[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 112 (Tuesday, July 12, 2016)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4962-S4968]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                ENERGY POLICY MODERNIZATION ACT OF 2015

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask the Chair to lay before the 
Senate the House message accompanying S. 2012.
  The Presiding Officer laid before the Senate the following message 
from the House of Representatives:

       Resolved, That the House insist upon its amendment to the 
     bill (S. 2012) entitled ``An Act to provide for the 
     modernization of the energy policy of the United States, and 
     for other purposes,'' and ask a conference with the Senate on 
     the disagreeing votes of the two Houses thereon.


                            Compound Motion

  Mr. McCONNELL. I move that the Senate disagree to the amendment of 
the House, agree to the request by the House for a conference, and the 
Presiding Officer appoint the following conferees: Senators Murkowski, 
Barrasso, Risch, Cornyn, Cantwell, Wyden, and Sanders.


                             Cloture Motion

  I send a cloture motion to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cloture motion having been presented under 
rule XXII, the Chair directs the clerk to read the motion.
  The senior assistant 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, 
     do hereby

[[Page S4963]]

     move to bring to a close debate on the motion to disagree to 
     the House amendment, agree to the request from the House for 
     a conference, and the Presiding Officer appoint the following 
     conferees: Senators Murkowski, Barrasso, Risch, Cornyn, 
     Cantwell, Wyden, and Sanders with respect to S. 2012, an 
     original bill to provide for the modernization of the energy 
     policy of the United States, and for other purposes.
         John McCain, John Cornyn, Marco Rubio, Deb Fischer, Rob 
           Portman, Roger F. Wicker, Richard Burr, Joni Ernst, 
           David Vitter, James M. Inhofe, Dean Heller, Pat 
           Roberts, Lamar Alexander, Ron Johnson, Tom Cotton, Thom 
           Tillis, Mitch McConnell.

  Mr. McCONNELL. I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum call 
be waived.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. McCONNELL. I ask unanimous consent that this cloture vote occur 
at 3:30 p.m. today, with the time from 2:15 p.m. until 2:30 p.m. 
controlled by Senator Boxer or her designee; further, that the time 
from 2:30 p.m. until 3 p.m. be controlled by the majority, and the time 
from 3 p.m. until 3:30 p.m. be equally divided between the two 
managers.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.


