[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 52 (Tuesday, March 26, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1972-S1976]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2019--MOTION TO PROCEED

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the motion.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 15, H.R. 268, a bill 
     making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending 
     September 30, 2019, and for other purposes.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nebraska.


                          Flooding in Nebraska

  Mrs. FISCHER. Mr. President, I rise to speak to the historic flooding 
that has devastated hundreds of communities throughout my home State of 
Nebraska.
  After a long, cold, and snow-filled winter, the catastrophic storm 
known as a bomb cyclone struck Western Nebraska with extreme blizzard 
conditions, while the central and eastern portions of the State were 
ravaged by record-setting floods. What were small streams became raging 
rivers, pouring over the banks, and breaching levees to flood towns and 
farmland.
  The floods, which carried car-sized blocks of ice in some areas, 
isolated entire communities and deposited sand, mud, and debris over 
large areas of our land.
  Homes have been destroyed, roads and bridges ripped apart, businesses 
and schools forced to close for an uncertain period of time. It is with 
a heavy heart that I say that three Nebraskans have lost their lives as 
a result of this storm: James Wilke, a farmer from Columbus; Aleido 
Rojas Galan of Norfolk; and Betty Hamernik of Columbus. I send my 
sincere condolences to their families. Their loved ones will not be 
forgotten.
  Cities like Fremont and farms across the State became islands, 
leaving people and livestock stranded. The bomb cyclone has demolished 
thousands of acres of family farmland and ranchland, resulting in a 
devastating number of livestock deaths and demolished farms, grain 
bins, hay supply, and farm equipment.
  One farmer recorded that he lost 700 of his hogs after 7 feet of 
floodwater swept through his land within minutes. A top concern for our 
ag producers is how do we replace ruined feed and the countless miles 
of washed-out fences.
  The Nebraska Department of Agriculture initially projects that the 
damages will total a loss of $440 million in crop losses and another 
$400 million in cattle losses. The devastation continues to grow as our 
farmers and ranchers across Nebraska assess lost land use and more 
livestock deaths.
  I heard from ranchers in Central and Western Nebraska who fought 
through this blizzard during calving, and what I heard most was that 
even though they suffered losses, they knew of others who were worse 
off.
  Farmers stood looking at once fertile land now covered with sand, 
mud, and unimaginably huge slabs and chunks of ice. They are worried 
what the future will bring.
  I agree with Gov. Pete Ricketts, as he has called this catastrophic 
weather ``the most widespread disaster we have had in our state's 
history.''
  Water from the Missouri River and Papio Creek has overwhelmed the 
southeastern side of Offutt Air Force Base and rendered some parts of 
the base as inoperable. I welcomed Secretary of the Air Force Heather 
Wilson to survey the flood damage at the base. Some buildings were 
filled with nearly 8 feet of water. Offutt leadership provided us with 
a preliminary damage assessment and discussed the response efforts that 
were successfully taken by the airmen.
  At the flood's peak levels, one-third of the base was affected, 
causing tens of millions of dollars in damages. I will continue to work 
closely with Secretary Wilson to ensure that Offutt receives the 
funding to meet the needs of the base and to restore one of America's 
most important national security assets.
  According to the Nebraska Emergency Management Agency, 81 of our 93 
counties, 98 cities, and 5 Tribes have declared states of emergency. 
This covers over 59,000 square miles, which is about 76 percent of 
Nebraska.
  To put this in perspective, well over 1.7 million Nebraskans are 
affected by this storm. That is more than 95 percent of our State's 
population.
  The Governor has estimated that more than 2,000 homes and 340 
businesses are damaged or destroyed. Significant damage to Nebraska's 
critical infrastructure is still being assessed at this time, but the 
Nebraska Department of Transportation released a preliminary estimate 
of $200 million that is needed to reconstruct hundreds of miles of 
roads and to repair or replace 15 bridges throughout the State.
  Nebraska is hurting. However, as our Nation has seen the sheer power 
of this storm, I want America to understand the courage, strength, and 
resiliency Nebraskans have shown in response. Overwhelming loss and 
grief have been met with stories of bravery and heroic efforts of our 
neighbors and first responders. Ordinary Nebraskans, without any prior 
training, grabbed their personal boats, jet skis, trucks, and planes to 
save their neighbors who experienced life-threatening situations.
  There have been countless stories of heroes who disregarded personal 
risk to help their neighbors in need--Nebraskans helping Nebraskans, 
neighbors helping neighbors.
  Hundreds of volunteers in Fremont stepped forward to fill sandbags 
and create barriers to protect the city from floodwater. Local pilots 
in affected cities across Nebraska have flown their personal planes to 
deliver and evacuate people who have been surrounded by water.

