[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 10]
[Senate]
[Pages 13624-13639]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




              LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2017

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
resume consideration of H.R. 5325, which the clerk will report.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 5325) making appropriations for the 
     Legislative Branch for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
     2017, and for other purposes.

  Pending:

       McConnell (for Cochran) amendment No. 5082, in the nature 
     of a substitute.
       McConnell amendment No. 5083 (to amendment No. 5082), to 
     change the enactment date.
       McConnell amendment No. 5084 (to amendment No. 5083), of a 
     perfecting nature.
       McConnell amendment No. 5085 (to the language proposed to 
     be stricken by amendment No. 5082), to change the enactment 
     date.
       McConnell amendment No. 5086 (to amendment No. 5085), of a 
     perfecting nature.
       McConnell motion to commit the bill to the Committee on 
     Appropriations, with instructions, McConnell amendment No. 
     5087, to change the enactment date.
       McConnell amendment No. 5088 (to (the instructions) 
     amendment No. 5087), of a perfecting nature.
       McConnell amendment No. 5089 (to amendment No. 5088), of a 
     perfecting nature.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The assistant majority leader.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I came to the floor to talk about the 
pending business, but I have to just comment based on what the 
Democratic leader has said. Apparently, he has so little confidence in 
his party's nominee for President that he insists on coming to the 
floor every day that we are in session, trying to assist her by making 
arguments either she cannot make or that she has not made. We do have 
pending business that is very important and which I know he would agree 
is important, and that is to keep the government running past the end 
of this fiscal year, which ends on Friday.
  That actually is the subject that I came here to talk about. We are 
continuing to work on a continuing resolution to fund the government 
through the end of the fiscal year. The fact of the matter is that we 
would not find ourselves in this distasteful position were it not for 
the filibusters of our Democratic colleagues who try to use the 
leverage and have effectively used the leverage to shut down the normal 
functioning of the appropriations process in order to gain some 
leverage to spend more money, notwithstanding the fact that we are $19 
trillion in debt. They simply shifted from one excuse to another in 
order to refuse to do their job, which is actually to work in a 
bipartisan way through the appropriations process to fund the 
functioning of the government at agreed-to spending levels.
  So we are now staring at a Friday deadline to keep the government 
open. Of course, this was their design all along--to drag their feet, 
delay, and turn from one excuse to another in order to keep from 
actually working in a bipartisan way to appropriate the money to fund 
the government so the government would continue to function. We could 
have finished this job a long time ago, but our Democratic colleagues 
simply made it clear that they wouldn't lose any sleep even as we get 
closer and closer to the funding deadline.
  This is actually the narrative they hoped for all along. They want to 
talk about shutdowns or potential shutdowns that they, in fact, could 
cause, not because of anything that we have done on this side of the 
aisle.
  The Appropriations Committee, chaired by Senator Cochran, and the 
Appropriations subcommittees have voted out on a bipartisan basis all 
12 appropriations bills, and they have done their work. Many of them 
have passed unanimously. Most of them have passed overwhelmingly with 
bipartisan support, which is very encouraging. So our Democratic 
colleagues have had a lot of participation and a lot of influence, as I 
know they would want, in the priorities of the Federal Government as 
reflected in the appropriations bill. Of course, that wasn't good 
enough, and that didn't meet their underlying need, which is to try to 
gain any advantage they possibly can when it comes to spending levels 
or in the upcoming November 8 election, which very much appears to be 
on the Democratic leader's mind as he continues to come to the floor 
and talk about the Presidential race rather than the pending business.
  Of course, now we know that we are running out of time. So the 
majority leader, Senator McConnell, has now proposed to call their 
bluff. They said they wanted a clean continuing resolution. As a matter 
of fact, the Democratic leader said last week that if a clean 
continuing resolution were brought to a vote, we could ``leave in 10 
minutes.'' That is what the Democratic leader said last week. But as of 
yesterday, we know he changed his tune. He said a clean CR wasn't near 
enough. He said: ``We want more.''
  We will soon have a chance to vote on that clean continuing 
resolution after lunch. This is the continuing resolution that the 
Democratic leader said we could pass and leave in 10 minutes. This 
continuing resolution funds the government at levels this Chamber has 
already agreed to. There are no riders or anything that the Democrats 
can claim as controversial. It is a simple continuation of funding at 
current levels under the same terms that the President has already 
signed into law last December. It also includes resources for 
bipartisan priorities like veterans programs, flood control, fighting 
the opioid epidemic that is devastating communities across our country, 
and dealing with prevention of the Zika virus--something the Democrats 
said they wanted money for since last May. Well, this is it. This is 
the $1.1 billion agreed to on a bipartisan basis. But this is when they 
shift their argument to something else.
  We remember that during the summer, our Democratic colleagues were 
quick to call for action on Zika funding. Ironically, they filibustered 
a bill that would have provided that funding, but when push came to 
shove, they flat out refused to act to give communities the funding 
they need to fight this real health crisis.
  We know from what has happened in Florida, where they have had 
domestic infections of people from the mosquitoes carrying the Zika 
virus in Florida, that it is just a matter of time before this will 
spread to other parts of the United States, including warmer weather 
States like mine, in Texas.
  I have spent some time in Houston, TX, with the mosquito and vector 
control folks at the Harris County Health Department, where they are 
monitoring these mosquitoes on a daily basis to see whether there are 
signs of the Zika virus in those mosquitoes. Thankfully, there is none 
yet, but they are identifying West Nile virus and other mosquito-borne 
diseases, and

[[Page 13625]]

thank goodness for the work and leadership they are showing at the 
local level. It would be nice if the Nation's congressional leaders 
would demonstrate similar leadership getting our job done, getting the 
money to the people who need it and can put it to good use.
  I have shown the picture of the devastating birth defects caused by 
the Zika virus in women of childbearing age. It is devastating. How our 
colleagues across the aisle can continue to block this funding in 
giving the money that could actually help address this potential health 
crisis is beyond me. We have given them what they wanted, and they 
refuse to take yes for an answer. They still talk a lot about it and 
the urgent need to get it done, while dragging their feet the whole 
way.
  The Democratic leader even said at the beginning of this month that 
we need to handle the Zika threat first and foremost. Well, I guess 
that is why he continues to delay a vote on the continuing resolution 
and why they continue to do what they say they are going to do. They 
are going to block the cloture vote this afternoon, again, because now 
they have changed the subject.
  Well, this is their chance to act, to send resources to fight the 
virus in communities across the country. I am glad the senior Senator 
from Florida, a Member of the Democratic caucus, has already said that 
he will support this clean CR, in light of the public health threat 
Zika poses to his constituents in Florida. He clearly has his 
priorities straight. It is not politics first and foremost. It is 
public health. I hope more of his colleagues follow his lead and vote 
to get on this continuing resolution so we can get our work done and so 
the money can go to those communities like those in his State and in my 
State that need it most.
  Some of our Democratic colleagues say they don't like the continuing 
resolution because it doesn't allow for funding for the water problems 
in Flint, MI. But I have to say that this is just another manufactured 
excuse. It ignores reality. We just passed overwhelmingly the Water 
Resources Development Act with more than 90 votes in this Chamber. That 
bill provides funding for the crisis in Flint, MI. The House is taking 
up their version of the bill this week. The chairman of the Environment 
and Public Works Committee, the senior Senator from Oklahoma, has made 
it clear he is committed to sending this Water Resources Development 
Act, including funding for Flint, to the President for his signature. 
So that excuse doesn't hold any water either.
  Our Democratic friends may say: Well, that is not included in the 
House bill. That is true. But with the commitment of the chairman and 
the ranking member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, 
Senator Boxer, who work so well together, there is no way in the world 
that a conference report is going to come back to the Senate without 
that Flint, MI, money in the bill. So that excuse doesn't hold water 
either.
  Once again, I guess because they think it helps them somehow 
politically, our Democratic friends are marching this country closer 
and closer to a shutdown. They have been slow-walking the process, 
starting months ago when they refused to consider and even pass 
bipartisan appropriations bills. As I said earlier, these were bills 
passed overwhelmingly on a bipartisan basis. Why in the world would 
they do that, I guess, perhaps is the question before us. Well, a 
Member of their leadership implied in yesterday's Washington Post that 
it is purely for political purposes.
  I am not naive. I understand politics is part of this process, but 
clearly the priority of our colleagues across the aisle is not to do 
their job and to address the funding needs for the Federal Government, 
including the Zika crisis or even to deal in a bipartisan way with the 
very issue they have identified, the Flint, MI, issue that is going to 
get that money to the community.
  In the article I mentioned in the Washington Post, the senior Senator 
from Montana, who heads the Democratic campaign committee, gave us just 
a momentary glimpse into our Democratic friends' playbook this election 
cycle. He said that in order to win more seats in the U.S. Senate, 
Democratic candidates need to show that ``Republicans really haven't 
done anything.''
  That was the campaign chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign 
Committee, saying in order for them to win seats, they have to show 
that under Republican leadership nothing has been done. The facts would 
show otherwise. This reminds me of the story of a propaganda technique 
where, if you tell a big enough falsehood and you tell it over and over 
and over, there are some people who are actually going to believe it.
  Facts are a stubborn thing. Democrats are marching us down a path 
that leads to a shutdown in order to gain some sort of political 
advantage. What a terrible thing to do to this country, to be brought 
to the brink purely for some perceived, temporary political game.
  The facts are, under the leadership of Senator McConnell as the 
majority leader and under a Republican majority, the Senate has been 
brought back to regular order, which means we are actually doing the 
people's business. Committee chairmen have had the freedom to flesh out 
legislation on a bipartisan basis and craft good policy solutions for 
the American people, rather than have bills cooked up in the Democratic 
leaders' conference room that have never seen the light of day in any 
committee and certainly were not bipartisan. That was the record when 
the Democratic leader was majority leader during the last Congress.
  We have had more votes on more bills so individual Senators could 
offer specific ideas on how to make legislation better, and the results 
speak for themselves. It is a long list, but the Senate has passed much 
needed overhauls of our education system and our transportation system, 
both on a bipartisan basis. We have passed bipartisan bills to help 
root out the dangers to our society from opioid addiction, heroin 
addiction, and human trafficking. We passed foreign policy measures 
that have made our country safer, including a bill to impose stronger 
sanctions on North Korea.
  Again, it is a long list. Last week, we passed the Water Resources 
Development Act I was referring to earlier, thanks to the leadership of 
a Republican, the senior Senator from Oklahoma, and a Democrat, the 
senior Senator from California. That is the way this process is 
supposed to work.
  The point is, until very recently, this Congress has been marked by a 
willingness of folks on both sides of the aisle to work through the 
issues and to find a path forward that would represent the best 
solution for the people we represent, the American people.
  According to the senior Senator from Montana--in what appears to be 
an act of desperation--that doesn't make for good campaign strategy in 
the days leading up to the election, apparently, and now they want to 
try to sell this propaganda, this gigantic falsehood repeated over and 
over so people, at some point, at some level, begin to believe it. They 
want to paint this Congress as ineffective under Republican control.
  When our friends on the other side of the aisle put the ``d'' in 
dysfunction during the 113th Congress, that is why the Republicans won 
the majority in the 2014 election, among other things, because 
Democratic incumbents running for reelection in 2014 had no record of 
accomplishment they could point to. That strategy backfired on our 
Democratic colleagues. You would think they would have learned 
something from that experience.
  For example, they had the incumbent Senator from Alaska go home to 
Alaska and ask to be returned to the Senate. He could not point to a 
single amendment on a single bill he actually sponsored that received a 
rollcall vote in the Senate. That is pretty hard to explain, especially 
when you are in the majority, but that is what happened. You would 
think our colleagues would have learned something from that.
  What do they gain by edging our country toward a government shutdown 
this Friday? I don't see how it helps anyone, but that is why we are

[[Page 13626]]

here today, staring at a deadline and trying to hammer out a stopgap 
spending bill--and this only gets us to December 9.
  Again, the reason we find ourselves having to do this is because they 
have simply shut down the Senate appropriations process, forcing us 
into a position that no one who actually has any interest in performing 
the duties of their job actually likes. This is not the way the Senate 
is supposed to work, but this is the hand we have been dealt because of 
their obstruction.
  I would hope more Democrats would join the senior Senator from 
Florida and take yes for an answer when it comes to funding the 
government, when it comes to dealing with Zika, the potential Zika 
crisis in our country.
  I hope our colleagues on the other side will reconsider their 
decision to block the vote this afternoon. We are ready to move forward 
with the solution our Democratic colleagues have called for, a clean 
continuing resolution, but again it is like Charlie Brown and the 
football. Do you remember that cartoon? Every time Lucy would put the 
football out, she would pull it back at the last minute and Charlie 
Brown would end up on his back.
  All we need is a partner who will work with us. I encourage some of 
our friends across the aisle to reconsider their position.


               Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act

  Mr. President, late on Friday afternoon, the President fulfilled his 
promise to veto the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act.
  I have a hard time understanding the President's rationale. This 
legislation was approved unanimously in the Senate and in the House. 
That doesn't happen very often, where Democrats and Republicans, where 
Senators and House Members, unanimously support a piece of legislation, 
but tomorrow afternoon we will vote on an override of that veto. 
President Obama made clear in his message that he doesn't understand 
how limited and narrow in scope this legislation is. As a matter of 
fact, he misrepresents what this legislation actually does, which is an 
extension of current law, and it is well within the bounds of 
historical practice and modern court guidance under the Foreign 
Sovereign Immunities Act.
  The victims of terrorism in this country need an ability to seek 
justice in a court of law. That is all this bill is about. It doesn't 
identify a single country, and it doesn't purport to decide the merits 
of the case. All it says is, yes, you can present your case to a judge 
and a jury in a court of law. Why the President would object to that is 
lost on me.
  This legislation will help victims of terrorism on U.S. soil seek 
compensation. By doing so, it will potentially deter other terrorist 
acts. If there are consequences associated with sponsoring terrorist 
attacks on American soil, don't you think this might have some modest 
deterrence effect, including our counterterrorism measures that our 
national security forces are engaged in?
  This also sends an important message that the United States takes 
care of its own and that we will never tolerate terrorism and we will 
never ever shy away from the pursuit of justice for Americans.
  I realize there are some of our colleagues who say: Well, Saudi 
Arabia or some other country might be upset with us.
  Frankly, I could care less. We are here to represent the American 
people, not some foreign country. The fact is, our colleagues--our 
friends in Saudi Arabia, to the extent that we have aligned interests, 
we work well together and that will continue despite this veto 
override. To simply say because some foreign country or some King or 
some Prince of some other country doesn't like legislation so the 
President is going to veto it is simply unacceptable, when clearly the 
American interest here is for these victims of terrorism to find 
recourse in our courts of law.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The assistant Democratic leader.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, while the Republican whip is still on the 
floor, I believe there is an agreement, at 10:45, Republicans will have 
control of the floor.
  I have waited patiently while the Senator from Texas has given his 
speech. I ask unanimous consent to allow me 10 minutes to speak on the 
floor before the Republicans claim their time.
  Mr. CORNYN. Absolutely.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DURBIN. Thank you very much.
  Mr. President, why are we facing a continuing resolution to fund the 
government of the United States of America? Because our budget expires 
on October 1.
  It is a new budget. We are supposed to pass spending bills, 
appropriations bills, budget bills that will cover this next 12 months 
of the fiscal year, and we have failed. The Senate Appropriations 
Committee, which I am proud to serve on, has done its job on a 
bipartisan basis. In fact, we have reported out all 12 spending bills 
but had very little luck on the floor of the Senate moving those bills 
forward. The first one we took up was the military construction bill, 
which passed with good support, and was sent over to the House of 
Representatives. They loaded it up with every political issue they 
could think of for this campaign season, and that bill started 
floundering at that point. That is why, at this moment in time, we need 
to pass a continuing resolution. This is no way to run a government 
but, to be honest with you, both political parties have been guilty of 
finding themselves in this mess before, where we have had to buy a 
little extra time into the fiscal year in order to agree on the budget 
for the remainder of that year.
  What the President said to the Republican leaders of the House and 
Senate last week is, if you want to do this continuing resolution bill, 
just keep the government running until you can agree on all the 
appropriations bills, give me a continuing resolution bill until 
December 9, and--if you would--please acknowledge that we are facing a 
public health crisis with the Zika virus. The President raised that 
issue because in February of this year, 7 months ago, he notified 
Congress this was going to happen; that we were going to see these 
mosquitoes carrying the Zika virus infecting people in Puerto Rico and 
in the United States and endangering mothers who were carrying babies. 
In February, the President asked for Congress to give $1.9 billion to 
eradicate the mosquitoes, to lessen the danger, and, equally important, 
to develop a vaccine. This is a vaccine which frankly, when it is 
developed, all of us will want to take, one that protects all of us 
from Zika virus infection in the future.
  What did the Republican-controlled Congress do with the President's 
emergency public health crisis request for Zika? Nothing. They ignored 
it until May of this year, when the Senate finally passed, with 89 
votes, Democrats and Republicans together--it was not $1.9 billion but 
$1.1 billion to deal with the Zika virus, this emergency public health 
crisis. It took 3 months. It should have taken 3 days.
  In May, with 89 votes, we sent a bill from the Senate over to the 
House of Representatives to deal with this crisis. What did they do 
with it? Instead of passing the bipartisan bill the President 
requested, they decided to load it up with politically controversial 
issues that they thought would help them in this election cycle. Listen 
to some of the things they added to this bill, this emergency public 
health crisis bill.
  First, they put in the provision that there was a prohibition of 
funding any efforts by Planned Parenthood on family planning under this 
bill. Why? Because mothers, facing the prospect of a pregnancy and the 
possibility of an infection, would seek family planning help at Planned 
Parenthood. Two million American mothers did last year. They put this 
provision in to defund Planned Parenthood. They knew that was going to 
be a fight. They put it in anyway. They eliminated $500 million from 
the Veterans' Administration funding to process veterans' claims--
something we desperately need. They

[[Page 13627]]

took the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency to monitor 
the chemicals that would be used to kill the mosquitoes. And then, to 
add insult to injury, they put in a provision that said you could 
display Confederate flags in U.S. military cemeteries. What does that 
have to do with the Zika virus? Nothing. It was political gamesmanship. 
It was going nowhere. The President would never sign it under those 
circumstances, and they knew it.
  Now the President says: Give me a clean Zika funding bill and we will 
move forward with this continuing resolution.
  Finally, last week the Senate Republican leader gave us that clean 
bill as part of the CR, and if that were all he did, we would be 
finished, we would be home, but he kept moving forward in other areas 
of controversy. You see, there was terrible flooding in Louisiana, and 
a lot of innocent people were hurt. They lost their homes and 
businesses. It has been a custom in the Congress to rally to the aid of 
victims of disasters. I have voted for that over and over again, for 
maybe every State across the United States, because I knew the day 
would come--and it has--when Illinois would need a helping hand, and I 
wanted to be there for my colleagues.
  So we said this to the leader on the Republican side: If you want to 
help Louisiana--and I do--also help the people living in Flint, MI.
  Remember when their water supply was contaminated? There were 100,000 
people ingesting lead, when there is zero tolerance in our blood 
streams for that. The damage is obvious. Imagine 9,000 children in 
Flint poisoned with lead-contaminated water. That happened. In that 
poor city, they are still drinking water out of bottles every single 
day.
  So we said to the Republican leader: Yes, we care about Louisiana. 
You should care about Flint, MI. If you are going to help Louisiana, 
help those poor people in Flint who are facing this kind of 
contamination.
  He refused. He said: There will be money for Louisiana but no money 
for Michigan.
  Why? We think there are victims in both places, and in the past the 
Senate and Congress have risen to those tragedies and those demands. I 
have done it on a bipartisan basis. It makes no difference to me that 
we have two Republican Senators in Louisiana, and it should make no 
difference to Senator McConnell that we have two Democratic Senators in 
Michigan. Let's think about the Americans who are hurting in both 
places instead of playing political games. But no--Senator McConnell 
said: We will help Louisiana; we will provide no help to Flint, MI. 
That is unfair, and it complicates the situation.
  If that were all he did, it would be bad enough, but Senator 
McConnell has a pet project that he needs to put into this bill. Listen 
to what it is. It is a prohibition at the Securities and Exchange 
Commission that would promulgate a rule to require America's 
corporations to publicly disclose the campaign contributions they are 
making. Under Citizens United, in warped thinking at the Supreme Court, 
it was determined that corporations are persons when it comes to 
contributing money. Look what has happened--a flood of millions of 
dollars. Republicans were boasting that they raised $43 million in 
their super PAC in August, and they got $20 million last week from 
Sheldon Adelson, a rich man who lives out in Nevada. Oh, they are 
rolling in millions, but Senator McConnell is determined to keep secret 
the source of these funds, so he wants to prohibit the Securities and 
Exchange Commission from requiring corporations to simply state 
publicly that they are making these contributions. We do. If 
corporations are persons--individual persons, like myself have to make 
a disclosure of contributions that are made. Why should corporations 
have the benefit of being treated as a person to make contributions but 
not the responsibility facing persons to disclose this publicly? 
Senator McConnell wants to keep that secret, and that is why he 
included it in this legislation and made it as controversial as it is.
  A simple word to the leader on the Republican side and to the wise 
who want to leave and go home and campaign: There is a way out of here. 
Treat the people in Flint, MI, with the same respect we are treating 
the victims in Louisiana. Provide the resources for opioid funding, 
which we desperately need. Leave out this special interest provision 
protecting corporations that want to make political contributions but 
want to keep it secret so nobody knows what they are doing. Make sure 
that we finally--finally--7 months later, adequately fund the Zika 
crisis so we can deal with this and develop a vaccine to protect all of 
America.
  Mr. President, to reiterate, after weeks of bipartisan negotiations 
and significant progress made in settling our differences on a bill to 
keep the government open through December 9, Republican leadership has 
given up on negotiations and instead filed a bill that completely 
ignores the ongoing emergency in Flint, MI. For over a year, the good 
people of Flint have waited for Congress to do our job and address the 
public health emergency that has poisoned 9,000 children and left 
100,000 residents without access to clean and safe water. But once 
again, they are being told to wait. They are being told that the 
emergency their community is facing is somehow less important than 
emergencies other communities around the country are facing.
  Republicans continue to argue that the ongoing crisis in Flint and 
other cities is better addressed through the Water Resources 
Development bill or WRDA. But while the Senate WRDA bill, which we 
passed earlier this month, includes vital funding for Flint, the House 
has made no commitment to help Flint in their bill. We cannot afford to 
wait any longer. The people of Flint have waited far too long already. 
We need to address the emergency in Flint now--in this bill--just as we 
are addressing the emergency in Louisiana.
  It is unbelievable that Congress continues to hold up federal funds 
to help aid these Americans in their time of need. Almost 100,000 
people are currently living without reliable access to clean water in 
their homes and 9,000 children are suffering from lead poisoning. Just 
like those suffering from flooding and tornados, these families did 
nothing to deserve this. And just as the federal government always 
helps when Americans are hit by disasters, it should do so now.
  There were no complaints last May when the Federal government 
declared an emergency and reached out to residents of Texas to help 
them rebuild their lives after a tornado hit. So I see no reason why 
Senators should hesitate to provide funding to Flint, Michigan, to help 
deal with this public health emergency. The crisis in Flint is a 
tragedy that demands Senate action.
  Instead of turning on the tap to make breakfast or take a shower, 
like all of us did this morning, these residents start their day by 
waiting in long lines for bottled water to feed and bathe their 
children, take showers, and stay healthy. And for those elderly or 
disabled residents that cannot make it to the pick-up location, they 
are left with the option of continuing to use water that they know is 
poisoning their bodies with lead and causing numerous health issues.
  The lead contamination levels in the City mean that an entire 
generation of children are in danger of suffering from irreversible 
brain damage, lower IQ scores, developmental delays, and behavior 
issues for the rest of their lives.
  This truly is a tragedy that requires federal support.
  And what is frightening, is that Flint is not the only city battling 
with lead issues, nor is it an isolated incident. Elevated lead 
contamination levels have been reported in cities nationwide--including 
in Ohio, South Carolina, New Jersey, Mississippi, and Washington, DC. 
In my own home state of Illinois, Chicagoans have been battling with 
lead contamination in their homes for years.
  Recent articles in the Chicago Tribune have highlighted this 
struggle. In 2012, an EPA study found high levels of lead in the 
drinking water of several Chicago homes--despite the City's use of 
anticorrosive chemicals to treat the

