[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 67 (Wednesday, April 25, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2414-S2416]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Opioid Epidemic
Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, an opioid epidemic is sweeping the
country. More than 60,000 Americans are dying from opioid overdoses
every year--more than the number of Americans who died in all 20 years
of the Vietnam war. What a staggering fact that is, but behind each
number is a tragedy for a family who loses their loved one.
Today, I want to tell the story of the Hacala family from Rogers, AR.
It is a story of love, persistence, courage, and, I hope, a story that
will save other families from the tragedy they felt.
Betty and Steve Hacala are joining us in the Gallery today. I met
Betty and Steve 3 weeks ago at a roundtable on the opioid epidemic in
Little Rock with Attorney General Leslie Rutledge, State and local law
enforcement, and the families of opioid victims. The news is full of
tragic deaths from heroin, fentanyl, and prescription drugs. I met
families that day whose children died from those well-known drugs, but
I learned from the Hacalas about another killer: unwashed poppy seeds.
Their son, Stephen Junior, died in his sleep from an overdose 2 years
ago. Stephen was only 24 years old and was a recent graduate of the
University of Arkansas. He loved to play guitar, and he was very
accomplished at it. He was the joy of his parents' life, and he was the
joy of his sisters Christina and Lauren's lives. His sudden death came
as a shock to them, but they got another shock when an autopsy
determined that Stephen died of morphine intoxication. There were no
drugs in his apartment--no pill bottles, no needles, nothing. What had
been found was a 5-pound bag of unwashed poppy seeds. Stephen had
ordered the seeds on Amazon. The Arkansas crime lab soon determined
that the poppy seeds were the source of the morphine that killed
Stephen.
Stephen's death resulted in part because of a dangerous gap in our
Nation's drug laws. It has been well known for ages that poppies are
dangerous, both addictive and toxic. That is why it is illegal to grow
or own almost any part of the poppy--the straw, the pod, the latex.
There is an exception, of course, for poppy seeds, which many people
enjoy on bagels, muffins, cakes, and other pastries. The seed itself
isn't addictive, but unwashed seeds tend to still have bits of the
plant on them, which can be washed off and used to create a powerful
narcotic.
To give a sense of just how deadly poppy seed tea can be, a lethal
dose of morphine is about 200 milligrams, but researchers at Sam
Houston State University, commissioned by the Hacalas, concluded that
there were about 6,000 milligrams of morphine in that 5-pound bag of
seeds that Stephen bought. That is over 30 times the lethal dose.
Stephen had no way of knowing just how toxic these seeds were.
While there are plenty of legitimate uses for washed poppy seeds,
there are no legitimate uses for unwashed seeds. Yet drug dealers and
unscrupulous merchants are abusing the legal status of washed seeds to
profit and to push unwashed seeds, which are widely available through
online retailers. And when you read the user comments, you can easily
find instructions for how to brew poppy seed tea and a description of
its narcotic effects.
So there is no question of these unwashed seeds being used for
grandma's poppy seed cake; it is plain they are being used to smuggle
the banned drug into our homes, and the manufacturers and distributors
should know that. And Betty and Steve made sure they did. It is hard to
imagine the grief they feel. It would have been easy to despair, but
they did not. They want to save other families from their fate, to be
sure Stephen's death would have meaning. They researched the issue,
commissioning that report from Sam Houston State and studying the
market for unwashed poppy seeds. They also became advocates, meeting
with community leaders and elected officials. As I said, I only learned
about the danger of unwashed poppy seeds by meeting the Hacalas.
After that meeting, I put in a call to the leadership of Walmart and
Amazon, which at the time both allowed unwashed poppy seeds to be sold
on their websites. They listened to our case and quickly agreed to stop
selling poppy seeds that are labeled as unwashed. This is important.
The two behemoths of online commerce agreeing to take down those seeds
was a victory and a testament to what normal citizens like Steve and
Betty can accomplish.
This is more than a labeling problem. In fact, some of the most
potent and deadly seeds, which we know about thanks to the work of
Steve and Betty, are not labeled as unwashed and are still available
for purchase. Therefore, I will work in the Senate and with the Drug
Enforcement Agency to ban unwashed seeds entirely. But today I do want
to take a moment to thank Amazon and Walmart for taking an important
first step for our country, for our State, and for the Hacalas and
families like theirs.
It is always hard to lose a loved one, and a child is the hardest
loss of all. I suspect nothing can assuage that kind of grief. But
because of the Hacalas's courage and determination, we can hope that a
few more families will be spared it. That is an act of true love for
Stephen and for their fellow Americans.
