[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 50 (Thursday, March 22, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1886-S1892]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




       NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018--
                           MOTION TO PROCEED

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 165, 
S. 1519.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report the motion.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 165, S. 1519, a bill to 
     authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2018 for military 
     activities of the Department of Defense, for military 
     construction, and for defense activities of the Department of 
     Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such 
     fiscal year, and for other purposes.

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senators 
be permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.


                   Recognition of the Minority Leader

  The Democratic leader is recognized.


                        Tribute to Thad Cochran

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I have a few items I would like to 
address this morning, but first I would like to recognize our dear 
friend from Mississippi, the senior Senator, who will be delivering his 
farewell speech today.
  Senator Thad Cochran has served in this body for decades with a sense 
of dignity, decorum, and respect for his colleagues. That was always 
appreciated but never confused for lack of fierceness or conviction. 
When his issues were on the line, Senator Cochran fought for 
Mississippi as hard as any Senator. After all, he was first bitten by 
the political bug in his run for head cheerleader at Ole Miss, and he 
shares that distinction with Trent Lott. So if you want to be a Senator 
for Mississippi, join the cheerleading squad for Ole Miss. Of course, 
for New Yorkers, we like Eli Manning too. Senator Cochran never stopped 
being a cheerleader for Mississippi.
  Chairman Cochran and I certainly had our differences. The chairman 
once said:

       I don't call a lot of news conferences. I just don't see 
     that as a necessary part of my responsibilities.

  Well, we will agree to disagree on that one, but there are many 
things we have in common, and there is a particular part of his legacy 
I admire.
  After Hurricane Katrina buffeted his State, he convinced the 
recalcitrant lawmakers to deliver aid to the gulf coast--far exceeding 
the administration's request--and he did it by working Members on his 
side of the aisle and across the aisle behind the scenes. That is how 
he earned the nickname the ``quiet persuader.'' It is a skill I greatly 
respect after going through something similar when Hurricane Sandy hit 
my home State of New York.
  At the time, Chairman Cochran was the ranking member on the 
Appropriations Committee. He and his staff were extraordinarily helpful 
throughout the process. Ultimately, Senator Cochran voted for the Sandy 
relief bill when many of his colleagues opposed it. I will never forget 
that.
  Under his stewardship of the Appropriations Committee, we have just 
completed the text of an omnibus spending bill, which I will address in 
a moment. Once the bill passes, it will be a fitting legacy that 
Senator Cochran will retire with another bipartisan accomplishment 
under his belt.
  I wish him and his family the best, and I thank him for his 
distinguished service to the State of Mississippi, to his beloved 
country, and to the U.S. Senate. He will be missed in the Senate.


                      Omnibus Appropriations Bill

  Mr. President, I am pleased to say the four congressional leaders 
have reached an agreement on the omnibus spending bill that is now 
public. It didn't happen until last night. It took a long time. There 
were painstaking weeks of negotiations, more than a few of which we 
went past the midnight hour. Before I go further, I want to thank 
Leader McConnell, Speaker Ryan, and their staffs, Leader Pelosi and her 
team, Chairman Cochran, Vice Chairman Leahy, the Appropriations 
Committee staff, and many others for all the hard work that went into 
this bill.
  It certainly doesn't have everything Democrats want, and it contains 
a few

[[Page S1887]]

things Democrats aren't thrilled about. The same is true of our 
Republican friends. That is true of all compromises. If each of us 
stood on our hind legs and said ``If I don't get everything I want, I 
am voting no,'' we would be totally paralyzed, and that happens far too 
often in this body, but on this appropriations bill, this omnibus, 
somehow that didn't happen. There was a remarkable spirit of give-and-
take in the room.
  Overall, we Democrats are very happy with what we have been able to 
accomplish on a number of very important priorities to the middle class 
in America: infrastructure, education, opioid treatment, mental health, 
childcare. For nearly a decade, the middle class in this country has 
suffered from a needless and self-imposed austerity, limiting 
investment of all of the things that create good-paying jobs and 
improve the working conditions of Americans, improve the lives of 
Americans. This spending bill, this spending agreement, brings that era 
of austerity to an unceremonious end and represents one of the most 
significant investments in the middle class in decades.
  So many of the middle class are frustrated, and they don't know why. 
Well, one of the reasons is quietly, but unfortunately and quite 
decisively, this Congress cut back on the very ladder that helps the 
middle class climb in education, in infrastructure, in healthcare. It 
was cut and cut and cut. The help that the Federal Government has given 
to the middle class since the progressive era of the early 1900s was 
taken away quietly but decisively. It is back. It is going to help 
middle-class people stay in the middle class. It is going to help those 
aspiring to the middle class climb that ladder and get there. It is 
really a good thing, and I am excited about it.
  As the Republican leader mentioned, it robustly funds our military, 
giving our men and women in uniform the resources they need; it also 
improves our ability to respond to wildfires; it makes a critical 
downpayment on election security; it provides a reliable pathway for 
the essential infrastructure projects in our country; and it makes an 
incremental but important progress on the issue of gun violence--a 
debate this Congress must resume soon.
  Again, that era of austerity, which so hurt middle-class Americans, 
is coming to an unceremonious end because this bill respects one of the 
most significant investments in the middle class in decades. For these 
reasons, I am confident this agreement will pass both Houses of 
Congress; hopefully, with comfortable margins; hopefully, in a 
bipartisan way.
  Again, I thank the Republican leader for his part in reaching this 
agreement, and I look forward to passing this legislation as soon as 
possible.


