Congressional Record, Volume 164 Issue 197 (Thursday, December 13, 2018)

[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 197 (Thursday, December 13, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7566-S7576]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

SAVE OUR SEAS ACT OF 2018

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I understand that the Senate has
received a message from the House to accompany S. 756.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
Mr. McCONNELL. I ask that the Chair lay before the Senate the message
to accompany S. 756.
The Presiding Officer laid before the Senate the following message
from the House of Representatives:

Resolved, That the bill from the Senate (S. 756) entitled
``An Act to reauthorize and amend the Marine Debris Act to
promote international action to reduce marine debris, and for
other purposes.'', do pass with an amendment.

Motion to Concur

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I move to concur in the House amendment
with a further amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. McConnell] moves to concur
in the House amendment to S. 756 with a further amendment
numbered 4108.

Mr. McCONNELL. I ask unanimous consent that the reading be dispensed
with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
(The amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Text of
Amendments.'')
Mr. McCONNELL. I ask for the yeas and nays on my amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays were ordered.

Amendment No. 4109 to Amendment No. 4108

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I have a second-degree amendment at the
desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

[[Page S7567]]

The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. McConnell] for Mr. Kennedy
proposes an amendment numbered 4109 to amendment No. 4108.

Mr. McCONNELL. I ask unanimous consent that the reading be dispensed
with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To require the Director of the Bureau of Prisons to notify
each victim of the offense for which the prisoner is imprisoned the
date on which the prisoner will be released)

At the appropriate place, insert the following:
Redesignate section 3635 of title 18, United States Code,
as added by section 101(a) of this Act, as section 3636.
After section 3634 of title 18, United States Code, as
added by section 101(a) of this Act, insert the following:

``SEC. 3635. NOTIFICATION.

``The Director of the Bureau of Prisons shall--
``(1) notify each victim of the offense for which the
prisoner is imprisoned the date on which the prisoner will be
released or if no victim can be notified due to death or
injury, next of kin of a victim; and
``(2) make publicly available the rearrest data of each
prisoner, the offense for which the prisoner is imprisoned,
and any prior offense for which the prisoner was imprisoned,
broken down by State, of any prisoner in prerelease custody
or supervised release under section 3624.''.
In section 3624(g)(1) of title 18, as added by section
102(b)(1)(B) of this Act, add at the beginning of
subparagraph (B) the following:
``(B) has been certified by the warden that the prisoner
has been determined by the warden to have the programmatic,
security, and reentry needs of the prisoner best met by being
placed in prerelease custody or supervised release, after the
warden--
``(i) has notified each victim of the offense for which the
prisoner is imprisoned of such potential placement (or, if no
victim can be notified due to death or injury, the next of
kin of a victim); and
``(ii) has reviewed any statement regarding such placement
made by the victim or next of kin of the victim, as
applicable, after the notification described in clause (i);
and
In section 3632(d)(4)(D) of title 18, United States Code,
as added by section 101 of this Act, add at the end the
following:
``(lxiii) Section 2422, relating to coercion and
enticement.
``(lxiv) Section 249, relating to hate crimes.
``(lxv) Section 752, relating to instigating or aiding
escape from Federal custody.
``(lxvi) Subsection (a) or (d) of section 2113, relating to
bank robbery involving violence or risk of death.
``(lxvii) Section 2119(1), relating to taking a motor
vehicle (commonly referred to as `carjacking').
``(lxviii) Section 111(a), relating to assaulting,
resisting, or impeding certain officers or employees.
``(lxix) Any of paragraphs (2) through (6) of section
113(a), relating to assault with intent to commit any felony
(except murder or a violation of section 2241 or 2242),
assault with a dangerous weapon, assault by striking,
beating, or wounding, assault against a child, or assault
resulting in serious bodily injury.
``(lxx) Any offense described in section 111(5) of the Sex
Offender Registration and Notification Act (34 U.S.C.
20911(5)) that is not otherwise listed in this subsection,
relating to sex offenses, for which the offender is sentenced
to a term of imprisonment of more than 1 year.
``(lxxi) Any offense that is not otherwise listed in this
subsection for which the offender is sentenced to a term of
imprisonment of more than 1 year, and--

``(I) has as an element the use, attempted use, or
threatened use of physical force against the person or
property of another, or
``(II) that, based on the facts of the offense, involved a
substantial risk that physical force against the person or
property of another may have been used in the course of
committing the offense.

Mr. McCONNELL. I ask that the second-degree amendment be divided in
three parts in the form at the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has that right.
The amendment, as divided, is as follows:

(Purpose: To require the Director of the Bureau of Prisons to notify
each victim of the offense for which the prisoner is imprisoned the
date on which the prisoner will be released)

Division I

``SEC. 3635. NOTIFICATION.

Division II

In section 3624(g)(1) of title 18, as added by section
102(b)(1)(B) of this Act, add at the beginning of
subparagraph (B) the following:
``(B) has been certified by the warden that the prisoner
has been determined by the warden to have the programmatic,
security, and reentry needs of the prisoner best met by being
placed in prerelease custody or supervised release, after the
warden--
``(i) has notified each victim of the offense for which the
prisoner is imprisoned of such potential placement (or, if no
victim can be notified due to death or injury, the next of
kin of a victim); and
``(ii) has reviewed any statement regarding such placement
made by the victim or next of kin of the victim, as
applicable, after the notification described in clause (i);
and

Division III

In section 3632(d)(4)(D) of title 18, United States Code,
as added by section 101 of this Act, add at the end the
following:
``(lxiii) Section 2422, relating to coercion and
enticement.
``(lxiv) Section 249, relating to hate crimes.
``(lxv) Section 752, relating to instigating or aiding
escape from Federal custody.
``(lxvi) Subsection (a) or (d) of section 2113, relating to
bank robbery involving violence or risk of death.
``(lxvii) Section 2119(1), relating to taking a motor
vehicle (commonly referred to as `carjacking').
``(lxviii) Section 111(a), relating to assaulting,
resisting, or impeding certain officers or employees.
``(lxix) Any of paragraphs (2) through (6) of section
113(a), relating to assault with intent to commit any felony
(except murder or a violation of section 2241 or 2242),
assault with a dangerous weapon, assault by striking,
beating, or wounding, assault against a child, or assault
resulting in serious bodily injury.
``(lxx) Any offense described in section 111(5) of the Sex
Offender Registration and Notification Act (34 U.S.C.
20911(5)) that is not otherwise listed in this subsection,
relating to sex offenses, for which the offender is sentenced
to a term of imprisonment of more than 1 year.
``(lxxi) Any offense that is not otherwise listed in this
subsection for which the offender is sentenced to a term of
imprisonment of more than 1 year, and--

Cloture Motion

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the desk for
the motion to concur with further amendment.
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 move to bring to a close debate on the motion to
concur in the House amendment to S. 756, a bill to
reauthorize and amend the Marine Debris Act to promote
international action to reduce marine debris, and for other
purposes, with a further amendment numbered SA 4108.
Mitch McConnell, Mike Lee, John Cornyn, Chuck Grassley,
Orrin G. Hatch, Tim Scott, Steve Daines, Jerry Moran,
Todd Young, Susan M. Collins, Pat Roberts, Bill
Cassidy, Lamar Alexander, Lindsey Graham, Jeff Flake,
Rob Portman, Joni Ernst.

