[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 57 (Monday, April 20, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2260-S2262]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
JUSTICE FOR VICTIMS OF TRAFFICKING ACT OF 2015
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the
Senate will resume consideration of S. 178, which the clerk will
report.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 178) to provide justice for the victims of
trafficking.
Pending:
McConnell (for Cornyn) amendment No. 1120, to strengthen
the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act by incorporating
additional bipartisan amendments.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Ms. STABENOW. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Ernst). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Lynch Nomination
Ms. STABENOW. Madam President, as we all know, a vote of confirmation
for Loretta Lynch to be our next Attorney General has now been delayed
164 days, or 5 months. We have seen this qualified woman waiting for a
confirmation vote, and we have had at least 51 Members--a majority--
indicating they will support her confirmation.
I remember coming to the floor listening to colleagues during the
Bush administration state over and over again that elections have
consequences, that Presidents have a right to have their nominees voted
on, and that it is our responsibility to make sure, if something comes
out of committee, that we vote on a final confirmation.
When we look at the fact that we have seen Loretta Lynch wait for a
vote on the floor for a combined length of time that equals more than
the last seven Attorneys General, I really do believe, as the President
has said, enough is enough.
I remember a time when we had a controversial nominee--John
Ashcroft--and many of us did not support that nomination. I did not
support that nomination. But we brought it to the floor for a vote. He
waited 42 days. At the time, people said that was a long time. He was
not blocked. We did not filibuster. We did not require a supermajority.
In fact, there were 42 of us who voted no, so we could have stopped it
on a procedural vote. But we allowed the nomination of John Ashcroft to
come to the floor for a vote.
So we fast-forward. And we have seen this, of course, over and over
again, as we look at the President's nominees in the last 6\1/2\ years.
Now we see this eminently qualified woman, who has been held up as of
today 164 days, waiting and waiting to have the opportunity to have a
vote up or down on confirmation. If people want to vote no, they have
that right, but she deserves a vote.
Today, we are going to vote on the confirmation of a district court
judge in Texas. I think it is good that the Southern District of Texas
will have a Federal court judge, but the entire country needs a
permanent Attorney General. In fact, the Attorney General's office is
the one that actually brings the cases to Federal courts and tries them
on behalf of all the American people. So it is really ridiculous that
we stand at this point where we are having to ask, after more than 5
months, that there be a vote for Loretta Lynch.
After she was reported out, we saw a very distinguished nominee for
Secretary of Defense come out of committee and immediately come to the
floor and be confirmed, but Loretta Lynch has waited and waited. We
continue to vote on district judges, and Loretta Lynch is waiting and
waiting.
We hear all kinds of excuses, all kinds of reasons. We are hearing
that Loretta Lynch's nomination to be Attorney General cannot be voted
on until we complete another very important bill--the human trafficking
bill--that we all want to get done. It has, unfortunately, had a curve
ball added because of the politics around choice and abortion that has
been interjected into this, and we are having to work our way through
that. I have been involved in a lot of discussions, as my colleagues
have. I am confident we can address those if people want to get this
done on behalf of girls and women in our country. But that has nothing
to do with the nomination of Loretta Lynch for Attorney General, other
than one thing, which is that as U.S. attorney of the Eastern District
of New York, she presided over a very effective antitrafficking
program, investigating and prosecuting scores of defendants.
In that sense, again, we need Loretta Lynch--her talent, her
expertise, and her experience--to be able to tackle what is a horrible
situation that way too many of our girls and women find themselves in.
We somehow for too long have thought this was something that was
happening someplace else. Yet we saw it in Lansing, MI--where I live,
the capital of Michigan--where there was a case in the trafficking
situation that the FBI and local officials addressed. What we are
finding right now is that as we proceed with confirming other people
for other positions--Monday nights we are voting on other positions, we
are voting on district judges, and we voted on other people for other
positions not held up by human trafficking, not held up by trying to
get that bill resolved, but for some reason the Attorney General
position has somehow been held up.
I don't buy it. It makes no sense that we would pick one person--one
person--not others but one person and decide that this person and this
nomination, this confirmation vote will be held hostage to another
issue. It is time to stop it. Now, 164 days is long enough; 164 days is
long enough. It is time to give Loretta Lynch the respect and the vote
she has been waiting for and she deserves.
[[Page S2261]]
I yield back the floor.
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. BROWN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. BROWN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up
to 15 minutes as in morning business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Trans-Pacific Partnership
Mr. BROWN. Madam President, this body--the Senate--continues to rush
through one of the most consequential changes to U.S. economic policy
this decade with little media attention, little scrutiny by committees,
and little discussion from leadership of this Senate. Last week, we
were called into a rushed legislative hearing on fast-track and a trade
package with little notice and no bill to see. We had less than 13
hours' notice for a committee meeting--the standard here is 1 week, and
I believe that is the Senate rule--on one of the most secretive
documents we have seen in front of us. Senators and their staffs,
Congress men and women and their staffs, have limited access to this
document--the Trans-Pacific Partnership--and no access to legislation
upon which we had a hearing on Thursday. It was only after the hearing
that they finally decided to introduce the bill. Yet, this affects more
than 50 percent of the world's GDP. Fifty percent of the world's GDP
could be affected by this package. Millions of American jobs are on the
line. Yet, Congress is rushing this bill through.
We cannot fast-track fast-track legislation. We know what so-called
free trade has done to this country. It may not affect too many people
who dress like this in this town, people who wear expensive suits, but
for those in the heartland and in places such as Des Moines and Iowa
City and Columbus and Cleveland, we know bad trade deals have
devastated towns.