          China and Protecting American Intellectual Property

  Mr. President, now on a final issue, while we are talking about 
agreement and bipartisanship, I don't agree with President Trump on a 
whole lot, but today I want to give him a big pat on the back. He is 
doing the right thing when it comes to China.
  For many of us, since Senator Graham and I went and visited China 
over a decade ago, we have watched China rapaciously take advantage of 
America, American jobs, American workers, and America's intellectual 
property. China is ruthless in how they go after us. They do it 
quietly. They do it with a smile. Unfortunately, previous Presidents--
Democratic and Republican--just stood by as China did what it did to 
us.
  President Trump is exactly right when, this afternoon, he will 
propose a plan designed to punish China for its most flagrant trade 
abuses.
  I have called for such action for years and have been disappointed by 
the inactions by both President Bush and President Obama. I am very 
pleased this administration is taking strong action to get a better 
deal on China because China has stolen and extorted the intellectual 
property of American companies for years without repercussion.
  Our intellectual property is our family jewel. The American way of 
openness, of thinking, of debate has created the kind of place where 
great thinkers come, think of great ideas, and those ideas are often 
translated into millions of middle-class, good-paying jobs. China knows 
this, but China is not a free and open society. To achieve the kind of 
gains and advancements in technology, in biomedical science, and so 
many other things, they have to steal what we do sometimes by buying 
our companies, sometimes by cyber theft, sometimes by just these joint 
ventures, and they tell American firms: You can only come to China if 
you give away your intellectual property. China is taking huge 
advantage of us.
  Intellectual property is the lifeblood of emerging industries and the 
good-paying jobs they provide. The American advantage of intellectual 
property is one of the main things that will keep us No. 1 economically 
in this century but not if we allow it to be stolen and taken advantage 
of, and the country that does that more than any other is China.
  As I said, intellectual property is the lifeblood of emerging 
industries and the good-paying jobs they provide, so it is impossible 
to overstate the cost of IP theft to our economy and our workers. This 
sentence pains me, and I think about it often: GEN Keith Alexander, a 
four-star general, nonpolitical, was in charge of cyber security in 
America, and here is what he said: China's theft of our intellectual 
property is ``the greatest transfer of wealth in history.'' We are 
letting them do it. The crown jewel of America, our free and open 
society that allows great thinkers to create great ideas and products, 
they steal it, and we do nothing. It is one of the things that 
aggravates me more than most others. Finally, President Trump is doing 
something, unlike his predecessors, so I commend him.
  The WTO--they have been grossly inadequate for this problem. We 
cannot continue to ignore flagrant cheating by China, whether WTO likes 
it or not. So the administration's announcement today is a leap 
forward. If this new push is going to be successful, we need our allies 
to work with us--Germany, Italy, France, Britain, open and free 
societies, unlike China. They know their stuff is being stolen too. 
Join with us. If we are a united, strong front against Chinese 
activities on intellectual property, we can force them to change their 
ways, but they will not do it by persuasion; they will not do it by 
smiling; and, frankly, they will not do it by diplomacy when some of 
our diplomats come in and say: We need China for this thing; ignore the 
economic theft; ignore the economic disadvantage. So I support what the 
President is doing.
  When it came to the tariffs on steel and aluminum, I supported the 
thrust, I supported the President's instinct, but it wasn't focused 
enough on China and hurt too many of our other allies, like Canada, 
where we have a trade surplus. I hope the President corrects his 
thinking on that, but, here, this is aimed at China and one of the ways 
China hurts us the very most. It is smart. It is good. I salute our 
Trade Rep Lighthizer for pushing this issue; I salute our Commerce 
Secretary Ross for pushing this issue.
  By the way, to help support the administration's efforts to crack 
down on China, we will fully fund the USTR's trade enforcement fund at 
$15 million in the omnibus. So let's make sure China starts playing by 
the rules, and intellectual property is certainly at the top of the 
list. Today's announcement by the President will be a great start in 
that direction. Democrats, Republicans, Americans of every ideology and 
every region of the country should support these actions.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Fischer). The Senator from Tennessee.


                      Omnibus Appropriations Bill

  Mr. CORKER. Madam President, I rise today to speak about the omnibus 
bill that we are going to be voting on either later today or tomorrow.
  I came to the Senate almost 12 years ago. I have 9 months left in my 
term. I told folks back home that I couldn't imagine serving more than 
two terms. Yet it has been an incredible privilege to be here. When I 
ran, I ran concerned about our Nation's fiscal issues, and I ran on the 
combination of pro-growth tax reform and entitlement reform and dealing 
with the tremendous deficits that our country has. I really thought we 
would do something about it.

