[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 12]
[Senate]
[Pages 15773-15783]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          TSUNAMI WARNING, EDUCATION, AND RESEARCH ACT OF 2015

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
resume consideration of the House message to accompany H.R. 34, which 
the clerk will report.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       House message to accompany H.R. 34, an act to authorize and 
     strengthen the tsunami detection, forecast, warning, 
     research, and mitigation program of the National Oceanic and 
     Atmospheric Administration, and for other purposes.

  Pending:

       McConnell motion to concur in the amendment of the House to 
     the amendment of the Senate to the bill.
       McConnell motion to concur in the amendment of the House to 
     the amendment of the Senate to the bill, with McConnell 
     amendment No. 5117, to change the enactment date.
       McConnell amendment No. 5118 (to amendment No. 5117), of a 
     perfecting nature.

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in 
morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Departing Senators

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, let me say at the outset that I took the 
floor last week and said a few words in tribute and friendship to my 
colleague, Senator Kirk. I am glad to hear the majority leader's 
statement this morning. It was spot-on, and it captured his public 
spirit, as well as his personal strength, that has brought him to this 
moment in history. I have been honored to serve with him for the last 6 
years.
  I would say to my colleague Senator Coats from Indiana: We served 
together in the House, in the Senate, and I actually visited him when 
he was an ambassador representing the United States in Germany. It is 
an amazing public career on his part, and I wish him the very best for 
whatever the future holds for him.


                                  DACA

  Mr. President, I wish to tell a story about an extraordinary young 
woman whom some of you may know. Her name is Laura Alvarado. When she 
was 8 years old, Laura was brought to the United States from Mexico. 
She grew up in Chicago in my home State of Illinois.
  In high school, she was an extraordinary student and was involved in 
extracurricular and volunteer activities. She was a member of the 
National Honor Society. She played soccer, tennis, basketball, and was 
a member of student government, the school newspaper, the chess club, 
the yearbook club, and many more. She decided to go to Northeastern 
Illinois University. She worked two jobs while she was going to school 
because she didn't qualify for any Federal assistance to go to college.

[[Page 15774]]

  In 2006, she graduated with honors from Northeastern. Her major was 
justice studies. But then she was stuck again. Her ambition in life was 
to become a lawyer, but she couldn't pursue her dream. It took her 6 
years. In 2012, President Obama established DACA, an Executive action 
which said to Laura and thousands just like her: You are in a special 
category. You were undocumented in America, but you were brought here 
as a child. You didn't make the decision to come to this country; your 
family did. So we are going to give young people like Laura a chance, 
on a temporary basis, if they will pay a filing fee of almost $500, 
submit themselves to a criminal background check to make certain they 
are no threat to anyone in this country, we will give them a 2-year 
status where they cannot be deported and they can work in America.
  Laura applied. There were people who were cautioning her: Be careful. 
If you identify yourself as undocumented to this government, somebody 
might use it against you someday. But Laura, who aspired to be a 
lawyer, decided to follow the law, register, pay her fee, go through 
the background check, and try to get the status of DACA. She received 
it. And because of it, she was allowed to apply and be accepted at 
Southern Illinois University School of Law at Carbondale.
  In law school, she was an outstanding student again. She won the moot 
court competition. She was selected for the Order of Barristers, a 
legal honor society.
  This spring, 10 years after she graduated from college, Laura 
received her law degree. Over the summer she passed her bar exam, and 
just last month she received her Illinois law license, which she is 
holding here proudly.
  Laura never gave up on her dream of becoming a lawyer, but it is a 
dream that never would have happened were it not for President Obama's 
Executive action, the Executive action that didn't give her a free pass 
to law school--just the opposite. It said to her: If you are accepted 
into law school, the government will not pay you a penny to help with 
your education. You have to go out and work for it. She did.
  Now we face a question with a new President coming in who says he 
wants to abolish the DACA that made Laura eligible to go to law school. 
He wants to abolish the status where these young people, brought as 
babies, toddlers, into this country are not subject to deportation and 
can work for a living. If that is abolished, then Laura, despite all of 
her hard work, all of her education, all of her achievements in life, 
faces deportation from this country.
  Laura said she wants to use her law degree to help people who don't 
have a fighting chance without lawyers who are more focused on service 
than on money. We are better if Laura is here as a lawyer practicing in 
America. We are certainly better in Illinois to have someone with a law 
license willing to give back to our State.
  Now the choice is up to Congress. Are we going to step in and give 
Laura the chance she asked for to prove herself again as she has so 
many times in her young life? I am glad to say that Lindsey Graham, the 
Senator from South Carolina, and I are joining in an effort to draw up 
legislation to achieve that goal and at least to give these DACA-
eligibles a temporary reprieve so that if there is an elimination of 
this Executive action, we don't eliminate the protection that keeps 
them here in the United States and where they cannot be deported and 
they have a chance to work. That is something we need to do--not just 
for Laura but for 744,000 other young people as well who grew up in 
this country and just deserve a chance to make this a better nation.