Mr. McCONNELL. I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum call
be waived.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I rise this afternoon, along with my
distinguished colleague and the ranking member of the Senate
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee, to

[[Page S7568]]

discuss the farm bill conference report--the Agriculture Improvement
Act of 2018.
I am grateful that my colleagues approved this measure with strong
support. The vote was 87 to 13 earlier this week. I also applaud
Members of the House for following suit with a similarly strong vote
yesterday, and we look forward to the President signing the conference
report into law soon.
The level of support is what happens when the Congress works in a
bipartisan and bicameral fashion. Senator Stabenow and I started by
listening to producers in Manhattan, KS, and then in Michigan. We
continued to listen to stakeholders from all over the country. This is
a good bill that accomplishes what producers asked us to do--first we
listened; then they asked--to provide certainty and predictability for
farmers and families in our rural communities.
The 2018 farm bill meets the needs of producers across all regions
and all crops. It doesn't matter what you grow, and it doesn't matter
whether you grow it in Kansas or elsewhere in this country--this bill
is designed to work for you. It ensures that our voluntary conservation
programs will keep farmland in operation while protecting our
agricultural lands, forests, and other natural resources.
The bill focuses on program integrity--requiring better management to
address challenges with fraud and abuse--and commonsense investments to
strengthen our nutrition programs to ensure the long-term success of
those truly in need of assistance. We make sure SNAP Employment and
Training coordinates with the private sector to provide the skills that
are needed for the jobs that are available in the workforce, and with
trade and market uncertainty, to say the least, the bill provides
certainty for our trade promotion and research programs.
Feeding an increasing global population is not simply an agriculture
challenge; it is a national security challenge. This means we need to
grow more and raise more with fewer resources. That will take
investments in research, new technology, lines of credit, animal health
activities, and proper risk management. It takes the government
providing tools and then its getting out of the producers' way. More
than 900--and counting--organizations that represent millions of
agriculture, food, nutrition, hunger, forestry, conservation, rural,
business, faith-based, research, and academic interests have issued
statements of support.
On behalf of the taxpayer, we have made tough choices and have been
very judicious with the scarce resources we have. This is a budget-
neutral bill. Most importantly, this farm bill provides our ranchers,
our farmers, and other rural stakeholders in Kansas and throughout the
country with much needed certainty and predictability.
Simply put, getting this bill done has taken a team effort. I would
like to thank my staff members who are as follows: Staff Director James
Glueck, DaNita Murray, Janae Brady, Fred Clark, Meghan Cline, Haley
Donahue, Matt Erickson, Darin Guries, Chance Hunley, Chu Hwang, Chelsie
Keys, Sara Little, Curt Mann, Andy Rezendes, Rob Rosado, Wayne
Stoskopf, Katherine Thomas, and Andrew Vlasaty. From my personal
office, I thank Jackie Cottrell, Amber Kirchhoefer, Will Stafford,
Morgan Anderson, Stacy Daniels, and Ray Price.
I especially thank the distinguished ranking member, Senator
Stabenow, and her team, which is led by Joe Shultz and Jacqlyn
Schneider. She has been a great partner throughout the Senate and
conference committee process. There were some tough days, but we both
worked together to get the job done.
I am also grateful to Chairman Mike Conaway and Ranking Member Collin
Peterson as well as their staff members on the House Agriculture
Committee.
The efforts of Jessie Williams, Amanda Kelly, Bobby Mehta, Katie
Salay, and Micah Wortham have been invaluable to the Senate Ag
Committee and the conference process.
Additionally, I thank the technical support from Secretary Perdue--
the Secretary of Agriculture has been simply outstanding--as well as
his staff down at the U.S. Department of Agriculture. He has been a
great and valuable partner throughout this process. We are grateful for
his support and the President's support of our Nation's farmers,
ranchers, and growers.
I also appreciate the work of the Congressional Budget Office's
staff, including Tiffany Arthur, Megan Carroll, Kathleen FitzGerald,
Jennifer Gray, Jim Langley, and Robert Reese, as well as of the
Congressional Research Service, including Val Heitshusen and Elizabeth
Rybicki.
Finally, I am grateful for the help of the legislative counsels in
the Senate: Heather Burnham, Deanna Edwards, Larissa Eltsefon,
Christina Kennelly, Heather Lowell, Mark Mazzone, and Patrick Ryan. My
apologies to all of those folks whose names I just mispronounced.
The staff members have done a fantastic job, and I am pleased they
are members of our team.
My predecessor in this business--and one of my mentors a long time
ago--was Senator Frank Carlson, of Kansas, who said there are no self-
made men and women in public office, that it is your friends who make
you what you are. I apply that to staff. All of the people I have just
mentioned represent a great team effort in our getting this legislation
passed in such fine fashion.
For all of them--and especially to my fellow Senators--we are
grateful for the support we have received this week. Together, we have
done what we were sent here to do--work in a bipartisan, bicameral
manner. This is a good bill for farmers, ranchers, growers, consumers--
many of whom may take their food supply for granted--families and rural
and smalltown America.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I rise to discuss a true bipartisan
victory along with my friend and colleague, the leader of our Senate
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee. I hear a lot of people
say that bipartisanship is all too rare these days, but in our
committee, it is our bread and butter.
Specifically, I thank my partner and friend, Chairman Pat Roberts. He
is the only person to have written a farm bill as both the chair of the
House and Senate Agriculture Committees. Kansas is fortunate to have
such a champion, and all of American agriculture owes him a debt of
gratitude for his persistence, doggedness, and tenacity. Maybe it is
his Marine training, but he never gave up on this bill even when
negotiations got tough. Maybe I could be an honorary marine. He also
knows that to do anything big, it takes a team approach. Thanks to his
commitment to bipartisanship, we were able to achieve a real historic
victory.
This summer, Chairman Roberts and I made history by passing our
Senate farm bill by 86 votes, and I am pleased to say we beat that
record this week by passing the final bill by 87 votes--the most ever.
One of the reasons I love my work on the Agriculture Committee is
that the work we do truly affects everyone. From the well-being of our
children to the viability of rural America, to the health of our lakes,
rivers, and streams, to our access to the most abundant, most
affordable, safest food supply in the world, the farm bill impacts all
of us.
I like to say it is our rural economic development plan for the
country, and that has been true since the very first one in the 1930s.
In the wake of the Great Depression, President Franklin Delano
Roosevelt signed the first farm bill to get agriculture and our economy
back on track.
Over the past 80 years, the role of the farm bill has evolved
alongside our agricultural and rural economy. In the 1970s, nutrition
assistance was linked to the farm bill for the first time, marking a
major step in strengthening the connection between our farms and food.
In the 1980s, we saw the first ever conservation title, demonstrating
the critical role of preserving land, water, and wildlife while
supporting working farms. In the 1990s, thanks to the leadership of my
friend Senator Patrick Leahy, we recognized evolving consumer
preferences through the creation of the National Organic Program. There
is, of course, the landmark 1996 farm bill, in which then-House
Chairman Roberts first left his mark, tackling one of the biggest
challenges in farm policy--reducing the incentive for farmers to plant
for payments rather than for markets.

[[Page S7569]]