[[Page S1888]]

  We had the financial crisis that took place back in 2007, 2008, 
2009--building in 2007 and occurred in 2008. We dealt with much of it 
over 2009. I remember talking to people around our country not just 
about the financial crisis but about the tremendous deficits that our 
Nation was creating. I was still hopeful in my first term that we would 
rise to the occasion and actually deal with the fiscal issues that are 
going to haunt these young people who are our pages sitting before me. 
We have $21 trillion in debt today and over $100 trillion in unfunded 
liabilities with our long-term programs, our mandatory spending 
programs. So during that period of time, near the end of my first term, 
I kept saying to people around the country: There is no question that 
the Senate and the House, with leadership from the executive branch, 
will deal with this fiscal issue.
  I am convinced today that that is not going to happen until there is 
a crisis in our Nation. Let me say it one more time. Without extreme 
leadership at the very top, I do not think we will deal with this issue 
until there is a crisis, because I just don't see the will here to do 
the things that need to be done.
  During December we had a debate on the pro-growth tax reform side of 
this, and I think it is well documented that I had concerns about it. 
As a matter of fact, when the bill came through the Senate, I voted 
against it. I continued to work with some of my counterparts on the 
Democratic side--Chris Coons and others--and the White House, to see if 
there was some way to potentially alter the bill so that if growth 
projections didn't achieve what we thought they might be, we had some 
way of ensuring that we would not have deficits. At the end of the day, 
when it came to the floor, I supported it--pro-growth tax reform, 
again, being one of those things that I ran on back in 2006.
  What concerns me is that today, or maybe tomorrow, we have a 2,232-
page omnibus bill before us that sets a base in spending that will be 
about $2 trillion in deficit spending over the next 10 years. By the 
way, that doesn't include some of the supplemental items. I am talking 
about just the baseline in spending.
  I think everyone knows that, like the Presiding Officer, I am a very 
strong supporter of our men and women in uniform. No doubt we all 
understand that the defense numbers in this bill are way beyond even 
what the executive branch asked for. Somehow, in these negotiations, we 
have ended up, over a 2-year period, with an average increase in base 
spending of about $150 billion. When you multiply that times 10, that 
is $1.5 trillion. We know there are going to be increases over that 10-
year period. Then, if you look at the interest on the debt that it is 
going to create, we are voting on a bill tonight or tomorrow that is 
going to add--there is no question--a minimum of $2 trillion in 
deficits over the next 10 years.
  What was fascinating during the month of December, when we were 
dealing--let me stop for a second.
  Let me just say this. There are a lot of discussions about the fact 
that maybe the Republican Party has lost its soul. There is a lot of 
discussion about that around the country--that maybe the Republican 
Party has lost its soul.
  I will say that for the Republican Party to have the Presidency, for 
the Republican Party to have the Senate, and for the Republican Party 
to have the House of Representatives, and for us to be passing a bill 
today--obviously, it couldn't happen without us; we control the agenda 
here--for us to be in this situation where we are getting ready to pass 
a bill that adds $2 trillion in deficits over the next 10 years, or 
sets the stage for that by passing the first 2 years with a huge 
increase in base spending with no offsets to speak of, does have to be 
a wake-up call for people as for whether that is the case.
  I can't imagine, for instance, had the 2016 election gone a different 
way and we had a Democratic President and we controlled the House and 
Senate, our being in a situation where we would vote tonight or 
tomorrow for a bill that is going to add $2 trillion in debt without 
offsets. As a matter of fact, I can just tell my colleagues, 
absolutely, that would not be the case.