[[Page S1973]]

  In Boyd County, firefighters continued to stay on the job and rescue 
those in need, even after their own homes were flooded.
  In the Nebraska Panhandle, one State patrol officer even scaled a 
barbed-wire fence to rescue a calf that was frozen to the ground.
  Last week, a staff sergeant with the Nebraska Guard was helping lead 
rescue efforts in Fremont, where the town was left without fresh food 
and water for 2 days because of the surrounding floodwater. She said:

       As we approached the town, I saw people coming out of their 
     houses, standing on street corners, waving and clasping their 
     hands in joy. . . . As we began carrying bottled water into 
     the store, an elderly lady, who had been waiting for hours 
     hugged me and was overcome with emotion. . . . She was so 
     thankful and relieved knowing that even in difficult and 
     trying times, there are Nebraskans doing things ``the 
     Nebraska way'' by watching out for our most vulnerable 
     citizens.

  That is who we are. These stories are inspiring, and they speak to 
the character and integrity of my fellow Nebraskans.
  I have been traveling across Nebraska to see the impact of this 
disaster firsthand.
  In Omaha, I joined Governor Ricketts at the Nebraska Strong phone-a-
thon for relief and support for flood victims. The event, sponsored by 
the Nebraska Broadcasters Association, raised nearly a half million 
dollars to benefit the American Red Cross in Nebraska and Southwest 
Iowa.
  In Winslow, I met with families and residents of the area who had 
been hit hard by the floods. Every structure in that town was flooded. 
I spoke to a mother of three who told me she had just 15 minutes to 
gather her children and her family's belongings before the floodwaters 
entered their home.
  Winslow Volunteer Fire Chief Zachary Klein, informed me that his team 
was able to get boats to help with their recovery efforts. Chief Klein 
and his team saved 29 local residents from their flooded homes.
  In Plattsmouth, the town's water treatment facility is currently 
powered down and inaccessible. Like many affected communities across 
Nebraska, their main concern is being able to gather the facts and to 
make decisions about how they can move forward with their lives.
  In Valley, I toured the devastation in the community with Mayor 
Carroll Smith and Councilwoman Cindy Grove. Large piles of wreckage can 
be found everywhere in town as people begin that cleanup process, but 
the people of Valley are resilient. Residents have started a donation 
center where people in need can get clothes, equipment, and other 
supplies as needed. More than 150 people have signed up as volunteers.
  I also spent some time with local residents and city and county 
personnel in North Bend. The community is understandably concerned 
about how their community will rebuild their lives, but it also warmed 
my heart to listen to stories of how the town is pulling together to 
support one another.
  Time and again, I heard of how proud the North Bend community is of 
their volunteers who are managing donations and distributing food and 
supplies to those in need.
  I want all Nebraskans to know that my office stands ready to help in 
any way that we can. Recently, I led the Nebraska delegation in a 
letter to President Trump outlining the extent of damage to our State 
and the projected cost of recovery. I want to thank the President for 
his rapid approval of Governor Ricketts' expedited request for Federal 
disaster assistance.
  Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue and I discussed the crisis that 
ag producers are facing. He assured me that USDA is committed to 
assisting our farmers and ranchers in any way they can. I also visited 
with Secretary of Transportation Elaine Chao by phone to share with her 
how this historic storm has damaged our critical infrastructure. The 
Secretary and the Department of Transportation, as a whole, are ready 
to help Nebraska.
  I spoke with Major General Bohac to discuss the Nebraska National 
Guard's flood response, the ongoing state of emergency, and ways my 
office can assist with their relief efforts. In the coming days and 
weeks, I will continue to work closely alongside Governor Ricketts to 
assist in coordinating Federal relief efforts for our State. I have 
spoken to President Trump and shared with him the needs of our State as 
we recover. He reassured me that Nebraskans will receive the help we 
need.
  I take great pride in the way our State has pulled together in this 
disaster. To know communities like Fremont, Plattsmouth, Columbus, 
Ashland, Norfolk, Spencer, or Niobrara is to know the definition of 
strength in unity and an unwavering pride in your State and country. 
Above the floodwaters, you will still see the American flag waving 
proudly in all of these communities. If you know Nebraska as I do, you 
know our State is filled with towns like these from one side to the 
other.
  I am proud to represent our great State every day in the U.S. Senate. 
Though much is uncertain for the victims of this disaster, our 
communities are rallying to endure and recover from these historic 
weather conditions.
  I close by offering my sincere thanks to our State and local 
officials, our emergency responders, and National Guard, who are 
working around the clock to provide lifesaving assistance to our 
citizens in need.
  We have much work to do, but Nebraskans are resilient, we are tough, 
and we are compassionate. Hour by hour and day by day, we will get 
through this difficult chapter in our State's history, and we will 
remain Nebraska Strong.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. McSally). The Senator from Iowa.