[[Page 13628]]

water. And since then, at least 179 young children in federally-
subsidized homes in Chicago have suffered lead poisoning stemming from 
exposure to lead-based paint.
  These issues have led to Illinois having some of the country's 
highest rates of children with elevated blood lead blood levels, which, 
unfortunately, have hit low-income and minority communities the 
hardest.
  Thankfully, however, lead levels in Illinois and across the nation 
have not risen to the severity of those in Flint.
  But the widespread nature of these issues does show that we need to 
get serious about investing in infrastructure programs that address the 
housing, environmental, and public health aspects of preventing lead 
contamination in American homes. That is why I was proud to join 
Senators from both sides of the aisle in supporting a bipartisan deal 
to address the ongoing lead crisis in Flint and other communities 
across the country and ensure all Americans have access to safe 
drinking water.
  The Senate's bipartisan WRDA bill provides $220 million in direct 
emergency assistance to Flint and other communities facing similar 
drinking water emergencies. It provides $1.4 billion over five years to 
help small and disadvantaged communities comply with the Safe Drinking 
Water Act. The bill modernizes our State Revolving Loan Fund program 
and provides $300 million in grants for communities to replace lead 
service lines. And because we are also seeing high levels of lead in 
our schools' water, the bill authorizes $100 million for additional 
lead testing in schools.
  This bill also addresses many of the issues that I raised in the 
Lead-Safe Housing for Kids Act that I introduced with Senator Menendez 
and the CLEAR Act that I introduced with Senator Cardin, two bills that 
would ensure our children are protected from the dangerous effects of 
lead in our water and our housing.
  While we still haven't figured out our differences over aid for 
communities affected by lead contamination, Democrats and Republicans 
have finally agreed to address the Zika public health emergency in this 
bill.
  In February, the President requested $1.9 billion to fight the Zika 
virus. In May, the Senate overwhelmingly passed a bipartisan bill to 
provide $1.1 billion in emergency funding to combat this virus, but 
then partisan politics took over. Republicans insisted on attaching a 
variety of controversial policy riders to the Zika bill, from 
attempting to overturn provisions of the Clean Water Act to trying to 
block money from going to Planned Parenthood health centers.
  Thankfully, 7 months after the President first made his request, 
common-sense is prevailing and Republicans have finally dropped their 
outrageous demands to load this bill up with contentious and extraneous 
items. I wish it had happened sooner. The bill before us today includes 
$1.1 billion in funding to help States and our Federal health agencies 
properly respond to the ongoing Zika epidemic. This money will be used 
for vaccine development, mosquito control, and the delivery of needed 
health care.
  What the bill before us today does NOT include are ill-conceived 
partisan poison pills. As of last week, there were more than 23,000 
reported cases of Zika in the United States and its territories, 
including more than 2,000 pregnant women. We are 7 months overdue in 
passing this emergency funding. It is my hope that pregnant women and 
children won't have to wait much longer.
  While this bill is missing vital funding for Flint, Leader McConnell 
had no problem including controversial language that limits the 
Security and Exchange Commission's ability to require disclosure of 
corporate political spending.
  In 2010, the Supreme Court issued a far-reaching decision in Citizens 
United v. Federal Election Commission. On a divided 5-4 vote, the Court 
struck down years of precedent and held that the First Amendment 
permitted corporations to spend freely from their treasuries to 
influence elections. As a result of Citizens United and the series of 
decisions that followed in its wake, special interests and wealthy, 
well-connected campaign donors have so far poured more than $2 billion 
dollars of outside spending into recent Federal elections, including 
2016 races.
  In the years since Citizens United, several of my colleagues and I 
have called for the SEC to initiate a rulemaking requiring public 
companies to disclose their political spending to shareholders. More 
than 1.2 million securities experts, institutional and individual 
investors, and members of the public have asked the SEC for a 
disclosure rule.
  Such a rulemaking would bring much needed transparency to the U.S. 
political process. Shareholders deserve to know when outside spending 
in political campaigns comes from the coffers of a company they have 
invested in.
  Unfortunately, last year, this provision limiting the SEC's 
rulemaking authority was slipped into the omnibus appropriations bill, 
which we had to pass in order to fund the government for the 2016 
fiscal year. We should not allow this rider to continue to strangle the 
SEC's authority.
  Despite weeks of bipartisan progress on a deal to fund the 
government, the Republicans have decided to move forward on a bill that 
continues to ignore the ongoing crisis in Flint and other cities like 
Chicago. Congress and the Federal government's primary responsibility 
is to protect the American people. And just as the Federal government 
always helps when Americans are hit by disasters, it should do so now.
  Like the communities in Louisiana suffering from devastating 
flooding, the people of Flint deserve our help in responding to this 
public health emergency. A deal to provide funding for Flint has 
already passed the Senate with overwhelming bipartisan support. We need 
to address the emergency in Flint NOW, in this bill. The people of 
Flint have waited long enough.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the time until 11:30 
a.m. will be controlled by the majority.
  The Senator from Wyoming.


                               OBAMACARE

  Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, the Senate minority leader, Senator 
Reid, came to the floor a couple of days ago and talked about health 
care. He said: If people would just look at the newspaper, they would 
see that ObamaCare has changed America--in his words--for the better.
  Well, millions of Americans do pick up the newspaper. I hope many of 
them saw the Presiding Officer's article in today's Wall Street Journal 
about some of the travel and things he has seen regarding our Nation's 
security. But I would like to point out to Senator Reid that there have 
been headlines in the papers repeatedly, including one in the Reno 
Gazette-Journal this month, that said his home State--``Nevada ranked 
48th in healthcare by finance website.'' This from a finance Web site. 
They are talking about just how bad the health care law has been for 
the people of his home State of Nevada. It was about a new survey that 
looked at things such as health care costs and access to care and how 
it impacts people at home. So if ObamaCare is so great--at least as 
great as Senator Reid says it is--then why is his home State ranked 
almost dead last?
  Look, Americans are seeing headlines like the one that appeared on 
the front page of the Washington Times the day the Senator came to the 
floor. Had he picked it up and looked at it on the way to the floor, he 
would have seen the headline on the front page saying ``Failures of 
Obamacare. . . . '' This was on the front page the day he came to the 
floor and said: Check out the headlines. The article says: ``Democrats 
see need for fallback plan.'' They need a fallback plan because this 
health care law has been so devastating to people all across this 
country. If ObamaCare is so great, why do the Democrats need a fallback 
plan?
  Look, people across the country are seeing headlines like this every 
day.
  A Washington Post headline: ``Health-care exchange sign-ups fall 
short of forecasts.''

[[Page 13629]]

  The New York Times: ``ObamaCare Options? In Many Parts of Country, 
Only One Insurer Will Remain.''
  Another New York Times article: ``Cost of health law's plans set to 
rise more sharply.''
  This is from the paper The Hill: ``Dems to GOP: Help us fix 
ObamaCare.''
  They didn't turn to Republicans for solutions and ideas when they 
forced it through on a party-line vote. They didn't listen to us and 
our concerns about the impact of this law on the families of this 
country. Now they come to us and ask us to help them fix the mess they 
have made.
  USA TODAY--I would point out to Senator Reid--``Obamacare rate hikes 
rattle consumers, could threaten enrollment.''
  The New York Times: ``The Incredible Shrinking Obamacare.''
  Senator Reid came to the floor and made his statement just a couple 
of days ago. Let me point out a few other headlines that have arrived 
since then.
  Bloomberg, Friday: ``Failing Obamacare Nonprofit Co-Ops Add to `Death 
Spiral' Fears.''
  You don't even have to turn to the newspapers; you could have turned 
on the radio--National Public Radio, just this past Friday, talking 
about people who are buying insurance for their insurance because the 
ObamaCare program is so bad for them personally.
  Sunday's New York Times, in the business section: ``Why Obamacare 
Markets Are in Crisis.''
  I would suggest the minority leader look at today's newspaper in 
Indiana regarding Indiana University health plans. ``IU Health Plans 
quit Obamacare exchange, citing `heightened financial uncertainty.'''
  Those are the headlines people are seeing all across the country. So 
I am not sure exactly what newspapers the minority leader is reading, 
but he is not reading the same papers Americans all across the country 
are reading.
  All across the country, people are hearing about their rates going 
up--in Georgia, 33 percent; Illinois, 45 percent; Tennessee, 59 
percent--and people are feeling the pinch from this rising cost of the 
Obama health care law. It is hurting the people who buy insurance 
through ObamaCare exchanges, and it is hurting the people who get their 
insurance through their jobs. A new report by the Kaiser Family 
Foundation says that for people who get their insurance at work, the 
deductibles have risen four times faster than the premiums did. So it 
is not just the premiums going up, but the deductibles are going up. 
And all of those are new costs as a result of the health care law. The 
American people are feeling it in their wallets, and millions of 
Americans are rejecting ObamaCare insurance because they know it is not 
a good value for them personally.
  According to one article, 8 million people face tax penalties this 
year for not buying ObamaCare coverage. These are people who can't 
afford this expensive, second-rate insurance, or they do not think it 
is right for them or their family. The Democrats who wrote this law and 
who are now asking for help in ``fixing it'' do not really care; they 
just want people to write their checks to the IRS, their penalties 
because of the mandates of the law--the taxes, the fines. These are for 
people who have no options.
  No options is exactly the situation most Americans are facing. Major 
insurance companies have decided to leave most of the ObamaCare 
markets. Just look at the insurers who are fleeing the ObamaCare 
exchange. Humana is selling coverage in 19 States this year; it is 
going to be in just 11 States next year. Look at UnitedHealthcare--in 
34 States this year but down to 3 next year. Aetna is going from 
selling ObamaCare plans in 15 States this year to just 4 States next 
year.
  On November 1, millions of Americans will go to sign up for ObamaCare 
and they will find their insurance plan has disappeared. Companies are 
running for the exits. The program is collapsing. It is in a death 
spiral. And so far, of the 23 co-ops under the health care law, 17 of 
them have failed, including the one in the home State of Senator Reid, 
Nevada, which went out of business at the end of last year.
  With all these companies shutting down and dropping out, people 
living in one-third of the country are going to be left with just one 
option for ObamaCare coverage in November. One option is no choice. It 
is not a marketplace, it is a monopoly.
  Under ObamaCare, we have seen medical costs skyrocketing and people 
losing their insurance. So it is no surprise that there is enormous 
anger and anxiety about the health care law, to the point that in a 
Gallup poll earlier this month, 29 percent of American families say 
they have actually been hurt personally by the health care law and only 
18 percent say they have been helped.
  Mr. President, Republicans said this was what was going to happen. 
Democrats ignored them. They ignored our concerns to try to improve 
health care for all Americans. Democrats went into a back room, behind 
closed doors in Harry Reid's office, they wrote a law they passed with 
no Republican support, and this is the result.
  We have offered direct solutions to the problems. We have offered 
relief for the American people. My colleague from Arizona, Senator 
McCain, who is now on the floor, has offered a bill to provide that 
relief for people who are hit with mandates, taxes, fines, and 
penalties because of the mandates of a law that is too expensive, too 
costly, and hurting American families. I am proud to cosponsor Senator 
McCain's legislation to provide that relief.
  So when people say ``Will you work with Democrats?'' I will say this: 
If Democrats want to work on a plan that provides nothing but more 
ObamaCare and more Federal control, count me out, but if they want to 
work on a plan, such as the plan I have introduced with Senator Graham 
from South Carolina and Senator Ayotte to provide opportunity, freedom, 
choice, and flexibility at the State level, to empower individuals in 
States, then count me in.
  But, Mr. President, when you look at a program that is impacting 
America, with 29 percent of people having been hurt by the President 
and his law and only 18 percent helped, I would say to the President of 
the United States: You shouldn't have had to hurt so many good people 
while trying to help those who didn't have insurance.
  This is a law that needs to be repealed and replaced, and right now I 
am proud to stand with Senator McCain in his efforts to provide relief 
to the families who feel betrayed by this President and this law.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Flake). The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Wyoming, who 
continues to be the voice of reason and the voice for so many millions 
of Americans who feel betrayed by ObamaCare--who have not been given 
their choice of a doctor if they wanted a doctor, who have not been 
able to keep the policy that the President promised they would be able 
to keep, period. He is the voice of those fellow citizens of mine who, 
in all counties but one in my home State of Arizona, have one choice--
not a choice of their doctor, not a choice of their health care policy, 
but one, and one only. And now they are looking at as much as a 65-
percent increase in the rate of their premiums beginning the next 1st 
of November--disgraceful.
  I thank the doctor. I thank my colleague and friend from Wyoming.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to address the Senate for 30 
minutes as in morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to engage in a 
colloquy with my colleague from South Carolina, Senator Graham.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Genocide in Syria

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, last night was one of the most watched 
political events in American history: the debate between Donald Trump 
and Secretary Clinton. A lot of issues were addressed or not addressed, 
depending on your point of view. But the stunning aspect of this, to 
me, is there was not a single comment about the genocide taking place 
in Syria as we speak--not a comment about this terrible situation, 
which has taken the lives of over

[[Page 13630]]

400,000 innocent men, women, and children in Syria, driven 6 million 
into refugee status, destabilized the European Union, and continues to 
this day in an endless flood. I think the American people deserve 
better than what they got last night, to be honest. So the beat goes 
on, the genocide goes on, and the slaughter goes on--only at an 
increased tempo.
  From today's Wall Street Journal: ``Syria Defies Calls to End 
Offensive.'' Of course they defy calls to end the offensive because 
their whole job is to take Aleppo, consolidate their control, kill off 
anybody who is in opposition, and then declare a cessation of 
hostilities once they have solidified their position and slaughtered 
thousands more.
  Whatever happened to the United States' commitment that Bashar al-
Assad had to leave power? Obviously, that is not happening, and it is 
being abetted by our intrepid Secretary of State. But it is not the 
fault of the Secretary of State; it is the fault of the President of 
the United States. ```It would be diplomatic malpractice' not to pursue 
talks, Mr. Kerry said.''
  ``It would be diplomatic malpractice.''
  One of the greatest diplomats that I have ever had the honor of 
knowing is a man by the name of George Shultz, one of the major reasons 
the Cold War ended and we won. I would like to give a quote in direct 
contradiction to Mr. Kerry's continuous quest to bend the knee and hope 
that Vladimir Putin will agree with him and stop the slaughter in 
Syria--time after time after time. Here is what Secretary Shultz said 
on diplomacy:

       Americans have sometimes tended to think that power and 
     diplomacy are two distinct alternatives. This reflects a 
     fundamental misunderstanding. The truth is, power and 
     diplomacy must always go together, or we will accomplish very 
     little in this world. Power must always be guided by purpose. 
     At the same time, the hard reality is that diplomacy not 
     backed by strength will always be ineffectual at best, 
     dangerous at worst.