In 2008, I was proud to author the creation of the first-ever
specialty crop title, recognizing fruit and vegetable growers and local
food systems for the first time.
In 2014, we made major reforms to commodity programs, streamlined our
conservation title, and made specialty crop research and clean energy
programs a permanent part of the farm bill. Each of these changes
represented a leap forward in farm and food policy and progress to
broaden the farm bill to support every corner of America and American
agriculture.
The momentum toward recognizing the diversity of our farm and food
economy has truly accelerated over the past 15 years. Now, in every
title of the farm bill, you can find policies that reflect the wide
variety of things we grow and how we grow them.
I am proud to say that this farm bill has continued the trajectory of
progress to diversify American agriculture. From expanded crop
insurance to historic assurance for urban farmers and improved coverage
options for our dairy farmers, this bill helps all types of farms, all
sizes of farms, and farmers in every region of the country.
In order to cultivate the next generation of agriculture, we made
permanent investments to support veterans, socially disadvantaged and
beginning farmers, and we expanded agricultural market opportunities so
that our farmers can make a living.
Historic investments in organic farming help producers tap into one
of the fastest growing sectors of agriculture. New, permanent support
for international trade promotion will help our farmers sell their
products abroad. Streamlined, permanent investments for farmers
markets, food hubs, and local food processing will help our farmers
sell to their neighbors.
While we know the farm bill supports our farmers, it also supports
our families. We protected access to food assistance and said no to
partisan changes that would take away food from those who need it most,
while still working to improve access to healthy food and improving the
program's integrity. I hope the administration takes note of this and
does not try to push forward with regulations that conflict with the
farm bill's bipartisan approach to protecting food assistance.
We continue the farm bill's legacy as one of the largest investments
in land and water conservation. This bill maintains conservation
investments and rejects harmful provisions that would jeopardize
drinking water and public lands.
Instead, we focused on successful conservation partnerships that will
actually grow funding by leveraging nearly $3 billion in new private
investment over the next decade.
We also lift up our small towns and rural communities and celebrate
what makes them great places to live and raise a family. By making
strong investments in rural water infrastructure and high-speed
internet, we help revitalize rural America and grow opportunities.
These important priorities have been 80 years in the making, and
there are a number of people I would like to thank for working hard to
continue the legacy of this farm bill.
Of course, I want to thank my leader, our Democratic leader, for his
leadership and support throughout this process; the majority leader,
who made sure this bill moved quickly on the Senate floor and was an
active participant in the Agriculture Committee, as well; and, of
course, my partner, Senator Roberts, who stayed true to our commitment
to deliver a bipartisan bill.
I want to thank our counterparts in the House, Chairman Conaway and
Ranking Member Peterson, for their hard work throughout this process,
and all of our colleagues in the House and Senate who supported this
bill with historic votes in the House and the Senate.
I also want to thank my incredible staff, who have worked so hard for
almost 2 years to bring this farm bill to the finish line: my committee
staff director, Joe Shultz and deputy staff director and policy
director, Jacqlyn Schneider, who both led this process; our legal team,
led by our chief counsel, Mary Beth Schultz, and our fellow, Ward
Griffin; our amazing commodities and livestock team, Mike Schmidt and
Kyle Varner, for supporting our farmers, with the help of farm bill
veteran, Susan Keith, and our fellow, Riya Mehta; on team conservation,
Ashley McKeon and Rosalyn Brumette, who protected our land and water,
with the help of USDA detailee, Lindsay White; our forestry and
environmental expert, Sean Babington, who preserved wildlife habitat
and public lands; Katie Naessens, for her work to support the
innovative future of agriculture, with the help of Dominique Warren;
our rural development and energy expert, Kevin Bailey, for creating
opportunities for our small towns; Katie Bergh, who led our work on
trade and food aid to help our farmers feed the world.
I would like to thank, as well, my staff in my personal office: my
chief of staff, Mike VanKuiken; legislative director, Emily Carwell;
deputy chief of staff, Anne Stanski; my senior aide, Krystal Lattany;
my communications director, Matt Williams; ag press secretary, Jess
McCarron; and the rest of the communications team, Miranda Margowsky,
Nirmeen Fahmy, and Amy Phillips Bursch; my State team, led by Teresa
Plachetka, and our Michigan ag expert, Kali Fox.
I want to thank everyone on Senator Robert's team, especially James
Glueck and DaNita Murray, true professionals who exemplified how to
lead a farm bill conference.
We spent a lot of time together, and I say to the Senator: I know you
spent a lot of time with Joe and Jacqlyn on our team. I think at the
end, we were working as one team, and that is something I am very, very
grateful for.
I also thank Jessie Williams--as the chairman has said--Amanda Kelly,
Bobby Mehta, and everyone who worked behind the scenes on the Ag
Committee.
I also appreciate our floor staff, those in the leadership staff
office who are so important, and CBO. Of course, I say thank you to all
of the members of the Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee
and their staffs.
With a lot of hard work by a long list of very talented people, this
Congress has passed a strong bill that supports the 16 million jobs in
America that depend on agriculture and our food economy.
I look forward to the President of the United States signing this
bill into law as soon as possible.
Thank you.
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.
Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I first wanted to thank Senator Roberts
and Senator Stabenow for their fine leadership on this farm bill, as
well as their staffs. I had a great opportunity to thank them.
This was something that was universally well accepted and exciting
for our State and, really, for every State in the country--the way we
got 87 votes. As I noted, at home, we don't get that many votes for a
volleyball resolution. It really put the bill in a good place to get
this done. I thank them for their leadership.
I also want to thank Brian Werner from my own staff, who has long
worked on these issues, as well as at home, Andy Martin and Chuck
Ackman, who have done ag work for us in Minnesota. I thank them for
their work on this bill as well.

Tribute to Claire McCaskill

Mr. President, I am here to make some brief remarks about two of my
favorite colleagues who are leaving us. They are both good friends of
mine, both from the middle of the country, and both extraordinary
leaders.
I will start with my friend, Senator Claire McCaskill. Senator
McCaskill and I were first elected at the same time, so we came in
together.
During our years of serving together, I have seen this strong,
incredible woman stand up for the people of Missouri and stand up for
the people of this country.
We were the only two women in our Senate class when we came in. One
of my first memories of Claire, which occurred near the beginning of
our time in the Senate, was that we were driving out of the Capitol
together to go speak

[[Page S7570]]

at an event. I looked out the window, and there was my husband John
walking across the lawn with a pink box. She sees him, and she looks at
me, and she says: What is John doing, walking across the Capitol lawn
with a pink gift-wrapped box?
I yelled out the car window, and I said: What are you doing with the
pink box?
He yelled back: It is the Senate spouse club event. I am going to Jim
Webb's wife's baby shower.
Claire looked at my husband and said, in her typical, blunt way: That
is the sexiest thing I have ever seen.
That is Claire.
We were rejoicing together in the car at that moment, as we thought
we were witnessing a milestone in Senate spouse history but also in our
own histories and in the journey of having more women in the Senate.
Claire is someone who never keeps quiet, who always speaks her mind,
and that is so refreshing.
When she found out about the substandard care for our veterans at
Walter Reed, she took it on. She was a freshman Senator, but she wasn't
quiet, and she took it on.
Her dad was a veteran, and she felt that the veterans of today
deserve the same quality care that he got. That is the kind of
leadership she has always shown.
She never backs down, especially in the face of corruption. I think a
lot of that was because of her work as a prosecutor. We shared that in
common.
If there were rights that needed to be respected--great. If there
were wrongs that needed to be righted, she was right there. She is
never afraid to speak truth to power.
By the way, in her own words, she is now unleashed, and I know that
will continue in a big way.
Whether she is at a hearing or writing one of her famous tweets, she
does it in a voice that is 100 percent authentic and 100 percent Claire
McCaskill.
I will never forget when she was grilling Wall Street executives at a
Senate hearing for their role in the financial crisis, and she said:
``You guys have less oversight than a pit boss in Las Vegas.'' That is
one example.
As Missouri's former State auditor and as someone who worked her way
through school as a waitress, Senator McCaskill has always rightfully
demanded accountability for those in positions of power.
We saw it again when she stood up to opioid manufacturers and
distributors, investigating suspicious shipments of these dangerous
drugs in communities across the country.
We saw it with her leadership in the fight against sex assault and
online sex trafficking, where she worked to take on backpage.
We saw it in her fight to strengthen the role of independent
watchdogs at our Federal Agencies and to expand protections for
whistleblowers.
We saw it every time she stood up for American consumers,
highlighting the challenges that consumers often face when they get
errors on their credit reports or when they have fraudulent robocalls.
I would always think of how she would challenge the commonsense
wisdom of her beloved mom, Betty, who is no longer with us. I had the
honor to meet Betty. So whenever I would watch Claire take on these
crimes--especially crimes against seniors--and speak out about them, I
would always think of her mom and how her mom was such an early,
powerful feminist and a woman who stood up and spoke truth to power.
Perhaps most of all, as I mentioned earlier, we saw it her work with
Walter Reed on behalf of our Nation's veterans. In addition to the work
she did in calling out what was happening at Walter Reed, it was Claire
who found out that contracting failures had led to thousands of graves
at Arlington National Cemetery being unmarked or improperly marked.
It was Claire whose legislation overhauled the IT systems at
Arlington and ultimately held the Secretary of the Army accountable.
That was trademark Claire: seeing an injustice, uncovering it,
speaking out, and then never giving up until it is fixed. That is what
she has done time and again.
What is cool about Claire, despite what I wish had not happened--that
she didn't win her election--is, she is the most resilient person I
know, and she will continue to serve and continue to do that work in
her way.
After a former political opponent once accused her of being
unladylike, she once told an Iowa audience that the traits needed to
excel in leadership--to speak out, be strong, take charge, change the
world--are traits she sees as very, very ladylike.
Claire has shown us how to be both strong and ladylike. It has been
my privilege to serve with her. I am so honored to call her friend, and
I am excited about what is to come for Claire McCaskill.