             Recent Tragedies in Minnesota and the Country

  Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I come to the Senate floor today to 
remember those who have been affected by the tragic events in my State 
and across the country over the last week. I am here today to remember 
the loss, to share in the grief, and to stand with our community as we 
seek justice and healing and solutions together.
  Last week was a tough week in Minnesota. There have been and there 
will be a lot of bleak moments, when all anyone can do is to hug their 
family and their friends and ask why. How can this happen? How can we 
make sense of the senseless? How can we go on as people and as a 
community that is hurting so badly?
  But amidst all the horror, I also saw hope this weekend. Sunday, I 
spoke at Pilgrim Baptist Church in St. Paul, as well as Greater 
Friendship Missionary Baptist Church in Minneapolis. When I looked 
around that room, I saw the horror, the frustration, the anger, but I 
also saw the hope. Being there with the grieving members of our 
community gave me that hope because I knew that they supported one 
another, that their hearts must mend, that the neighborhoods must heal. 
I literally heard them talk about how the love they had within the 
walls of that church must go beyond to the greater community.
  We have lost so many this week. What can you say to a mother whose 
precious baby boy--a 2-year-old--is killed in a drive-by shooting while 
sitting in his father's car in north Minneapolis? And what do you say 
to that same mother whose precious other child--the little boy's baby 
sister--was also injured by that gunfire?
  What can you say to comfort elementary school children who have 
suddenly lost that friendly face in the lunchroom who always gave them 
a smile, a kind word, a healthy snack? There are no words that can take 
away the pain of losing a beloved son, partner, and friend. Philando 
Castile was beloved--a ``gentle soul,'' in his mother's words. He loved 
the kids at his school, and they loved ``Mr. Phil'' right back. He knew 
all the kids' names. There were more than 500 of them. He learned who 
had allergies and who might need a little extra help. And, yes, with a 
little playful nagging, he got them to eat their vegetables. In short, 
he cared about them, and he let them know it. Everyone knew it. My 
State's outpouring of grief, especially from his school, and the love 
and support in the wake of his loss means something.
  The loss of that little 2-year-old is also a powerful reminder that 
being a friend is never a wasted effort--that even the smallest 
kindness shown to the smallest person makes this world better.
  Then there were the five officers lost in Dallas. Officer Brent 
Thompson had just gotten married a few weeks ago. His bride was a 
fellow transit officer. Officer Michael Smith served in the Dallas 
Police Department for 26 years and volunteered as a mentor to at-risk 
kids. Officer Patrick Zamarripa served three tours of duty in Iraq in 
the U.S. Navy. The only thing he loved more than the Texas Rangers and 
the Dallas Cowboys was his 2-year-old daughter, Lincoln.
  How about the 21 police officers in St. Paul who were injured 
Saturday night? There were so many peaceful protests--and there 
continue to be peaceful protests--involving Black Lives Matter and 
other groups in our State over Philando Castile's death. That is part 
of our democracy. That is how we make change. But what happened on 
Saturday night on Highway 94 was far from a peaceful process. We cannot 
achieve justice through injustice.
  So where do we go from here? We know that nothing we can say will 
take away the hurt, but here is what we can do to narrow the gap 
between us:
  First, we must pursue justice. When I served for 8 years as Hennepin 
County attorney, which is the chief prosecutor of our county, the 
largest county in our State, I always believed that my job--and the 
principle we would use when we looked at a case--was to convict the 
guilty and protect the innocent. That is what justice calls us to do. 
That is why I have joined with other members of the Federal 
delegation--Senator Franken, Congresswoman McCollum, and Congressman 
Ellison--in calling for a Federal investigation into Philando Castile's 
death. We need to understand what happened and how we can prevent this 
from happening again. Philando, his family, and all those children who 
loved him deserve nothing less.
  Second, we must fight for a criminal justice system that works for 
everyone. We all know people who have been caught up in a criminal 
justice system that can be harsh and unfair. It can do the right thing 
and it can protect victims, but it can also destroy individual people 
and it can pull families apart. That is why we must pass criminal 
justice reform. I have long supported important policy changes. My 
State was one of the first that videotaped interrogations, and that 
ended up being a good thing, not only for the defendants but actually 
for our police officers and those seeking convictions. I have supported 
reforms to the eyewitness process. I have supported body cameras, 
diversity in hiring, law enforcement resources and training--very 
important as we go ahead and look at what we should be focused on in 
the next year--and meaningful, meaningful work between law enforcement 
and our citizens.
  What else do we need? In my mind, we need commonsense gun reform. I 
was proud to join my colleagues on the Senate floor demanding changes 
to make our communities safer. One of those changes, in addition to the 
terror watch list bill, was to make sure we find some kind of consensus 
on improving background checks. The Senate's failure to pass bipartisan 
background check legislation has been a big disappointment. Here we had 
two A-rated NRA Senators that came together. Senator Toomey as well as 
Senator Manchin came up with a bill that would have closed some 
loopholes that would have made it safer. We know that States that have 
those background checks in place have reduced rates of suicides by 
guns, and they also have reduced rates of domestic homicides. I still 
remember those Sandy Hook parents in my office advocating for that 
change in the bill. They knew that wouldn't have saved their babies, 
but they also knew it was one of the things that could best save lives 
going forward and could best bring consensus in this Chamber.
  From my time as county attorney, I remember those little children 
lost to violence:
  Byron Phillips was a little boy killed on his north Minneapolis front 
porch. We had to put up billboards in the community saying: If you know 
who killed me, come forward. Eventually, it worked, and we put the guy 
in jail.
  Tyesha Edwards was killed by a bullet while doing her homework at her 
kitchen table. Her mom said: Get your homework done, and you can go out 
with us to the mall. That is how she died. Again, we put the guys that 
did it in jail, but that is not compensation for what happened to that 
family.
  Americans from across the Nation and across the political spectrum 
support commonsense proposals. They support commonsense background 
checks closing the loophole at gun shows by wide margins. In honor of 
those we have lost in Charleston and Orlando,

[[Page S4964]]

San Bernardino, Newtown, Aurora, north Minneapolis, and cities across 
the Nation, I will continue to stand with my colleagues until we take 
action on these commonsense measures.
  I am reminded of President Obama's beautiful words at a service 
remembering more Americans lost to gun violence--this time in 
Charleston, SC. He said this:

       For too long, we've been blind to the unique mayhem that 
     gun violence inflicts upon this nation. Sporadically, our 
     eyes are open: When eight of our brothers and sisters are cut 
     down in a church basement, 12 in a movie theater, 26 in an 
     elementary school. But I hope we also see the 30 precious 
     lives cut short by gun violence in this country every single 
     day; the countless more whose lives are forever changed--the 
     survivors crippled, the children traumatized and fearful 
     every day as they walk to school, the husband who will never 
     feel his wife's warm touch, the entire communities whose 
     grief overflows every time they have to watch what happened 
     to them happen to some other place.

  My friends, we must stem the tide. But we also know that justice in 
our laws--which means the criminal justice reform that I noted earlier, 
which means commonsense gun reforms, which means making sure that these 
cases are investigated and the law is followed no matter what the 
victims' race or ethnic background or how much money they have--must 
happen to bring justice to these families. But the other part of this, 
as I look at our neighborhoods that are affected by this every single 
day, is economic justice. In the famous words of Dr. Martin Luther 
King:

       We know that it isn't enough to integrate lunch counters. 
     What does it profit a man to be able to eat at an integrated 
     lunch counter if he doesn't earn enough money to buy a 
     hamburger and a cup of coffee?