  So here we are. There are going to be all kinds of things in this 
bill that people don't even know about. It is just human nature. When 
you have the pen in your hand and you are working in a back room some 
place--and I don't criticize back rooms; that is how these bills get 
written--people do things that benefit themselves. They just do. That 
is the way it works. I don't even want to speak to that. That will be 
something I hope the media will speak to over the next two or three 
weeks, when we find, in these 2,232 pages that no one has read, the 
things in this bill that are going to be egregious to the American 
people--highly egregious.
  I hope people will find them. I hope the media will report them. I 
know they are in there. I just don't know what they are yet because the 
bill has just been produced. That is of concern.
  What is of grave concern to me is that we have made no attempt 
whatsoever to create any kind of offsets and no attempt whatsoever to 
try to solve our fiscal issues. Together, Republicans and Democrats are 
running off a cliff and passing a bill.
  Now, let me speak to Democrats. I am criticizing Republicans, as I 
should, with this piece of legislation, when we control the executive 
branch, we control both Houses of Congress, and we are getting ready to 
pass a bill that will add $2 trillion for these young people to pay for 
down the road, which will compound, compound, compound. We have $21 
trillion in debt today, not to speak of the $100 trillion of unfunded 
liabilities.
  My Democrat friends, raised unmitigated H-E-L-L over the tax bill 
that was potentially going to create some deficits if growth 
projections didn't occur. I have not heard a word from them--not a 
word, not a word--about the fact that there is no question that we are 
adding $2 trillion in debt here--no question. This is money gone, down 
the tube, out the door, and no way to pay for it. I haven't heard a 
word from them--not a word. My friends in the media were beside 
themselves--beside themselves--in December. I mean, the world was going 
to come to an end if the growth projections that were laid out didn't 
occur, and the deficits that might be created by this tax bill if we 
didn't have the growth projections. They were just beside themselves. I 
have not heard a word from them. It is amazing. Somehow or another, 
spending more money than we have is different than hoping to create 
pro-growth tax reform.
  So let me just say this. I am optimistic about our future. I see 
young people around our country who are just so impressive. I go to 
schools. I go to colleges. I see people in townhall meetings, in 
restaurants, at the grocery store and in other places, and I could not 
be more upbeat about the generation of people coming after us--who care 
about others, who care about the future, and who are engaged in issues. 
We will have a big crowd up here this weekend, caring about a 
particular issue that they should care about.
  But I could not be more discouraged about where we are today with our 
adult leadership here in Congress and at the White House.
  This is one of the most grotesque pieces of legislation I can 
remember.
  One of the best votes I ever made was the Budget Control Act. It was 
criticized, but it kept domestic and discretionary spending on a level. 
We should have done the rest of it. The rest of it was people getting 
together to solve our long-term problems. That didn't happen. We 
created sequester, and I know that has built some of the pressure that 
leads us to where this bill is today.
  This is a grotesque piece of legislation--grotesque--that we would 
pass a piece of legislation that would set the standard for $2 trillion 
in deficit spending not offset.
  I am discouraged. I am discouraged about where we are today. I am 
discouraged about the fact that we continue to be engaged in 
generational theft--my generation.
  We will not deal with mandatory spending--mandatory spending that 
benefits my generation. To these young people sitting in front of me, 
we are engaged right now in generational theft because we are 
transferring from you to us your future resources, because we don't 
have the courage or the will to deal with issues.
  By the way, unfortunately, the American people are not there. The