                           The Green New Deal

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, I appreciate the majority leader's 
bringing the Green New Deal to a vote today so that every Senator had 
an opportunity to go on record. I voted no.
  Some of my Democratic colleagues may argue that a vote against the 
Green New Deal demonstrates an unwillingness to reduce our dependence 
on fossil fuels and to tackle serious environmental issues of the day, 
but nothing could be further from the truth.
  Contrary to popular belief, the United States is not a bad actor on 
the world stage. The United States has reduced its carbon emissions by 
758 million metric tons per year since 2005. This is the largest 
decline of any country in the world.
  Meanwhile, China's and India's carbon emissions have grown. According 
to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, U.S. consumption of 
biofuels and other renewable energy has more than doubled from 2000 to 
2017. The United States will only continue to increase renewable energy 
consumption through 2050 as we see more investment in wind, solar, 
biomass, geothermal, and other alternative energies.
  Let's be very clear. A ``no'' vote on the Green New Deal is a vote 
against a government takeover of our economy that would stifle economic 
growth, bankrupt our Nation, and endanger the prosperity of all 
Americans. A ``no'' vote is a vote in favor of continuing an open and 
free economy that has made America the richest country in the world. We 
find that the best way to make environmental improvements is to use the 
wealth of a nation to accomplish that goal, and as a nation becomes 
more wealthy, the more apt it is to have the ability to protect the 
environment.
  The fact is that the Green New Deal is wholly unrealistic in its goal 
of obtaining net-zero carbon emissions within 10 years. We are not 
going to be successful at reducing our dependence on fossil fuels and 
lowering our carbon emissions through virtue signaling. That is all the 
Green New Deal boils down to--virtue signaling. It is all lofty goals 
and aspirations with no concrete plan or concern as to its feasibility.
  It is easy to support a vaguely worded, nonbinding resolution calling 
on the Federal Government to accomplish certain goals, but guess what. 
That is us--we, in the Congress. Congress is part of the Federal 
Government with the responsibility under our Constitution to write the 
laws. If Members of Congress have concrete ideas about what the Federal 
Government should be doing, they should introduce real legislation 
detailing who should do what to accomplish these goals.
  Instead of a ``green dream,'' as Speaker Pelosi called the Green New

[[Page S1974]]