  When we see lingering disparities--and ``lingering'' is kind of a 
nerdy word for what we are talking about here. When we see these 
disparities of economics, when we see health disparities, when we see 
far too many families working so hard but still struggling to get 
ahead, and stubborn achievement gaps in our schools, we know there is 
so much more work to do. The solutions here are a deep commitment to an 
economic future for the people that live in our cities, to make sure 
they have access to the jobs that are starting to open up all over this 
country, that they are trained--that we look at what is happening in 
their schools and make sure that the training they get matches jobs 
that are open. We have jobs all over our State now in technology, in 
science, in manufacturing and welding, and this is giving those kids 
hope--not just in community colleges and regular colleges, not just in 
high school, but in middle school--that they are going to be able to 
get one of these jobs. That is economic hope. It is about training our 
kids, keeping them in school, opening the doors of our businesses, big 
and small, to people of neighborhoods like the one that I was in 
yesterday in St. Paul.
  Finally, we must all work to protect the innocents among us. That is 
what I started talking about--how we must convict the guilty and 
protect the innocent, especially our children. Two-year-olds should not 
be shot and killed on the streets of north Minneapolis. Four-year-olds 
should not watch a man die in the car seat right in front of them. 
Nobody should have to explain to a classroom of children why their 
beloved friend ``Mr. Phil'' doesn't feed them lunch anymore. We are 
better than this.
  I recently visited a mosque in Minneapolis and heard the story of a 
Muslim family who had gone out to eat at a restaurant--two parents, two 
kids. The parents, by the way, had been through 9/11 and understood 
what had happened then but have been able to live in our community, 
where we have the largest Somali population in our country, without a 
lot of discrimination, without a lot of hateful words even after 9/11. 
But not this time. They were in the restaurant with their little kids, 
and a guy walked by and said: You four go home. You go home to where 
you came from.
  The little girl looked up at her mom and said: Mom, I don't want to 
go home. You said we could eat dinner out tonight. I don't want to go 
home and eat dinner.
  Those are the innocent words of a child. As sweet and funny as it is, 
think about this: She knows no other home. She didn't even know what 
that guy was talking about because she knows no other home, because 
Minnesota is her home, because the United States of America is her 
home.
  America is better than angry words directed at strangers in a 
restaurant. America is better than babies being shot on the street in 
broad daylight. America is better than Philando Castile losing his 
life. And America is better than throwing concrete chunks at police 
officers in St. Paul and five Dallas cops being taken from their beat 
forever.
  So I am here today to stand with the people who are not satisfied 
with how things are--the people who are ready to work to make things 
better, the people who are the helpers and the peacemakers. Together, 
we can make this world a better place, and more just.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Lankford). The Senator from Utah.


               Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Bill

  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, the Senate will soon vote on the conference 
report for the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act. The importance 
of this bill cannot be overstated. People are dying, families are 
suffering, communities are being torn apart. We can help, but we must 
do so now.
  I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this legislation, which 
passed in the House last week with only five votes in opposition. The 
bill is intended to address the growing national crisis with regard to 
opioid abuse and addiction.
  The staggering statistics surrounding this issue are well known and 
are worth repeating. Every day, approximately 7,000 people show up in 
an emergency room for problems associated with opioid abuse. Every 30 
minutes, on average, someone in our country dies from conditions that 
are opioid related.
  My home State of Utah has been particularly hard hit. In 2014, 289 
Utahans died due to opioid abuse. That is more than half of all drug 
overdose related deaths in the State. The CARA conference report 
represents a thoughtful set of policies that tackle the problems 
experienced by the real people--with families, children, and friends--
who are represented by these statistics.

  A letter signed by over 200 advocacy organizations supporting the 
conference report states that the report addresses the ``six pillars'' 
of a comprehensive response to drug addiction crises. These pillars are 
prevention, treatment, recovery support, criminal justice reform, 
overdose reversal, and law enforcement.
  I am proud of the role I played in not only supporting the CARA 
effort but in helping to shape the conference report. As the chairman 
of the Finance Committee, it was important to me that the report 
include key improvements for Medicare in the fight against opioid 
abuse. I am glad to say we were successful in that regard. The 
legislation allows Medicare Part D prescription drug plans to identify 
only one physician to prescribe and one pharmacy to fill all of an at-
risk patient's opioid prescriptions.
  Senator Toomey, who has worked closely with Senator Brown, has been 
an important leader on this policy. Both of them have been excellent. 
He should be commended for his work that, in the end, will improve 
patient care, reduce abuse, and give at-risk beneficiaries more 
opportunities to get the help they need.
  Additionally, the conference report contains significant provisions 
related to medication-assisted treatment, or MAT, which has long been a 
priority for me. I have a long history of working to improve access to 
drugs like buprenorphine as a prescription treatment for opioid-use 
disorders, including heroin and prescription drug addiction.
  I was the author, together with Senators Levin and Biden of the DATA 
2000 law that first made it possible for patients to be prescribed 
buprenorphine. I would also like to note that colleagues like Senators 
Markey and Paul have also been very able champions in our recent 
efforts to expand access to this effective drug treatment, including 
the introduction of legislation and our push to get the administration 
to use its regulatory authority to address this need.
  Our efforts helped to encourage the drafting of an HHS rule that was 
finalized on July 6, the same day as the CARA conference meeting. This 
rule