                      Tribute to Barbara Mikulski

  Mr. President, I join my colleagues in saluting the public life of 
Senator Barbara Mikulski. Before I do that, I want to thank a woman who 
is not here. She was a Catholic nun and the debate coach for Senator 
Mikulski when she was in high school at the Institute of Notre Dame, an 
all-girls Catholic high school in Baltimore, the same school Nancy 
Pelosi graduated from.
  As a young Barbara Mikulski was preparing to debate a particularly 
tough opponent, this nun, her debate coach, told her: ``You can do it, 
Barb--get out there and roll those Jesuit boys!''
  I went to a Jesuit college and law school, and I am proud and 
relieved to report that I never had to face Barbara Mikulski in that 
kind of debate. I have rarely found anybody who can stand up to her in 
a debate. She can still ``roll those Jesuit boys,'' or anyone else who 
tries to stand in the way of helping women, children, seniors, or 
advancing fairness.
  Barbara Mikulski has been my colleague for 20 years, my friend, the 
chairwoman of my Appropriations Committee and the ranking member, and 
so many times an inspiration.
  As most of my colleagues know, my first job was working in the Senate 
as an intern, myself, in the office of Senator Paul Douglas of 
Illinois. Like Barbara Mikulski, Paul Douglas was a champion for the 
underdog, and he was a pit bull when it came to protecting the American 
taxpayers.
  Every year, the University of Illinois chooses a leader of uncommon 
decency and courage to receive the Paul H. Douglas Award for Ethics in 
Government. This year, I was honored to present that award on behalf of 
the University of Illinois and in the name of Paul Douglas to Barbara 
Mikulski of Maryland. I know Senator Douglas would have been thrilled 
that she is carrying on that same public service tradition.
  Some day--and I hope and trust I will live to see it--the ultimate 
glass ceiling will break, and there will be a woman elected President 
of this country. When that historic day comes, we can be sure that 
Senator Barbara Mikulski will have had a hand in bringing it about.
  Many of my colleagues have spoken about the long list of times she 
has already broken glass ceilings herself: Barbara Mikulski, first 
woman ever elected statewide in her beloved State of Maryland; Barbara 
Mikulski, first Democrat elected to both the U.S. House and the U.S. 
Senate; Barbara Mikulski, first woman to ever serve as head of the 
powerful Senate Appropriations Committee.
  But as Barbara, very self-deprecating, has often said: She has never 
been interested in simply being the first. She wants to be ``the first 
of many,'' and she has been.
  When Maryland voters sent Barbara Mikulski to this Senate in 1986, 
there were two women in the entire body: Nancy Landon Kassebaum of 
Kansas, a Republican, and Barbara Mikulski of Maryland, a Democrat--two 
women in this Chamber out of 100 Senators. Today, there are 20 women 
Senators, and after they are sworn in on January 3, there will be 21. 
That is great progress, but not nearly enough by Barbara Mikulski's 
standards.
  Senator Mikulski also had the brainchild of making sure the women in 
the Senate became an even more powerful force. Her bipartisan, women 
Senators-only dinners were a rare display of bipartisanship in an 
institution too often divided. The discoveries of common cause, common 
trust, and common purpose resulting from those dinners have made a big 
difference on the floor of the Senate.
  Barbara Ann Mikulski is the proud granddaughter of Polish immigrants. 
Her parents owned a small grocery store in Baltimore. She, her parents, 
and her two younger sisters lived across the street in one of the 
famous Baltimore row houses. As a young girl, Barbara thought about 
becoming a Catholic nun. She changed her mind because, as she put it, 
``that vow of obedience kind of slowed me down a bit.'' So she found 
other ways to practice the social gospel of justice.
  She was a driving force behind the first bill signed by President 
Barack Obama, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. I was there that day. 
The President signed the bill, and he took the first pen from the first 
bill he was signing and handed it to Barbara Mikulski because he knew 
that she had been a champion for equality in the workplace for women 
throughout her career.

[[Page 15775]]

  There are two stories that I always think of when I think of Senator 
Mikulski.
  In October 2002, the Senate voted on whether to authorize the war in 
Iraq. Only 23 of the 100 Senators then serving voted against the Iraq 
war resolution. Of those 23 Senators, only 8 still remain in the Senate 
today: Barbara Boxer, who is leaving at the end of this Congress, 
Patrick Leahy, Patty Murray, Jack Reed, Debbie Stabenow, Ron Wyden, 
Barbara Mikulski, and myself. This is a woman who has always been 
willing to risk her career to follow her conscience.
  One of her great heroes is Dorothy Day, founder of the Catholic 
Worker Movement. The reason, Barbara Mikulski says, is that Dorothy Day 
was always ``trying to find the hopes of people,'' rather than preying 
on people's fear and anger.
  I saw Barbara Mikulski's instinctive appeal to hope on that infamous 
sad day--September 11, 2001. As dust was settling on that heart-
wrenching, heartbreaking day, most of the Members of the Senate 
gathered on the steps of the Capitol. The hope was that there would be 
a demonstration by Members of both parties to the Nation and to the 
world of solidarity. Suddenly--unplanned, unscripted--Barbara Mikulski 
started singing ``God Bless America.'' Everyone joined in. In one of 
America's darkest hours, Barbara Mikulski brought us together. That is 
what a real leader does.
  I and so many in the Chamber and so many untold millions of Americans 
are going to miss her presence in the Senate. We take consolation in 
knowing that, while she is leaving the Senate, she is not leaving the 
fight. She will never leave the fight.
  Those of us who are returning in the next Congress have learned from 
Senator Mikulski, and we will continue to fight the good fight to 
invest in lifesaving, job-creating medical breakthroughs at the 
National Institutes of Health--or, as Barbara Mikulski calls it, the 
``National Institutes of Hope.'' We will continue the good fight she 
has fought with such pithiness and passion to make our Nation safer and 
make our economy fairer for all Americans. I know that she will 
continue that fight as well.
  Barbara Mikulski may be leaving the Senate, but no one ever has, and 
I doubt anyone ever will, think of Baltimore's Barbara Mikulski as 
``retiring.''
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mrs. FISCHER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


      Honoring Nebraska's Soldiers Who Lost Their Lives in Combat

  Mrs. FISCHER. Mr. President, I rise today to continue my tribute to 
this generation of Nebraska heroes. They are the men and women who have 
given their lives defending our freedom in Iraq and Afghanistan. Each 
one has a different story, and each Gold Star Family has the same 
request: that we remember the sacrifice of their loved one. By telling 
these stories of their service here on the Senate floor, we can honor 
that family's request.