Deal, we need to focus on commonsense, bipartisan approaches that have 
an actual shot at making a difference. In other words, a resolution is 
a resolution; it is not a law. It doesn't accomplish anything. It 
states these goals that we ought to seek, but nobody has come forth 
with a concrete plan to accomplish those goals.
  Cutting taxes is an effective way to encourage positive, 
environmentally conscious ways to produce electricity and fuel. This is 
what I have sought to do as a leader on renewable and alternative 
energy production for decades now. I was the original author of the 
production tax credit for wind energy in 1992. It won me an award as 
the father of wind energy, and now, I suppose, 25 years later, I am the 
grandfather of the wind energy approach.
  During my leadership on the Senate Finance Committee during the early 
2000s, I oversaw the establishment, enhancement, and renewal of 
numerous tax incentives that promote clean energy from sources such as 
wind and solar to renewable fuels like biodiesel, to energy efficient 
buildings, homes, and appliances.
  Unlike the aspirational goals of the Green New Deal, these proposals 
I have been a part of are real, proven, bipartisan actions that I 
helped shepherd into law to make the United States more energy 
independent and, at the same time, improve our environment.
  Renewable energy is a very smart investment and the fastest growing 
source of electricity generation in our country. According to the U.S. 
Energy Information Administration, utility-scale solar power is 
expected to increase by 10 percent in 2019--that is in 1 year alone--
while wind power is expected to surpass hydropower for the first time. 
As prices continue to fall, the economic benefits from these clean 
energy investments will obviously increase.
  Already, Iowa leads the Nation for its share of renewable energy. 
Iowa's wind generates nearly 37 percent of the State's electricity from 
wind, and the State's largest utility in America is set to generate 100 
percent of its electricity within just a few years. Iowa ranks first in 
the Nation in the production of ethanol and biodiesel. Iowa alone 
accounted for over 26 percent of the entire U.S. ethanol production and 
over 17 percent of the U.S. biodiesel production.
  The solar industry in Iowa continues to mature and ranks 17th 
nationally. The bottom line is that renewable energy helps diversify 
Iowa's economy. It creates jobs in rural America and strengthens U.S. 
energy independence. As far as the jobs are concerned, I believe there 
are about 7,000 just for wind energy and 43,000 for biofuels.
  Instead of trying to build on these and other proven policies, the 
authors of the Green New Deal are more concerned with trying to correct 
all the ills they see in the U.S. economic system and even our broader 
society.
  So it is not just about environment. Here is a list of the grievances 
they want to attack in the name of an environmentally sustainable 
economy: life expectancy, wage stagnation, economic mobility, income 
inequality, systemic injustices, the oppression of indigenous people, 
the unhoused, and the list goes on and on and on. Just in case I might 
be taken as a person who doesn't care about all of those things I just 
listed--in other words, don't get me wrong; these are important issues 
that deserve our attention as a nation, but it is simply not realistic 
to believe that they can all be solved through a plan that targets 
environmental sustainability.
  Of course, since no crisis should be allowed to go to waste, every 
aspect of the progressive agenda must be implemented to fend off the 
threat of climate change. According to an analysis by the American 
Action Forum, a portion of the so-called Green New Deal plan focuses on 
eliminating carbon emissions. That program, by itself, would cost 
between $8.3 and $12.3 trillion. Of course, that is assuming it is 
followed up with actual legislation that attempts to implement the 
goals it lays out, and I have pointed out that all of that legislation 
is not being brought forward.
  Those figures account for only a fraction of the Green New Deal's 
cost. The portion of the progressive economic agenda that includes 
enacting universal healthcare, free college tuition, a Federal jobs 
guarantee program, and much more is estimated to cost somewhere between 
$43 and $81 trillion. So that would put the total cost of the Green New 
Deal at somewhere between $51 and $93 trillion over the first 10 years.
  Now, $93 trillion--that is kind of hard to imagine. Can you imagine 
that? That is more money than the U.S. Government has spent in its 
entire 230-year history. How would we even go about paying for it?