Tribute to Joe Donnelly

Mr. President, I am going to talk about my friend, Senator Donnelly--
also someone who made extraordinary contributions to his State, the
State of Indiana, as well as to our country.
Indiana holds a special place in my heart. My husband, John, was born
there. His parents met in a ballroom dance class at Ball State, of all
places.
Our States share a lot of confusion because people always seem to not
be able to tell the difference between Indianapolis and Minneapolis.
There is a difference. We share some thriving metropolitan areas and a
lot of tech jobs, things like that, in our two major metropolitan
areas, but we also share rural areas.
Whenever I visited Indiana--and you know how much Indiana loves
cars--well, Joe Donnelly loves driving. I have been with him in South
Bend, where he went to school at Notre Dame, close to where he lives in
Granger. Actually, I will never forget one time when I was in
Indianapolis for something, and Joe drove all the way just to accompany
me on this trip. He was by himself, drove down there, and drove me
around to these campaign events. He always had his lunch bag with him
just in case he needed some lunch--a paper bag--but then he decided he
would treat me to his favorite lunch stop, Panera Bread.
He also believes in a simple idea about public service; that is, you
don't just go where it is comfortable, you go where it is
uncomfortable. Joe Donnelly exhibits that kind of leadership by taking
on the tough issues every time he can. For Joe, that has meant going to
factories that have been shut down to meet with the employees or
standing with former Indianapolis United Steelworkers leader Chuck
Jones, who took on the President over jobs at an Indiana plant that
were being sent to Mexico.
Later, at his retirement party, Chuck Jones said of Joe Donnelly's
efforts on behalf of the workers: He got it done and he didn't get the
fanfare, but people benefited all the same.
That is what is so special, so powerful about Joe Donnelly's
leadership. He doesn't always get all the attention he deserves, but he
has this incredible, understated strength and conviction. He has this
great sense of humor that I wish everyone could see.
Mostly, he has been a champion for the people of his State, whether
it was farmers when he served on the Agriculture Committee--he recently
worked with Senator Stabenow and others to get that farm bill done--
whether it is the work he has done in the Armed Services Committee on
behalf of our military, or whether it is working with our
servicemembers to make sure they get the mental health care they need
and deserve. Because of Joe's convictions, his very first bill as a
Senator was the Jacob Sexton Military Suicide Prevention Act, which
required annual mental health assessments for all servicemembers.
Because of his leadership, that legislation became the law of the land.
He also teamed up with Senator Young on a bill to improve mental health
services for the law enforcement officers who sacrifice so much to keep
our communities safe.
Joe has stood up in the fight against the opioid epidemic, passing
legislation to help ensure that nonaddictive medications are developed
and that substance abuse and treatment providers work in areas that
have high overdose rates, like our rural communities.
Joe stood up against high rates on student loans by helping our
students pay for school with our Empowering Student Borrowers Act.
Whenever you are lucky enough to work with Joe Donnelly, you see his
heart, his effectiveness, that twinkle in his eye, and you also see his
caring work that he does every single day.

[[Page S7571]]

One of my funniest moments with Joe is I called him once when a
report came out that showed how much money people have when they are in
Congress, and they always have the richest Members at the top, and you
keep looking down to see where you end up. I called Joe Donnelly once
and said: Guess what. We are tied. We have the same amount of money.
Joe Donnelly, without missing a beat, said: I am sorry. I am sorry
for you.
In any case, that was him.
Earlier this year, Senator Donnelly was at a practice for the
Democrats on the congressional baseball team. He was chatting with
Congressman Steve Scalise, who had been a victim of that horrific
shooting at a practice the year before. When asked about the majority
whip's return to the field, Joe said: It is great to see him. You know,
in the end, we are all brothers and sisters.
It is very sad to be losing one of my favorite brothers here in the
Senate, but what I know is this: Joe Donnelly will never stop. He is
going to be doing great work. He will always do great work, and we look
forward to seeing him again.
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 bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. WICKER. 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. WICKER. I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Tribute to Rex Buffington

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I come to the floor this afternoon to
recognize Rex Buffington, who is retiring next year after 30 years as
the executive director of the John C. Stennis Center for Public Service
Leadership.
Mr. Buffington had a tall order to fill in 1988 when he was named the
first executive director of the newly created Stennis Center. This
native of Meridian had been selected by John Stennis himself,
demonstrating the confidence the Senator must have had in the young
man. After all, the center would bear Stennis' name and would be
located at his alma mater, Mississippi State University. The center
would be a living tribute to his 41-year career in the Senate, which is
still one of the longest in our Nation's history.
Under Rex Buffington's leadership and guidance, the Stennis Center
has fulfilled its purpose as set forth by Congress. The center was
established by statute for the purpose of ``promoting public service as
a career choice'' and providing training and education to State and
local leaders, congressional staff, and students.
As part of the legislative branch, the Stennis Center is subject to
annual oversight, and it has always proved its value. A major success
of the center--and no doubt a credit to its longevity--is the reach of
its leadership development programs. The center truly offers something
for everyone, whether that person be a student body president, a Hill
intern, a veteran staffer, or a Member of Congress.
One of the center's best known programs is the Congressional Staff
Fellows Program, which counts among its alumni hundreds of senior level
staffers. These chiefs of staff, staff directors, and legislative
directors--representing different political parties, different parts of
the country, and both congressional Chambers--are given the opportunity
to discuss the challenges facing Congress and how it can work better
for the American people. Through this important dialogue, the program
not only brings a wealth of talent to the table but also opens the door
to future collaboration between staffers who might otherwise never have
met.
Rex Buffington is also a key supporter of the Stennis-Montgomery
Association, a collaboration between the Stennis Center and the G.V.
``Sonny'' Montgomery Foundation, named after another graduate of
Mississippi State University. The association encourages greater
political participation among a group of MSU students of all
backgrounds and academic disciplines. When these students visit
Washington, I never fail to meet with them, and I never fail to be
impressed.
Another of the center's signature events is the annual Southern Women
in Political Service Conference. Since 1991, the conference has brought
together a diverse group of women in politics to learn new skills and
make new connections. Rex was certainly ahead of his time in
recognizing the need to bring more women to the table as important
policy decisions are made at every level of government.
Rex learned firsthand from the ``Senator's Senator,'' as Senator
Stennis was known, that a good mentor can have a profound impact on a
young leader's career. He created the Emerging Leaders Program to
connect senior congressional staff with those still early in their
careers--a nod to Senator Stennis' legacy of lending his time and
wisdom to new lawmakers.
In keeping with Senator Stennis' support for our Armed Forces,
culminating in his role as chairman of the Armed Services Committee,
Rex Buffington implemented initiatives to recognize military leaders
and give them opportunities to speak directly with Members of Congress,
often on an informal basis. As part of this initiative, I was
privileged to cohost a series of meetings with Senator Reed to bring
together Members of this body and senior members of the military.
Rex Buffington and his staff of eight--four in Starkville and four in
Washington--have encouraged young Americans to take part in their
communities and their government. This small but mighty team has helped
to build productive working relationships and lasting friendships
between Democrats and Republicans, House and Senate staffers, and those
at different stages in their careers. The Senate and House are better
because of Rex Buffington and the Stennis Center. Our work product is
better. Many of my colleagues would agree, and I mention in particular
my friend, Senator Coons from Delaware, who served with me on the
center's board of trustees. It is my understanding that Senator Coons
may be submitting remarks for the Record in honor of Rex's career.
I have no doubt that retirement will bring more opportunities for Rex
to serve the Starkville community and to spend time with his wife,
Anne, and their two children, John Gavin and Catherine. He certainly
will not sit still in retirement. I offer this unsung hero, Rex
Buffington, my sincere thanks for making the Stennis Center what it is
today, and I wish him all the best in his next chapter.
Mr. COONS. Mr. President, today, I am pleased to join my colleague
Senator Wicker in honoring Rex Buffington, a friend and public servant
who will soon retire from the John C. Stennis Center for Public Service
Leadership, where he has served as executive director for three
decades. Rex was present at the center's founding and has been
instrumental in the development and success of this important
legislative branch institution. He embodies the essence of its mission
which endeavors to inspire and train new generations of leaders who
seek out public service.
The late Senator John C. Stennis, who founded the center, embodied
this commitment to public service, not only in his relationships with
his colleagues, who called him a ``Senator's Senator,'' but to all who
admired the way he lived his life. Integrity, courage, commitment to
duty, and hard work are among the core principles that marked his time
in the Senate.
Given the late Senator's focus on public service, the Stennis
Center's congressional mandate became clear--to attract young people to
careers in public service, to provide training for leaders and future
leaders in public service, and to offer training and development
opportunities for senior congressional staff, Members of Congress, and
other public servants.
Rex has played a vital role in helping to realize Senator Stennis's
vision. Rex has said:

