Minnesota had a happy warrior, one of the great, great Senators who 
has ever served this body, Hubert Humphrey. We may have noticed during 
Mark's speech he teared up a few times, the most when he was talking 
about his wife.
  That is good for you. That works out well.
  But Hubert Humphrey said: ``A man who has no tears has no heart.''
  This man has a tremendous heart. Humphrey was a happy warrior, and 
this guy is a happy warrior--and you brought joy, humor, and optimism 
to this body, and I thank you, my friend, for that.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.
  Ms. LANDRIEU. I rise to say a word about my dear friend Mark Begich 
and to add some words on behalf of him.
  We saw, when he presented himself in his final remarks to this body, 
his compassion, his heart, and his emotions were clear in relation to 
his family, his son, and to us--because he was truly an amazing friend 
to many. He is always in a good humor, always upbeat.
  As the Senator from Virginia said, we could never quite understand 
it, but he was--and still is--an amazingly optimistic and positive 
person.
  Having served as mayor, as a small business owner, as a passionate 
champion for Alaska, what he didn't mention--I thought I might because 
it might be too hard for him to remember today--but I want this body to 
remember that Mark comes from a distinguished line of public service.
  A lot of us say that, but in Mark's case his father literally gave 
his life to Alaska. His plane went down on October 16, 1972. The plane 
has never been found.
  So when Mark walked in the first day I met him, I don't know what I 
was expecting, but I was expecting someone to have a heavy burden on 
his shoulders because of that. As the eldest daughter of nine children, 
I take responsibility so much for my brothers and sisters, and I don't 
know how I could have gotten where I have gotten without both parents 
literally lifting me up every day.
  So as I have sat across from Mark all these years in very close 
leadership meetings on Tuesday mornings--and he has walked in with such 
optimism, such extraordinary confidence in himself, in what he is 
doing, and in encouraging us--I was always just so struck by the fact 
that he grew up with a large family, six children. His mother was 
widowed at a young age. He took on so much responsibility, and yet he 
came to the Senate ready to serve.
  I know his father is truly honored that he didn't get bitter, he 
wasn't angry. He grew up to be a man who accepted that as God's will, 
which is a hard thing to accept.
  He did so much for the community that his father loved and the State 
that his father loved. I wanted to add that to the Record because a lot 
of people watching us think we are one-dimensional robots and that 
there are no other dimensions to our lives and our family.
  But it always struck me, Mark, that you have been such a man of 
courage, such a great inspiration to your family, and truly an 
inspiration to all of us.
  I know your parents are very proud, both of them.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
  Mr. MERKLEY. I wish to add a word to honor my good friend Senator 
Mark Begich. I think there is a special connection with those of us who 
were elected on the same day.
  We share something else in common, which is on that election day in 
November 2008 neither one of us knew if we had won. We both had to wait 
some length of time--in my case 2 days and in Senator Begich's case a 
couple of weeks--but it kind of makes us ponder the future: Are you 
going to serve or are you not going to serve and how will you utilize 
that opportunity.
  There is another connection that comes from being western Senators. 
When we talk about salmon--and Mark Begich mentioned a while ago 
``Frankenfish.'' Well, we are very concerned. We have a collective 
concern about the health of our salmon runs.
  It is not just a fishing economy, although that is very much a part 
of the economy of our States, it is about the soul of our States, the 
traditions of our State, the natural resources of our States.
  When we talk about timber, we have a connection. Sitka was mentioned. 
Sitka spruce is a common tree in our State of Oregon.
  When we get concerned about the rescues off the Oregon coast because 
the water is so cold one can't be in it for very long without dying--
which makes it much more important to have advanced helicopters, and 
just last night we were able to keep a key helicopter on the coast due 
to Senator Mark Begich's considerable involvement and advocacy. Thank 
you so much for doing that.
  Why is our water so cold off the coast of Oregon? Because it is 
coming down with the currents from Alaska. In so many ways our States 
are tied together.
  As I have served this first 6 years, I have turned to my friend from 
Alaska for advice and counsel time after time. His seasoned policy 
judgment and his core political instincts are on a par with any other 
Senator in this Chamber and certainly far in advance of my own.
  I say to the Senator, I appreciate your friendship. I appreciate you 
sharing your judgment, and I appreciate your buoyant spirit that 
reminds us, when we are discouraged, that so much can be accomplished. 
What an honor it is to have a seat in the Chamber of just 100 Senators, 
where we can add our voice to a conversation about truly how to make 
this a better world.
  Thank you, my friend, for your service. We will miss you greatly.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. King). The Senator from Michigan.
  Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I just want to add my words to what my 
other colleagues have said about someone I am going to miss dearly. 
Senator Mark Begich and I worked together on many things. When I passed 
the reins from the steering and outreach committee and suggested to our 
leader that he should seriously consider Senator Begich for that 
responsibility, he made us all proud as part of the leadership in 
presenting a very important perspective every single day.
  I have frequently referenced an energy committee trip I took to 
Alaska with Senator Begich where--I thought Michigan was big. Michigan 
is big. But we not only had to travel a long way to get to Alaska, once 
we were in Alaska we had to travel a long way from one end to another.
  I remember I ran into a number of people from Michigan because in our 
Upper Peninsula we also have a lot of snow, and we have a lot of people 
who were working there. But everywhere we went--and we traveled to 
Native American villages. We flew to Barrow. We were in every part of 
the State. Some areas you could only get into by helicopter.
  We would get there--we went to a Native village that needed a new 
post office. Senator Begich took me out. We had boots on because there 
was water coming up. We looked at this little,