  I wish the Secretary of State would read what one of the great 
diplomats and leaders of our time, Secretary George Shultz, said.
  Meanwhile, the slaughter goes on. Mr. President, I ask unanimous 
consent that the editorial, ``As Aleppo burns,'' be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

               [From the Washington Post, Sept. 27, 2016]

                            As Aleppo Burns

       ``WHAT RUSSIA is sponsoring and doing'' in the Syrian city 
     of Aleppo ``is barbarism,'' U.S. Ambassador to the United 
     Nations Samantha Power, said on Sunday, She's right: For 
     days, Russian and Syrian planes have rained bombs--including 
     white phosphorus, cluster munitions and ``bunker-busters'' 
     designed to penetrate basements--on the rebel-held side of 
     the city. Hundreds of civilians have been killed; as many as 
     half are children, U.N. special envoy Staffan de Mistura 
     described ``new heights of horror.'' Ms. Power said that 
     ``instead of helping get lifesaving aid to civilians, Russia 
     and [Syria] are bombing the humanitarian convoys, hospitals 
     and first responders who are trying desperately to keep 
     people alive.''
       It goes without saying that this war-crimes-rich offensive, 
     which Syria's U.N. ambassador said is aimed at recapturing 
     east Aleppo, has shredded the Obama administration's attempt 
     to win Russian and Syrian compliance with a cessation of 
     hostilities. So naturally reporters asked senior officials as 
     the ``attack was getting underway how the United States would 
     respond. ``I don't think . . . this is the time to say where 
     we will go from here,'' one answered. Said another: ``We're 
     waiting to see what the Russians come back with.''
       In other words: Hem, haw.
       By Monday, the administration's response seemed clear: It 
     will hotly condemn the assault on Aleppo, but do absolutely 
     nothing to stop it. On the contrary, Secretary of State John 
     F. Kerry insisted he will continue to go back to the regime 
     of Vladimir Putin with diplomatic offers, hoping it will 
     choose to stop bombing. ``The United States makes absolutely 
     no apology for going the extra mile to try and ease the 
     suffering of the Syrian people,'' he grandly declared after a 
     meeting Thursday on Syria. By ``extra mile,'' he doesn't mean 
     actual U.S. steps to protect civilians--just more futile and 
     debasing appeals to Moscow.
       The Putin and Bashar al-Assad regimes are well aware that 
     the only U.S. action President Obama has authorized is 
     diplomatic, and that they are therefore under no pressure to 
     alter their behavior. They already obtained, via Mr. Kerry, 
     U.S. agreement to the principle that the Assad regime should 
     remain in power while the United States and Russia join in 
     fighting those rebels deemed to be terrorists. The regime 
     then took advantage of a mistaken bombing of Syrian soldiers 
     in eastern Syria to launch the assault on Aleppo, and Russia 
     joined in. If it succeeds, Damascus will have essentially won 
     the civil war and will have no real need for the negotiations 
     Mr. Kerry says the cease-fire should lead to. If the 
     offensive stalls, Mr. Putin can send Foreign Minister Sergei 
     Lavrov back to renew the deal with Mr. Kerry. Either way, 
     Russia wins.
       The losers are the civilian trapped in eastern Aleppo--
     250,000 to 275,000 human beings--who are cut off from 
     supplies of food and medicine and being bombed mercilessly. 
     They are being offered the same choice the regime has 
     successfully imposed on other towns across the country: 
     surrender or starve. Those who try to approach the evacuation 
     corridors Russia says have been established are shot at. They 
     are, indeed, victims of barbarism--but the rhetoric of U.S. 
     diplomats, and continued petitioning to Mr Putin, won't help 
     them much.

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, here we are:

       What Russia is sponsoring and doing in the Syrian city of 
     Aleppo ``is barbarism,'' U.S. Ambassador to the United 
     Nations Samantha Power said on Sunday. She's right: For days, 
     Russian and Syrian planes have rained bombs--including white 
     phosphorus, cluster munitions and ``bunker-busters'' designed 
     to penetrate basements--on the rebel-held side of the city. 
     Hundreds of civilians have been killed; as many as half are 
     children. . . . Ms. Powers said that ``instead of helping get 
     lifesaving aid to civilians, Russia and [Syria] are bombing 
     the humanitarian convoys, hospitals and first responders who 
     are trying desperately to keep people alive.
       By Monday, the administration's response seemed clear: It 
     will hotly condemn the assault on Aleppo, but do absolutely 
     nothing to stop it. On the contrary, Secretary of State John 
     F. Kerry insisted he will continue to go back to the regime 
     of Vladimir Putin with diplomatic offers, hoping it will 
     choose to stop bombing. ``The United States makes absolutely 
     no apology for going the extra mile to try and ease the 
     suffering of the Syrian people,'' he grandly declared after a 
     meeting Thursday on Syria. By ``extra mile,'' he doesn't mean 
     actual U.S. steps to protect civilians--just more futile and 
     debasing appeals to Moscow.

  We are now treated to seeing the Secretary of State of the most 
powerful Nation on Earth on bended knee, going to Moscow, begging his 
friend Lavrov to stop this slaughter. Did anybody not see the picture 
of the little boy covered with dirt and blood? Did no one see that?

       The Putin and Bashar al-Assad regimes are well aware that 
     the only U.S. action President Obama has authorized is 
     diplomatic, and that they are therefore under no pressure to 
     alter their behavior. They already obtained, via Mr. Kerry, 
     U.S. agreement to the principle that the Assad regime should 
     remain in power while the United States and Russia join in 
     fighting those rebels deemed to be terrorists.

  Remember, the President of the United States said: It's not a matter 
of whether Bashar al-Assad will leave but a matter of when.

       If it succeeds, Damascus will have essentially won the 
     civil war and will have no real need for the negotiations Mr. 
     Kerry says the cease-fire should lead to. If the offensive 
     stalls, Mr. Putin can send Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov 
     back to renew the deal with Mr. Kerry. Either way, Russia 
     wins.
       The losers are the civilians trapped in eastern Aleppo--
     250,000 to 275,000 human beings--who are cut off from 
     supplies of food and medicine being bombed mercilessly. They 
     are being offered the same choice the regime has successfully 
     imposed on other towns across the country: Surrender or 
     starve. Those who try to approach the evacuation corridors 
     Russia says have been established are shot at. They are, 
     indeed, victims of barbarism, but the rhetoric of U.S. 
     diplomats and continued petitioning to Mr. Putin will not 
     help them much.

  I don't claim to be an academician, but I am a student of history. 
There was a guy named Calgacus, who, talking to his people who were 
fighting against the Romans, once described the Roman conquest of 
Carthage--where not one stone was left on top of the other, the ground 
was salted, and the Carthaginians were slaughtered. He described it: 
They made a desert, and they called it peace.
  We are seeing a repetition of history. My friends, Mr. Assad, Mr. 
Putin, the Iranians, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, Hezbollah are 
making a desert, and they will call it peace. This is one of the most 
shameful chapters in American history.

[[Page 13631]]

  I ask my friend and colleague, how many hospitals, markets, schools, 
and playgrounds do Russian and Syrian regime aircraft have to bomb 
before we realize that Putin and Assad are not interested in stopping 
the violence? They are interested in victory; they are not interested 
in stopping the violence. How many aid warehouses and U.N. humanitarian 
convoys do they have to destroy before we realize Putin and Assad are 
not interested in delivering aid to those in need? Four hundred 
thousand Syrian civilians have been murdered. Six million are refugees. 
When will the President of the United States do what is necessary to 
stop this slaughter before they make it a desert?
  Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I thank the Senator for his passion and 
caring for the people of Aleppo and Syria. History will judge Senator 
McCain well. I am proud to be by his side.
  But let's be honest with each other. It is not just the Obama 
administration that is the problem here. Where is the United Nations? A 
convoy carrying aid to Aleppo was bombed, and we all believe it was by 
the Russians. What has the U.N. done? What about the countries in the 
region that border Syria? What do they know? Our friends in France have 
been attacked several times based on ISIL's ability to project wars by 
having the caliphate in Syria. They have dropped bombs. All of us have 
used air power. Where is Trump? If you can understand what he would do 
differently, I would love to hear it. I don't understand it. I can tell 
you this, Secretary Clinton really disappointed me when she said ``no 
ground forces in Iraq and Syria.''
  Mr. McCAIN. May I ask my colleague, when former Secretary of State 
Clinton said ``no ground troops in Iraq or Syria,'' do you think that 
means the 4,500 that are there now have to be withdrawn? Does she 
really believe that you can destroy ISIS with air power alone, which 
was basically what she said last night?
  Mr. GRAHAM. Yes, I agree. We have over 5,000 troops on the ground in 
Iraq, and if we count the people who come and go, it is closer to 
7,000. So from their point of view, I think that is a pretty offensive 
statement. We have lost one SEAL, and other people are definitely at 
risk.
  We live in an interesting time. It is probably much like the 1930s, 
when Hitler was building up. I am not saying al-Assad is Hitler, and I 
am not saying Putin is Hitler. But I am saying there is evil on the 
march, and most people are not doing anything about it. If you are in 
Aleppo right now, you feel as the Jewish people must have felt in the 
1930s--and other countries who were being overrun by evil--when a lot 
of people just stood along the sidelines and issued statements.
  To Samantha Powers, whom I have known and actually personally like 
her: Do you think anybody listens to you, Samantha? Do you think 
anybody cares what you say? Because it is just all words. You have been 
up there for months now, and every ceasefire agreement has been broken.
  To my good friend John Kerry: You said it would be diplomatic 
malpractice not to try to get a ceasefire solution. At what point does 
it become malpractice to misread the person you are talking to? At what 
point will you understand that the Russians are not interested in a 
ceasefire agreement? They want to install al-Assad in a military 
fashion so that he cannot be overtaken by power, which means they win.
  So to me, the real crime here is that the world, not just Obama, has 
let this happen, and to the people in this body.
  Several years ago, we were in an authorization-to-use-military-force 
debate after al-Assad used chemical weapons in violation of the redline 
that President Obama drew. To Senator McCain's credit--and I went with 
him during Labor Day several years ago. The President called us up and 
said: I want to take action because it is clear to us that al-Assad 
used chemical weapons. We went outside the Oval Office in the driveway 
and stood by our President, called the Speaker of the House, Mr. 
Boehner, who stood with the President. There was a lot of Republican 
support for the idea that the President must act to put this brutal man 
back in check. That was early in the week. By Friday, President Obama 
takes a stroll in the Rose Garden with Denis McDonough, and, all of a 
sudden, now we are coming to Congress.
  I have yet to get a call. I read it in the paper. When it came to 
Congress, it completely melted down. People on our side objected to the 
use of force, saying we would be the Air Force for Al Qaeda. People on 
our side did not understand what it meant to draw a red line and not 
use some force.
  There is plenty of blame to go around. People on the Democratic side 
almost never come to the floor and challenge what is going on in Syria. 
President Obama is getting a complete pass, except from pockets, like 
Senator McCain and every now and then an editorial. Why? Most people 
don't care about Syria because it seems distant.
  When you talk about the young boy, it breaks our heart, and then we 
move on. Most people think we can't get involved ever again in the 
Middle East because it is just hopeless over there. Here is what I 
would suggest to you that we learn: If you let Syria continue to 
deteriorate, you will regret it. The King of Jordan, one of our best 
allies, is being overrun with Syrian refugees. One in five children in 
Lebanon is a Syrian refugee. This war will never end until America 
leads.
  Back to Obama--you and your administration are very deceitful when it 
comes to foreign policy. You are the ones who told us, as to Benghazi, 
that this was a protest caused by a hateful video rather than an 
organized terrorist attack, for weeks. In the debate last night, 
Secretary Clinton said that the reason we had no troops in Iraq was 
because the Iraqis did not want them and would not agree to leave some 
troops behind.
  All I can say is that is a lie. I know that to be a lie because I was 
called by her before the decision to leave was made, and she asked that 
I, Senator McCain, and Senator Lieberman go to Iraq to talk to the 
parties about a follow-on force. We did. We went to Prime Minister 
Maliki, President Barzani of the Kurds, and Mr. Allawi, who was 
representing the Shia group--the Iraqiya Party, I believe it is called.
  The bottom line is that we left there with an understanding that all 
three groups would work with each other to have a follow-on force 
because they understood the need for it. This is the moment I will 
never forget as long as I live. During the meeting with Prime Minister 
Maliki, when it was my turn to ask him questions, he turned to me 
before I could speak and said: How many troops are you talking about 
leaving?
  I turned to General Austin, who was the commander, and Ambassador 
Jeffrey, who was the Ambassador at the time, and I said: General, what 
is the answer to the Prime Minister's question?
  He said: We are still working on that.
  Here is the truth. There never was a protest outside the consulate in 
Benghazi. It was always a terrorist attack. They should never have had 
the Ambassador there to begin with, and they left him hanging.
  Here is the truth. The Obama administration wanted to leave. They 
wanted to get to zero to fulfill a campaign promise. The reason the 
general could not answer Prime Minister Maliki's question is because 
the White House was trying to get the numbers down to the point where 
it wouldn't matter if he left anybody because they were so low.
  You can say a lot about Trump. You can say a lot about Republicans, 
and a lot of it is true. You can say a lot about President Obama and 
Hillary Clinton when it comes to Iraq. But the one thing you can't say 
is that it was the Iraqis' fault that we left.
  The reason I will not tolerate that is because too many people fought 
and died to get Iraq back in a better place. The surge did work, and 
they held it as a success.
  Back to Syria, if you don't realize that we have several hundred 
people on the ground today in Syria, you are dishonoring them. If you 
don't realize that the strategy Obama has come up with will never work, 
you are not doing your homework. The people we are training to take 
ISIL down and to hold