The Stennis Center believes that no government, regardless
of its history and structure, can be better than the people
who make it work. That is why our focus is on people over
policy. We are confident that if we can get the best possible
people in public service leadership, we will also get good
policy.

From the creation of the Stennis Center in 1988, Rex Buffington has
committed himself to memorializing those

[[Page S7572]]

ideals the late Senator Stennis embodied. At its core, the Stennis
Center operates a unique, bipartisan development program for 30 of the
most outstanding high-ranking congressional staff in the House and
Senate. Best known for the flagship Stennis Congressional Staff
Fellowship Program, Rex has ushered in nearly 400 senior-level
congressional staff members through this practical, bipartisan,
bicameral leadership development experience established in the 103rd
Congress. These veteran staff members have in turn started a mentoring
program for younger congressional staff, called Emerging Leaders.
Rex sought out many other ways to honor public service. He has been a
strong supporter of our Nation's military servicemembers. Honoring the
late Senator Stennis's relationship with the defense community, Rex has
cultivated a unique civilian-military relations portfolio of programs
at the Stennis Center. He was also instrumental in establishing
programs that have inspired leaders at every level--from high school to
newly elected Members of Congress. For example, over 300,000 high
school students from across the country annually compete for a spot at
the John C. Stennis National Student Congress.
Rex's hard work and dedication have been integral to the success of
the Stennis Center and to thousands of public servants who have
benefited from his counsel and leadership.
Prior to being appointed executive director, Rex served as Senator
Stennis's press secretary and chief spokesperson and played a major
role in shaping the Senator's legislative strategy. He has long been
active in his local community and his church, serving in a variety of
roles supporting youth, advocating for education, and participating in
organizations such as Scouting, the United Way, the Rotary Club, the
Boys and Girls Club, and many more.
Rex was born and raised in Meridian, MS, and graduated from
Mississippi State University with a degree in communication. He started
out as a news reporter for the Memphis Commercial Appeal before moving
to Washington to work for Senator Stennis.
Rex has long been a steady, thoughtful, and committed leader. He has
dedicated his professional life to the bipartisan work of promoting and
strengthening the highest ideals of public service leadership in
America and has provided vital services and resources to Members of
Congress and their staff for 30 years. I want to thank Rex and his
family for their commitment to public service, and I wish them all the
best in the future.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in
morning business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Remembering the Victims of Sandy Hook Elementary

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I rise today to remember those killed at
Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT, in 2012, just 6 years ago.
Tomorrow will be the anniversary of that horrible day, when America
lost 20 first graders and 6 adults in one of the worst mass shootings
in our Nation's history.
Since 2012, I have kept--and I know others have done similar things
to remind us--one page from a newspaper on my desk in the Russell
Building. I will not show all of it, but here is the top half of it. It
is obviously yellowed from 6 years. It just happens to be the Wall
Street Journal, dated Monday, December 17, 2012. At the top of the page
it says: Connecticut school shooting. The headline there just says two
words: Shattered lives. Then it gives a photograph of almost every
child and every adult. They missed a few because of the timing of this.
But then it has a biography of each individual killed. As I said, 20 of
them were children.
We have to remember tragedies like this to remind ourselves of our
obligation--on many issues, but this is certainly one of them. I wanted
to start by reading the names of all of those 26 Americans who were
killed on that day. I will just read through them, and after reading
each name I will also note the age of the individual on that horrible
day in December of 2012:
Charlotte Bacon, 6 years old; Daniel Barden 7; Rachel D'Avino, 29;
Olivia Engel, 6; Josephine Gay, 7; Dylan Hockley, 6; Dawn Lafferty
Hochsprung, 47; Madeleine Hsu, 6; Catherine Hubbard, 6; Chase Kowalski,
7; Jesse Lewis, 6; Ana Marquez-Greene, 6; James Mattioli, 6; Grace
McDonnell, 7; Anne Marie Murphy, 52; Emilie Parker, 6; Jack Pinto, 6;
Noah Pozner, 6; Caroline Previdi, 6; Jessica Rekos, 6; Avielle Richman,
6; Lauren Rousseau, 30; Mary Sherlach, 56; Victoria Soto, 27; Benjamin
Wheeler, 6; and, Allison Wyatt, age 6.
Those are the 26 individuals.
There are so many ways to express our sorrow and to continue mourning
as we did as a nation. I can't even imagine what each family had to
live through and still lives through today, and how that community had
to endure in that moment of horror--those days of horror and mourning
and sadness and all these years later.
The great recording artist Bruce Springsteen, after the 9/11 attacks,
wrote a number of songs reflecting upon that tragedy. One of the songs
he wrote--at least the lyrics that I remember--probably capture the
same sentiment that we all think about when we are thinking about that
kind of a tragedy. The name of the song is ``You're Missing,'' and a
refrain of the song goes like this:

You're missing, when I shut out the lights.
You're missing, when I close my eyes.
You're missing, when I see the sun rise.