[[Page S2415]]
Mr. President, the office of Secretary of State has always held a
place of special prominence in the President's Cabinet. The conduct of
foreign policy is the highest craft of statesmanship. In the
Secretary's hands rest matters of the most sensitive, delicate, and
consequential nature, affairs of war and--we always hope--peace.
President Kennedy put it simply when he said: ``Domestic policy can
only defeat us; foreign policy can kill us.'' That is why Presidents
across the ages have filled the office of Secretary of State with some
of the most distinguished statesmen in our history, names such as
Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Adams, Clay, Webster, Marshall, Kissinger.
Now we will add the name of Mike Pompeo. Very soon, the Senate will
confirm Mike to be our 70th Secretary of State. I strongly support his
nomination, as I have made widely known in recent days. Before we vote,
I want to emphasize what a truly impressive nominee he is--a man of
noble character whose name future generations, I suspect, will include
on the roster of those great statesmen.
Mike has succeeded at every stage of life. He graduated first in his
class at West Point and then joined the 2nd Cavalry on the frontline of
freedom in West Germany. After his military service, he excelled at
Harvard Law School. He later started one business and served as
president of another. He became a respected community leader in his
adopted home of Wichita, where his fellow Kansans elected him in
repeated landslides to serve them in the House of Representatives.
Wichita is also where he had his biggest victory of all--winning the
hand of his bride, Susan. Of course, he has served as Director of the
Central Intelligence Agency for the past 15 months after being
confirmed by the Senate on a bipartisan vote of 66 to 32. Since then, I
have watched Mike lead the CIA, boost its morale, and put the right
people in the right places, driving them to succeed and holding them
accountable.
None of this surprises me because I have known Mike for as long as I
have been in public life. When I was an unknown candidate for the
House, he called me out of the blue to encourage me and offer support.
He was one of my best friends in the House and one of my strongest
supporters and smartest advisers in my Senate campaign. As Members of
the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, we traveled the world
together to learn, to conduct oversight, and to engage with foreign
leaders.
Mike and I have collaborated on several occasions to highlight
gathering threats to our Nation. In 2013 we wrote an op-ed in the
Washington Post calling on our party to support a strike against Bashar
al-Assad for using chemical weapons. It was a lonely place for
Republicans to be, but we were right then, and we are right now. I only
wish more Republicans and President Obama had heeded our call.
In 2015 we traveled to Vienna, where we discovered and revealed
Iran's secret side deals with the International Atomic Energy Agency.
In 2016, after a trip to Norway and Sweden, we wrote an op-ed in the
Wall Street Journal drawing attention to Europe's growing challenges
with mass migration and what it means for our own country.
Mike has gone from one success to another because he is a consummate
professional--a man who treats everyone with respect but who doesn't
pull a punch or shade a view to please his audience.
Democrats don't deny his professionalism. The senior Senator from
Montana has said that he has led an ``exemplary career in public
service.'' The junior Senator from Delaware said he would be a ``good
advocate for the career professionals at the State Department and
USAID.'' Even former Secretaries of State Hillary Clinton and Madeleine
Albright have expressed their hope that he would reinvigorate the State
Department, and nonpartisan experts agree that Mike Pompeo's integrity
and record of accomplishments cannot be denied. As ADM James Stavridis
has said, Mike is ``a solid, thoughtful and accomplished leader.'' It
is why 30 national security professionals--including former NSA
Director Keith Alexander, former CIA Director Michael Hayden, and
former Attorney General Mike Mukasey--submitted a letter endorsing
Mike's nomination.
Unfortunately, many Democratic Senators are opposing Mike's
nomination, and they have given their reasons. But I have to say that
these reasons don't hold up very well under scrutiny. Some say Mike is
adverse to diplomacy. In fact, he simply knows that diplomacy is most
effective when it is backed with a credible military threat. As
Frederick the Great said, ``Diplomacy without arms is like music
without instruments.''
He also knows that some situations may not be susceptible to
diplomatic solutions no matter how much one might wish it so. That is a
fact of life. It is not a reason to oppose Mike's nomination.
I would add that he recently demonstrated his commitment to diplomacy
by meeting with Kim Jong Un to lay the groundwork for the President's
upcoming summit. It is hard to think of a worse regime than North
Korea, but Mike was willing to sit down with Kim to try to find a
peaceful solution to the nuclear crisis on the Korean Peninsula. That
should show us all, definitively, that he is committed to diplomacy.