[[Page S6600]]

tiny post office that was maybe a little bigger than a closet, not 
much. We came out. The whole community was there to urge us to support 
this post office.
  To see not only the information, the depth that Senator Begich had 
about that before we got there, but the way he interacted, his 
commitment to them--everywhere we went he knew about that community, 
the leaders in the community. He had a relationship with them.
  This is somebody who loves Alaska. In his bones, in your DNA, Mark, 
is your State. I love seeing that. It was so inspirational to see that. 
I know the Senator has wonderful family support at home. It has been my 
pleasure to be at your home for dinner and to watch your son. He is 
growing up. I know we have a lot more that we will benefit from, from 
your leadership. I know you have a lot more to contribute to Alaska, to 
our country.
  Just know you are leaving with incredible respect from colleagues and 
love and affection. We wish you every Godspeed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey.
  Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, I rise to add my sense of gratitude and 
appreciation to someone who has become a dear friend. I am his newest 
colleague and have had the privilege of working with him for these past 
13 months. I just want him to know and state very publicly that he was 
one of the anchors to me as I was getting to know a very different 
place from being a mayor of a big city.
  Your sense of fierce pragmatism was a light to me, coming down into a 
place known for partisanship and gridlock, and demonstrated to me your 
ability to bring people together and get things done, but even more 
than that, being a model for me, a role model for me in the early stage 
of my career in the Senate.
  I have to confess, and do it with pride, that I love this country 
with the depth and the core of my being. My parents taught me that 
sense of pride. But you expanded that, incredibly, by bringing me out 
to Alaska. Of all my experiences in these 13 months, that was one of 
the highlights. It taught me a lot when I saw that a Senator still had 
such a powerful touch and connection and knowledge and love of the 
people of that State. You have made me love Alaska even more and know 
Alaska in my heart.
  What was extraordinary to me, in knowing you in your short career, 
was how much you got accomplished, how steadfast you were in pursuing 
the interests of your State and this Nation. One thing I have to say, I 
felt uncomfortable as I saw you--I will never forget being at Bartlett 
High School, with the Bears, and seeing your love and connection to 
those kids. It made me feel very uncomfortable, the negativity that was 
being hoisted upon you during a campaign.
  It made me think of something as I was out there, and I thought about 
it again as you talked of history. There is a very famous poet named 
Maya Angelou, who said these words:

     You may write me down in history
     With your bitter, twisted lies,
     You may trod me in the very dirt
     But still, like dust, I rise.