I grew up in Mansfield, OH. When I was a kid, we had thousands of
jobs at Westinghouse, Ohio Brass, Mansfield Tire, Fisher Body, Goreman-
Rupp, and so many other companies. Almost all of those companies have
shut down--not just because of globalization and bad trade deals, but
certainly that contributed to it. Every one of those companies that
hasn't shut down has laid off, in most cases, thousands of its workers.
On Friday, I was in Dayton, where I spoke with Jimmy Allen. Jimmy
worked at Appleton Paper for 45 years. He was a union officer for 43 of
those years. He was one of 400 workers laid off due to unfair trade in
2012 when China cheated on currency, undermining the U.S. paper
industry.
I hear all the time from workers like Jimmy. George Rossi of Warren,
OH--at the other end of the State--wrote to me to share his story. He
wrote:
My wife lost her job of 15 years at GE in Ravenna, OH
because of foreign trade. The plant that once employed 600 is
now closed. My brother-in-law lost his [job] at Ohio Lamp in
Warren, which is now closed. My plant, WCI Steel, is now
closed. At one time the plant employed 1,800 people.
George wrote: I could go on and on. There have been many friends and
family, so many who have worked in numerous plants that are now
closed--in large part because of bad foreign trade deals.
Jamie Vaughan wrote to me saying that Jamie's father and Jamie's
grandfather worked at Ford in Canton, OH, until it shut down. Jamie's
father was able to transfer to Indianapolis, where Jamie and Jamie's
brother also worked, until that Ford plant shut down too. Jamie wrote:
They built a plant exactly like Indy's in Brazil. My
brother and I transferred to California. A few years later,
that plant shut down.
I got a letter from Gary Ordway of Continental, OH, about how factory
closures have ripple effects across entire communities. He wrote:
In 1995 I was employed with General Motors Powertrain
Foundry in Defiance, OH, where we were working 12 hours a
day, 6 to 7 days a week, and then along came the North
American Free Trade Agreement. There were over 5,000
employees working at that time, and after NAFTA there was a
constant loss of jobs, so today, there are about 1,000
employees left. We are looking at a weekly loss of $4.8
million in wages to the local economy and around $1.2 million
in weekly taxes lost due to the 4,000 jobs exported because
of NAFTA. Within the next couple of years the foundry will be
losing all of its iron castings and another 350 jobs will be
eliminated, and Plant One is scheduled to be torn town. So
NAFTA wasn't good for our community and foundry because our
iron casting business went to Mexico.
That was Gary Ordway of northwest Ohio. We have seen it in the
northwest and we have seen it in the southwest.
Joseph Hicks from Elyria, OH, wrote:
I am a member of Local 1104 in Lorain. I work at U.S. Steel
tubular division. As of the 22nd of March, me and 600 of my
brothers and sisters have been placed on indefinite layoff,
some departments idled, due to lack of work. This is mainly
[because of] the illegal dumping of cheaply-made steel.
I would add, subsidized steel.
Foreign countries cut corners on safety, pay workers next
to nothing, and don't care about quality. With these
ingredients, they are able to sell their steel products for a
lot less than we at U.S. steel can.
There used to be a time when ``Made in America'' meant
something. I long to see that be the attitude again.
Joseph goes on:
I am suffering greatly now because of the trickle-down
effect. I am laid off, I have lost my job, my career, my way
of life to support my growing and deserving family. I have a
wife, Megan, [who] cannot work because she has to care for
our 2-year-old disabled daughter.
I ask, beg, our public officials . . . do what needs to be
done to get American workers back to work.
That is Joseph from U.S. Steel in Lorain.
We owe these workers more than rushed hearings. We owe them more than
to rubberstamp a deal we have barely been able to read. Keep in mind
that we didn't see this bill until Thursday night. We have still not
had one hearing on this bill to discuss the bill. The chairman of the
committee wants to do the markup the day after tomorrow, and this bill
will govern potentially 60 percent of the world's GDP. So they want to
fast-track this fast-track legislation so they can pass more trade
agreements that outsource jobs.
Trade done right can create jobs, but our current trade deals amount
to corporate handouts and worker sellouts.
The Economic Policy Institute found that the wage loss to workers on
the wrong end of expanded trade is almost certainly larger than the
estimated net national gains from the TPP. They write that there is no
such thing as an all-gain, no-pain treaty. We know that is true because
workers such as Joseph and Jamie and George and Gary and Jimmy feel
that pain.
I urge my colleagues over the next couple of days to ask the tough
questions and demand answers from the U.S. Trade Representative, who
has told us little and who has given us even less access to these trade
agreements, and to say no to a trade deal that will end up fast-
tracking more jobs overseas.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.
Measures Placed on the Calendar En Bloc--H.R. 636, H.R. 644, H.R. 1295,
H.R. 1314, and S. 984
Mr. VITTER. Madam President, I understand there are five bills at the
desk due for a second reading.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bills by title for
the second time.
The bill clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 636) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to permanently extend increased expensing limitations,
and for other purposes.
A bill (H.R. 644) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to permanently extend and expand the charitable
deduction for contributions of food inventory.
A bill (H.R. 1295) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to improve the process for making determinations with
respect to whether organizations are exempt from taxation
under section 501(c)(4) of such Code.
A bill (H.R. 1314) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to provide for a right to an administrative appeal
relating to adverse determinations of tax-exempt status of
certain organizations.
A bill (S. 984) to amend title XVIII of the Social Security
Act to provide Medicare beneficiary access to eye tracking
accessories for speech generating devices and to remove the
rental cap for durable medical equipment under the Medicare
Program with respect to speech generating devices.
Mr. VITTER. Madam President, in order to place the bills on the
calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to further
proceeding en bloc.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
[[Page S2262]]
The bills will be placed on the calendar.
Mr. VITTER. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. CASSIDY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The senior Senator from Louisiana.
____________________