[[Page S4965]]

raises an individual doctor's patient cap for buprenorphine from 100 
patients to 275 patients. Thanks to these combined administrative and 
legislative efforts, patients will have greater access to the 
medication-assisted treatment they need in their recovery from 
substance abuse disorders.
  I am pleased, as well, to see provisions included in this legislation 
that encourage the National Institutes of Health to intensify 
fundamental, translational, and clinical research on the understanding 
of pain. The hope is that this kind of research will lead to 
alternatives to opioids for effective pain treatment. These few lines 
within the legislation will have a significant influence on our 
understanding of how opioid abuse and chronic pain impact our families 
and communities.
  Another set of highlights in the conference report are the provisions 
designed to protect infants born to mothers suffering from opioid 
addiction. Reuters reported that, roughly every 19 minutes, a child is 
born with an opioid dependency in the United States. That statistic is 
astounding.
  My home State is not spared from this heartbreaking problem. A recent 
Utah Health Status Update indicated that, between 2009 and 2012, more 
than 100 babies each year tested positive for illicit drugs at birth. 
Once enacted, CARA will strengthen the existing plan of safe care for 
infants born and identified as affected by substance abuse or 
withdrawal symptoms, as well as fetal alcohol spectrum disorder. 
Hopefully, this will be an effective step to address what is a tragic 
problem for too many American children.
  As you can see, these are issues that have been in need of sensible 
solutions for some time. As such, I wish to emphasize that the process 
that has brought us here to the precipice of passing CARA is nearly as 
impressive as the conference report itself.
  Senator Portman, from Ohio, longtime advocate on these issues, has 
worked tirelessly alongside Senator Whitehouse, from Rhode Island, for 
roughly 3 years to shepherd this effort through the Senate. Those two 
gentlemen deserve a lot of credit and support, and I am glad that 
politics around this situation have been reduced so they can get this 
bill through.
  Senator Ayotte, who also deserves a tremendous amount of support and 
respect here, has also been a champion for those afflicted by these 
problems. Also, Senator Ayotte deserves a lot of praise for all of her 
hard work. She understands this problem probably more than a lot of 
others, as her work in law enforcement helped her to do so. Senators 
Portman, Whitehouse, and Ayotte heard from the individuals and families 
who are afflicted in dealing with these issues, and they did an 
outstanding job to craft policies to address these needs. All three of 
them deserve a great deal of respect and support.
  Under Chairman Grassley's leadership, CARA was reported out of the 
Senate Judiciary Committee. He did a great job in committee. I was on 
the committee. The original bill then came to the Senate floor, where 
Senators were able to offer amendments. The Senate passed the amended 
version by a vote of 94 to 1.
  A similar process played out in the House, with the House passing its 
opioid package by a vote of 400 to 5. I was pleased to serve on the 
conference committee that produced what should be the final draft of 
this report legislation. There were many similarities between the House 
and Senate bills, and we were able to resolve our few differences in a 
way that produced an improved CARA bill.
  I want to commend Representative Fred Upton, the chairman of the 
House Energy and Commerce Committee--he is a great friend of mine--who 
was instrumental to the House effort and who also very ably chaired the 
conference committee. Fred Upton is one of the great people in this 
body, as are the others that I mentioned.
  As I alluded to earlier, the House passed the conference report this 
past Friday by a vote of 407 to 5. In other words, over the past 
several months, there have been three major votes in the two 
congressional Chambers, and the support has been overwhelming. Counting 
every vote collectively, the bill has received around 900 yea votes in 
Congress and less than a dozen nays. Do you know how many of those 
votes in opposition have been cast by a Democrat? One. A single House 
Democrat voted against passage of the original House opioid package. 
Every voting Democrat in the Senate voted in favor of our version of 
the bill. I commend them for that.
  Last week, every House Democrat who was present voted in favor of the 
conference report. I commend them for that. I note these facts not to 
unduly inject partisanship into this discussion but because we have 
heard rumblings that a number of Senate Democrats may want to hold up 
the process in order to extract more concessions. Some have actually 
suggested that, despite regular order and the overwhelmingly bipartisan 
support this legislation has enjoyed thus far, Senate passage of the 
CARA conference report is in doubt. I find this hard to believe, and I 
hope it is not true.
  A few weeks ago, the White House urged Democrats in Congress to 
``slowdown'' the effort to finalize an opioid package. Thankfully, this 
was met appropriately with outrage. All of us, Republicans and 
Democrats, now have a tremendous opportunity to give vital assistance 
to many Americans in need and to do so with, hopefully, an almost 
unanimous voice. These days, we don't often get to do that around here. 
We should not let partisan politics get in the way of this pressing 
issue.
  Like I said, more than 200 advocacy and stakeholder groups that have 
been involved throughout this process have urged passage of this 
conference report. Individuals suffering from these afflictions, as 
well as their families and friends, are crying out for help. The House 
of Representatives heeded their call. The Senate must do the same.
  I want to commend the majority leader for moving swiftly to bring 
this important legislation up for a vote. I think it is absolutely 
essential that we act before Congress breaks for the recess.
  I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the CARA conference report. 
Let's send it to the President's desk this week and deliver results for 
those Americans who are depending on us.
  With that, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.