[[Page S1889]]

American people do not care about this issue because we are living fat 
and happy today and because the crisis has not yet occurred and because 
we can slough it off on you and keep ourselves from making these tough 
decisions.
  By the way, these tough decisions play themselves out in the polls 
because people get angry about the fact that we need to be responsible 
and that we need to make sure that you guys are not going to pay these 
huge tabs. By the way, your standard of living, when we pass this bill, 
will be diminished. When you go on to college and graduate and start 
working in your job, just know that what we are getting ready to do 
tonight or tomorrow is going to diminish your standard of living, 
because we are going to pass a huge bill, unpaid for, that you are 
going to pay for and your children are going to pay for. That is what 
we are doing.
  That is what we are doing because we don't have the will as a body to 
say: OK, if we are going to spend this additional money, what is it 
that we are going to cut over here? What are we going to do relative to 
the fact that right now Medicare recipients take about three times out 
of the program what they put in. What are we going to do about that?
  Well, see, we are going to do nothing about it because that is 
unpopular, and people don't want to hear the truth about these things. 
Instead, what they would rather do is say: Well, let's worry about that 
down the road.
  But let me tell you who is going to be worrying about it. You are 
going to be worrying about it.
  I know you have seen some outstanding people. I serve with 
outstanding people in this body. I really do. They are intelligent, 
hard-working people. I really do. It has been a great privilege. But 
what you are going to see tonight and tomorrow is a bunch of hard-
working people pass a piece of legislation that is going to make your 
lives and your kids' lives worse.
  I will not support this piece of legislation. I know it is going to 
pass overwhelmingly because there is too much in it to make people 
happy for the moment. But let me just say that down the road the 
American people are going to be very unhappy with our lack of 
responsibility.
  Not only do I question the soul of my own party, I question the soul 
of the other party, and I wonder where the media is and why they are 
not out crying over what we are getting ready to do.
  With that, I yield 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. DURBIN. 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. DURBIN. Madam President, I use the term loosely, but last 
Saturday, the 17th of March, was one of the high holy days in Chicago--
St. Patrick's Day. They color the Chicago River green. Everybody wears 
green. There are great parades, great celebrations. I look forward to 
it each year--going back to my parish, Old St. Pat's, for mass and 
celebration and having a wonderful day of a lot of good feelings.
  During the course of the St. Patrick's Day Parade, I walked along 
with various groups who were going to march and came upon the Chicago 
Police Department's bagpipe and drum band. I noticed that the banner 
they were carrying for the day was in honor of a wonderful man by the 
name of Commander Paul Bauer.
  Paul Bauer, a commander of the Chicago police force, was downtown in 
the Loop of Chicago on February 13. He was attending an important 
meeting, and he heard over his radio that a fugitive was trying to 
escape. He dropped what he was doing, joined in, and participated in 
trying to catch this fugitive. He was cornered in the stairwell by this 
man and shot dead. The man who shot him got off six rounds and killed 
this wonderful man who had served not only the city of Chicago but our 
Nation in his role with law enforcement. He left behind a young wife 
and beautiful teenage daughter. He was from the Bridgeport community of 
Chicago, and when his funeral was held, massive crowds showed up, 
people paying tribute to Paul Bauer.
  The reason I raise that is because they traced the gun that was used 
to kill this brave policeman. It was a gun that was originally sold 
legally through a federally licensed dealer in Madison, WI, and then 
the person who purchased it sold it, without a background check, to a 
member of his gun club. We don't know whether that person was 
disqualified, under the law, from owning a handgun, but we do know that 
the next purchase was the purchase that made a difference. That person 
decided to sell the gun on the internet, with no background check, and 
ended up selling it to a convicted felon--a person disqualified, under 
the laws of this country, from owning a gun. That is when that handgun 
got into the world of crime. It was used in the commission of a crime 
months before the shooting of Commander Bauer, and it was used to kill 
him on that day, February 13.
  The reason I raise that is we know what we need to do. We need 
universal background checks--no ifs, ands, or buts about it. Whether 
selling to a person at a gun show or over the internet, there ought to 
be a background check. There is no excuse for selling a gun legally in 
the United States to someone who is prohibited by our laws from owning 
it--none. That is what happened. That is why that wonderful man, that 
brave policeman, lost his life.
  The reason I raise that is we have a bill before us now. It is an 
Omnibus appropriations bill, and it includes some provisions about gun 
safety. They are good. I don't argue with them. One is called Fix 
NICS--try to make sure more information is put into the background 
check system. There is another one related to school violence, which 
provides grants to schools to make them safer and such. I have no 
objection whatsoever. But we are not getting to the heart of the issue.
  This is the heart of the issue: We have a Second Amendment that gives 
rights to Americans to legally own guns and use them responsibly, and 
the Supreme Court has made clear that we can draw clear lines as to 
what is permissible in that gun ownership and gun usage. We can draw 
lines that say: Yes, if you have been convicted of a felony, you cannot 
own a gun. You cannot assert a Second Amendment right. You have 
disqualified yourself. We can say: If you are mentally unstable, you 
can't legally own a gun in America. You can't assert Second Amendment 
rights in that circumstance. We can put provisions in the law relating 
to the type of gun that you own, how old you have to be to buy that 
gun, what kind of background check takes place. But none of that--none 
of that--is included in this omnibus bill.
  My fear is that many Members of Congress will say: Well, we got a lot 
of contacts after the Parkland, FL, situation, and met with a lot of 
people. Now we have taken care of our constitutional obligation with 
the provisions in this omnibus bill.
  It will be a sad day if that is the case because what we have done in 
this omnibus bill would not have stopped that killer from taking the 
life of Commander Paul Bauer--not at all. So as far as I am concerned, 
we have fallen far short from where we need to be when it comes to gun 
safety.
  Something is about to happen this Saturday, a week after our St. 
Patrick's Day Parade. There are going to be marches and parades across 
the United States on March 24. Tens of thousands of students and their 
supporters are going to march right here in Washington, in Chicago, 
where I will join them, and in cities and towns all across America, 
including Springfield, IL. They will march to urge lawmakers--like me--
to finally pass meaningful gun reforms that help keep our children safe 
and our communities safe.
  There are things that happen in our personal lives that we bring to 
our professional lives, and I will share one of them with you.
  After the terrible shooting that occurred in Florida, my daughter, 
who lives in Brooklyn, NY, was talking to her daughter, my little 
granddaughter, a first grader. Her daughter, that first grader, said: 
Mom, the teacher told us that if there is a shooter in our school, stay 
away from the windows and get down on the floor.
  In first grade, they are being warned about shooters coming into 
their classroom. Who would have dreamed that

[[Page S1890]]