I am sure that has been the circumstance for those families every
day, missing the loved one--for 20 of those families missing a loved
one who was age 6 or age 7, and for 6 other families missing an adult
family member of various ages.
We have a lot to do in this body, not only in the next couple of days
but certainly as we start both the new year and a new Congress. This
scourge of violence, which has consumed our country for so many years
now, should be at the top of that list of priority issues we focus on.
Just think about it this way: The 20 children who died at Sandy Hook
would be in the seventh grade right now. As we still mourn, we must
make sure that we come together to make sure no other family has to
endure a tragedy like that.
The shooting at Sandy Hook was a turning point for me as a public
official and I am sure a turning point for many Americans about what
our obligation is to respond to this problem. The tragedy in
Connecticut fundamentally changed the way I view both our Nation's
response to gun violence and my own responsibility as a public
official. I believe that each of us has an obligation to help take
action, to work as Members of the U.S. Senate. I would include Members
of the House, of course, and the executive branch.
We must continually ask ourselves a number of questions. One of those
questions surely is, Is there nothing our Nation can do to try to
prevent this kind of tragedy or other tragedies that we will note in a
few moments? Is there nothing we can do to prevent this? There is no
law, no action, no policy change on which we can come together to at
least reduce the likelihood that we will have another mass shooting in
a grade school or in a lot of other places around the country?
Some people here in Washington seem to believe that there literally
is nothing we can do, the most powerful country in the world that has
solved some big problems. We haven't solved all of them. We have solved
some pretty tough problems in this Chamber and in the other body, the
House, working together on a number of big issues over the years. But
on this one, some people in Washington just throw up their hands and
say there is nothing we can do--absolutely not a single law that we can
pass--other than enforce existing law; that that is all we can do, and
we hope that enforcement will reduce the likelihood, but if it doesn't,
then we just have to throw up our hands. I don't believe that. I don't
think many Americans believe that no matter what side of the political
aisle they are on.
I believe we have an obligation to take a couple of steps. The first
one ought to be easy because some of the data tells us that it is
supported by 90 percent of Americans or maybe even more than 90
percent; that is, universal background checks.
We undertook an effort in the Senate in 2013, in the aftermath of the
Sandy Hook massacre, and we made progress on getting bipartisan support
for a universal background check bill, but we

[[Page S7573]]

haven't done a lot since then in the Senate on that issue. That is one
bill we could vote on in 2019. I hope the majority leader will schedule
a debate on that bill--whatever version we have now in front of us--or
will in the new Congress. We can schedule debate and have a vote.
Obviously, Senators can vote any way they want, but let's have a debate
and let's vote on universal background checks.
Is that a magic wand which will wipe out this problem forever? No.
Background checks will make it less likely that we will have the kinds
of mass shootings we not only have endured as a nation but have grown,
unfortunately, tragically accustomed to.
I believe as well--and I know there are plenty of people who disagree
with me--that we ought to have a debate and a vote on another issue:
banning military-style weapons. I know. I understand that we have, by
some estimates, double-figure millions of these weapons already on our
streets. I get that, but does that mean we should continue down this
road and have 20 million and then 25 million of those weapons on our
streets and then 30, 40, 50, 60 million? Just throw up our hands and
say: That is all we can do; that we have to have tens of millions of
military-style weapons--weapons that belong on a battlefield, not on
our streets in our communities and our neighborhoods. That would be a
good debate to have on that bill.
We ought to have a debate and a vote on a limitation on magazine
capacity so we don't have one person who can spray hundreds of bullets
in a matter of moments. Is there nothing we can do about that?
The greatest country in the world can't do anything about these
issues, these votes?
How about preventing people on the terrorist watch list from getting
their hands on a firearm? We made a determination after 9/11 that we
were going to take certain steps--even against political pressure not
to take certain steps--to protect our Nation from terrorists. One of
them was, if you are a terrorist, we are going to do everything we can
to prevent you from getting on an airplane, or if we have a reasonable
suspicion that you are a terrorist, we are going to try to prevent you
from being on an airplane so we don't have another 9/11.
The same country that did that, so far, because of inaction by the
Congress over many years, allows that same individual who is too
dangerous--we have deemed them too dangerous--to get on an airplane, to
get a firearm because we haven't yet plugged that loophole. We have
tried a couple of times but not nearly enough.
Let's at least have a debate on a few of these issues and have up-or-
down votes. If you want to vote against them, fine, but let's not
pretend that we are dealing with an issue when we don't even have a
debate and don't even have votes. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me,
and I am sure it doesn't make sense to Americans, no matter what side
of the debate they are on.
We can't simply throw up our hands and do nothing as thousands of
lives are lost each year. Why not try to do something to reduce that
number? We need a sustained debate and a series of votes. It is a good
time, by the way, coming up. New year. New Congress in 2019. A brandnew
Congress. We can start fresh by putting these issues on the floor of
the Senate.
We need to make sure the American people know where their
legislators--in this case, Federal legislators, Members of the
House and Senate--stand so they can be held accountable. That is as
American as anything we can do in this body.

We need to do it for the children and the staff who were killed at
Sandy Hook Elementary School. We need to make sure their lives are
remembered--not just in mourning, not just in recognition of a tragedy,
but are actually remembered by way of our action, of taking action and
doing something substantial that will reduce the likelihood.
We have had too many of these tragedies in the last couple of years.
I will do a partial list or a partial itemization of other tragedies--
not all of them but just a few. We know these cities by the tragedies
that took place in them: Orlando, in a nightclub; Charleston, in a
house of worship; Sutherland Springs; Las Vegas; Parkland; Thousand
Oaks; in my home State of Pennsylvania almost 2 months ago now at the
Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, where the killer came into
another house of worship on a Saturday morning and gunned down people
who range in age, in that circumstance--not children but range in age
from midfifties all the way to late eighties, early nineties, in age--
11 people.
Whether it is Sandy Hook Elementary School or the Tree of Life
synagogue or a lot of places in between--and I am mentioning just the
ones since 2006, roughly; there were plenty before that--we have to not
just remember but take action.
In 2018--just 1 year not yet completed--so far in 2018, there have
been 13,743 gun deaths and 26,581 injuries. This is a uniquely American
problem. It doesn't happen around the world; it is happening here. That
is yet another reason for the American people to demand that we do our
job in the Senate, in the House, and in the executive branch. If it is
a uniquely American problem, Americans should try to solve it or at
least get on the road to solving it.
I hope we would have a measure of satisfaction if we pass just one
bill in 2019. Even if nothing else happens for years, maybe 25 years
from now, we could prevent one school shooting, prevent just one
shooting in a synagogue where 11 people lose their lives in a house of
worship, prevent a school or another place in our community from being
unfortunately etched in that wall of tragedy and loss and horror
forever, the name of a town, the name of a community remembered only in
some cases because of the violence that took place there.
I will say it again. This is a uniquely American problem, and we have
to try to solve it together. To say the status quo is unacceptable is a
terrible understatement, but that is the truth. I think people
understand that.
I know this is an issue people on both sides care very deeply about.
We haven't come together yet to take very much action. If you look at
the record on taking action on gun violence--I hate to use the word,
but it is true--it is pathetic in terms of Federal action.
I am still hopeful that the American people will continue to demand
more of all of us--both parties, both Houses, and two branches of the
Federal Government coming together not just to mourn and to remember
and to pay tribute and to offer prayers and condolences, but to take
action, to do what Americans do when we are faced with a problem--take
action, just as we did after 9/11. We didn't throw up our hands and
say: This is just the new normal. We said: No, we are going to take
action to try to stop it or at least reduce the likelihood. We can do
the same on this issue of gun violence.
Mr. President, 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. PORTMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Opioid Epidemic

Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. President, this evening, I want to talk a little
about the nexus of high prescription drug costs and the opioid epidemic
that has gripped my State and our country--the No. 1 public health
crisis in America today. It is a story of greed, frankly, and it is a
story of the need for some fixes here in Congress to keep it from
happening again.
With regard to the opioid crisis, I think the degree that this is
affecting our communities is well documented. Some 72,000 Americans
died last year of overdoses from drugs. This is the high water mark for
our country. It is a grim statistic. More than two-thirds of those
overdose deaths involve what is called opioids. This would be heroin,
prescription drugs, and pain killers, and also the new synthetic
opioids--the fentanyl, which is responsible for most of those opioid
deaths.
I think we have made good progress over the past couple of years here
in Congress in passing new legislation to help to address this
problem--new innovative ways to get people into treatment and longer
term recovery, which