  The truth is, you are one of those people who are at your ascendency. 
You have risen above it all. You have risen above the things in 
Washington that try the spirits, not just of those of us here but of 
the Nation. You have risen to a level of accomplishment in your life 
that is extraordinary and as awesome as some of the vistas I saw in the 
State of Alaska.
  The beauty I have right now, the confidence and the joy I have right 
now, is the simple fact that I know that God ain't finished with you 
yet.
  Thank you. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico.
  Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. President, I just want to rise, similar 
to others in our class, and many other Senators have risen, to talk a 
little bit about Mark Begich and his service to Alaska and praise him 
for his service, because I think he has been--since I have been here, 
the 6 years I have served with him; he was in my class--I have seen a 
remarkable Senator who truly cares about his State and has been an 
incredible advocate for his State.
  I was not here for his entire speech, but I turned it on. The good 
thing about our offices is you can tune it in. I caught the point where 
he got a little bit choked up about Deborah and Jacob. I got choked up, 
too, in the office. I can cry but not in public. In any event, the 
first thing I know about Mark is how much he cares about his family and 
how much the toll of serving in the Senate takes on that family.
  His travel--I am a westerner, and I have to travel out 5 hours, 6 
hours, 8 hours to get home. His flight is always--we heard the 
description the other day from Senator Murray. He flies all the way out 
to Seattle at the end of the day. It is 12:30 our time when he arrives 
there. Then he gets on another flight for another 4\1/2\ hours up to 
Anchorage, just to get home. It is not a very long weekend. Then he has 
to get on a flight and come back.
  His family is so important. I have seen him with his son Jacob. We 
live just across the alley from each other. I can look out my back 
window and look down and see the light--just four houses down--and know 
whether Mark and Deborah and Jacob are in town. We have spent many good 
times in his house there. That is the first thing I would like to say.
  The second is--I have seen this over and over again with Senators. 
You are one of the best at it--taking the issues that are involved with 
Alaska and that Alaskans care about and that you knew so well when you 
were a mayor and fitting them into this vast Federal landscape and 
making sure Alaskans are heard. I think you are one of the best at 
doing that. You stepped out on so many different issues. I remember the 
Native American corporations and how you would reach out in a number of 
areas with Senators throughout the Senate and try to reach some 
compromise there.
  I have a large Native American community. We, too, have the same 
kinds of issues on that front that you do. We also share many Native 
American tribes. As the Senator knows well, it was my father and my 
uncle who stood up in the 1960s and 1970s to make sure the Natives got 
a fair shake in Alaska. Mark--that is the way he serves when it comes 
to Native Americans, caring about them, caring about their issues, 
going up to the North Slope where it is cold.
  My understanding is that during this campaign he got frostbite on one 
occasion, being out in that terribly tough environment. Thank you for 
that and for working with me and working with everyone else who tries 
to make sure Native people get justice. They look to Washington for 
justice. They look for justice at the Supreme Court. They are not 
getting much of it over there at the Supreme Court any more. We are the 
last refuge. We served together on the Indian Affairs Committee.
  One final thing to talk about. I have been working on an issue, it is 
the chemical substances act, for the last couple of years with Senator 
Vitter. We have tried to do everything we can to bring people--
extraordinary piece of legislation--12 Republicans, 12 Democrats on 
this piece of legislation.
  We have been working to make it better. We have had Senators start 
joining us on both sides of the aisle. Mark, you were one of the key 
people to work on that. As Senator Warner said earlier, you were our 
liaison to the leadership. You were in all of those leadership 
meetings. Whenever I told you there was a problem, you would surface 
it, whether or not it was going to blow up the meeting. You stuck in 
there when it came to truly caring about issues and caring about 
getting things done.
  I think if anything is your hallmark, it is wanting to put aside the 
partisanship and try to get things done. So that is something that you 
should be tremendously proud of.
  Just as a final word, I love your State of Alaska. I have climbed 
your highest mountain. My cousin, Mark Udall, has also done the same 
thing, climbed Mount McKinley, which has now returned to its Native 
name, called Denali. I remember going up to your State as a State 
attorney general. It was the only State in the Nation that put in money 
for our conference of attorneys general and put us on an 8-hour train 
across Alaska so we could see all of Alaska.
  Alaska is a terrific State. You and I have some disagreements on what 
we