America would reach this point? It has. Who would possibly argue that 
the Second Amendment envisioned that possibility, that we would arm 
teachers so we could have some sort of a shootout in a first grade 
classroom anywhere in this country?
  The marches that will take place on Saturday are a sign that perhaps 
America has reached a tipping point on gun safety. The fact that a 
majority of gun owners have stepped up and said that we should have 
universal background checks is an indication that we are reaching that 
point. The younger generation is standing up, speaking out, and, 
frankly, confronting us--those of us who are in positions of power, 
elected office--confronting us to do something and stop talking about 
it.
  These young people are tired of living in fear, as are many students 
across this country. They are fed up with the status quo, in which 
hundreds of Americans are getting shot every day while politicians sit 
on their hands in fear of the gun lobby and the National Rifle 
Association.
  I don't care what my scorecard is with the National Rifle 
Association. I know, incidentally, it is a failing grade, which I wear 
with pride. I don't care about my scorecard there. I care about my 
scorecard with the people I represent in Illinois, and I particularly 
care about the students and the parents who are worried about whether 
the school for their kids will be the next site of gun violence.
  These young people who are going to march on Saturday are fed up with 
lawmakers who ignore the overwhelming majority of Americans who want to 
close loopholes in the background check system. Through their powerful 
advocacy and eloquence, these juniors and seniors in high school are 
already bringing about change.
  Listen to what businesses across the country are doing. They are 
distancing themselves from the National Rifle Association. It is no 
longer considered just another political organization. They are 
voluntarily changing their business practices so they don't give a 
break to a gun lobby that will not give a break to honest Americans who 
want to be safe in their homes and schools. The students from Parkland, 
FL, have helped these businesses recognize that they need to be part of 
this effort.
  We are seeing new gun safety reforms passed in State legislatures--
not so much here in Washington but in States like Florida that have a 
long tradition of voting the other way on gun issues.
  Unfortunately, the Republicans, who control the House, the Senate, 
and the White House, still haven't gotten the message. What we have 
included in this omnibus bill is weak soup; 17 lives in Parkland, FL, 
are worth more than what we are putting in this bill. Even after 
Parkland, after all of the lives that have been lost to violence, even 
as the school shootings continue, including a shooting in a Maryland 
high school this week, President Trump and the Republican majority of 
Congress are still unwilling to push for universal background checks 
and an end to high-capacity magazines and assault weapons.
  There were modest measures included in this bill. Is that all we get? 
Is that it? Is that the end of the national debate on gun safety for 
another 5, 6, or 8 years?
  There is important language that I included in the defense portion of 
the bill, directing the Department of Defense to not only submit all 
its relevant records for NICS background checks but also to flag and 
prevalidate the records that would prohibit a person from buying a gun. 
It is a step in the right direction. It is necessary, but it is not 
sufficient to really make a difference when it comes to gun safety.
  The prevalidation and flagging are important for the FBI to help us 
and will help them quickly confirm whether a person should be blocked 
from a gun sale. But let's be honest; this omnibus bill that we are 
considering today and tomorrow doesn't address the fundamental 
challenges our Nation faces when it comes to gun violence. It takes a 
pass.
  It is time for Congress to start considering legislation on gun 
violence that the gun lobby might not like. We can't let the National 
Rifle Association have veto power over gun policy in this Nation. 
Politicians need to recognize the obvious. The gun lobby is 
increasingly angry, sometimes paranoid, often isolated in its political 
positions. It no longer speaks for the majority of people who own guns 
responsibly in America.
  Remember, the gun lobby cares about one thing more than anything: 
selling firearms. It is all about the business side of the ledger--the 
bottom-line profit margin.
  Violence prevention is not the focus of the gun lobby's agenda. In 
fact, the gun lobby usually opposes violence prevention legislation 
just in case it might hurt gun sales. It has reached the point where 
the NRA endorsement of gun reform proposal is typically a sign that the 
proposal is not meaningful.
  We can't settle for the status quo anymore. We are facing a public 
health crisis of gun violence, and half-hearted measures are not 
enough. We need to fight for meaningful gun safety reforms. We need to 
call up measures like universal background checks and ending high-
capacity magazines.
  Tell me why a person who owns a firearm, whether it is handgun or a 
semiautomatic weapon, needs to have a high-capacity magazine so that 
they can fire 30 or 60 rounds at a time. Tell me why. You might need 
that if you are in the military. You might need it when it comes to 
police work and keeping our communities safe. There could be 
circumstances where they are needed, but why would an individual 
citizen need the capacity to fire 30 or 60 rounds at one time? Those 
are the clips that are being used, incidentally, by these shooters. 
Those are the clips that are being used for mass killing in America. 
Those clips do one thing: They take human lives. It is not a question 
of sport or hunting or target practice.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has used 10 minutes.
  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 3 
additional minutes, if the Senator from Utah will give me that 
opportunity.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DURBIN. Let me close by saying, on March 24, students and 
Americans of all ages will march in the streets to honor those who have 
been lost to senseless gun violence and to call on their elected 
representatives to step up. I support the marchers. I will continue to 
work for meaningful action to help reduce gun violence. I am going to 
keep doing everything I can to put the safety of our kids and our 
neighborhoods ahead of the gun lobby's agenda.
  I don't have any obligation to the National Rifle Association 
whatsoever, but I do have an obligation to a granddaughter living in 
Brooklyn, NY, in the first grade, who has been warned about what to do 
if a shooter comes into her classroom.
  I hope my colleagues from across the aisle will join me. It is time 
to take a stand and show leadership. America is waiting.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.


                       Nomination of Ryan Nelson

  Mr. LEE. Madam President, I wish to speak for a few minutes about 
Ryan Nelson, who has been nominated by the President to serve as the 
Solicitor of the Department of the Interior. Ryan is a fantastic choice 
for this position at Interior. As a native and current resident of 
Idaho Falls, he is a fellow westerner who understands the issues 
confronting the West, confronting the region, confronting the entire 
country as it relates to the U.S. Department of the Interior.
  Ryan would not just work on behalf of the West. I know he is someone 
who is going to serve honorably on behalf of the American people as a 
whole. In order to do that, he first has to be confirmed.
  By my count, it has been 232 days since Ryan Nelson was nominated. 
There should be no further delays. The American people deserve to have 
qualified professionals in the executive branch, and Mr. Nelson is 
qualified, to put it very mildly. He is someone who has worked in 
notable posts of responsibility in all three branches of government.
  During the George W. Bush administration, Ryan worked as Deputy 
Assistant Attorney General in the Department of Justice's Environment 
and

[[Page S1891]]