                    Tragedy in Dallas and Gun Policy

  Mr. MURPHY. Mr. President, I am coming to the floor once again to 
express my condolences to the families of those who were lost in 
Dallas--the families of Brent Thompson, Michael Krol, Patrick 
Zamarripa, Lorne Ahrens, and Michael Smith. In Connecticut, we know the 
ripples of loss that really never end in a community like Dallas and a 
community like Orlando. There is going to be a long period of healing. 
Our thoughts and our prayers and any help we can provide from those of 
us who represent Connecticut and Sandy Hook, specifically, extend to 
those in Dallas.
  In the wake of another tragedy, I wanted to come down to the floor 
for a short period of time--I know my colleagues are waiting to speak--
to talk about some of the very irresponsible rhetoric that gets tossed 
around when it comes to this debate over the future of gun policy in 
this country. I want to take 5 or 10 minutes to talk about what is the 
biggest lie used by the gun lobby in this debate, and it is this: The 
only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun.
  This isn't true. It has never been true. It will never be true. It 
is, quite simply, an invention designed by the gun industry to sell 
more guns, to convince Americans that laws and rules cannot protect 
them, and that the only thing that can keep them safe from being shot 
is to buy expensive weapons and expensive ammunition that pad the 
profits of the big gun companies.
  It is time we call this lie what it is. It is a marketing gimmick for 
gun companies, plain and simple: The only thing that stops a bad guy 
with a gun, is a good guy with a gun.
  Let me be clear. I don't quarrel with anyone who decides to buy a 
weapon for self-defense. That is your decision. That is your call. Last 
week I met in my office with women from Connecticut who came to my 
office to tell me about their belief that owning a weapon is 
instrumental to their ability to protect themselves. One woman told me 
a story of repelling an attacker with a gun that was in her purse, and 
her sincere belief is she would not be alive today if it weren't for 
the weapon that was on her person.

[[Page S4966]]

  I support the Second Amendment, and I accept that the Supreme Court 
has made it clear that this amendment protects the ability of anyone to 
buy a weapon for self-defense, subject to certain commonsense 
limitations. But if you are buying a weapon because you think that 
owning one makes you less likely to be killed by a gun, then you are 
wrong. If you are standing in the way of policies that crack down on 
illegal or dangerous weapons on our street because you believe in some 
kind of gun control Darwinism--a world in which the good guys with guns 
eventually shoot all the bad guys with guns--then you have it backwards 
because that is not how it works.
  You know how I know this? Because study after study tells us that 
owning a gun makes you more likely to be killed by that gun than to use 
it to kill someone who threatens you. Studies show that in countries 
and States with more guns, there are generally not less gun deaths but 
more gun deaths, like the study in the New England Journal of Medicine 
that showed a gun in your house doesn't make you less likely to be 
killed. It isn't even risk neutral. Having a gun in your home actually 
increases your chance of getting killed by a gun by anywhere from 40 
percent to 170 percent.
  How about the study in the American Journal of Epidemiology that 
showed that people living in a house with a gun are 90 percent more 
likely to die from a homicide than a person who lives in a house 
without a gun.
  What about the study from the Violence Policy Center that showed that 
instances of guns being used in self-defense are so rare that on 
average there are 44 criminal homicides with guns for every time a gun 
is used for protection in a justifiable homicide.
  How about one more study. The Harvard Injury Control Research Center 
study showed that in States and communities with greater gun 
availability, gun homicide rates were higher, not lower, than in 
communities and States with lower gun availability. It is your decision 
whether or not to buy a gun. There are certainly instances where it may 
make sense, and I don't begrudge the individual who makes that 
decision, but the data tells us only one story. The actual real, live 
experience of living in a nation awash in guns shows that contrary to 
the gun lobby sloganeering, the opposite of their claim is actually 
true. The more good guys there are who have guns, the more good guys 
die from guns. We have no clear or more horrifying example of this 
truth than last weekend in Dallas, TX.
  Texas is an open carry State, meaning that anyone who can legally buy 
a semiautomatic weapon can walk around the streets of Dallas or any 
other community with that weapon attached to them. Reports suggest that 
there were perhaps 30 people openly carrying AR-15-style weapons at 
Saturday's protest. Some were also wearing camouflage, bulletproof 
vests, and gas masks. There were also dozens and dozens of police 
officers on hand, all of them expertly trained and heavily armed. 
Between the 30 heavily armed civilians and dozens of police officers, 
there were more good guys with guns in the vicinity of this one very 
bad guy with a gun than at nearly any other crime scene in recent 
memory, and it led to chaos.
  Here is what Dallas Police Chief Brown said in the wake of the 
shooting:

       We're trying as best we can as a law enforcement community 
     to make it work so that citizens can express their Second 
     Amendment rights, but it's increasingly challenging when 
     people have AR-15s slung over their shoulder and they're in a 
     crowd. We don't know who the good guy is versus the bad guy 
     when everyone starts shooting.