[[Page 13632]]

Raqqa after they take ISIL down are YPG Kurds. That may not mean 
anything to you, but it means a lot to the region.
  The Kurdish element that is being trained cannot hold Raqqa, cannot 
liberate Raqqa. General Dunford, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, said 
that. The people we are relying on to destroy ISIL can't take them down 
and hold the territory because it is an Arab town. As to the people we 
are training to fight ISIL, the vast majority of the force has no 
interest in going after Assad.
  If you leave Assad in power, the war never ends. Some 450,000 people 
have been slaughtered by Assad's forces--mostly through barrel bombing 
and brutal tactics. There is no plan to create a military counter push 
coming from the Syrians themselves to create negotiating space. Without 
power, there is no diplomacy. The force to destroy ISIL will never be 
successful in holding the territory. The force we are training to 
destroy ISIL has no interest in going after Assad. If you leave Assad 
in power, this never ends.
  This whole foreign policy approach of the Obama administration is 
ill-conceived, shortsighted, and deceitful, and they know everything I 
am saying is true. There are people in the White House who know that 
the reason we left Iraq was because of politics in the White House. 
There are people in the White House who know--and the Pentagon who 
know--that the Kurdish force being trained can't get the job done. They 
are just trying to buy time until the next President comes along.
  All I can say about Syria is that it seems to be a faraway place with 
strange sounding names. It seems to be something we shouldn't get 
involved in, in the minds of a lot of people. The one thing I would 
challenge you to think about is that the last time powers gathered up 
to murder and butcher hundreds of thousands of people, it eventually 
mattered to us. It is going to matter to you sooner than you think 
because all of these children who lost their parents and all of these 
parents who lost their children are looking at us, and they are going 
to hate our guts, along with the world community at large, because we 
sat on the sidelines and watched it happen.
  Come with me and Senator McCain to a refugee camp and look into these 
kids' eyes. I see broken-hearted children who need somebody to help 
them and a good investment. The terrorists see a recruiting 
opportunity, a literal gift from the world at large. You may not think 
it will affect you, but I promise you that the policies of the Barack 
Obama administration--when it comes to Syria--are going to haunt the 
world for generations if we don't do something about it soon and change 
course.
  Mr. McCAIN. My colleague mentioned this meeting that we had with 
Maliki about maintaining a residual force. I would also like to point 
out to my colleague that the reason given by Obama and then-Secretary 
of State Clinton was that we couldn't get a status of forces agreement 
with the Iraqi government, which then would not make it tenable for our 
troops to remain. We now have 4,000 or 5,000--whatever it is--there. 
Where is the status of forces agreement that was so necessary then? It 
is not there because they wanted out.
  By the way, I believe it was the President of the United States who 
said we are leaving behind the most peaceful, prosperous, and 
democratic Iraq in its history. Last night, Mr. Trump was right when he 
said that Al Qaeda went to Syria and became ISIS. We had Al Qaeda 
defeated. It was over.
  I would also remind my colleague that one of the most consequential 
hearings in the history of the Armed Services Committee was when we 
were about to have a resolution through the Congress calling for the 
withdrawal of all troops because our strategy had failed. There was no 
strategy. The Senator from South Carolina and I called for the 
resignation and the firing of the then-Secretary of Defense of our own 
President, George W. Bush, because we were failing. Then along came the 
surge and David Petraeus. It was then-Senator Clinton at that hearing 
who said--and whoever wrote it for her, in clever style: I would have 
to have a willing suspension of disbelief in order to think that the 
surge will work.
  She was wrong then, and she is wrong now because the surge did work--
thanks to the sacrifice of so much precious American blood at places 
like Fallujah. Then, we had it won. Then, the worst lie that I have 
seen in my time in the Senate was this: Well, we couldn't have stayed 
because we had to withdraw.
  That is a lie. We could have stayed. The Senator from South Carolina 
just described the meeting we had with Maliki. The fact is clear. Al 
Qaeda then moved to Syria. It became ISIS. Now we have seen the 
consequences of the abject failure of that administration, that 
President, and that Secretary of State. You cannot deny the facts.
  I would say to my friend from South Carolina that this didn't have to 
happen. But what is happening now, as a consequence of that failure--as 
much as we want to revisit history--is that we could stop it now. We 
could stop it now. We could declare a no-fly zone. We could have a 
100,000-person force--90 percent of them from Sunni Arab countries--and 
go into Raqqa and take them. We could tell Bashar Assad that he has to 
stop the slaughter. The barrel bombs have to stop, or we will take 
their planes out of the air.
  You know what would happen? The next time one of them was shot down 
after dropping bombs and these terrible weapons on innocent civilians, 
it would stop.
  Mr. GRAHAM. You have been a fighter pilot in combat, flying for your 
Nation, and you know what it is like to risk your life. I would say 
this. If we had an American President who would tell the Russian 
President that we are going to train forces inside of Syria to replace 
Assad because Assad must go for the benefit of the region and the world 
at large, and if you come after the forces we trained, then you put 
your own people at risk, they wouldn't come. If you shot down one 
Syrian jet that was trying to bomb innocent people or the people we are 
training, it would be hard to get the next pilot to fly. That is the 
fact. That is a fact, I think.
  Here is the other fact. We are doing none of that. We are watching 
people get slaughtered. Here is the question for those who want to be 
President and for this body. You are never going to win in Iraq again 
unless you have some troops left behind this time. Here is the 
question. Let's say we liberate Mosul, and that is going to be hard to 
do with the number of troops we have on the ground, because every 
American soldier is a force multiplier--a trainer, an adviser bringing 
capability to the fight that the Iraqis don't have themselves. So 
everyone we have over there, within reason, ensures the demise of ISIL 
and accelerates the chance of destroying ISIL and not having to rely on 
the Shia militia from Iran.
  If you are worried about Iran being the big winner in Iraq, you 
should be because they are. The only way you are going to stop this 
dynamic is to have more American forces--somewhere around 10,000, and 
we are getting close at about 7,000 now--and they have to stay behind 
to keep Iraq from falling apart again. That is my humble opinion.
  John McCain has been far more right than he has been wrong. Everybody 
tells us that every time we suggest something, that would create a lot 
of problems. All I can say is this: At what point do you realize we 
have a lot of problems? This thing is going to get worse if it doesn't 
get better, and the only way for it to get better is to do something 
different. The 5,000 troops are appreciated. Incrementally, they are 
doing what we suggested 3 years ago. We are still not there.
  But look at Syria. Here is my warning to the American people and to 
the world at large. What we have on the ground in Syria cannot possibly 
destroy ISIL and hold the territory. You are going to need a lot more 
troops from the region who would be welcomed in the area in question. 
The Kurds cannot liberate Raqqa. They cannot destroy ISIL. They cannot 
hold the territory. Until you get regional forces involved, this will 
never work.

[[Page 13633]]

You will never have any diplomatic solution until there is military 
pressure put on Assad.
  Currently, if you are joining the American effort to destroy ISIL, 
you are prohibited from going after Assad. The people in Syria and the 
region want two things--the destruction of ISIL and the removal of 
Assad, who has been the butcher of Damascus. We are not providing the 
second. The Russians and the Iranians are all in behind Assad. We have 
abandoned the people who joined our cause years ago. Four years ago 
Assad was on the ropes. Obama blinked; the rest is history. Going 
forward, if we don't have a different ground component in Syria, we 
will never destroy ISIL and hold the territory, and we will never end 
the war without putting military pressure on Assad, and that is going 
to require a regional commitment with an American component. If you 
don't do that, another 9/11 is coming here because they have the 
ability to plan and project force. We have seen it in Paris and other 
places. I am not talking about one or two people; I am talking about a 
group of people who can do a lot of damage to the United States. Every 
day that we let Syria get worse, every day that ISIL enjoys the ability 
to operate, the longer it takes to get them destroyed will put us more 
at risk. This strategy will not work.
  Secretary Clinton's approach is no different than Obama's. She is for 
a no-fly zone, and I give her credit for that, but if you don't realize 
we need a new ground component in Syria, then you are giving ISIL the 
time they need to send their forces throughout the world, including 
here. If we don't stop them over there, they are coming here, and our 
plan to stop them over there will never work unless we change it.
  Mr. McCAIN. I will leave my colleagues again with the words of former 
Secretary of State George Shultz:

       The truth is, power and diplomacy must always go together, 
     or we will accomplish very little in this world. Power must 
     always be guided by purpose. At the same time, the hard 
     reality is that diplomacy not backed by strength will always 
     be ineffectual at best, dangerous at worst.

  That is the situation we are in today.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. RUBIO. 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. RUBIO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be recognized as 
in morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                       Remembering Jose Fernandez

  Mr. RUBIO. Mr. President, I awoke early Sunday morning to familiar 
news in Florida. Three boaters had lost their lives in an accident, and 
at the time their names were not known. Unfortunately this happens 
quite often, especially at night and during this time of the year. A 
couple of hours later, as I was driving to church with my family early 
that morning, I got a text that I didn't get to look at until we had 
parked, and it basically said that Jose Fernandez, the all-star pitcher 
from the Miami Marlins, had lost his life in a boating accident. 
Immediately I was able to connect the two events and realized that one 
of the three boaters who had lost their lives in the boating accident 
was Jose Fernandez--and his two friends, Emilio Macias and Eduardo 
Rivero.
  His death at just 24 years of age has obviously devastated his 
family, but it has also had an extraordinary impact on our community. 
It has shaken the Miami Marlins organization and its fans. It has 
rocked Tampa, FL, where he played in high school, and South Florida 
communities where he lived and was just starting to make his mark. It 
has had a deep impact on immigrant communities, especially the Cuban 
exile communities in South Florida, and, of course, the entire baseball 
and sporting world.
  His talents were unquestionable, even though he had only a brief and 
shining career in Major League Baseball. He had played for a year, was 
injured over the past 2 years, and when he came back, he had a better 
year than he did in 2013 when he was Rookie of the Year. He was 
obviously a young man on his way to a distinguished career that I 
believe would have led to the Hall of Fame and, perhaps along the way, 
a couple of pennants.
  It is interesting that his impact goes well beyond what one would 
normally think of a star baseball player. You ask yourself: Why did 
this young man, who had been with us for just a brief moment, lead to 
such an outpouring of grief from a community? Anywhere you go in Miami, 
that is all anyone could talk about over the last 48 hours. I think 
that to understand it, you have to understand his story.
  I had never met Jose Fernandez, yet I feel as though I knew him, and 
that is how millions of people feel. They had never met him, but they 
feel as if they know him. They feel as though they know him because his 
story, his family, and his passion, in the end, is our story, both as 
Cuban Americans and as Americans.
  By now, most of the Nation has seen tributes to Jose. They have seen 
commemorations showing footage of what he accomplished on the field in 
the way most baseball fans knew him--as Jose Fernandez, the dominant 
baseball player, the Tampa Alonso High School phenom who lead them to 
two State titles. He was a first-round draft choice, Rookie of the 
Year, and two-time All Star. As a baseball player, quite frankly, there 
were few better than Jose Fernandez. But, from everything we know, off 
the field, as a human being, a son, a grandson, a teammate, and a 
neighbor, I believe he was even better.
  He was born in Santa Clara, Cuba, in a place where tree branches and 
rocks are what passes for Louisville sluggers and Rawlings balls. He 
was drawn to the national sport of Cuba. He would spend countless hours 
swinging branches at rocks he had collected, dreaming of the day his 
talents could and would take him somewhere else. Thanks to sacrifices 
by his mother, who would take him to the ballpark so he could play 
youth baseball, he started to demonstrate a special talent at a young 
age.
  By the time he was a teenager, like more than a million Cubans during 
the past 50 years, Jose faced a difficult choice. His stepfather, a 
baseball player in his own right, had defected after 13 attempts and 
made himself a life in Tampa. Jose could stay in Cuba, a place that, to 
this day, is still ruled by a despotic regime where your talent and 
work can take you only as far as unelected dictators say you can go, or 
he could risk it all for a chance at freedom. He risked it, not once, 
but on four separate occasions. So desperate was he to leave that 
island that he took his chances crossing the Florida Straits on boats 
that probably had no business being more than a few miles off shore. 
Three times he tried, and three times he failed. After his third 
attempt, the Cuban Government put him in prison for 2 months. He was 14 
years of age at the time and was placed in a prison cell with hardened 
criminals, murderers--a boy among the worst.
  Then came a fourth try, but instead of a short and treacherous 
journey to Miami, they chose a longer and more dangerous journey to 
Mexico. At one point during that fourth journey on a boat being tossed 
by crashing waves and high seas, he heard a splash and saw someone in 
the water thrashing about 60 feet away from the boat. He didn't know 
who it was, and without thinking, he jumped in to save that person. It 
was only when he got close to the person who had fallen overboard that 
he realized who it was--his mother. He recalled swimming toward her and 
watching her struggle in the rough seas. When he finally reached her, 
he calmed her and told her: Grab my back, but don't push me down. Let's 
go slow and we will make it. She held his left shoulder, and with his 
right arm--by the way, his pitching arm--he paddled. He swam 15 minutes 
back to the boat in waves he later described as ``stupid big,'' and he 
pulled himself and his mother to safety. Jose was 15 years old.
  Before America ever met Jose Fernandez and before his fastball earned 
him millions of dollars and countless fans, this young man of only