[[Page S6601]]

protect in Alaska, but the wonderful thing is we understand each 
other's position. We are still very good friends. It has been a real 
honor to serve with you. I wish you and Deborah and Jacob the very 
best. Wherever you land--I hope to see you in Alaska again because I 
know I am going to come up there. But wherever you land, our door will 
always be open to you.
  Thank you and God bless you.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
  Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, we have heard a lot of people honoring 
our wonderful colleague Senator Begich today. We are all going to miss 
him dearly. We are especially going to miss him in Minnesota. I have 
heard many positive statements about Alaska today, but no one can come 
from a State where they can say they have one of the main streets in 
Anchorage named after them; that is, Minnesota Street in Anchorage.
  That is because there are many Minnesotans. Believe it or not, it was 
not cold enough in Minnesota so they moved to Alaska. One of those 
people who moved to Alaska was Mark's dad. Mark's dad actually grew up 
about 30 miles away from my dad. It is rough-and-tumble country up in 
the Iron Range of Minnesota. Mark still has relatives in northern 
Minnesota, and particularly he has an uncle named Uncle Joe--Joe 
Begich--who served in the legislature for many years and also is a 
Korean War vet and was truly the heart and soul of the Iron Range 
delegation in the Minnesota State legislature.
  For any of our colleagues who think Mark Begich is a character, they 
should meet his Uncle Joe. I know Uncle Joe. I hope he is watching 
because nothing made him happier than the day Mark Begich got elected 
to the Senate. And when Mark once came up there with me and we were 
greeted by Uncle Joe, it was like a hero's welcome when Mark Begich 
appeared on the Iron Range of Minnesota. People came out, and we did an 
event with veterans. Then, of course, the problem was we went to a bar, 
and we could get no pictures that didn't have a Budweiser sign on them.

  But Mark is a hero up there, and he is a hero across our State just 
for the work he has done for rural communities. When I say we have 
rural communities in Minnesota, he always says we have extreme rural 
communities in Alaska.
  He has done work in conservation, which we care about so much. He has 
done work on tourism. We are cochairs of the tourism caucus, and I 
still remember the hearing we had right in the middle of the downturn, 
where every Senator came to talk about all of the things that were 
happening in their States with tourism. Mark was actually able to cite 
the price of cruises you could take in Alaska. It was written up in the 
Washington Post about all the Senators hawking their States, but no one 
was prouder to hawk Alaska.
  The other thing about Mark, which I know was mentioned, is he doesn't 
believe politics is about standing in the opposite corner of the boxing 
ring. He believes politics is about working together in the middle and 
trying to find common ground.
  The last thing I will say is how much we love Deborah and Jacob, and 
we know we will see them around and they are not going to go away.
  One time Deborah, Jacob, and Mark came over to our house for brunch. 
My daughter is about 6 years older now. She was about 13. Jacob and my 
daughter were playing a game in the other room, and the adults were 
talking over breakfast. I will never forget Jacob Begich. From the 
other room, he heard his dad talking about him and, as any politician's 
kid would do, he said: Stop talking about me, dad. So that kid has 
inherited that Mark Begich sense of fierce independence. When he left, 
my daughter said: I love that kid, mom. He knows how hard it is to be a 
politician's kid.
  So Mark has left here the legacy of Alaska, the legacy of good work, 
the legacy of a great staff, and the legacy of a great family. So we 
will see you around, and thank you for your service.
  Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                         Tribute to Mark Pryor

  Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. President, I am honored to stand here and recognize 
my colleague and friend, Arkansas's senior Senator Mark Pryor, for his 
service to our State, his contributions to our country, and his work 
across the aisle.
  I have worked with Senator Pryor during his entire service in the 
Senate, both as a Member of the House and as a colleague in the Senate. 
While we don't always agree on policy, we always agree that we need to 
do what is best for Arkansas and what is best for our Nation.
  Mark is always ready to step forward, find a solution, and resolve an 
issue. He is always ready to extend a hand to the other side of the 
aisle to get support, and he always has Arkansas on his mind.
  Over the last 4 years, we have introduced several pieces of 
legislation together, and you will find our names as cosponsors of 
several other pieces of legislation that all have one goal--helping the 
people of Arkansas and helping the people of our country.
  There is a longstanding tradition of collaboration in the Arkansas 
delegation. When I was elected to the House in 2001, long-time Arkansas 
Congressman John Paul Hammerschmidt gave me some advice I have tried to 
live by since coming to Washington. He said: John, always remember that 
once the election is over, it is time to put away the political 
differences and focus on helping the people of Arkansas. That is how 
the delegation worked during John Paul's 26 years of congressional 
service, which included service with Mark's dad, Senator David Pryor, 
and that is how Mark and I operated as well.
  I appreciate the welcome Mark gave to me and the help his office 
offered to my staff when I moved over here to the Senate in 2011. I 
value his friendship, thank him for his service, and appreciate all he 
has done for the people of Arkansas. I wish him well in the next 
chapter of his life.
  I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Will the Senator withhold his request?
  Mr. BOOZMAN. I will.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.


                      Bailout Provision In Omnibus

  Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, yesterday I came to the floor to call on 
House Democrats to withhold their support from the omnibus spending 
bill until one provision is removed. The provision was slipped in at 
the last minute to benefit Wall Street. In fact, it was written by 
lobbyists for Citicorp. That provision means big money for a few big 
banks. It would let derivatives traders on Wall Street gamble with 
taxpayer money--and when it all blows up, require the government to 
bail them out.
  Just to be clear, I want to read the title of the part of the law 
that will be repealed if this provision is not stripped out of the 
omnibus. The title is ``Prohibition Against Federal Government Bailouts 
of Swaps Entities.'' That is what is on the table to be taken out of 
the law.
  Now, I am here today to ask my Republican colleagues who don't want 
to see another Wall Street bailout to join in our effort to strip this 
Wall Street giveaway from the bill. This is not about partisanship. 
This is about fairness. This is about accountability and 
responsibility. This is about preventing another financial collapse 
that could again wipe out millions of jobs and take down our whole 
economy.
  If big Wall Street banks want to gamble with their own money, so be 
it. Let them take their risks with their own money, and let them live 
with the consequences of those risks. That is how markets are supposed 
to work. But they shouldn't get to gamble with government-insured 
money, and they shouldn't get to run to the government when the deal 
goes sour.
  Opposition to government bailouts of Wall Street is not a liberal or 
a conservative issue. The current law, the one about to be repealed, 
was put in place years ago because after the 2008 financial collapse, 
people of all political persuasions were disgusted by the

[[Page S6602]]

prospect of ever having to use taxpayer dollars to rescue big banks 
from their own bad decisions.
  This morning, Senators from both parties--Sherrod Brown, a Democrat 
from Ohio, and David Vitter, a Republican from Louisiana--called for 
this provision to be taken out of the spending bill. Here is what they 
said:

       If Wall Street banks want to gamble, Congress should force 
     them to pay for their losses, not put taxpayers on the hook 
     for another bailout. Congress should not gamble on a possible 
     government shutdown by attempting to tuck this controversial 
     provision into a spending bill without having been considered 
     by the committees of jurisdiction, where it can be subject to 
     a transparent and rigorous debate.