  Several Democrats have floated ideas or introduced bills that have 
gone along the lines of taxing the wealthy. That, I assume, may make up 
some of their possibilities. Earlier this year, the House author of the 
Green New Deal suggested imposing tax rates of 70 percent or more on 
earnings over $10 million. Here in the Senate, Senator Warren has 
proposed an annual wealth tax of 2 percent on assets of $50 million and 
3 percent on assets of over $1 billion. Not to be outdone, Senator 
Sanders has introduced legislation to supercharge the death tax with 
rates as high as 77 percent of estates exceeding $1 billion. More 
recently, Representative DeFazio reintroduced his proposal to tax 
securities transactions.
  Think about this. Even if we assume that these proposals would not 
have detrimental economic or behavioral effects--and we all know they 
would--these taxes would not come anywhere close to covering the price 
tag of the Green New Deal. The Washington Post reported that a 70-
percent tax rate on incomes over $10 million could theoretically raise 
$720 billion over 10 years. Senator Warren's own estimates suggest her 
annual wealth tax proposal could raise as much as $2.75 trillion in a 
decade. According to Senator Sanders, his death tax proposal would 
raise $315 billion over a decade. Congressman DeFazio's transaction tax 
is estimated to bring in $777 billion. So adding up all that, even 
under the rosiest assumptions, these Senators' proposals combined would 
only cover between 5 and 10 percent of the Green New Deal's cost.
  The fact is, there are not enough millionaires and billionaires in 
the United States to cover the price tag, so eventually they start 
taxing the middle class. These socialist ideas remind me of former 
United Kingdom Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's wise observation that 
``the trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other 
people's money.''
  Many of the Green New Deal backers appear to realize this and have 
even suggested that offsetting its cost is unnecessary. According to 
these authors of the Green New Deal, it can be paid for simply by 
printing more money. Yes, you heard me right--printing more money. 
Their solution is the same as what has been tried by every bankrupt 
third world country around the world--just crank up the printing 
presses.
  The poster child for this fantasy in the world today, at least, is 
Venezuela, a country rich with great economic vitality in the 1970s--
probably even earlier than the 1970s--but that economy has been driven 
into the ground by socialist policies, financed in large measure by 
churning out currency, leading to multimillion percent inflation rates.
  Now that Senators have had an opportunity to go on record in support 
or opposition to the resolution, I hope the nonsense that is the Green 
New Deal will be put to rest. Hopefully, we can all now rally around 
sensible, proven policy to secure our energy independence and to 
improve the environment. From my point of view, that is the United 
States continuing on the success we have already had but standing as an 
example for China, India, Indonesia, Brazil, and other countries.
  Affordable, clean energy is key to moving the United States forward. 
A good starting point would be to enact tax extenders legislation that 
I introduced last month with Ranking Member Wyden. This legislation 
would extend nearly a dozen separate practical and proven incentives 
for renewable energy and energy efficiency. Investing in alternative 
forms of clean energy is good for the environment, good for national 
security and energy independence, and good for job creation, 
particularly in rural America. It is good for economic development and 
surely good for the taxpayers, and it is obviously good for attacking 
climate change.
  I yield the floor.

[[Page S1975]]

  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. PERDUE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                                H.R. 268