                        Sergeant Germaine Debro

  Mr. President, today I honor the life and service of Germaine Debro, 
a man who seemed destined for military service. Germaine's father, 
Alvin Debro, was a career Air Force technical sergeant. At a young age, 
Germaine even picked up a nickname: ``G.I. Joe Maine.'' Even then, 
family and friends saw qualities that would make Germaine a great 
soldier. Because of his military service, Alvin and his wife Priscilla 
and their three boys moved often.
  Germaine attended Benson High School in Omaha, NE, for a year before 
his family moved to Arkansas. There, Germaine graduated high school in 
1991. Later, he and his family returned to Nebraska. For a time, 
Germaine worked as a manager at the local Burger King.
  In 1994, G.I. Joe Maine followed his calling and he enlisted in the 
Army. In 1997, he joined the Nebraska National Guard. During those 
years, Germaine became known for his genuine personality and for 
developing a great camaraderie with his fellow soldiers. According to 
SPC Shawn O'Neil, Germaine was the ``nicest guy you could ever meet.'' 
He would walk into a room and it would light up. To his battle buddies, 
SPC Germaine Debro was affectionately known as DB. His dedication to 
his fellow soldiers was obvious. Being single, Germaine volunteered for 
assignments so that married soldiers might remain at home with their 
families.
  Germaine deployed to Kuwait in 2001 and to Bosnia in 2002. In 2005, 
he learned that his unit, the 1st of the 167th Cavalry of the Nebraska 
Army National Guard, would deploy to Iraq. Germaine would be assigned 
to Troop B. Germaine's family was anxious about him deploying again, 
but Germaine would not let his Army brothers go without him. In the 
end, his family supported his decision.
  In explaining how his fellow soldiers felt about Germaine, SGT Josh 
Graft put it simply: ``He was like a Dad to all of us.''
  After a year of training, the 1st of the 167th Cavalry arrived in 
Iraq in early 2006. That is when the Sunni-Shia civil war erupted. In 
February, the al-Askari mosque was bombed and Iraq was plunged ever 
deeper into sectarian violence. American forces had come to enforce 
peace; they found themselves engaged in intense wartime operations. 
Germaine's unit was right in the thick of it. Enemy attacks were 
frequent. Tensions were high.
  On September 4, 2006, a 20-truck convoy headed out from a site 30 
miles north of Baghdad. In the United States, Americans were 
celebrating Labor Day with barbecues, sporting events, and family 
gatherings. In Iraq, Germaine was driving a humvee, providing advanced 
security for the convoy. Thirty miles outside of Baghdad, Germaine's 
humvee struck an improvised explosive device. The vehicle was spun 
several times before erupting into flames. SGT Josiah Warren, riding in 
the right seat, tried unsuccessfully to pull Germaine free. Germaine 
Debro died on September 4, 2006.
  At Iraq's Camp Anaconda, members of the Nebraska Army National Guard 
assembled to honor the man who had cared so deeply for them.
  On September 18, 2006, the Morning Star Baptist Church near downtown 
Omaha was filled with people paying a final tribute to Germaine Debro. 
Outside, 110 patriot riders stood guard.
  Germaine's brother, Maurice, read from a letter Germaine had written 
to him. In it, his brother offered some advice: ``If you don't take a 
risk, then you'll never know what happened.''
  ``That was my brother,'' said Maurice. ``He was a loving, caring 
person.''
  Germaine Debro was promoted posthumously to the rank of sergeant. His 
military decorations included a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart. SGT 
Germaine Debro is survived by his father Alvin, his mother Priscilla, 
and his brothers, Alvin, Jr., and Maurice. He is a true Nebraska hero. 
I am honored to tell his story.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Flake). The Senator from Rhode Island.
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 
up to 20 minutes as in morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                             Climate Change

  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I rise today for my 151st ``Time to 
Wake Up'' speech on climate change. I have covered many topics during 
these speeches--from pulling back the veil on the fossil fuel 
industry's web of denial to sharing my visits to States from New 
Hampshire to Florida to Utah to see the effects of climate change there 
firsthand. But one recurring theme of my speeches and in the scientific 
literature has been the warning that the effects of climate change will 
hit home first and hardest along our coasts.
  The oceans have soaked up more than 90 percent of the excess heat 
that has been trapped in the atmosphere by greenhouse gasses. That is a 
lot of

[[Page 15776]]

heat. The Associated Press has compared the ocean heat we have added 
since 1997 to a, ``Hiroshima-style bomb being exploded every second in 
the ocean for 75 straight years.''
  That excess energy is warming our oceans at alarming rates, and by 
the principle of thermal expansion, we know that when water warms it 
expands. That, coupled with the melting ice sheets, is driving up sea 
levels worldwide. For my Ocean State that is a big deal. Warming and 
rising seas carry real consequences for coastal economies.
  New England is being hit particularly hard on this front. The Gulf of 
Maine is warming faster than almost any other part of the ocean in the 
world. Narragansett Bay, in my home state of Rhode Island, has already 
seen a nearly 4-degree Fahrenheit increase in winter water temperatures 
since the 1960s. Since measurements started in 1930, sea level is up 
nearly 10 inches at the tide gauge at Naval Station Newport.
  Now, 10 inches may not sound like an enormous amount, but if you do a 
little mathematics and take that 10 inches and you multiply it by the 
147 square miles that Narragansett Bay occupies, that adds nearly 100 
million cubic meters of water offshore--throw weight for when the next 
storm comes.
  Now, we don't model storm surge very well yet. But there is a lot of 
potential harm for Rhode Island. If you look not just at Narragansett 
Bay but at Rhode Island State waters, it is more than 500 million cubic 
meters, which is more than 500 million metric tons of potential storm 
surge.
  Earlier this year, researchers published in Nature an updated 
estimate of global sea level rise. With new estimates of how melting 
Antarctic sea ice will contribute to sea level rise, the scientists 
were able to paint a more accurate picture of what lies ahead. It is 
not good news.
  The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had previously 
estimated sea level rise to reach between 1.7 and 3.2 feet by 2100. The 
new study doubles that estimate, putting global sea level rise over 6 
feet by the end of this century.
  To complicate matters more, as Antarctica loses ice and consequently 
mass, it will actually also affect the gravitational pull of the 
Antarctic on the oceans. With Antarctica's gravitational pull reduced, 
other continents will proportionately carry more gravitational clout, 
drawing even more ocean water away from the South Pole to their coasts.
  Ben Strauss, the director of Climate Central's sea level rise 
program, recently told the Washington Post:

       [T]he 22nd century would be the century of hell. There 
     would really be an unthinkable level of sea rise. It would 
     erase many major cities and some nations from the map.