[[Page 13634]]

15 had struggled against all odds in the middle of the night in rough 
seas, revealing who he was and what he would one day be. As he would 
later tell us, the harder part of his life was still to come.
  Like so many immigrants, my parents included, his first years were 
difficult. He struggled when he first arrived, feeling overwhelmed by 
his new surroundings and new language. He was helpless, alone, and 
missing his family, especially his grandmother, who he once said was 
the love of his life: ``She was my everything.'' He said it was the 
toughest period of his young life. It was even tougher than the time he 
spent in a Cuban prison after he tried to defect, but he overcame all 
of that and eventually came into his own.
  He was a star on the high school diamond in Tampa, and the scouts 
took notice. Before the 2011 draft, Major League Baseball released 
their scouting report on him. He got high marks for his athletic 
abilities, but what set him apart was how he rated when it came to his 
poise, instincts, and aggressiveness. The notes on the official 
scouting report read: ``Exudes confidence. No fear approach.'' This was 
not cockiness or arrogance. It is the kind of peaceful self-assurance 
that comes from a kid who had known life and death, had known freedom 
and captivity, and had lived more life in 19 years than a kid his age 
should have to.
  He finally reached the Major Leagues with the Marlins, and right away 
you saw a young man blessed with Hall of Fame talent, blue-collar work 
ethic, and played the game with the energy and enthusiasm of a boy who 
understood and appreciated just how blessed he was.
  One of Jose's proudest accomplishments--in fact, he said his 
proudest--was not on the diamond. We know this because he told us. Last 
year, Jose became an American citizen, and afterward he said:

       This one is my most important accomplishment. I'm an 
     American citizen now. I'm one of them. I consider myself now 
     to be free.
       I thank this amazing country for giving me the opportunity 
     to go to school here and learn the language and pitch in the 
     major leagues.
       It's an honor to be a part of this country, and I respect 
     it so much.

  Jose knew. He knew how special and fortunate and blessed he was and 
we are. He knew how improbable his journey was, from the rocks and 
branches in Santa Clara to the brightest lights of the show, from a 
Cuban prison to a Major League clubhouse, from living in a Communist 
nightmare to living the American dream. And that is why Jose's death 
has hit so many so hard; Jose's story is our story. He reminds so many 
in my community of someone they know--a brother, a son, or a nephew. 
Jose represented not just all of us who were fortunate to live our own 
American dream; he represents countless others who never made it, the 
ones who lie in unmarked graves along the Florida Straits, those who 
died in political prisons in Cuba, those who sent their children to 
America hoping to join them later only to never see them again, those 
who long gave up hope that life in Cuba could ever return to what it 
once was but had found new hope, joy, and gratitude in this, the 
greatest country the world has ever known.
  We loved him just a little more and took more pride in him than most, 
but Jose didn't just belong to Cuban Americans. He was a young man from 
Santa Clara, Cuba, playing America's pastime in a truly unique American 
city on a team with players from Taiwan; Venezuela; Japan; Dominican 
Republic; Mobile, AL; and Panorama, CA. Jose Fernandez was the pride of 
Miami, but he belonged to every fan who loved to watch him pitch. When 
Miami saw Jose, they saw more than just a great athlete, they saw all 
their hopes, dreams, and aspirations--all we are and all we could be, 
and we said to ourselves: This is what the American dream looks like, 
and, boy, is the American dream alive and well.
  This young man meant a lot to a lot of us for different reasons and 
in different ways, and now, just as quickly as he came into our lives 
and was coming into his own and really starting to fulfill his athletic 
potential--just as we were getting to know him, he was gone.
  In a moment of unimaginable grief, I thank his family for bringing 
him into this world and raising him, despite difficult obstacles, to 
become the man he was, and for encouraging Jose to never give up in the 
search for freedom--a freedom that eventually allowed him to share his 
many gifts with us on and off the field.
  Jose Fernandez made Tampa's Alonso High better, the Miami Marlins 
better, and he made all of baseball better. He made Miami and Tampa 
better, and the way he lived his life reminded us of how blessed we are 
to live in this, the greatest Nation on Earth. My friends, that is not 
bad for a 24-year-old kid from Santa Clara, Cuba.
  With that, I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Will the Senator withhold his suggestion?
  Mr. RUBIO. Yes.
  Mrs. BOXER. I thank the Senator.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California is recognized.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I want to associate myself with those 
remarks that were made. It is a tragedy to lose such a fighter, talent, 
and hero like that.
  Speaking of heroism, we need a little bit of it on the floor here. We 
need to have a leadership here that understands when children are being 
poisoned by lead in their water, we need to do something about it. We 
need leadership that understands that, just as the people of Louisiana 
deserve every bit of help, so do the families of Flint. We need a 
leadership that understands our responsibility to children.
  What good are we?
  Now, I have to say, I stand here as the ranking member of the 
Environment and Public Works Committee, and we are responsible for the 
Safe Drinking Water Act and Clean Water Act. My partnership with 
Senator Inhofe, which has been noted by a few around here, has extended 
to taking care of the people of Flint. We took care of the people of 
Flint and all of the kids who were exposed to lead in the water in the 
Water Resources Development Act that passed here with over 90 votes. 
That is good. That says there is goodness in the U.S. Senate, but 
unless we can deliver this bill and put it on the President's desk, it 
is a meaningless goodness. It is for-show goodness.
  I have to say, it is so simple. The continuing resolution has in it 
help for Louisiana, and those people deserve that help but so do the 
people of Flint.
  How easy is it? It is already paid for. We figured it out. It doesn't 
cost a penny. Unlike helping the people of Flint where we put that into 
the emergency spending, we have paid for the way to help the people of 
Flint and the children all over this country who have suffered from the 
impact of lead.
  I want to show you some charts that demonstrate what it is like. This 
is what corrosive water has done to leach the lead out of these pipes. 
These are the drinking water pipes. Why did it happen? Because 
unelected people in Flint, appointed by the Governor there, decided 
they wanted to save a few bucks and they changed the source of the 
drinking water. They switched to a very corrosive drinking water. It 
leached all this lead out, and the lead poisoned the children. That is 
a simple fact in evidence. We need to fix it. We need to replace it.
  I want to show you something else. This is what it looks like. If you 
saw this color water coming out of your tap, you would get out of the 
house with your family. I would get out of the house with my family. We 
are lucky. We have more resources than a lot of folks.
  I want to show you some more pictures and some more charts. This 
headline: ``Pregnant women, kids cautioned over Jackson water, lead.''
  This is Newsweek: ``WITH LEAD IN THE WATER, COULD SEBRING, OHIO 
BECOME THE NEXT FLINT?''
  The next Flint? These are other cities in our country where the lead 
is leaching into the drinking water. This is not a Democratic or 
Republican issue. We fixed it over here, all of us together. Now we are 
being told by the

[[Page 13635]]

Republican leader that he can't possibly take care of it in the 
continuing resolution while he takes care of other places. Since when 
do we play God and decide which people are deserving of our help? When 
they are suffering, you help people. When there has been terrible 
mistakes made with the drinking water supply, you help people, and we 
did it in a way that is financially and fiscally responsible. We 
figured out a way to pay for this new program that will not only help 
Flint pay for their pipes but will help cities like this all over the 
country.
  Here is another headline: ``Elevated Lead Levels Found in Newark 
Schools' Drinking Water.''
  ``Lead in water not confined to Flint.''
  Our provision that we put in helps people all over this great Nation 
of ours. What else do we have to show? I want to tell you the list of 
organizations who are calling to add aid to Flint and these other 
cities into the continuing resolution: The AFL-CIO, Catholic Charities, 
First Focus Campaign for Children, the Congressional Black Caucus, 
Human Rights--represents more than 200 national organizations--A. 
Philip Randolph Institute, the ACLU, African American Ministers, 
American University Women, American Family Voices, American Federation 
of Government Employees, American Federation of State, County and 
Municipal Employees, American Federation of Teachers, American Islamic 
Congress, American Rivers, American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, 
Americans for Democratic Action, Andrew Goodman Foundation, Asian and 
Pacific Islander American Health Forum, Asian Americans Advancing 
Justice, Asian Pacific American Alliance, Bend the Arc Jewish Action, 
Campaign for America's Future, Catholics in Alliance for the Common 
Good, Center for Community Change Action.
  We can see all the interfaith groups. Every religion is asking the 
majority leader to take care of these children. For God's sake, where 
is your heart? Where is your heart?
  We have paid for it. We have taken care of it. We are helping Flint. 
We are helping all the communities. Let's continue to see these groups: 
Center for Law and Social Policy, Children's Defense Fund, Children's 
Health Fund, Common Cause, Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund, 
Environment America, Every Child Matters, International Association of 
Official Human Rights Agencies, National Association of Social Workers, 
National Black Justice Coalition, the National Coalition on Black Civic 
Participation Black Women's Roundtable, Jobs With Justice, the League 
of Conservation Voters, the League of United Latin American Citizens, 
MomsRising, the NAACP, the United Automobile, Aerospace and 
Agricultural Implement Workers of America, the Jesuit Conference of 
Canada and the United States.
  Where are your values? Where are your religious values, I say to the 
majority leader. You can take care of this, and it doesn't cost a 
penny, and you will shut down the government rather than do this? You 
have to be kidding.
  Here are some more organizations: National Council of La Raza, 
National Disability Rights Network, National Education Association, 
National Employment Law Project, National Fair Housing Alliance, 
National Jobs for All Coalition, National Urban League, National 
Women's Law Center, the National WIC Association.
  Do you know what WIC stands for? Women, Infants and Children. They 
make sure our babies are healthy, and they know there is no safe 
exposure of lead in a child, and they know lead builds up.
  Here are more organizations: Restaurant Opportunities Centers United, 
Service Employees International Union, the Sierra Club, the United 
Church of Christ Justice and Witness Ministries, the United Methodist 
Church General Board of Church and Society, Voices for Progress, People 
for the American Way.
  We don't want to listen to Democrats? Listen to the churches. Listen 
to the great religions. Listen to the people who fight for children. 
Put Flint in the continuing resolution. It doesn't cost a penny.
  I want to go back to the photo of what it looks like when lead comes 
out of the water. I want to show you that picture. That is what it 
looks like. The majority leader, when asked about this, says: Oh, I 
don't have to put this in the continuing resolution. I just know, I 
know that we are going to get this in the Water Resources Development 
Act.
  As I started out saying, this Senate voted by more than 90 votes to 
fix Flint and to fix this problem with lead in the drinking water by 
setting up a paid-for program in the WRDA bill. I thank Senator Inhofe, 
my chairman. What a joy to work with him and his staff office. He is 
committed to this. I am committed to this.
  What about the House? Because I don't have to tell you or explain to 
you how a bill becomes a law. It has to go to the Senate. It has to go 
to the House. It has to go through a conference committee to debate the 
differences, then it has to go to the President to either sign or veto. 
OK. The House passed a WRDA bill. Guess what is not in their bill? 
Flint.
  Guess what is not in their bill? Any provision to deal with lead in 
drinking water. They think: Trust us. We don't need it in the CR. Let's 
take care of these other people, but we don't need a continuing 
resolution. Don't shut down the government. Come on. We will take care 
of it in WRDA. Really? Well, they had a chance yesterday to allow an 
amendment to add Flint's provisions to the WRDA bill. Guess what they 
did. They said no. They said no. They will not even allow a vote. 
Chairman Sessions--not Senator Sessions, this is Chairman Sessions over 
there in the Rules Committee. He said: You know, Flint can be an 
earmark. Well, No. 1, it is not an earmark because we take care of all 
areas where there is lead in the drinking water.
  No. 2, what did Paul Ryan say? The Speaker over there, the one who 
said he is so compassionate for poor people, said: This is a local 
matter.
  A local matter? How is it a local matter, when the people of Flint 
were being governed by people appointed by the Governor and they 
decided to save money and they didn't care what happened? They went to 
a cheaper water supply and they poisoned the people.
  A local matter, really? Is it a local matter to not have safe 
drinking water? Really? Ask the people who served when Richard Nixon 
was the President, and he started all the environmental landmark laws.
  People have a right to clean air. People have a right to clean water. 
People have a right to safe drinking water. People have a right to 
these things, and we have a responsibility to ensure that they have 
that right because the consequences are dire.
  A local matter? That is Speaker Ryan, the Republican Speaker, who 
said he is so compassionate. Why isn't he making this happen? Why isn't 
he helping us? We cannot trust the House to address Flint. They proved 
it yesterday. They will not even allow an amendment. All they have to 
do is allow an amendment and the amendment passes, same as the Senate, 
send it to the President. It is in the bill. We are done. We are happy. 
Then you don't have to put it in the continuing resolution. All you 
have to do is take up and pass the Senate bill, the Senate WRDA bill, 
which passed here with over 95 votes. Do you think they would take it 
and pass it in a time when we can't even agree on a resolution 
commending Mother's Day? We can't even agree on something simple.
  We agreed with 95 votes on a WRDA bill. Take it up and pass it, get 
it off the plate, and then we can get this issue behind us. They will 
not do it.
  The suffering in Flint has gone on for far too long. The crisis began 
in 2014, when that unelected Flint leadership appointed by the 
Republican Governor of Michigan cut costs by switching the water supply 
to the corrosive Flint River. The city managers failed to use corrosion 
control measures, and that was a disaster because lead began leaching 
into the water from the aging drinking water pipes.
  We will show those pipes again. Look at that picture. That is 
frightening.