  All of those guns in the hands of good-hearted civilians and trained 
police officers--and what killed the sniper, Micah Johnson? It wasn't a 
gun. It was an explosive device attached to the end of a robot on 
wheels. Eleven brave police officers fired their weapons at Micah 
Johnson. Dozens of armed civilians theoretically had the opportunity to 
defend themselves and their fellow protesters, but one deranged man, 
armed with an antique rifle and 30-round magazines strategically 
positioned above his targets, was unharmed by all of those good guys 
with guns, just as Jared Lee Loughner was unharmed by a civilian with a 
gun in the parking lot of the supermarket where he shot Congresswoman 
Gabby Giffords in the head, and just as the armed security guard in 
Pulse nightclub couldn't do anything about Omar Matteen as he executed 
49 young men and women. It is just like what happened to Nancy Lanza, 
who thought the guns in her home would protect her and her son from 
harm, only for them to be used by her son to murder her in her sleep 
and then massacre 20 first graders and 6 of their educators.
  If you want to buy a gun for self-defense, that is your call, but 
before making that purchase, understand that the gun lobby is lying to 
you. If a bad guy has a gun and wants to kill, there is very little 
that can be done to stop him once the tragedy is in motion. The best 
policy is to stop madmen and killers from getting these dangerous 
weapons in the first place.
  Dallas Police Chief Brown said to us:

       Do your job. We are doing ours. We're putting our lives on 
     the line. The other aspects of government need to step up and 
     help us.

  When Connecticut implemented a law requiring a permit to be issued 
before a gun is issued, gun homicides dropped by 40 percent. In States 
that require background checks for private handgun sales--listen to 
this--48 percent fewer law enforcement officers are shot to death by 
handguns, and in States with universal background checks, women are 46 
percent less likely to be shot by their intimate partner than in States 
without universal checks.
  This isn't conjecture. Good laws save lives. Concentrate on passing 
laws that keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of criminals and 
killers, and you will save lives. Load up your streets, schools, and 
shopping malls with weapons and just hope that the good guys will 
eventually outshoot the bad guys, and people will be killed.
  People across this country have figured it out, and that is why they 
support expanded background checks by an astounding ratio of 90 percent 
to 10 percent. There is no public policy in this country that is 
supported by 90 percent of Americans. They know that smart firearms 
laws save lives, and so they support universal background checks by a 
ratio of 9 to 1. It is also why there are fewer and fewer American 
families buying guns. It makes sense for some people, and I am not 
denying that. A new CBS News poll shows that gun ownership is at a near 
40-year low with only 36 percent of Americans reporting that they own a 
gun. That is down 17 points from its highest rate in 1994 and down a 
whopping 10 points from just 4 years ago, but be forewarned, this 
development will simply propel the gun lobby to be even bolder in 
spreading its lies about the effects of gun ownership.
  Just two weekends ago the head of the NRA went on national TV and 
told Americans that the only way to protect themselves from terrorism 
is to have a personal defense plan. That means, if you didn't parse his 
words, to go out and buy a gun from a gun company and help the industry 
stem this tide of declining gun ownership all in the name of collective 
self-defense. Well, it is a lie. Good guys with guns generally don't 
stop bad guys with guns. They didn't in Dallas. Good laws that keep 
illegal and dangerous weapons off of our streets, that make sure that 
only law-abiding, peaceful citizens are obtaining weapons--those laws 
stop bad guys. When you strip away all of the rhetoric driven by the 
gun industry profit motivations, that is the truth.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to complete my 
remarks.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                        FAA Reauthorization Bill

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, over the past 4 months, the Islamic State 
has carried out two deadly terrorist attacks at airports. Taken 
together, these two attacks--one at Brussels Airport and one at 
Istanbul's Ataturk Airport--resulted in more than 500 injuries and more 
than 70 deaths.

[[Page S4967]]