  A study published in the ``Proceedings of the National Academy of 
Sciences'' last month looked at the effects of rising seas on more than 
100 coastal cities around the world. The study predicts that we will 
hit 2 degrees Celsius of average global warming, which scientists say 
brings catastrophic and irreversible climate effects, sometime between 
2040 and 2050.
  When that happens, over 90 percent of the world's coastal areas will 
experience almost 8 inches of further sea level rise. On the Atlantic 
coast of the United States, it is estimated to be more than 15 inches. 
If we continue emissions unabated and hit 5 degrees Celsius warming by 
2100, New York City could see over 3\1/2\ feet of seawater swamping its 
streets.
  The year 2040 is not that far away. If you buy a house on the coast 
today, 2040 would fall well within your typical 30-year mortgage. As 
you might imagine, the real estate business is starting to take notice. 
Zillow, the online real estate marketplace, has looked at how 6 feet of 
sea level rise by 2100 would affect over 100 million U.S. homes in its 
database. Around 1 in 50 homes in the United States, or just under 2 
million properties, would find their ground floors underwater by 2100.
  Thirty-six U.S. cities would be considered completely lost, and 
another 300 cities would lose at least half of their homes. Florida 
fared the worst in the study, losing more than 12 percent of the 
State's housing to sea level rise. Hawaii is not far behind, with over 
9 percent of its homes expected to go underwater. Though New Jersey's 
overall housing situation fares somewhat better, with a loss expected 
at just over 7 percent, the value of those homes well exceeds any other 
State. New Jersey alone accounts for over 10 percent of the 
$882,000,000,000 worth of potentially underwater properties.
  Miami Beach would be the hardest hit city, losing over 37,000 homes, 
worth over $33 billion. Those numbers just count residential 
properties, not expected losses to commercial or public properties. The 
insurance industry uses the term ``100-year flood'' to describe a flood 
that has a 1-percent chance of occurring in a given year. According to 
a 2013 study commissioned by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, 
the area in the United States susceptible to 100-year floods will grow 
by 45 percent by the end of the century. Our Government Accountability 
Office says Federal flood insurance premiums are not keeping pace with 
that growing risk.
  From 2002 through 2013 already, taxpayers bailed out insured 
properties to the tune of $18 to $25 billion. Government-backed 
mortgage giant Freddie Mac is preparing itself for broad losses from 
climate-driven flooding. ``The economic losses and social disruption 
may happen gradually,'' says its Web site, ``but they are likely to be 
greater in total than those experienced in the housing crisis and the 
Great Recession.''
  Let me say that again: ``They are likely to be greater in total than 
those experienced in the housing crisis and Great Recession.'' Some of 
the effects of climate change, it says, may not even by insurable. 
Unlike the 2008 housing crash, owners of homes that are subsumed by 
rising seas would have little expectation of their home's value ever 
recovering. Therefore, they would have little incentive to make their 
mortgage payments, which would add to steep losses for lenders and 
insurers.
  We don't, of course, have to wait until 2100 to see the effects of 
sea level rise on coastal cities like Miami, Charleston, Norfolk, or 
Newport, RI. So-called sunny day flooding is increasing in coastal 
communities. As sea levels rise, regular high tides can be all that is 
needed to flood streets, sidewalks and basements. NOAA estimates that 
non-storm-related nuisance flooding, just from tides and sea level 
rise, has increased somewhere between 300 to 925 percent along the 
United States' three coastlines since the 1960s.
  This past October's King Tides--the year's highest tides--brought 
around 2 feet of water to Boston's waterfront. Last month's Super Moon 
pulled water into the streets of Charleston and the parking lots of New 
Hampshire. This wayward octopus--I don't know if you can see it 
clearly, but there is a fairly good-sized octopus here--ended up 
swimming through a Miami parking garage.
  These extreme high tides give a preview of what may be the new normal 
in this century. Higher seas plus stronger storms forebode real 
catastrophe for coastal communities. The Great New England Hurricane of 
1938 is the worst in Rhode Island's history. A storm surge of 12 to 15 
feet hit Narragansett Bay, engulfing downtown Providence. You can see 
old photographs of the streetcars with just their roofs showing over 
the water.
  If that storm hit again today, it would have a big head start, riding 
to shore on 10 more inches of sea with that potentially 500 million 
metric tons of water available for storm surge. Again, we don't know 
how much of it becomes storm surge, but it certainly raises the 
potential.
  This picture is from historic Newport after Superstorm Sandy gave us 
a glancing blow in Rhode Island in 2012. It brought a storm surge of 
over 9 feet to Providence, and over 4 feet to the south coast of the 
State. This is downtown Newport and Seamen's Church Institute right 
here, and somebody is kayaking through downtown.
  According to the most recent report from the National Ocean Economics 
Program, more than 134 million people lived in U.S. coastal zone 
counties in 2014. Those counties accounted for nearly half of the total 
U.S. GDP and

[[Page 15777]]

more than 40 percent of total U.S. employment. In my State of Rhode 
Island, the coastal economy accounts for $55 billion of the State's GDP 
and employed over 400,000 people in 2014.
  This productivity is at risk if those communities and their 
businesses cannot protect themselves from the consequences of our 
changing environment. A lot of places are taking this threat seriously. 
Although partisans in the State government make the phrase ``climate 
change'' a taboo in Florida, local policymakers, particularly in South 
Florida, are making climate change adaptation a priority, forming a 
regional bipartisan compact on climate resiliency, hiring resiliency 
and sustainability staff, building seawalls, installing pumps, updating 
building codes, and in Miami Beach's case--just in that one city--
making $400 million in storm water management upgrades.
  In New Hampshire, the Coastal Risks and Hazards Commission has 
advised cities to prepare infrastructure and buildings for rising seas. 
Louisiana rewrote its Coastal Master Plan to accept the dark 
predictions of land loss and sea level rise facing that lowland State 
and to include around 200 projects designed to protect Southern 
Louisiana's marshes and limit the effects of storm surge.
  In Alaska, Native villages are seeking financial support to relocate 
their traditional coastal homesteads to higher ground. In Rhode Island, 
under the leadership of Grover Fugate at our Coastal Resources 
Management Council and in cooperation with the leading experts at the 
University of Rhode Island, Rhode Island Sea Grant, and Rhode Island 
Geological Survey, we are well aware of what climate change, sea level 
rise, and storm surge mean for our coastal communities.
  STORMTOOLS, a free public online tool developed through this 
collaboration, is providing our city planners and concerned citizens 
with a visualization of the effects of various levels of sea level rise 
and storm surge on their properties. The Coastal Risk Environmental 
Index, which is shown here, will add even more specificity to the 
models working in STORMTOOLS. Users can actually navigate Google Earth 
to see what flood damage from sea level rise and storm surge will look 
like on a building-by-building basis. The city of Warwick, RI, featured 
here, is already using its maps in its future planning and emergency 
planning.
  The rising tide calls for increased investment in coastal resiliency 
around the country. Senators Merkley, Menendez, and I asked the 
Government Accountability Office to review the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration's support for coastal States' resilience 
efforts. Among its findings, the GAO report said that the Regional 
Coastal Resilience Grants Program ``received 132 qualified applications 
requesting a total of $105 million during its first application period 
in fiscal year 2015.'' Well, guess how much money was available to meet 
that $105 million approved or qualified need. Only $4.5 million. NOAA 
was able to support less than 5 percent of the coastal States' demand.
  Climate change doesn't care whether you believe the science or the 
propaganda and nonsense pumped out by the fossil fuel lobby--shoreside 
homes' basements will flood either way. It is not a matter of belief, 
it is a matter of physics.
  For all the denial and diversion, you will notice that the fossil 
fuel industry's web of denial groups don't talk much about the effects 
we are seeing in our oceans and along our coasts. Their business is 
denial and, through calculated misinformation, creating phony doubt. 
That is their mission. If that is your mission, it is hard to deny 
water levels that are measured essentially on a glorified yardstick at 
tide gauges. It is hard to deny measurements from a Ph test that high 
schoolers do in their science classes. It is hard to deny readings from 
thermometers.
  Here in the Senate, our choice is clear: We can take action or 
continue to sleepwalk through history. But we should remember Pope 
Francis's warning. Pope Francis said: ``God always forgives, we men 
forgive sometimes, but nature never forgives. If you give her a slap, 
she will give you one.'' And we have a big slap coming.
  If we do nothing, what will we tell the millions of Americans who 
live by the sea and rely on it for their livelihoods? What should we 
tell them when they can't get insured for the next hurricane or when 
their mortgages are underwater in a literal sense? If we refuse to help 
our own citizens, who then will help the millions of others in 
developing countries around the world suffering the same fate and 
looking to our country for leadership? We have a moral obligation to 
pluck our heads from the sand and get to work. The oceans warn; it is 
time we woke up and listened.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority whip.