  Senators Brown and Vitter are exactly right. This provision has no 
place in a must-pass spending bill.
  Conservative activists have jumped in as well. They are raising their 
voices today to say that this provision has no place in a must-pass 
spending bill. Here is what one front-page contributor on the 
conservative blog RedState said this morning:

       I have no way to refute the basic point that Democrats are 
     making about the CRomnibus fight right now. In fact, I might 
     even go so far as to say they are right. . . . what possible 
     good faith reason can Republicans have for threatening to gum 
     up the whole works over doing a favor to Wall Street? . . . 
     generally speaking, if Nancy Pelosi is opposed to something 
     then instinctively I know I should be for it. Beyond that I 
     haven't the slightest clue why the proposed tweak to Dodd-
     Frank ought to be anything resembling a hill the Republicans 
     should die for.

  These conservative activists are right. If you believe in smaller 
government, how can you support a provision that would expand a 
government insurance program and put taxpayers on the hook for the 
riskiest private activities? If you thought the Ex-Im Bank exposed 
taxpayers to risk--even though it has never cost the taxpayers a dime--
how can you support a provision to prevent another calamity such as the 
one that cost taxpayers billions of dollars just 6 years ago?
  House Republican leaders are moving quickly to try to jam this bill 
through today before their own Members have had a chance to digest this 
Wall Street bailout provision. The fact sheet that Republican 
appropriators sent around to their Members explaining the provision 
doesn't even describe it accurately. According to the fact sheet, the 
provision in question would ``protect farmers and other commodity 
producers from having to put down excessive collateral to get a loan, 
expand their businesses, and hedge their production.'' Whatever you 
think about the bill, that description is flatly wrong. In fact, that 
description applies to yet another Wall Street reform rollback that the 
Republicans are pushing right now, which is attached to a completely 
different bill.
  Now, I don't know if Republican leaders in the House are deliberately 
trying to confuse their Members into voting for a government bailout 
program or whether they just can't keep straight all their efforts to 
gut financial reform. Republican leaders are about to bring this bill 
up for a vote. So here is the bottom line. A vote for this bill is a 
vote for future taxpayer bailouts of Wall Street. When the next bailout 
comes, a lot of people will look back to this vote to see who was 
responsible for putting the government back on the hook to bail out 
Wall Street.
  To Republican leaders in the House, I would ask this. You say you are 
against bailouts on Wall Street. I have heard you say it again and 
again for 5 years. So why in the world are you spending your time and 
your energy fighting for a provision written by Citigroup lobbyists 
that would increase the chance of future bailouts? Why, in the last 
minute as you head out the door and a spending bill must be passed, are 
you making it a priority to do Wall Street's bidding? Whom do you work 
for--Wall Street or the American people?
  This fight isn't about conservatives or liberals. It is not about 
Democrats or Republicans. It is about money, and it is about power 
right here in Washington. This legal change could trigger more taxpayer 
bailouts and could ultimately threaten our entire economy, but it will 
also make a lot of money for Wall Street banks. According to Americans 
for Financial Reform, this change will be a huge boon to just a handful 
of our biggest banks: Citigroup, JPMorgan, Bank of America.
  People are frustrated with Congress. Part of the reason, of course, 
is gridlock. But mostly it is because they see a Congress that works 
just fine for the big guys but won't lift a finger to help them. If big 
companies can deploy their armies of lobbyists and lawyers to get 
Congress to vote for special deals that benefit themselves, then we 
will simply confirm the view of the American people that the system is 
rigged.
  This is a democracy. The American people sent us here--Republicans, 
Democrats and Independents. They sent us here to stand up for them, to 
stand up for taxpayers, to protect the economy. Nobody sent us here to 
stand up for Citigroup.
  I urge my Republican colleagues in the House to withhold their 
support from this package until this risky giveaway is removed from the 
legislation. It is time for all of us to stand up and fight.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a 
quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________