[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 4]
[Senate]
[Pages 5149-5150]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                     HUMAN TRAFFICKING LEGISLATION

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I am not an expert in the field of 
etymology, which is the study of the origin of words, but I do find the 
origin of English words to be enlightening. For example, the word 
``govern'' is one we hear often in the Capitol. ``Govern'' is derived 
from the Greek word meaning ``to steer or pilot a ship.'' The most 
important question for a party in power is simply this: Can you govern? 
I say this to my Republican friends. In other words, can you steer the 
ship? Can you pilot this great Nation of ours in the right direction?
  We are just over 100 days in this Republican-controlled Congress, and 
it is already clear that the Republican leader and his side have not 
been up to the task. One need look no further than the Republicans' 
botched handling of the human trafficking bill before the Senate.
  I would just say in partial response to my friend the Republican 
leader that I have never been a big fan of polling--political polling 
or any kind of polling--because you can get any answer you want by 
asking the right question. Of course, the Republican leader, in the 
questions submitted to the Congressional Research Service, asked the 
wrong questions.
  The majority leader and the assistant majority leader took a piece of 
legislation and steered it right into the rocks. The ship has sprung 
many leaks. All Democrats and Republicans support the provisions of 
this bill to help the victims of sexual trafficking and hold the 
offenders accountable, but instead of legislating on common ground, the 
Republicans are legislating to obstruct. When they were in the 
minority, all they did was obstruct. So they know how to do that. I 
vouch for that. One of the things I said was that we are not

[[Page 5150]]

going to treat them the way they treated us. And we haven't done that.
  The Republicans, now in the majority, can't filibuster themselves so 
they are resorting to tanking good legislation--bills they themselves 
wrote and support--in order to score some type of political point. Does 
that seem like reasonable governance to anyone? I don't think so.
  Yesterday, I sat listening to the majority leader--and I did today--
claiming that they are seeking a compromise, even saying that 
Republicans have offered three compromises. Well, if we are just going 
on the number of offers made, we have done 10. We have made 10 good-
faith offers to get this human trafficking bill on the right path. We 
have tried and tried and tried to reach an agreement. We have done 10. 
I will mention just a few.
  We proposed that they strip the Hyde language from the bill. Then we 
proposed the Leahy substitute, which would strip the Hyde language and 
also include Leahy's Runaway and Homeless Youth Act and Senator 
Klobuchar's Stop Exploitation through Trafficking Act, which would 
strengthen the legislation. Then we proposed to use the entire 
trafficking bill passed by the House instead of the Cornyn bill. That 
is the bill the House passed. Let's bring it to the floor here and pass 
it. We even proposed to keep the Cornyn fund but use it only for law 
enforcement efforts to help catch sex traffickers and use the House 
bill's authorization for victims services, including health care.
  But Republicans would not agree to any of those changes. They simply 
are not interested in getting to ``yes.'' This morning, I heard some 
talk that maybe we can work something out. I hope that, in fact, is 
true. I hope they are not using this urgently needed trafficking bill 
to continue to push through the party's backward agenda relating to 
women's health.
  The Hyde language--I served in the House of Representatives more than 
30 years ago. I served with Congressman Hyde, a fine man. If there ever 
were anyone who looked like a public servant, it was Henry Hyde--big 
man, beautiful white hair, great speaking voice. He, this good 
Congressman, is responsible for the Hyde language. It has been in bills 
since then, but it applied and has always applied to government money, 
taxpayer money--taxpayer money.
  What we have said over the last couple of weeks time and time again 
is that Hyde should not be expanded to cover nontaxpayer dollars. That 
is what this is all about. We are not going to bend on that issue. It 
is not right. We do not need to expand Hyde. We think the Republicans 
believe this is a way to pacify the right-to-life community, some of 
these--not all but some of these ideologues out there who want to 
expand Hyde. We are not going to allow that to happen. Hyde should 
apply to taxpayer-funded money and nothing else.
  What has taken place on the direction of human trafficking is an 
effort to obfuscate--to hide the real purpose of the legislation. We 
all agree that human trafficking should stop. This legislation we have 
before us is a step in the right direction. We want to support that 
legislation.
  My friend the Republican leader said: Well, all they are complaining 
about is a sentence or so. Well, that is why people spend all these 
years going to law school, taking contracts courses. That is why my 
friend the assistant Republican leader, who served as a trial court 
judge, a supreme court justice--during his entire career, he dealt with 
lawyers coming to him talking about sentences in a contract or 
sentences in a piece of legislation. That is what this is all about.
  We should eliminate those sentences that allow Hyde to be expanded to 
nontaxpayer money. We cannot allow that to happen.
  So, over 100 days into this Congress, we should move forward and get 
this bill done. It is time that, on this legislation, Republicans right 
the ship. If human trafficking legislation is any indication, 
Republicans have not had a desire to govern dependably. I think that is 
unfair.
  I hope this cloture vote will be defeated. I hope at that time people 
will finally come to the realization that we are willing to do whatever 
needs to be done to change this language so that the Hyde language is 
not applied to taxpayer dollars. If that is the case, we can move 
forward expeditiously.

                          ____________________