                  Justice For All Reauthorization Bill

  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, it is my honor to come to the floor with 
the senior Senator from Vermont, my friend Mr. Leahy, to talk about 
bipartisan legislation that will soon help victims of crime restore 
their lives. The Justice for All Reauthorization Act passed the House 
last week, and the Senate followed suit with unanimous support. Now it 
is on its way to the President's desk so it can become the law of the 
land.
  When I served as the attorney general of Texas a few years ago, I 
felt that one of my most important jobs was to protect crime victims. I 
know that all Members of the Senate feel the same way. The Justice for 
All Reauthorization Act is first and foremost a bill that will help 
victims. It includes a number of provisions to help them get the 
justice they deserve. It will improve victims' rights by increasing 
access to restitution, reauthorize programs that support them in court, 
and increase resources for forensic labs to reduce the rape kit 
backlog.
  I have spoken about the rape kit backlog before, and it is a big 
problem. At one point, it was estimated that there were as many as 
400,000 untested rape kits in America, and this was due primarily to a 
lack of resources and lack of focus in making this a priority. This is 
evidence which has proven to be enormously powerful to help convict the 
guilty and exonerate the innocent.
  This legislation will also give law enforcement more resources to 
keep violent offenders off the street and fairly prosecute crimes.
  I know sometimes people must think Senator Leahy and I are the odd 
couple of the Senate. We worked together not only on this legislation 
but also on reforms of the Freedom of Information Act. We share a 
passion for that topic as well. I am enormously grateful to him for his 
partnership on this important legislation. I also wish to thank Senator 
Grassley for his leadership in helping to shepherd this bipartisan bill 
through the Judiciary Committee.
  I am looking forward to the Justice for All Reauthorization Act 
becoming law soon so we can help more victims restore their lives.
  I yield to the senior Senator from Vermont.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished senior Senator 
from Texas. Senator Cornyn and I have had the privilege of being 
prosecutors, he as an attorney general and I served as the State's 
attorney. I think you get a special view of what is needed. I have 
enjoyed working with the Senator because we do not have to paint a 
great picture for each other; we both understand the mistakes that can 
be made and why we do not want them.
  For more than 6 years, I have championed the reauthorization of the 
Justice for All Act. I want to ensure that our criminal justice system 
lives up to our national pledge of liberty and justice for all. Having 
served as a prosecutor--and most former prosecutors--I am committed to 
ensuring that our criminal justice system has the integrity and 
confidence of the public it serves. I should not just say former 
prosecutors; current prosecutors feel that way.
  From my time on the frontlines as a State's attorney in Chittenden 
County, VT, to the more than 15 years I have served as either chairman 
or ranking

[[Page 15778]]

member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, it has become clear to me 
that our system is deeply flawed. There is not always justice for all. 
I have met many innocent people wrongly convicted of crimes they did 
not commit.
  I shared the story of Kirk Bloodsworth. He was falsely convicted. He 
was sentenced to death for the rape and murder of a 9-year-old girl--a 
horrible crime, but he maintained his innocence. In 1993, he became the 
first death row inmate to be exonerated by DNA, and they were finally 
able to charge the man who did commit the horrible crime. The irony 
there is that some have said: Boy, don't they look alike? That is what 
happened.
  We know our system gets it wrong. We have a responsibility to improve 
our criminal justice system. That is why I joined with Kirk Bloodsworth 
years ago to introduce and enact the Post-Conviction DNA Testing Grant 
Program. It was originally part of the Innocence Protection Act, which 
was enacted in 2004. It gives defendants like Kirk a chance to prove 
their innocence.
  To ensure our justice system gets it right from the beginning, the 
bill provides a means to improve the quality of indigent defense. 
Ensuring good representation for those accused of crimes means fewer 
innocent people will be behind bars. It is an outrage if an innocent 
person is wrongly punished, but then that injustice is exacerbated 
because it means the person who committed the crime is still out there, 
and oftentimes, as my friend from Texas knows, they will commit the 
crime again. The American people deserve a system that gets it right 
the first time.
  Many Senators in this Chamber know the story of my friend Debbie 
Smith, also a friend of the senior Senator from Texas. She has become a 
champion for victims of sexual assault. She waited 6 years after being 
attacked before her rape kit was tested and a culprit was caught. Think 
about that. During those 6 years, she had to live in terror that the 
person who did this heinous crime might come back and do it again. No 
one should have to live in fear while an attacker remains free to 
victimize someone else or them.
  This legislation not only provides important resources to improve the 
quality and efficiency of forensic testing, but it also expands it to 
underserved populations, such as those in rural areas, which is much of 
my State. Actually, every one of us has rural areas in our States.
  I have worked with Senators on both sides of the aisle to craft 
solutions to some of the most significant issues of our time. That is 
why I am proud to partner with Senator Cornyn on this important 
legislation.
  I hope we will continue to work together in the next Congress. We 
have to continue to protect all victims. We have to create fairness in 
our criminal justice system. We have to make sure we get it right the 
first time.
  I call on those who have worked with me on this important legislation 
to continue to support our efforts. We can correct costly mistakes in 
our criminal justice system; we will be a better country for it. We 
will have a lot more respect for our criminal justice system, and we 
will do what the best of our prosecutors and police want to do--get it 
right.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority whip.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I again wish to express my gratitude to 
the senior Senator from Vermont, Senator Leahy, for his critical role 
in making sure this legislation becomes law, and I look forward to 
continuing to work with him on similar topics in the future.