Natural Resources division. In that position, he personally argued 13 
appellate cases. He also oversaw 700 attorneys and staff, who touched 
on all aspects of energy and environmental issues within the Department 
of Justice.
  Later, Ryan worked in the White House as deputy general counsel for 
the OMB and as special counsel to then-Senator Jeff Sessions. That is 
just his experience in government.
  Ryan has acquired senior management experience in the private sector 
as well. For the past 8 years, he has worked as general counsel for 
Melaleuca, which is a very successful billion-dollar Idaho business.
  Ryan does not just know what it is like to work in government, what 
it is like to work in Washington. He knows that, but he also 
understands the challenges that businesses and workers face in the 
modern world.
  I have known Ryan for many years. Ryan and I got to know each other 
while we were both in law school at BYU. I got to know Ryan and his 
wife Barbara, who have 7 lovely children. After law school, I ended up 
recruiting him to work at the law firm where I was then employed, 
Sidley Austin. After pulling all-nighters alongside Ryan, I can confirm 
what nearly 50 of his former colleagues wrote about him in a recent 
letter of support: He is an excellent choice to serve as solicitor.
  Ryan has outstanding analytical skills, and he pays immense attention 
to details. These are qualities that will serve him well as the 
Department of Interior's top lawyer.
  As you know, this administration has made it a priority to repair the 
relationship between the Federal Government and the Western States, 
where the Federal Government owns so much land. Too many workers in the 
West still don't feel as though they are treated fairly by their 
government. We can help restore that trust by confirming impartial, 
well-qualified nominees. Ryan Nelson is such a nominee. We need him at 
the U.S. Department of the Interior.
  The Interior Department needs to have a Solicitor. Ryan Nelson is an 
exceptionally qualified nominee for that position. Let's confirm Ryan 
Nelson today.
  I yield 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. CORNYN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                      Omnibus Appropriations Bill

  Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, I rise to mention one piece of 
legislative business and then will pay tribute to the senior Senator 
from Mississippi, Senator Thad Cochran.
  Last night, the Appropriations Committee, which Senator Cochran 
chairs, released the 2018 Omnibus appropriations bill. It includes a 
proposal that I feel very strongly about, and I am grateful to him and 
all of our colleagues for their support. I particularly want to 
acknowledge the advocacy of the majority leader, Mitch McConnell, to 
make sure this provision is included in the omnibus bill. The House 
will soon vote on the omnibus, and then I hope we can quickly follow 
suit here in the Senate.
  The provision I am referring to is, in shorthand, called Fix NICS. 
NICS, of course, is the National Instant Criminal Background Check 
System. I think it is a reasoned and reasonable response to the 
shootings that have, appallingly, occurred in our schools, our 
churches, and in our public spaces.
  Just this last week, a gunman opened fire at a high school in 
Maryland, not far from here, and, of course, shootings have occurred in 
Florida, Texas, Nevada, Charleston, SC, and elsewhere. Our constituents 
are frustrated, frightened, and fed up. They want us to do something. 
More importantly than that, they want us to do something that will be 
effective and save lives. I am happy to say the Fix NICS bill fits that 
description.
  People who haven't been active on this issue now are raising their 
voices and demanding that they be heard. Students are worried, 
understandably, and parents of students are worried. They simply don't 
want what happened in Parkland, FL, to occur to them. We need to listen 
to all of these voices, including to these students, who obviously will 
shape our Nation's future. They don't want to go to school and wonder 
whether bullets will rain down their hallways or whether their friends 
might be the next victims.
  In a recent interview, one teenager said something that was trite but 
true. She said: ``Guns are not the problem. The people are the 
problem.'' I happen to agree with that.
  One question about school shooters is, How did they get to the point 
at which they thought that shooting up public places was what they 
really wanted to do? How did they justify it in their own minds, as 
warped as that might be? Also, what is it about our culture, their home 
environments, or their mental states that allows them to rationalize 
violence that does such tremendous harm? How does slaughter--because 
that is what it really is--become justified in their warped 
perspectives? I admit that those are tough questions to answer, and 
they are tough to even ponder, but we still can and have to do what is 
possible to protect our schools, our churches, parents, teachers, and 
our children.
  Recently, 13 families from Parkland, FL, wrote in support of this 
particular legislation--legislation that would improve school safety, 
that has been sponsored by our colleague, the senior Senator from Utah. 
Senator Hatch's bill would fund the creation of and provide training 
for threat assessment teams--in other words, to evaluate beforehand 
where people are vulnerable. It includes security measures and 
anonymous reporting systems. This bill is widely supported and shows 
that even on a divisive issue, there is plenty of room for common 
ground.
  In that same letter, the 13 Parkland families said they supported 
Senator Hatch's school safety measures. They also expressed support for 
the Fix NICS bill, which they said is desperately needed to improve 
compliance with firearms purchasing background check systems.
  A recent Gallup Poll showed that the public broadly supports 
proposals like Fix NICS. More than 9 in 10 see the importance of 
background checks.
  Over the last few weeks, there has been a true groundswell of support 
for this bill that I and the junior Senator from Connecticut, Mr. 
Murphy, cosponsored. The supporters now include not only victims' 
rights advocates, gun violence prevention groups, and prosecutors, but 
also the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National League of Cities, the 
Major County Sheriffs of America, as well as other law enforcement 
groups. All of these organizations have endorsed Fix NICS and signed a 
letter that asks that the majority and minority leaders put this 
measure to a vote. Now, in its having been included in the Omnibus 
appropriations bill, we will finally have a chance to do that--first in 
the House and then in the Senate.
  These organizations and the general public agree that fixing our 
background check system should be a national priority and that we 
should better ensure that convicted criminals with past histories of 
violence and mental illness do not purchase or possess firearms, as the 
law currently in effect provides. They see merit in trying to fix our 
system that currently has allowed these same people to slip through the 
cracks and purchase firearms in order to kill innocent people, like the 
26 who were gunned down inside the First Baptist Church in Sutherland 
Springs, TX, just outside of San Antonio.
  Some have said that Fix NICS doesn't go far enough, that it is a 
modest measure. I have to question that sort of description. Is it 
really a modest measure if it will, in fact, save lives? I think not. 
It is a necessary measure and one that brings people together across 
the political spectrum, Republicans and Democrats alike. Even if Fix 
NICS were to save just one life, that would be reason enough to enact 
it, but I think that is unlikely. I think it will save many lives once 
it is enacted into law and signed by the President.
  We have 78 cosponsors of this legislation. I can't think of another 
piece of legislation that has enjoyed such broad bipartisan support, 
including by the majority leader and the Democratic leader, Senator 
Schumer. In today's hyperpolarized environment, that kind of support 
speaks for itself.