[[Page S7574]]

we know works well in some instances--and also to do a better job on
prevention and education.
So I do think those numbers will begin to turn around, but they
haven't yet. They haven't yet. We have much more work to do. The
Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act, which we passed, is starting
to work. The Cures Act is starting to work. Most recently, the
President signed legislation to try to reduce the cost of this
synthetic opioid coming into our country, mostly from China, mostly
through the U.S. mail system, based on research that we had done. That
is called the STOP Act.
So, again, we are making some progress, but these overdose death
rates are just unbelievably high, and it is a tragic situation, not
just in my State, which is probably top three or four in the country,
but throughout our Nation.
There is a miracle drug that can be used to reverse the effects of an
overdose, and one reason we are beginning to see some progress in some
regions of my State and around the country is that we are getting this
drug out to more first responders and others who can, in effect, save
people from an overdose. Then, of course, the trick is to get that
person into treatment, and not to just have these overdoses continue to
occur. That is where the more innovative programming is starting to
make a difference. But I guess I could say that we have never in our
history as a country had more of a need for this miracle drug to reduce
the effects, to reverse the effect, of an overdose. It is called
naloxone, and naloxone, again, is something that we are using more and
more, and we are saving more and more lives.
I am going to talk this evening about a company that exploited the
opioid epidemic by dramatically increasing the price of this naloxone
drug by more than 600 percent just in the space of a few years.
The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, which I chair
alongside Tom Carper, a Democrat from Delaware, conducted a year-long
investigation--a bipartisan investigation, a really nonpartisan
investigation--into this naloxone issue. We were concerned about the
rising cost in order to find out why it was happening.
We focused on a pharmaceutical company called Kaleo and their
naloxone auto-injector, called Evzio. While naloxone is available in
generic form, two branded products exist for take-home use by untrained
individuals in the case of an overdose. One is Adapt's nasal spray,
called Narcan. You may have heard of that. Narcan is something that
many first responders use and know about.
But the other one is this Evzio drug which is, again, the other
branded naloxone product.
Narcan is available at a cost of about 125 bucks for two doses--$125
for two doses.
Evzio, I thought, was an innovative product when it came out, and
indeed, it has some innovative aspects to it. A unit includes two auto-
injectors and a training device that provides verbal instructions to
talk the user through using the product.
Before Kaleo took Evzio to the market, industry experts, who were
impressed with the product, said they should probably charge between
$250 and $300 for this product. Again, it is miracle drug to reverse
the effects of an overdose. They told the company they could ``own the
market'' at that price of $250 to $300 a unit.
Instead, the company decided on charging a higher price, taking it to
the market in October of 2014. So about 4 years ago they took it to the
market for a price of $575 per unit.
With sluggish sales--I think because the price was a little higher
than, again, was advised--Kaleo could have lowered the price. Instead,
the company went the other direction. It implemented a new distribution
model proposed by an outside drug pricing consultant--who has installed
similar distribution models at other pharmaceutical companies, by the
way--and this involves dramatically raising the drug price.
Now, let me explain this. As part of the distribution model, Kaleo
increased Evzio's price from $575 per unit in 2014--again, October
2014--to $3,750 in February of 2016, and then to its current price of
$4,100 in January of 2017.
So they started off a little high, had sluggish sales, and instead of
going lower, they went from 575 bucks to $4,100. That is a 600-percent
increase over the space of about 2\1/2\ years--a 600-percent increase
in this drug that is so needed right now in our communities.
Why did they do this? Well, according to company documents, the new
distribution model for Evzio was designed to ``capitalize on the
opportunity of opioid overdose at epidemic levels.''
So, in effect, from the company's own documents, they chose to
capitalize or exploit the opportunity of the opioid epidemic--this
tragic epidemic that is killing more Americans than any other thing
right now in my home State of Ohio and the No. 1 cause of death of
Americans under the age of 50 in the entire country--72,000 is the
number from last year of overdose deaths.
So as part of this new model the company worked to ensure that
doctors' offices signed the paperwork indicating that Evzio was
medically necessary.
Why is that important?
Well, this ensured government programs like Medicare and Medicaid--
these are programs that, as you know, we already look at every year and
think: Gosh, how do these costs keep going up? What do we do to
maintain these important programs?
But they said they would increase the cost of this drug because they
could get doctors to say that this was medically necessary, and that
meant that these government programs--Medicare and Medicaid--would
cover the cost regardless of what the cost was, even though it had
increased 600 percent in 2\1/2\ years.
So that was the concept behind this new distribution model. It relied
on a portion of the prescriptions being filled by patients with
commercial health plans that covered Evzio at the much higher cost--and
it worked.
For people whose plans didn't cover Evzio or who didn't have
insurance, Kaleo gave the drug to the patient for free. In these
instances, the company incurred the roughly $52 in cost of the goods.
It was worth it because they could get these incredibly high prices
from Medicare and Medicaid.
This distribution model worked, as I mentioned, when physicians
deemed that Evzio was medically necessary. Then it would cover the
cost--Medicare and Medicaid--all the way up to $4,100 a unit.
Under this new model, Evzio fill rates jumped from 39 percent to 81
percent. So it worked. They sold more product. They made a killing, but
at the expense of the U.S. taxpayer and at the expense of all of us,
really.
The majority of Kaleo's initial revenue was from Medicare and
Medicaid, and the resulting cost to the taxpayer to date has been about
$142 million, despite the fact that a much less costly alternative was
readily available.
You will remember that for most of this time Narcan, this other
product--not Evzio but Narcan--was available for $125 for two doses.
So instead of following recommendations by drug pricing experts to
take the product to market at that lower price, the company decided to
exploit this loophole in our health insurance market and charge this
much higher price to the American taxpayer through Medicare and
Medicaid.
Our report from the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations was
released on the same day that 60 Minutes aired a new story on Kaleo,
its products, and why the price was so high. The findings of our report
were used in that segment to highlight Kaleo's distribution model that
transferred the cost of this drug, effectively, to American taxpayers.
Now, you can see our report online at the Permanent Subcommittee on
Investigations' website. That PSI report and the 60 Minutes segment
were both released on November 18.
Today, less than a month later, I am very pleased to tell you that
Kaleo has publicly stated its plan to take steps toward now reducing
the cost--the price--of its naloxone auto-injector from the current
price of $4,100 per unit down to $178.
This is a very positive step forward, and I am hopeful that it will
increase access to Naloxone--this critically important overdose
reversal drug that has saved so many thousands of lives already. But I
am also pleased that they made this change because it is going to save
taxpayers a lot of money.
Make no mistake. I don't believe that this change would have occurred
but

[[Page S7575]]

for our year-long investigation, the PSI report, and the 60 Minutes
story shining a light on these incredibly high drug prices. Does
anybody really believe that these prices would have been lowered if not
for exposing it and the transparency that was then able to show what
was happening?
So the bipartisan investigation has produced a good result, but we
need to do a lot more.
The report includes recommendations to prevent similar situations
moving forward. Among other things, the report recommends that the
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid, or CMS, should review its policies
governing physicians' use of medical necessity exceptions for Part D in
Medicare to prevent companies from inappropriately influencing
prescribing. That is the least they should do.
While there are legitimate uses of the exception sometimes, we need
to be sure it is not exploited, as it was in this case.
Congress should also require CMS to improve transparency regarding
the total amount spent for drugs purchased by government healthcare
programs so we can identify these problems early on and stop them.
To combat the underlying factors affecting addiction, of course,
Congress has to do more here. We should put in place a 3-day limit, in
my view, on prescription pain medication for acute pain--not for
chronic pain, not for cancer, but for acute pain. That would make a
huge difference.
By the way, it is consistent with the Centers for Disease Control
recommendations requiring all States to utilize prescription monitoring
programs--another thing we should do--and we should allocate more
funding for immediate overdose remedies and first responder training.
There is reason to be optimistic, as I said earlier, about the
direction our country is now headed in overcoming the opioid epidemic.
We have committed ourselves here at the Federal Government to do more
and to be better partners with State government and local government
and non-profits. That is good, and I am proud of the work this Congress
has done.
But the tragedy of overwhelming opioid overdoses has also created
this opportunity for companies like Kaleo to exploit or, as they said,
capitalize on this public health crisis. That is wrong. It is shameful.