                     Legislation Before the Senate

  Mr. President, we are about a week into the lameduck session, and we 
have already tackled some pretty significant legislation.
  Last week, I was proud to see two bills that I introduced pass the 
Chamber. The first was the Cross-Border Trade Enhancement Act, a bill 
that will help staffing, safety, and efficiency at our ports of entry, 
and it passed the Senate unanimously.
  In Texas, as the Presiding Officer knows in Arizona, this is not a 
new concern. Some of our border communities have seen the 
infrastructure and the staffing prove to be inadequate at our 
legitimate ports of entry, with a negative impact not only on the 
environment, as cars stack up to cross the border, but it also provides 
an unnecessary drag on legitimate trade and commerce.
  Through the use of innovative public-private partnerships, we have 
seen that we can increase staffing, improve the infrastructure, and 
basically end up filling the gap left by the Federal Government not 
doing its job by dealing--as it, of necessity, must--with our 
international borders and making sure they work as they should. This is 
a good step in the right direction, and I am hopeful we can get the 
legislation to the President's desk in the coming days so that more 
ports of entry throughout the country can take advantage of its 
benefits.
  Senator Leahy and I just spoke about the Justice for All 
Reauthorization Act, and then last night this Chamber voted to move the 
21st Century Cures bill forward with--incredibly--85 Senators voting in 
favor of it. It passed the House overwhelmingly last week, and I look 
forward to getting it through the Chamber and to the President's desk 
as soon as possible. This legislation will play an important role in 
supporting our scientists and researchers working to find cures for 
diseases like cancer, and that includes resources that will support the 
Cancer Moonshot Program, which will help those studying and researching 
to actually find a way to end cancer. That means cancer centers like 
the MD Anderson hospital will have more support to carry out their 
mission to make cancer history.
  The Cures legislation will support research for Alzheimer's and help 
fight the opioid addiction that is running rampant through many parts 
of our country. In other words, this legislation is critically 
important to the health of our country now and for generations to come.
  Significantly, the 21st Century Cures bill includes reforms to our 
mental health delivery system, in part, based on legislation I 
introduced in the Senate called the Mental Health and Safe Communities 
Act. As a result of the deinstitutionalization and treatment of people 
with mental illness in the 1990s, the safety net that was supposed to 
be there to catch people so they didn't fall through the cracks never 
came into being. So many people suffering from mental illness simply 
live on our streets as homeless individuals or they are frequently 
fliers, so to speak, in our criminal justice system and in many 
instances never had their mental illness diagnosed, much less treated, 
so they can actually have a chance at a better life. The mental health 
provisions included in the Cures bill is one way to correct that 
course. It would also help families with a mentally ill loved one find 
a path to treatment and a way forward, including assisted outpatient 
treatment programs.
  One of the biggest challenges families have when they have a mentally 
ill family member--particularly when they are an adult--is getting them 
to comply with their doctor's orders and take their medication. Due to 
the miracle of modern pharmacology, many people with mental illnesses, 
if they are compliant with their medication, can lead very productive 
lives. Often there are additional tools that need to be available to 
family members when they find their loved one is getting sicker and 
sicker and not being compliant with their medication, potentially 
becoming a danger to themselves or to the community at large.
  This legislation will equip State and local governments with better 
tools to assess individual health care needs so those suffering from 
mental illness in the criminal justice system can begin to recover and 
get the help they need, instead of getting sicker.
  This bill also encourages the creation of crisis intervention teams 
so our law enforcement officers and first responders can know how to 
deescalate a dangerous confrontation. If a police officer comes to the 
scene of a call only to confront a mentally ill person, if they are 
untrained and don't know how to deescalate the situation, they may find

[[Page 15779]]