  Since September 11, airport security efforts have emphasized securing 
aircraft against hijackings, but the Brussels and Istanbul bombings 
highlight other airport security vulnerabilities. As these attacks 
demonstrate, it is not just planes that are vulnerable. Both the 
Brussels and Istanbul attacks sought to exploit the largely unprotected 
areas outside the principal security checkpoints where the attackers 
could detonate bombs outside of screening. The large crowds of people 
who congregate in nonsecured areas of an airport--like security 
checkpoints, check-in counters, and baggage claim--make appealing 
targets for terrorists who like nothing better than maximum loss of 
life with minimum effort.
  This week, the Senate will take up the Federal Aviation 
Administration reauthorization bill, which will directly address the 
vulnerabilities exposed by these attacks. It will ensure that attacks 
like those that happened in Brussels and Istanbul don't happen at 
American airports.
  While this bill has gained new urgency in the wake of the bombings in 
Istanbul and Brussels, the reforms in this bill are not a hasty 
response to these attacks. Instead, they are the product of months of 
Commerce Committee oversight of our Nation's transportation safety 
agencies and extensive Commerce Committee analysis of airport security 
vulnerabilities.
  I am proud that the bill we are considering today is the most 
significant airport security reform bill that Congress has considered 
in a decade. As I have already mentioned, one problem that the Brussels 
and Istanbul attacks highlighted in great detail is the tempting 
terrorist target offered by large crowds of people in unsecured areas 
of airports. The FAA bill addresses that problem in a number of ways. 
For starters, this bill includes provisions to get more Americans 
enrolled in the TSA's PreCheck program. Expanding enrollment in 
PreCheck will reduce wait times at security, which will help reduce the 
size of crowds waiting in unsecured areas.
  The bill also directs the TSA to more effectively deploy its 
personnel during high-volume travel times to speed up wait time at 
checkpoints. It also requires the TSA to develop and test new security 
systems that expedite the movement of passengers through security. 
Another important measure we can take to prevent attacks like those in 
Brussels and Istanbul is increasing the security presence in unsecured 
areas of airports.
  The FAA bill adds more prevention and response security teams, which 
often include K-9 units, and expands training for local airport 
security personnel so the airports are better able to deter or respond 
to bombers or active shooter threats. Increasing security at our 
Nation's airports and expediting security checks will go a long way 
toward preventing terrorist attacks, but threats at U.S. airports are 
not only threats facing U.S. airline passengers. Americans travel 
internationally on a regular basis, and on their return flights they 
depend on the quality of airport security in other countries. Part of 
protecting the traveling public is making sure that Americans traveling 
to other countries are safe when they return to the United States.
  To increase security for Americans traveling abroad, the FAA bill 
that we will pass this week authorizes the TSA to donate unneeded 
screening equipment to foreign airports with direct flights to the 
United States. It will strengthen cooperation between U.S. security 
officials and security officials in other countries and authorize the 
TSA to support training for foreign airport security personnel. It 
requires the TSA to conduct assessments of security that have received 
less attention at foreign airports and foreign cargo security programs.
  Another aspect of airport security that has received less attention 
but is equally important is the need to make sure that individuals who 
work behind the scenes at airports don't pose a threat. In October of 
2015, terrorists killed 224 people when they brought down Russian 
Metrojet flight 9268 shortly after it departed Sharm el-Sheikh airport 
in Egypt. Many experts believe that the terrorists responsible had help 
from an airport worker. Ensuring that airport workers are trustworthy 
is essential to keeping passengers safe. However, at times the security 
badges that permit individuals to work behind the scenes at airports 
have been issued to individuals who have no business holding them. 
Right now in the United States individuals with convictions for crimes, 
including embezzlement, sabotage, racketeering, immigration violations, 
and assault with a deadly weapon can all obtain security badges 
granting them access to restricted sections of an airport.
  While most criminals are not terrorists, there are too many criminals 
who, for the right price, would happily expand their criminal 
activities even if it involved assisting terrorists. In fact, in March 
of this year, an airline ramp agent was arrested in a Florida airport 
with $282,400 in cash that he allegedly intended to hand off to an 
unknown individual. News reports indicated that he was aware the money 
was connected to illegal activity but knew little else. In other words, 
he could easily have been transporting money to terrorists without 
being any the wiser.
  The FAA bill that we will pass this week tightens vetting of anyone 
with access to secure areas of an airport and expands the list of 
criminal convictions that could disqualify someone from holding a 
security badge. This bill also provides for an increase in random 
searches of behind-the-scenes airport workers who are not always 
subject to security screening the way passengers are.
  I am very proud of everything this FAA bill achieves in terms of 
security. This is the most comprehensive airport security package in a 
decade, and it will help us make real progress toward keeping airline 
passengers safer, and that is not all.
  In addition to its robust security package, this bill puts in place a 
number of other important measures, among them new consumer 
protections. For example, this legislation will require airlines to 
refund package fees for lost or unreasonably delayed baggage so 
passengers will not have to spend a ton of time tracking down a refund 
when the airline doesn't deliver. It will also make sure airlines have 
policies that will help families traveling with children sit together 
on flights. It also takes steps to improve air travel for individuals 
with disabilities, and it ensures that Americans in rural areas will 
continue to have access to reliable air service.
  The bill also takes measures to support the general aviation 
community. It streamlines the requirements for the third-class medical 
certificate for noncommercial pilots so private pilots don't face 
unnecessary bureaucracy when obtaining their medical qualification, and 
to reduce the risk of accidents for low-altitude fliers like 
agricultural applications, the bill requires highly visible markings on 
small towers that could impose a hazard to pilots.
  On the aviation safety front, this bill updates current law to 
reflect the rapid advances in technology we have seen over the last few 
years--most notably drones. This bill includes provisions to deploy 
technology that will work to keep drones out of the path of airliners, 
which is particularly important given reports of near-miss collisions 
by airline pilots. It will also deter drone operators from interfering 
with emergency response efforts like wildfire suppression, and, in 
addition to fostering drone safety, this bill authorizes expanded 
research opportunities and operations that will further the integration 
of drones into our Nation's airspace.
  Since we took control of the Senate in January of 2015, Republicans 
have focused on passing legislation to address the challenges facing 
the American people in our country. I am proud that with this bill, we 
have found a way to make our increasingly dangerous world a little 
safer for Americans. I am grateful to my colleagues who contributed to 
this bill, particularly my Democratic counterpart in the conference 
committee, Senator Nelson.
  Senator Ayotte also led numerous subcommittee hearings in the 
Aviation Subcommittee to get the bill on a path to success, and both of 
us appreciate the contributions of Senator Cantwell, our Aviation 
Subcommittee ranking member.
  This bill is an example of what can happen when Democrats and 
Republicans work together to get things done for the American people. I 
look forward