[[Page 13636]]

  It wasn't until January of 2016 when the government declared a state 
of emergency. Meanwhile, a local doctor began warning of the high 
levels of lead in children's blood, but State officials assured those 
parents their water was safe to drink. One hundred thousand working-
class Americans in Flint--African Americans, White Americans, Hispanic 
Americans--41 percent living below the poverty line, used contaminated 
water for drinking, for cooking, for bathing for months without knowing 
about it because these so-called local officials appointed by the 
Republican Governor refused to tell them there was a problem, and the 
Republican leadership here has the temerity to say those people don't 
deserve relief or say that we will take care of it in the Water 
Resources Development Act, when yesterday the House refused to do it. 
There are 12,000 Flint children who were exposed to lead-tainted water, 
according to NBC. Those children will be dealing with the harmful 
consequences of lead contamination for the rest of their lives. No safe 
level of lead is known. There is no safe level, and the exposures are 
generally irreversible.
  What does lead do? It harms the developing brains and nervous systems 
of children and fetuses. This is a tragedy. Yet the Republican leader 
comes to the floor and says: Oh, we will take care of it after the 
election. Don't worry about it.
  No, that is wrong. That is not right.
  In my position as the ranking member of the Environment and Public 
Works Committee and before that, as chairman, I swear I could stand 
here and tell you I gave my heart and soul for the people of Louisiana 
and the gulf coast when they were hit by strife. I went to Louisiana. I 
stood with the people of Louisiana. I stand with them now. They deserve 
our help. So do the people of Flint, and so do the people of all the 
communities that are suffering from lead in drinking water.
  It has been over 9 months since Flint was granted an emergency 
declaration, and the citizens continue to deal with the horrible water 
crisis. They do not have access to safe drinking water. This started in 
2014, and in 2016 the Republican leader doesn't understand that is 
wrong, that we haven't helped those people. Come on. Don't hide behind 
the Water Resources Development Act because in the House they have not 
agreed to fix it. Why are Republicans picking and choosing communities 
that deserve our help?
  We are going to have a vote today, and that vote is important. We 
need to be strong. We need to say we are for helping the people of 
Louisiana, we are for helping people, but we are not for leaving out 
these poisoned children and this community that has been suffering when 
we can fix it without a penny of taxpayer cost.
  I hope we are going to vote no on that, and maybe then the leader 
will decide to put Flint into this continuing resolution. We cannot 
play games with this. This can be fixed. Ninety-five Senators know how 
to fix it. This can be fixed.
  We are very worried about this issue of lead in drinking water 
because millions of homes across America receive water from pipes that 
date to an era before scientists fully understood the harm of lead 
exposure, so there are lead pipes. If you put the wrong type of water 
into those pipes, it will leach the lead out. So families are 
unknowingly bathing in lead, they are drinking lead, and they are 
cooking with lead. This is wrong.
  The Presiding Officer has to hear this. This is very important to 
hear. We don't just fix the problem in Flint, we set up a new program 
to help communities all over the country. The American Water Works 
Association estimates that as many as 22 million Americans have lead 
service lines. So what are we going to say? We won't take care of this 
in the continuing resolution; we will just throw it over into the water 
bill. Yet the House Republicans are very disinterested in this.
  I have read the organizations--and this is the first time I have 
actually looked at all those organizations.
  I just wish to make this last plea to the Republican leader and to 
all of you who run this place here, for now, and that is this: If we 
are here for any reason--and we thank God we are here. What an honor it 
is to be here. As I look at my days dwindling down in the Senate, I am 
filled with an emotion that I have been able to help so many people. 
Why are we here? Not to hurt people, not to turn a blind eye to the 
suffering of people, but to step up to the plate and say: You know 
what, we understand, and we are going to help. We have a chance to do 
that.
  I was so proud of my partnership with my Republican friends on the 
Environment and Public Works Committee. We took care of this in the 
WRDA bill. We solved the problem in a fiscally responsible way and a 
judicious way. We have it solved. It is done. The work is done, and 95 
Senators stood behind that work.
  What we want to say to the House is this: Take up and pass the Senate 
bill. Take care of this matter. If you can't do that, give us an 
ironclad commitment that you will absolutely get it done.
  Short of that, it has to go into the continuing resolution. Until 
then, what we are doing in the continuing resolution is saying yes to 
the suffering and pain of some of our beloved citizens and no to the 
suffering and pain of another set of our beloved citizens. This is the 
United States of America, not the Divided States of America. We care 
for all our children, for all our families. We look at safe drinking 
water as a right. That is why we have the Safe Drinking Water Act. That 
is why we have the Clean Water Act. These were signed by Republicans 
and Democrats, signed into law by Republican and Democratic Presidents.
  I hope that the leader, with whom I have had some excellent relations 
of late, will rethink this and that we can leave here in an election 
year knowing we helped all the people.
  Thank you very much.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.
  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, the Senate is scheduled to vote at 2:15 
on the continuing resolution. The resolution will provide $1.1 billion 
in emergency funding to respond to the Zika virus outbreak. Funds are 
included to accelerate vaccine development, provide mosquito control in 
areas where the virus is being transmitted, and address health 
conditions related to the Zika virus.
  The bill also includes $500 million to help Louisiana, West Virginia, 
and other States recover from devastating floods. We will continue to 
assess the total recovery needs in those States, but this funding is 
needed immediately to help get residents back into their homes and 
businesses.
  The fiscal year 2017 Military Construction and Veterans Affairs 
appropriations bill is also included in this legislation. The bill 
provides record levels of funding for medical care and other important 
veterans programs. It also funds housing for military personnel and 
their families and supports infrastructure that sustains U.S. military 
forces.
  Enactment of the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs 
appropriations bill would mark the first time since 2009 that a regular 
appropriations bill has been signed into law before the end of the 
fiscal year. This would be another step in the right direction as we 
seek more regular consideration of appropriations measures.
  This legislation also includes a continuing resolution to sustain 
government operations at current levels until December 9. This will 
give us additional time to complete work on the fiscal year 2017 
appropriations bills. I am pleased that the Appropriations Committee 
reported all 12 of the regular appropriations bills for the second year 
in a row. The Senate has approved three of these bills. We look forward 
to completing our work on the remainder.
  I urge the Senate to approve the continuing resolution.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
  Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. President, I rise today to ask my colleagues to 
support this cloture motion this afternoon and move forward in passing 
the continuing resolution to fund our government through December 9.
  Flooding is a national emergency. I have heard many Members talk 
about

[[Page 13637]]

the flooding in Louisiana, West Virginia, and Texas.
  It is a devastating circumstance we find ourselves in in the State of 
West Virginia. Twenty-three West Virginians lost their lives. 
Amazingly, the last victim was found--a 14-year-old girl--probably just 
a month ago. Twelve counties were declared Federal disaster areas. For 
some areas of West Virginia, this was a thousand-year event. It came up 
so quickly. Some of our oldest and our poorest communities suffered 
serious destruction, and nearly 90 percent of the homes and businesses 
affected did not have flood insurance.
  I toured most all of the affected areas and talked to some very brave 
people and very brave local mayors, who were doing a great job. There 
are 5,100 homes and businesses that have suffered a loss, as verified 
by FEMA. Seventy-five percent of the affected homes have been deemed 
unsafe by inspectors, so we have thousands of people who are not living 
in a permanent home situation. Some are still living in temporary 
situations that are unsafe, and certainly, moving into the fall, it 
would be very unhealthy.
  There is a significant need for resources to help communities, 
individuals, and small businesses to recover, and disaster-related 
needs go beyond the disaster reimbursement provided by FEMA. Our 
Governor, Earl Ray Tomblin of West Virginia, wrote to President Obama 
earlier this month outlining the significant need for disaster aid. The 
Governor's letter identified $310 million in flood-related needs from 
the Federal Community Development Block Grant Program.
  I am a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee. I very much 
appreciate our chairman, Senator Cochran, coming to the floor today to 
implore, after all this hard work trying to get this continuing 
resolution confirmed.
  I have worked hard to secure the resources in this bill for our West 
Virginia flood victims. The legislation we will vote on today takes an 
important step to address flood recovery in disaster-stricken portions 
of West Virginia and certainly for our friends in Louisiana and other 
parts of the country. I thank my colleagues on the Appropriations 
Committee. I thank the leader for listening to me. I thank Chairman 
Cochran and Senator Collins, who chairs the subcommittee, for 
responding favorably to my request for these desperately needed 
resources.
  This bill begins to address this by including funds for the Community 
Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery Program. Those funds will 
help meet housing and infrastructure needs in communities impacted by 
the flooding in West Virginia and all across the country.
  Given the need in my State and other States, such as Louisiana and 
Texas, additional disaster funds beyond those in this bill will be 
needed. This is an emergency. This means now. These floods occurred 
several months ago.
  I could have easily come to the floor today and heralded the record 
funding this bill includes for our Nation's veterans or the important 
resources it provides to help combat our opioid and heroin epidemic--
something that is devastating my State and many States across this 
country. These are needs facing all States. They should have been 
addressed by our regular appropriations bills.
  No one likes the fact--well, I don't think anyone likes the fact that 
a continuing resolution is necessary. The Senate Appropriations 
Committee, of which I am a member, passed all 12 of the appropriations 
bills. Many of them were bipartisan and worked out between the chair 
and the ranking member. I wish the Senate had acted on all of these. We 
tried for weeks and weeks to get cooperation to move through these 
bills in a predictable and very responsible manner so that we could 
have addressed our Nation's priorities in a fiscally responsible way. 
But this bill today keeps our government open and provides the 
additional resources to help our flood victims who are still suffering 
so much. It helps our veterans, and it helps to address those who are 
suffering this new and devastating scourge of opioid and heroin 
addiction. I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this 
legislation.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise to also speak about the 
continuing resolution, and I speak in opposition to the continuing 
resolution.
  I just want to say to the Senator from West Virginia that I so 
respect the leadership role she has played in the Senate. What a 
diligent Senator she is, in her advocacy for West Virginia and the 
flood victims who really have not only my sympathy but as the vice 
chair of the Committee on Appropriations, I would like to be of help to 
her and to the people of Louisiana and West Virginia, but I would also 
say we can't leave out Flint, MI. We just can't.
  Now, we don't want to ``Christmas tree'' the bill--she and I are 
experienced legislators--but really, when we think about Flint, imagine 
living off of bottled water. Imagine trying to run a small business. I 
don't know if my father who had a small grocery store could have kept 
it open. I do hope we can put our heads together to come up with a 
solution, get rid of the poison pill riders, and meet the compelling 
human needs, as the Senator articulated so well, and find a solution to 
keeping the doors of government open. Right now we need an open mind in 
talking with each other, and so I look forward to being able to do 
that.
  Mr. President, I do come here to discuss keeping the government open. 
That is really important to me. I have 300,000 Federal employees in 
Maryland, and they do everything from working at NIH to find a cure for 
cancer or find a cure for Alzheimer's to working at the weather service 
so we can provide communities large and small throughout America the 
information about the weather they need to prepare for everything from 
natural disasters to planning to prevent our oranges and peaches from 
freezing on the trees.
  The Senate has until Friday of this week to avoid a government 
shutdown. As I said last week--and I have said many times--Democrats 
are ready to negotiate. We are willing to compromise, but there are 
certain things we cannot capitulate on, and Flint, MI, is one.
  Last week, the majority leader, the distinguished Senator from 
Kentucky, Mr. McConnell, filed a Republican continuing funding 
resolution. The leader has ``filled the tree,'' which is Senate speak 
for meaning we cannot amend the continuing resolution before us. So we 
are stuck. We are stuck in the same old ways, with the drama of being 
so close to the deadline, it can threaten a showdown, a slamdown. This 
is not where we want to go.
  What do Democrats want? Well, we want what the American people should 
want. No. 1, let us keep the government open through December 9. Now, I 
am not saying shut it down December 9. I am saying that by December 9, 
we could come to a complete omnibus bill, meaning our total funding for 
the fiscal year that lies ahead.
  Second, as Americans, we need to look at each other across the aisle, 
across State borders, and meet compelling, urgent needs, such as Zika, 
such as the floods in Louisiana and West Virginia and other States, and 
in Flint, MI.
  We need to be free of poison pill riders like the rider preventing 
the Securities and Exchange Commission from requiring companies to tell 
investors where they are putting their political contributions. What is 
wrong with that? Shouldn't we have an open and transparent process? We 
are not asking any company to reveal their trade secrets, but trading 
in political contributions should not be a trade secret. It is about 
are you trading, are you ashamed--are you ashamed of your political 
contribution? Wow. Is that what you want to do? You want to hide it? I 
don't think that is America. We are not saying to whom companies should 
give, but they should tell us to whom they did give.
  Let us also provide a full year of funding for our veterans and our 
military construction, most of all for our veterans. Talk about 
compelling human needs. We are just weeks away from once again 
celebrating Veterans