themselves in danger, both the first responder as well as the 
individual person with mental illness. This is about finding ways to 
help the mentally ill individual get help while keeping the community 
safe at the same time.
  Mr. President, the last bit of business we have is to fund the 
government. I said many times the best way to do that is to take the 
appropriations bills up one at a time so we can properly vet them, 
discuss them, and pass them. Our friends across the aisle had a 
different view this year and blocked the passage of individual 
appropriations bills. While it is not my preference, it is where we 
are. Right now, we are looking forward to passing a continuing 
resolution soon as we fulfill our important responsibilities to the 
American people.
  I am glad to see we are making some progress on other pieces of 
legislation, including the Water Resources Development Act, a bill that 
will help us strengthen our waterways to account for growing trade and 
provide help for drought and flood protection.
  Finally, we are working to finish the national defense authorization 
bill that will make sure Congress provides the resources for our 
military men and women so they can accomplish their missions and keep 
America safe.
  We have quite a bit of work left to do and not much time left to do 
it in before the holidays, but with a little cooperation, I am sure we 
will get it all done.
  With that, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.
  Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I am here, along with a number of my 
colleagues, to applaud the 21st Century Cures Act as a major milestone 
and a long-overdue initial investment in combating the opioid epidemic. 
In particular, I applaud the inclusion of $1 billion in funding over 2 
years that will address this crisis. For treatment providers on the 
frontlines of the epidemic, I am pleased to say help is on its way with 
this bill when it is passed by the Senate--and I believe it will be.
  Make no mistake, these resources are badly needed. This remains an 
uncontrolled epidemic and unfortunately is still gaining strength. A 
staggering 47,000 Americans died of drug overdoses in 2014--more 
Americans than died in car accidents. Sadly, in New Hampshire, we are a 
bull's-eye for the highest percentage of drug overdoses per populace of 
any State in the country so I am pleased this bill includes language to 
prioritize the allocation of these new resources to the most heavily 
affected States, and I intend to work with the current and incoming 
administration to get this funding out to States as quickly as 
possible.
  More than a year ago, I introduced legislation to help stem the tide 
of the opioid crisis by providing emergency funding to States, first 
responders, and treatment providers. I joined with other Senators in 
working to include funding in the Cures Act to provide at least an 
initial infusion of funding to fight the opioid epidemic. I am relieved 
these efforts have led to the bipartisan agreement we will soon vote 
on.
  Last month, the U.S. Surgeon General, Dr. Vivek Murthy, issued a 
landmark report and an urgent call to action. He said 21 million 
Americans have a substance use disorder--far more Americans than have 
cancer--yet only 1 in 10 is receiving any kind of treatment.
  My State of New Hampshire, and New England overall, has been 
especially hard hit, but make no mistake, this is a nationwide 
epidemic, and it doesn't discriminate. It is impacting young and old, 
urban and rural, rich and poor, White and minority, Democrats, 
Republicans, and Independents.
  This fall I met with Susan Messinger of Holderness, NH. Her son Carl 
experimented with heroin at a party and quickly became addicted. He got 
treatment, was in recovery, and was doing great, but he came down with 
a respiratory infection and was prescribed medicine that unknown to 
him, included an opioid--just simple cherry cough medicine. Carl 
relapsed, and he died of a fentanyl overdose days before his 25th 
birthday.
  This chart entitled ``Drug Overdose Deaths Across America'' shows 
very vividly the extent of the problem. It was compiled by the National 
Center for Health Statistics at the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention. It shows the inexorable spread of the opioid crisis and the 
disease it causes from 2003, here where we don't see as much bright 
red, to 2008, where it is growing, to 2014, where it is almost the 
entire country. We can see that in the Presiding Officer's section of 
the country, in the Southwest, it is particularly challenging, as well 
as in the Appalachian region of the East. According to the CDC, 
mortality trends in the opioid epidemic are now similar to the trends 
in the HIV epidemic at its peak in the late 1980s and 1990s.
  The second chart shows drug overdose deaths across New Hampshire. It 
shows a parallel spread of the opioid epidemic in New Hampshire, with 
especially devastating effects in the northern part of the State--what 
we call the north country. In 2003, we see no orange and no red. In 
2007, we are beginning to see patches of orange. In 2011, they have 
turned red, and by 2014, it is particularly affecting the entire State, 
and here--the northern part of New Hampshire--is where it is hardest 
hit.
  In his landmark report last month, the U.S. Surgeon General said: 
``It is time to change how we view addiction--not as a moral failing 
but as a chronic illness that must be treated with skill, urgency and 
compassion.'' Yet what we are seeing in New Hampshire and across the 
country is that treatment centers are completely overwhelmed.
  Certainly, the new funding in the Cures Act will be welcome news to 
Friendship House in Bethlehem, NH, which is a treatment center I 
visited on Friday. It is up here in the northern part of the State in 
New Hampshire's north country, which has one of the highest overdose 
rates per capita in New Hampshire. Friendship House is the only 
treatment center within a radius of 65 miles.
  Back in April, Kaiser Health News reported on the case of Eddie 
Sawyer. Eddie overdosed and died while he was waiting for his turn to 
be admitted to Friendship House. When police found Mr. Sawyer, on the 
table next to his bed was a list of treatment facilities. There were 
checkmarks next to the name of each facility. Mr. Sawyer had called 
every place on the list, and he had not found one that could take him 
for treatment.
  The Surgeon General's new report states that nearly 9 out of 10 
people with substance use disorders do not receive treatment. They are 
being turned away. They are being denied treatment due to a chronic 
lack of resources. Hopefully, this legislation is going to help that 
because over the last year, I visited treatment centers in every part 
of the Granite State. These centers are staffed by skilled, dedicated 
treatment professionals. They are saving lives every day, but they tell 
me that for every life they save, others are being lost for lack of 
treatment capacity, facilities, and funding. When people with substance 
use disorders are turned away, this means they remain on the streets, 
desperate, often committing crimes to support their addiction and at 
constant risk of a lethal overdose.
  Last year, a promising young woman named Molly Alice Parks died of a 
heroin overdose in Manchester, NH--New Hampshire's largest city. Her 
father wrote her obituary which appeared in the Union Leader newspaper. 
He wrote openly about Molly's addiction, and the obituary included this 
plea to readers: ``If you have any loved ones who are fighting 
addiction, Molly's family asks that you do everything possible to be 
supportive, and guide them to rehabilitation before it is too late.''
  I admire the courage of Molly's father, his willingness to warn other 
families, and talk openly about his daughter's addiction, but what if a 
family persuades a son or daughter to seek treatment and no treatment 
is available? Sadly, that is the case in so many communities across 
America where treatment centers are overwhelmed.
  That is why the additional resources in the Cures Act are so 
important. This new funding will make a real difference for treatment 
providers in each of our

[[Page 15780]]

States. Make no mistake, this legislation will save lives. The funding 
in the Cures Act is a welcome initial investment in combating the 
opioid epidemic. President-Elect Trump, during dozens of visits to New 
Hampshire over the last year, pledged aggressive action to fight the 
opioid epidemic. When the new Congress convenes in January, we must 
come together with our new President, on a bipartisan basis, to address 
the opioid crisis in a comprehensive fashion, including continuing 
resources for policing, prevention, treatment, and recovery. As Surgeon 
General Murphy says, ``How we respond to this crisis is a test for 
America.'' With so many lives at stake, it is a test we must not fail.
  With the 21st Century Cures Act, Congress is providing urgent new 
funding for treatment on the frontlines--professionals who have been 
doing truly heroic, lifesaving work. Our message in passing this 
legislation is: Help is on the way. I urge my colleagues to give strong 
bipartisan support to this important bill.
  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. MANCHIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