[[Page S1892]]

  I look forward to its passing in the House as part of the funding 
bill, and I hope the Senate will do the same before the end of the 
week.


                        Tribute to Thad Cochran

  Madam President, I close by saying a few words about our friend and 
trusted colleague, the senior Senator from Mississippi, Thad Cochran, 
who has announced his retirement from the Senate. I know the real 
tributes are about to kick off in a minute when the majority leader 
comes out, but since I am up here, I thought I would take the 
opportunity to say a few words.
  Senator Cochran has represented the State of Mississippi in the U.S. 
Senate since 1978. He is one of the longest serving Members of Congress 
in the history of the United States. His career and his life speak for 
themselves.
  He is the son of a school principal and math teacher. Not 
surprisingly, he was a gifted high school athlete. He is a piano player 
and a former college yell leader. Yes, even like me, he is a recovering 
lawyer, but we will not hold that against him.
  Before he joined Congress, he served in the U.S. Navy because he 
loves this country and the opportunities it has afforded him and his 
family. He is a man with a strong sense of duty and gratitude for the 
opportunities he has been given in life. After ROTC at the University 
of Mississippi, he received orders to join the USS Macon, and after 
that he joined the staff of the Navy commandant in New Orleans. Later, 
he ran for public office. He first served in the House of 
Representatives. He then, of course, came here to the Senate, where he 
quickly established himself as a cordial but formidable presence.
  Before I came to the Senate, Senator Cochran was chairman of the 
Senate Republican Conference. He has chaired the Senate Agriculture, 
Nutrition, and Forestry Committee too. Most recently, he has alternated 
between serving as ranking member and chairman of the all-powerful 
Appropriations Committee.
  Throughout his 45 years in Congress, he has participated in crafting 
and enacting historic legislation, but his main focus has always been 
on the people of Mississippi. His highest priority has always been on 
the men and women he was elected to represent in places like Jackson, 
Gulfport, Greenville, Starkville, and Hattiesburg. One example is when 
he fought so hard for recovery funding after Hurricane Katrina had 
destroyed large swaths of the southern part of Mississippi. Many people 
forget that that awful storm was much bigger than New Orleans'. 
Mississippi was hit almost equally as hard, and Senator Cochran made 
sure his State got the help it needed to get back on its feet.
  His storied career is one of service and collegiality even amidst the 
fractious debates. He treats friends and political adversaries with 
respect. He listens to what people have to say. We need more people 
like that in public life.
  The majority leader has called him the ``quiet persuader,'' one who 
knows ``there's a big difference between making a fuss and making a 
difference.''
  Judge E. Grady Jolly, of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth 
Circuit, who has known Senator Cochran as long as anyone, said that 
back home, he is known for his ``modesty and his retiring nature''--not 
attributes you would normally associate with somebody in politics, but 
he is a class act. He is also known for the consistent attention he has 
paid to the Mississippi Delta--one of the poorest regions in the 
Nation's poorest State. The judge calls Senator Cochran the ``ultimate 
model of sincerity,'' one who ``never engages in ad hominem or personal 
attacks'' and always ``keeps a sense of humor about himself.''
  My office spoke to one Mississippi resident this week because we 
wanted to learn a little bit more about what Senator Cochran has meant 
to her. That woman, who had met Senator Cochran only a handful of 
times, said she had always respected and admired Senator Cochran's 
statesmanship and the dignity with which he represented Mississippi. 
Her comments are a good note to end on--statesmanship and dignity. 
Those traits never go out of style.
  I know I speak for my other colleagues--and they will speak for 
themselves--when we all say thank you to Thad Cochran for setting a 
higher standard for the Members of this body. The U.S. Senate will not 
be the same without him.

                          ____________________