I am proud of the investigative work we have done. I will continue to
work in a bipartisan manner to do what we can to reduce prescription
drug prices and also protect taxpayer-funded programs like Medicare and
Medicaid.
Thank you.

Tribute to Bob Corker

Mr. President, today on the floor the Senate voted on legislation
dealing with Saudi Arabia; two issues, the death of journalist
Khashoggi and also the ongoing and tragic war in Yemen.
You may have seen on the floor somebody who helped to orchestrate
this debate. I thought it was a healthy debate. I thought it was good.
People offered amendments and had an opportunity to discuss their
amendments and debate them in full.
I appreciate the fact that the Senate voted by an overwhelming margin
and, in fact, by unanimous consent for a resolution that I think sends
a very clear signal to Saudi Arabia and to other partners in the region
and, frankly, to the Trump administration.
The person who was orchestrating this, you may have seen him down on
the floor of the Senate, is the chairman of the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee. His name is Bob Corker.
Senator Corker is leaving after this week, assuming Congress is going
to be out of session this week or next week. I think we will. He has
chosen to retire, not to run for reelection. So come January, we will
have another Senator from Tennessee who will be joining us, but Bob
Corker is going back into the private sector.
So today I want to talk a little bit about Chairman Corker, the
person you saw on the floor if you were watching earlier. He is a
friend, but he is also a very valuable Member of the U.S. Senate.
The reason other people aren't on the floor talking about him right
now is that he chose not to give a departure speech, which is unusual.
Most Senators take to the floor and give a speech about their departure
and their reflections on being here and what they might do in the
future, and other Members come and talk about them. Bob Corker, in his
typical style, being a guy who is here for all the right reasons and
that is not him--it is about others for him--said: I don't think I am
going to give a departure speech.
So I don't think I will have a chance to talk about him as I have
with other colleagues in their presence because he is not going to give
that speech, but I will say, he deserves to have others like me talk
about his record because he has had so many accomplishments.
He has been a leading voice in this body on so many important
initiatives and issues. As chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee on a global stage, of course, he has been active focusing on
issues to improve the U.S. image around the world. Our diplomacy is
something he believes in and has supported. He is concerned about the
U.S. role in the world. He wants to be sure America continues to play a
leading role on things like human rights, spreading democracy, and
opening up channels of commerce.
He has also been very involved in budget issues, focusing on the
debt, the deficit, and the problems we face in this country.
Finally, he has been active on other legislative matters. One that
comes to mind is banking issues. He is on the Banking Committee and
very involved in how to deal with Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and, after
the financial crisis, some of the issues that arose after the great
recession. So he has been very active as a legislator.
He also brings an interesting perspective to this place because to
this day, he will tell you he is a businessperson, not a politician. He
came up as a developer, a builder. He didn't come up through politics.
He did become the mayor of Chattanooga, and that is how he got involved
in the political world, but he has this business approach to things
around here which I think is refreshing.
He also has the work ethic that comes with somebody from the private
sector, and that is relentless. I see it on display every day, but I
think it has been part of Bob's personality since he was a kid.
He started his first job at age 13. That was picking up trash and
bagging ice. He started his own construction company at age 25. By the
way, that construction company later expanded to 18 States--17 States
in addition to his home State of Tennessee.
He first entered public service, not in a glamorous job, but having
been successful in the private sector, he wanted to give back, and he
was offered an opportunity to help his State. He said he wanted to be
the Finance and Administration department director of Tennessee. Sort
of like the budget person, and he was very helpful to the Governor and
to the State of Tennessee in that role and then became mayor of
Chattanooga, his hometown.
In 2006, he ran for Federal office for the first time, and that was
for the U.S. Senate. He quickly rose to prominence as someone who again
had expertise on some of the issues. That was after the housing crisis,
so he was focused on that issue--the housing market crash and someone
who advocated for conservative principles like reining in Federal
spending and reducing the U.S. deficit.
In 2012, he was reelected to the Senate handily and has been chairman
of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for the past 4 years. I am a
member of that committee, so I have had the opportunity to see his work
up close and watched how he works patiently with Republicans and
Democrats alike and focuses not just on sound bites and throwing out
the rhetoric but on actually how do you get something done that helps
our great country.
I can tell you with certainty that during Chairman Corker's tenure
before the Foreign Relations Committee, our allies around the world
have benefited and our adversaries have been held accountable. That is
his approach--pretty simple.
He has played a key role in helping restore America's leadership role
in the world, and I am pleased the work was accomplished, combating
Russia's continued aggression in Eastern Europe and standing up for our
friend and ally, Israel, and for what we did today, sending a clear
message on values.
Just recently, legislation he championed was called the BUILD Act,
and

[[Page S7576]]

it was signed into law with the President without a lot of fanfare, but
it is going to make a big difference in terms of helping our country
and helping not just our image around the world but ensuring we are
helping to bring other countries out of poverty by using U.S. market
forces that work. It helps bring U.S. private sector investment to low-
income countries around the world to reduce poverty, to grow
investment. This is important in any context but certainly today with
one of our competitors, China, trying to do the same thing. They are
using another tactic--not the private sector but the public sector. It
is a perfect example of the kind of impact Bob Corker has had on this
body.
He has built up international relationships and has bolstered our
national security all at once. It was a pleasure working with him, and
I wish him all the best.
He is a restless guy, so he is going to end up doing something else
very creative with his life, I am sure, and I know he will enjoy
spending more time with his wife, Elizabeth, of 30 years and their two
daughters and grandchildren, but I am eager to see what Bob is going to
do next. I know we will be hearing from him because his thirst for
public service and helping others is just too great.
So to Bob Corker, congratulations on a career of public service, and
I hope you enjoy the next exciting chapter of your life.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Kennedy). The Senator from Louisiana.

Tribute to Charles Davis and Doug Curtis

Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. President, I rise to honor two people from my State
and yours who served in World War II and are being celebrated in
Northwest Louisiana--Charles Davis and Doug Curtis. Both are 92 years
old.
Mr. Davis celebrates his 93rd birthday in 2 days, and so on the
behalf of the Presiding Officer and certainly on my behalf, I wish him
a happy birthday.
These American heroes are part of the ``greatest generation.''
Mr. Davis joined the Navy when he was 16 years old, just after Pearl
Harbor was bombed in 1941. Imagine that--16 years old, leaving home,
volunteering to face a world of danger to defend our country.
He bravely served 6 years at Iwo Jima, Okinawa, Guadalcanal, Solomon
Islands, Cape Esperance, and more. His courage was tested on numerous
occasions. One example was when the ship on which he served was
destroyed, leaving him and his fellow crew members stranded in the
middle of the ocean, with only life vests to keep them alive for 37
hours. Charles said he spent a lot of time talking to God during those
painful hours--particularly painful because his brother, serving on the
same ship, did not live. Such a trying ordeal, a terrible loss.
When Charles talks about his life, he speaks with humility and
gratitude about his life experiences. He says he lived a great life, in
no small part due to the great country we live in.
Asked how he remains always so positive, he says: Every morning, you
can decide to have a good day or a bad day, and for him, he says, it is
not a tough choice.
Mr. Doug Curtis served from January 1944 to August 1946, starting in
Little Rock, AR. He deployed overseas to the Philippines and Japan,
prepared to do whatever was needed, pledging patriotic duty to protect
our country and the people he loved.
A special celebration is being thrown on December 14, tomorrow in
Many, LA, to honor Charles and Doug. My office will present them both
with American flags which have flown over this Capitol Building. It is
a small gesture but meant to honor these two men and to celebrate their
service and sacrifice.
I thank these great Louisiana heroes for their service to our
country, and, Mr. President, I will convey your thanks as well.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.

____________________