[[Page S4968]]

to sending our legislation to the President for his signature later 
this week.


     United States Appreciation for Olympians and Paralympians Bill

  Mr. President, I also wish to speak for just a moment, if I can 
today, about a bill that hopefully will pass the Senate later today as 
well.
  In just a few weeks, our Olympic athletes will head to Rio de 
Janeiro, Brazil, for the 2016 Olympic games. The following month, 
America's Paralympic athletes will compete in the Rio Paralympic games. 
These athletes represent what is best about our country. They embody 
the timeless values of hard work, dedication, and sportsmanship.
  Our Olympic and Paralympic athletes--and their families--have made 
innumerable sacrifices over the many years of training it takes to 
become a world-class competitor. Training is not cheap, and the vast 
majority of our amateur athletes put it all on the line without the 
help of sponsors or endorsement deals to subsidize their expenses.
  Many of these athletes have spent virtually their entire lives 
training for this moment, and I have absolutely no doubt these brave 
young men and women will represent our Nation with great honor and 
distinction.
  America's Olympic and Paralympic medal winners, in particular, will 
be greeted with much enthusiasm and great appreciation upon their 
return. Local communities across America will find ways to honor their 
returning hometown heroes. Unfortunately, one of the ways the Federal 
Government will welcome home our Olympic and Paralympic champions is by 
greeting them with a new tax bill. That is right. The Internal Revenue 
Service considers these medals to be income and will tax the value of 
any gold, silver, or bronze medal awarded in competition as well as any 
incentive award our athletes receive from the U.S. Olympic Committee.
  I believe this tax penalty on our Olympic heroes is wrong, and that 
is why earlier this year I introduced S. 2650, the United States 
Appreciation for Olympians and Paralympians Act.
  This legislation--introduced with Senators Schumer, Gardner, 
Gillibrand, and Isakson--would ensure that America rewards the 
sacrifice and hard work of Team USA by exempting from Federal tax the 
medals and cash prizes they win at the Olympics and Paralympics.
  I am pleased my legislation will pass the Senate later today, sending 
a strong signal to our athletes as they depart to the 2016 games that 
their Nation stands behind them. I urge the House of Representatives to 
take up and pass this legislation before the House adjourns for the 
August recess.
  America's Olympic and Paralympic athletes deserve not only our 
admiration and respect but also a tax system that acknowledges the many 
years of training and sacrifice they have endured. Because training for 
the Olympics is not considered a business enterprise, our athletes 
cannot deduct the substantial costs they incur over the years as they 
prepare to represent America on the world stage.
  Most countries not only compensate their athletes but also subsidize 
their training expenses with taxpayer dollars. Our athletes make 
considerable financial sacrifices to train for the Olympics and 
Paralympics and as amateurs receive no compensation for their training. 
The very least we can do is ensure they don't receive a tax penalty 
when they successfully represent our Nation in the highest level of 
athletic competition.
  Simply put, when it comes to our victorious Olympic and Paralympic 
athletes, we should celebrate their achievements rather than tax their 
success.


                     Congratulating Paige McPherson

  Mr. President, I would also like to take this opportunity to extend 
my congratulations and best wishes to one of Team USA's shining stars; 
that is, South Dakota's own Paige McPherson.
  Paige grew up in Sturgis, SD, graduating from Black Hills Classical 
Christian Academy in 2009. She will be competing in Taekwondo at the 
Rio games and will be striving for her second medal in a row, after 
claiming a bronze medal at the London Olympic Games in 2012.
  I know Paige will represent America--and South Dakota--with great 
distinction next month, as will all of our Olympic and Paralympic 
competitors.
  I wish to thank the original cosponsors of my legislation, whom I 
mentioned earlier, as well as Finance Committee Chairman Hatch and 
Senators Sullivan and Moran for their support. I look forward to seeing 
our legislation enacted into law this year, and I wish all of our 
Olympians and Paralympians the very best of luck in Rio.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.

                          ____________________