  Mr. PERDUE. Madam President, I rise tonight to talk about something 
we don't see very often in this body. We saw a bipartisan effort today 
to move to regular order, to actually put a bill on this floor, to 
debate its merits, to make amendments to it, and to try to find a 
compromise position to do the right thing for the people across many 
States in our country that have been devastated by untoward disasters 
just in this last year.
  As many of us know all too well, our country suffered a series of 
unprecedented natural disasters over the last year. Actually, it is a 
trend that has gone on over the last couple of years. We have had a 
series of unprecedented disasters.
  In July, August, and November 2018 alone, wildfires in California 
displaced hundreds and even thousands of people and destroyed thousands 
of homes in a very short period of time. These fires were the deadliest 
and most destructive in California history.
  In August 2018, Hurricane Lane dropped 52 inches of rain over 5 days, 
causing heavy flooding and mudslides. It ranks as the second wettest 
tropical cyclone in U.S. history, behind Hurricane Harvey in 2017.
  In September of 2018, Hurricane Florence caused catastrophic damage 
in North and South Carolina. It flooded homes, schools, and businesses. 
A week after the hurricane, major highways were still underwater.
  In November 2018, a 7.0 magnitude earthquake hit Alaska and damaged 
highways and buildings and displaced hundreds, if not thousands, of 
individuals.
  Earlier this year, an EF-4 tornado flattened Lee County, AL, and took 
23 lives, including 3 children, and injured hundreds of others.
  Today, our friends in the Midwest are suffering from devastating 
flooding. Roads have been washed away, fields look like lakes, and many 
cattle have been drowned. As a matter of fact, this flood happened just 
at the wrong time--during calving--and we know that thousands of calves 
have been lost.
  My home State of Georgia has not been immune and is indeed at this 
moment reeling from a natural disaster as well.
  On October 10, 2018, Hurricane Michael made landfall on the Florida 
Panhandle with a category 4 hurricane. It was one of the strongest 
storms to ever hit the United States. Over the next few hours, 
Hurricane Michael barreled through Florida, tore through southwest 
Georgia, and moved on to North Carolina and South Carolina, doing 
immense damage. In a matter of hours, homes were flattened, tracts of 
timber destroyed, crops were ruined, and people's lives were radically 
changed forever. This hurricane hit exactly at a time when most crops 
were ready to be harvested. Cotton, peanuts, pecans, timber--it was 
devastating. Nothing was spared.
  Today, agriculture is Georgia's top industry and our No. 1 economic 
driver. Before the hurricane, farmers in my State were expecting a 
record harvest in many commodity categories. Instead, just at the time 
when harvesting was starting, Hurricane Michael hit, and crops were 
completely destroyed across most of our State.
  Our farmers are resilient, however. They have weathered droughts 
before and low-yield harvests and poor farm economies. They suffered 
through several years of low commodity prices as well. But they never 
ever faced anything quite like this before. The strength and magnitude 
of this hurricane indeed was unprecedented.
  Shortly after the hurricane hit, President Trump, Vice President 
Pence, and the Secretary of Agriculture all came down to Georgia with 
Senator Isakson and me to view the damage. Together, we toured the 
State, saw the devastation, and heard directly from farmers about the 
tough road to recovery. It was interesting that these farmers were not 
asking for anything; they were actually praying for their brethren in 
other parts of the country who were also being ravaged by these 
disasters.
  The scene we saw that day is something I personally will never 
forget. We visited one of the largest pecan farms in the world--
certainly in Georgia--and saw the damage in their fields. At this one 
farm alone, these two brothers who started from nothing had 800 acres 
of beautiful pecan trees. These maturing pecan trees were completely 
uprooted at the very time when the heavy harvest was sitting right 
there on the trees. In fact, when I was there, you couldn't walk on the 
ground; it was just a solid carpet of pecans on the ground, literally 
ruined.
  Crop insurance will help with this year's losses somewhat, but 
agriculture insurance only covers part of the loss. What it won't cover 
are the trees that were damaged, particularly in this 800-acre tract 
that we personally saw with the Vice President.
  Here, there is no insurance. Today in the agriculture industry, there 
is no way to insure this machine called a pecan tree that produces 
pecans. You can insure part of the crop, but you can't insure the 
trees. It takes about 10 years--some varieties, a little less, but 
about 10 years to start getting a crop from those new trees. So you can 
see for them that this is truly a generational loss.
  When they saw the devastation, the Trump administration told Georgia 
farmers and other farmers around the Southeast from this particular 
hurricane that they would have their backs, and they have moved to do 
just that.
  President Trump said: ``Farmers really got hurt, especially in 
Georgia, but we're going to get it taken care of.'' Vice President 
Pence said: ``We will rebuild these crops and these communities. We 
will restore southwest Georgia. We will restore the Sunbelt region 
bigger and better than ever before.'' They have acted consistently 
since October of last year.
  The State of Georgia immediately stepped up and offered tax credits, 
short-term financing, bridge loans, and other forms of direct 
assistance to those impacted. The Federal Government has been a little 
slower to act. It has been 5 months since Hurricane Michael ravaged the 
Southeast, and this Congress has done very little to help people who 
are barely hanging on right now. That is shameful. It is time to do 
something about it. This aid should have been funded as soon as we had 
an estimate of the damage, which was really a mere few weeks after the 
hurricane came through in October. Instead, disaster aid got caught up 
in a partisan spending battle here in the Senate, and in typical 
Washington fashion, Congress kicked the can down the road.
  It is totally unacceptable that Washington's intransigence continues 
to threaten the livelihood of the very people who sent us here to 
represent them. If we don't help these people right now, they may lose 
their businesses, their farms, their livelihoods, and, in some cases, 
their families through no fault of their own. That is the reality we 
are facing here.
  Every night, farmers in my State get on their knees and pray that 
help will soon come. They pray their lenders will show compassion when 
their bridge loans are maturing, as they are, literally, today. They 
pray they will not go bankrupt. They pray they will be able to provide 
for their families. And yes, they are praying for other people around 
the country who have been devastated just like they have.
  Senator Johnny Isakson has been a workhorse in this entire effort. He 
and I, along with several other Senators from southeastern States, have 
introduced this stand-alone supplemental disaster relief bill that we 
just had a vote on merely an hour ago. This bill passed the motion to 
proceed 90 to 10. I am very proud to be a Member tonight of a body that 
has agreed to put this on the floor and to do what the Senate is 
supposed to do, and that is to debate a bill, amend it, and then vote 
on its passage.
  This particular bill, among other things, for States like California 
and other parts of the country, includes $3 billion for agriculture. 
This is specifically disaster relief for our farmers and ranchers 
around the country. These funds are for States like Georgia, Florida, 
Alabama, the Carolinas--that is