[[Page 13638]]

Day. Celebrating veterans shouldn't be just 1 day a year. It has to be 
every day of every year.
  We have men and women--some of whom have served in the Senate, such 
as the distinguished Senator from Georgia, Mr. Max Cleland, and 
others--who come back bearing the permanent wounds of war, and we need 
to pay and bear the permanent responsibility for caring for those who 
did serve. We need to be able to back our veterans and not just with 
lip service and wonderful yellow ribbons. We need to do our duty. We 
have the funding ready for the defense of the Nation and the things to 
protect America outside of DOD.
  We have agreed on helping with Zika and victims in Louisiana, but the 
Republican continuing resolution doesn't help Flint, MI, and it 
includes poison pills. So I want to end the partisan gamesmanship--no 
shutdowns, no slamdowns, no showdowns. That is why I want to be clear 
about three changes I strongly recommend.
  No. 1, we need Flint, MI, funding. I see the Senator from Michigan is 
now on the floor. She is a sister social worker, and I so admire her 
unabashed, unrelenting, unflagging support, particularly for the 
children and particularly for the small businesses for Flint, MI. She 
has been so steadfast, unflagging and unrelenting, and we need to be 
the same way.
  We had $220 million for water infrastructure that passed in the Water 
Resources Development Act on a vote of 95 to 3. Guess what. It is fully 
paid for. So what is the problem? What is the problem with Flint, MI?
  When I think about Flint, I think about little children with lead in 
their drinking water. What does that do? It stifles intellectual 
development. It inhibits you for the rest of your life from fulfilling 
your God-given full intention. If we respect life, we should do all we 
can to sustain it.
  Then, think about small businesses. Think about trying to run a 
business when you don't have water. Water, water, everywhere water, 
water, but none of it fit to drink. How do you run a little diner? How 
do you run a little diner or a produce stand?
  As I said, my father owned a small grocery store. Everything was 
spotless. Everything was meticulously clean. He made sure his fruits 
and vegetables were clean. Everything was clean. He didn't have lead in 
the water. So let's get on with it.
  We know there are people in this country who have been hit by floods. 
They have too much water. Flint has too much of the wrong water. We can 
right that wrong by just joining our hands and understanding compelling 
human need. It doesn't come from a Democrat or a Republican ZIP Code, 
it comes from the United States of America, and we should be united in 
dealing with it.
  We should strip out the poison pill riders, such as the SEC political 
contribution transparency rider. We should reduce the Zika offset 
package to $375 million. These are reasonable changes that if the 
Republican caucus is willing to agree, we could pass the continuing 
resolution today.
  I remind my colleagues that when I became the first woman to chair 
the Committee on Appropriations upon the death of the esteemed Senator 
Inouye, the funding to respond to Hurricane Sandy was on the floor. 
Working together, we were able to pass that bill and meet compelling 
human need. I would like to be able to do that now.
  Throughout my tenure as the chair and vice chair of the Committee on 
Appropriations, I have lived by the principle that we owe the American 
people help when disaster strikes. We should respond to Zika that is 
now affecting 23,000 people, 2,000 pregnant women. We need to help the 
victims of Louisiana and other States that have been hit. We just saw 
the terrible things going on in Iowa. We must help the 100,000 people 
in Flint who are still waiting for the water in their pipes to be clean 
and their children, being exposed to lead, protected. The people of 
Flint need help.
  We passed the WRDA bill, and we need now to pass a CR that gets rid 
of poison pill riders, meets compelling human needs in every part of 
our country, and also makes sure our veteran funding is there to ensure 
there is no backlog in applying for their disability benefits and no 
backlog when they try to get to see a doctor.
  I am so proud of my Committee on Appropriations that is working with 
the VA on the veterans bill. We have a wonderful bipartisan bill 
working to meet the needs of rural veterans and veterans who had to 
wait in line for mental health needs and the other support we need to 
help with.
  So let's do our job, really. Hello? Let's do our job. I believe there 
is still time to work this out, but until we do, I oppose cloture on 
the McConnell substitute.
  Mr. President, that concludes my remarks, and I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Paul). The Senator from Michigan.
  Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up 
to 10 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Ms. STABENOW. I thank the Chair.
  Mr. President, the first thing I want to do is thank our very 
distinguished Democratic ranking member on the Committee on 
Appropriations, the former chair, Senator Mikulski. She has been with 
us every step of the way.
  I have learned a lot about lead exposure. I thought I knew a lot, but 
by sitting down with Senator Mikulski, when we have had an opportunity 
to have discussions about potential treatments to help and impacts 
regarding the lead, I have learned how very frightening it is, 
particularly for children what lead poisoning means.
  Over the years, I have appreciated Senator Mikulski's advocacy and 
leadership with the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for 
Disease Control and in other areas on health care. That leadership has 
made a tremendous difference, including helping to create a way to have 
some options on treatment for children. So I want to thank her. We are 
going to greatly miss her. I don't think we are going to let her go. 
She is just amazing, as is her staff and their commitment and support 
and understanding of what the people in Flint are going through.
  Two weeks ago now, we were feeling like we were on our way finally. 
We spent the last 8 months getting through various procedural hurdles 
and objections to get help for Flint and other communities with lead 
poisoning and other water issues. We had a bill come to the floor, and 
I greatly appreciate the majority leader bringing it to the floor. We 
had a terrific bipartisan team, with Senator Inhofe and Senator Boxer 
leading us in passing a very important bill. As I have said, it passed 
95 to 3. That doesn't happen a lot around here--95 to 3. We thought we 
were on our way. The families of Flint were in town at that time, and 
we felt like, finally, maybe there was some hope.
  We were told WRDA would be coming up quickly the next week in the 
House. That didn't happen. What we saw instead were comments that House 
leadership--the Speaker and the chairman of the committee--would not 
support Flint being a part of the House WRDA bill.
  We have heard, on the one hand, that we should wait for WRDA, and 
then the same people say, but we don't support putting Flint in WRDA. 
OK. We have the same people saying this is a local issue, while the 
House Government and Oversight Committee and Chairman Chaffetz held 
hearings, bringing in the EPA Administrator and challenging her to step 
down because of what the EPA did in Flint. So, OK, it is local. No, it 
is the EPA, which is Federal.
  We feel like we are being bounced back and forth and back and forth, 
and the bottom line is, people in Flint still can't drink the water. 
Since mid-August, we have had more than 611,000 cases of bottled water 
delivered to families in Flint. In fact, ``delivered'' is the wrong 
word because most of the time they have to figure out a way to pick it 
up. If you are riding a bus, walking, or if you have a car, you are 
trying to figure out when you are going to get the bottled water to 
bathe in, feed your children with, cook with. This has gone on day 
after day after day.
  So while we thought we had a path, now it is extremely unclear. I 
trust our

[[Page 13639]]

leaders here--Senator Inhofe and Senator Boxer--in the Senate, but we 
are getting a very different message from the House of Representatives, 
and then all of a sudden we have a short-term appropriations bill, a 
continuing resolution, where we could, in fact, stop all the back-and-
forth, ping-ponging, and get this done for the people of Flint. We are 
told no. The people of Flint are told no. Then all of a sudden there is 
help for Louisiana.
  I am happy to support the people of Louisiana. It would be a tragedy 
and, frankly, an outrageous way to make decisions if the answer, after 
all of this, is, OK, we won't help Louisiana, either. That is not what 
we are suggesting. We are saying that whether it is hurricanes, floods, 
disaster assistance; whether it is livestock disaster assistance, which 
I put in the last farm bill, which affects very few people in Michigan 
but an awful lot of people in the West and the South; whether it is 
that or a fertilizer plant explosion caused by various issues of 
malfeasance in West Texas that exposed people to chemicals, and the 
Federal Government came in to help--wherever it is, we step up together 
in extraordinary circumstances when there is an emergency, a disaster 
beyond the control of the citizens and the community involved, and we 
help. This has not been partisan in the past. We have not decided by 
ZIP Code or whether you had a Republican Senator or a Democratic 
Senator representing you. We have stepped up together to support 
efforts, and I supported every single one of them. What is different 
about Flint, MI? That is the question. The only thing I know that is 
different is that we have actually agreed to eliminate a program to 
fully pay for what we are doing to help. Normally it is not paid for; 
it goes on the deficit. We don't see a program being eliminated to fund 
the floods in Louisiana or other areas, but we took the extra step. We 
are actually phasing out a program that affects predominantly Michigan, 
that I authored in the 2007 Energy bill, because of the urgency and the 
dire circumstances in the city of Flint. That is the only difference I 
see, is that it costs nothing to do this--nothing. We could do it by 
unanimous consent today. It costs nothing.
  So then the real question is, well, why? Why is there such a problem? 
Why is there such a problem including something that costs nothing on 
this short-term appropriations bill? I don't get it. The people of 
Flint don't get it. The fact is, I hear from people all over the 
country who don't get it.
  This is an opportunity today, and I am strongly urging that we reject 
the continuing resolution in front of us and ask the leaders to go back 
to the drawing board and get it right and to indicate that we see, we 
hear, and we care about 100,000 people in Flint, MI; about 9,000 
children under the age of 6; about people who live in homes that have 
some lead levels higher than a toxic waste dump; about the mom who was 
here 2 weeks ago whose daughter was bright and engaged and going to 
school and now, after lead exposure, is lethargic, is not focused, and 
she can't eat a sandwich because her teeth are crumbling because she 
had zero vitamin D--zero. When she was tested, the doctors immediately 
put her into the hospital to give her massive doses of vitamin D for 
her bones. How do I tell that mom that we could help her now and it is 
not going to happen? I don't get it.
  It is time to vote no on this procedural motion on the CR and get 
back to work and make sure that families who had floods in Louisiana, 
in West Virginia, and other places get the support they need and that 
we help in partnering--to help, not total, but help with some of the 
costs that will put the water back on in Flint.
  When you turn on the faucet today, wherever you are, think about what 
would happen if you didn't have confidence that what came out of that 
faucet wasn't going to poison you. This is the United States of 
America. We can do better than this. This body has supported doing 
better than this. It is time to get it done.

                          ____________________