Others say they are opposing Mike because they disagree with him on
social issues. Here I would simply note that most Republicans surely
disagree with Hillary Clinton's and John Kerry's views on these issues.
Yet they still voted to confirm them. For that matter, Hillary Clinton
opposed same-sex marriage when the Democrats voted to confirm her back
in 2009. So it hardly seems fair to hold Mike Pompeo to a different
standard.
Still, others oppose Mike's nomination because he refused to say that
he would resign if President Trump fired Special Counsel Robert
Mueller. I have to say, that is quite a stretch for a Secretary of
State nomination. This isn't the Department of Justice. On the merits,
I would ask: Do they think it would have been a good idea for Henry
Kissinger and Jim Schlesinger to resign in 1973 or 1974? Would it help
or hurt America to have our top diplomat suddenly leave the world stage
at a time of domestic turmoil? And if that is to be the standard, have
those Democrats asked Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis that question? I
bet they haven't.
Finally, there are those who worry that he will not be a check on the
President. But since when is a Cabinet member supposed to do that?
Regular elections, the separation of powers, and all that entails are
the checks on the executive branch under our Constitution. The
President's Cabinet owes him candid advice, especially when he doesn't
want to hear it, but they aren't supposed to undermine him. The State
Department, in particular, is the last place for open conflict between
the President and a Cabinet member. If the world doesn't believe that
the Secretary has the President's confidence and conducts foreign
policy on his behalf, he is of little use to the President or the
country.
In fact, I would say it is the President's confidence in Mike that
cinches his readiness for the job. When Mike Pompeo speaks, the world
will know that the Secretary of State speaks for the President. He is
well respected by the President's national security team, and he is
well respected by the world.
I know Mike Pompeo will excel as our Secretary of State, and I regret
some Senators will oppose him for shortsighted, political reasons, but
since they all profess grave concerns about the lack of personnel at
the State Department, I look forward to them all confirming Secretary
Pompeo's sub-Cabinet nominees promptly once he submits them.
But even better is to put politics aside and to do the right thing
for our country. Mike Pompeo has served his country with distinction.
He is eminently qualified to be Secretary of State, and we need him on
the job now. I call on every Senator to vote for confirmation and to
send to the State Department a strong leader, a wise counselor, and a
good man--Mike Pompeo.
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.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to voice my
strong
[[Page S2416]]
opposition to Director Pompeo's nomination to be our next Secretary of
State.
This position is too important. The stakes are too high to let this
nominee slide by without full consideration of what it would mean for
Director Pompeo to be our Nation's top diplomat--the person whose every
word and action broadcasts America's values to the rest of the world.
Some of my opposition concerns Director Pompeo's harsh views on
matters of war and peace, and his blatantly false accusations regarding
members of the Muslim community. Some of my opposition surrounds my
deep concern about Director Pompeo's ability to stand strong against
President Trump's erratic and uninformed foreign policy positions.
But what I wanted to take a few minutes this afternoon to do is to
express my serious concern about what Director Pompeo's ideological,
extreme positions on women's rights and reproductive freedom would mean
for women across the world.
Our Nation has an important role to uphold as a global champion of
women's rights. We need a Secretary of State who will be a strong
advocate and continue our legacy of leadership in fighting for women's
health and reproductive freedom and the rights of women and girls
around the world. Instead, I am afraid Director Pompeo would undo much
of that legacy and undermine much of the global progress we have made.
An advocate for women doesn't repeatedly support the global gag rule,
which keeps funding from clinics and programs that provide women
important medical care. Director Pompeo did.
An advocate for women doesn't vote to defund the United Nations
Population Fund, which provides family planning services for women
around the world who live in poverty. Director Pompeo did.
When it comes to fighting for the survivors of rape and against those
who would use rape as a tool of war, it is clear we should stand by
survivors, fight for them, and work to make sure they have access to
the medical care they need. However, Director Pompeo has said he would
prevent women who have been raped from access to abortions. That is an
unacceptably cruel response to women and war survivors, and it is one
of the many clear indicators that Director Pompeo is an unacceptable
choice to serve as Secretary of State.
The Secretary of State is always a critically important position, but
it takes on even more important meaning in 2018. The President not only
needs good counsel in navigating our complex global relationships, but
he also desperately needs someone who can tell him when he is wrong and
who can stand up to him and be a check on this President's worse
impulses.
Throughout his nomination process, Director Pompeo failed to convince
me that he is that person. So I will be voting no on his nomination to
be Secretary of State. I urge my colleagues to do the same.
Thank you, Mr. President.
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. CARPER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.