[[Page S1976]]

North Carolina and South Carolina--Alaska, Hawaii, California, Iowa, 
Nebraska, Missouri, and Kansas, which are all battling natural 
disasters right now and over the past year.
  I would also add that our colleagues from the upper Midwest have 
really moved very quickly and have been very reasonable so that we can 
include in the language here flexibility to make sure their needs are 
met, as well.
  I also want to take a moment to thank our colleagues here for being 
very reasonable about needs in other parts of our country.
  I really think that what the President has done with Puerto Rico 
needs to be called out. The Trump administration has been resolute in 
their support of the people in Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria and 
Hurricane Irma hit the island. To date, $40 billion has already been 
allocated, and another 50 is potentially going their way--depending on 
how things happen in the next 5 years or so--to help Puerto Rico 
recover from recent hurricanes. That is a potential of over $90 
billion.
  To ensure Puerto Rico continues to have the resource it needs to 
recover, this disaster relief bill includes $600 million in additional 
nutritional assistance for the most vulnerable families in Puerto Rico 
since that relief, that aid, actually runs out this week.
  Some Members of this body argue we should allocate more funding for 
Puerto Rico. I would remind them that this is the same level of funding 
that they have previously supported. In addition, Puerto Rico's own 
representative in Congress, Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon, supports our 
bill. She said this ``bill puts my constituents one step closer to 
receiving the assistance they need to continue the long path toward 
recovery, and I look forward to its swift passage.''
  This bipartisan disaster relief package is a win for our farmers. It 
is a win for families and businesses who were devastated by historical 
hurricanes in the Southeast and wildfires in the West. It is a win for 
the people in Puerto Rico, whom the President has previously helped.
  Every day we continue debating this issue is a day that people across 
the country face crippling uncertainty. Today, I call on each of us to 
put our individual political interests aside and do the right thing for 
these people who are depending on us right now. Time is of the essence. 
People back home are counting on us to get this done.
  In conclusion, this discussion reminds us of a bigger issue. The 
funding we are debating here today is, by definition, borrowed money. 
Because of Washington's intransigence over the last 4 years and its 
inability to get its financial House in order over the last few 
decades, coupled with this debt crisis we have today, we are losing the 
ability to do the right thing, whether it is medical research, 
infrastructure, education, or responding to national disasters. Moving 
forward, we will not be able to continue dealing with these emergencies 
and crises if we don't have a functioning Federal Government that can 
pay its bills and keep its financial house in order. Today I ask each 
of my colleagues here for their individual support on this disaster 
relief package.
  I also ask that going forward we have a serious debate about tackling 
this debt crisis and responsively funding the Federal Government on 
time every year so we can help the American people when they are 
counting on us the most.
  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. PERDUE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________