              Coal Miner Health Care Benefits and Pensions

  Mr. MANCHIN. Mr. President, I rise to explain what is happening for 
all of my colleagues and my friends on both sides of the aisle.
  I have been here for 6 years as a Senator. I have always fought to 
make the body work, and for the people of West Virginia and for our 
country. I have never believed partisan gridlock is a way to accomplish 
our policy goals, so I haven't come to this decision easily. I have 
never used the procedure that I am using today, and I will use, to 
basically stop all UCs, a lot of good pieces of legislation, a lot of 
good friends who have worked diligently on this. I want to be able to 
work with them.
  My reason for doing this is that over 2 years ago we promised the 
retired coal miners of America--we promised them--mostly their 
families, and there are a lot of widows now; we promised them they 
would have their health care benefits that were guaranteed to them and 
their pensions. We have been working toward that.
  We knew this day would come. As of December 31, the end of this 
month--less than 4 weeks away--there are going to be 16,500 retired 
families, retired miners who are losing their health care benefits. 
There will be another 4,000 the first of next year.
  So I am using this procedure, which I do reluctantly and I never 
thought I would have to, because we are fighting for those people whom 
we promised, fighting for those we believe in, to thank them for the 
power they have provided to this Nation. Now we are turning our backs 
on them.
  We have pay-fors for this. We have a way to move forward. These are 
the health care benefits for our retired miners. It is something they 
have worked for, they have earned, they deserve, and we are the country 
we are because of the hard work they have done.
  So I wanted my colleagues to know why this procedure is going to be a 
little bit more laborious than they would have liked, why we might not 
be leaving here when they would have liked to go home. If we don't 
stand for the people who have made our country as great as it is, we 
stand for nothing.
  So with that, I hope my colleagues understand where I am coming from 
and why I hope they will be with me on this for the sake of all of 
these families and all of these widows and all of these miners who have 
given to much to our country.
  Thank you.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I wish to start by expressing my 
appreciation to all of my colleagues who have worked so hard on the 
priorities in the 21st Century Cures bill, including investing in 
tackling our hardest to treat diseases, confronting the opioid 
epidemic, strengthening mental health care, and advancing medical 
innovation.
  The legislation that we will be voting on either really late tonight 
or tomorrow morning takes important steps to improve the care that 
patients receive.
  I am very grateful to every Senator and Member of Congress who worked 
across the aisle to make this legislation the best it could be for 
those whom we serve. In particular, I want to express my heartfelt 
thanks to Vice President Joe Biden. Not everyone has the strength to 
respond to profound personal tragedy by doing even more to protect and 
help others, but that is exactly what he has done. I know we are all 
grateful for and inspired by his leadership, and I am confident it has 
given a lot of families hope, knowing that Joe Biden is fighting for 
them and their loved ones.
  Of course, I want to acknowledge and thank the chairman of the HELP 
Committee, Senator Alexander, for his work and leadership on this bill, 
as well as the Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton, Ranking Member 
Frank Pallone, and Congresswoman Diana DeGette.
  I am proud of our country's history of lifesaving public health 
initiatives and world-changing medical innovation. From eradicating 
smallpox to mapping the human genome, we have risen to challenges and 
found ways to combat seemingly unbeatable diseases and public health 
threats. There is no question we are a strong country for that.
  The bill we are talking about today, while far from perfect, gives us 
the chance to build on that tradition of leadership and respond to some 
urgent health challenges we face right now. One of those is the opioid 
epidemic. Like many of my colleagues, I have heard from far too many 
families and local leaders in my home State about the ways that opioid 
use disorders are ruining lives and tearing families apart. My 
constituent Penny LeGate, whose daughter Marah died of an overdose at 
the age of 19, said that this crisis can happen anywhere and it is 
everywhere. That is the same thing I have heard from worried parents 
and sheriffs and community leaders across Washington State.
  I was glad that earlier this year, the Senate passed the 
Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act to strengthen and improve 
programs that address opioid addiction. But, as Democrats made clear, 
improving policy wasn't enough. Tackling this crisis head-on requires 
putting new investments into these efforts as quickly as possible, and 
that is what this bill will do. It dedicates $1 billion over 2 years, 
above and beyond the budget caps, to help States and communities fight 
back. And critically, we were able to secure changes that ensure this 
money will go to States based on where it is needed the most.
  Many of my colleagues were closely involved with this effort, but in 
particular I wish to recognize Senators Whitehouse, Shaheen, Baldwin, 
Markey, Donnelly, and Manchin.
  I have also heard from people across Washington State and the country 
about what a broken mental health system means for them and their 
families. One constituent whose experience has really stuck with me is 
Jenny. Jenny is from Olympia, WA, and she was pregnant when her husband 
began having severe psychotic episodes. Jenny told me that she 
remembered how striking the differences were between the coordinated, 
thoughtful care she received as an expectant mother and the confusing 
patchwork that she and her husband had to navigate to try to help him 
get better. Jenny's husband cycled in and out of the hospital without 
effective treatment, and tragically he took his own life while Jenny 
was in the NICU with their newborn baby.
  Jenny's story is unfortunately one of many about families struggling 
to find quality mental health care for loved ones with mental illness. 
I am confident that everyone here today has heard these stories, and we 
know we have to do better.

[[Page 15781]]

  Our legislation will help expand access to quality care for mental 
illness and substance use disorders by making it easier for patients to 
get in touch with providers. It will strengthen coordination between 
local agencies that are engaged in crisis intervention, and it will 
make sure that resources are available to strengthen the mental health 
workforce.
  While we weren't able to resolve the IMD exclusion, which is a policy 
that makes it extremely difficult for States to provide inpatient care 
to those with mental illness and substance abuse disorders, this bill 
does change policy so that Federal funding will fully support the 
physical needs of children in psychiatric facilities.
  It also puts in place measures to strengthen our mental health parity 
law to make sure that health insurance will cover mental health and 
addiction services when it is needed. Chairman Alexander and I worked 
with Senators Murphy and Cassidy to move this legislation through our 
committee this year, and I wish to recognize their commitment and 
leadership on this issue in particular.
  In addition to investing in and tackling the opioid epidemic and 
putting in place desperately needed reforms to our mental health care 
system, this legislation makes real investments in tackling the hardest 
to treat diseases. According to the National Cancer Institute at NIH, 
40 percent of men and women in the United States will be diagnosed with 
some form of cancer in their lives. Right now, more than 5 million 
people are living with Alzheimer's. These are truly staggering 
statistics, and they represent enormous hardship and suffering and loss 
in nearly every family and community.
  Now we have made enormous progress in understanding and treating 
cancer, and we know more about how the brain works and what diseases 
like Alzheimer's and Parkinson's and traumatic injuries do to human 
minds, but we can and must do more, and that is exactly what the 
investments in NIH in this bill will mean.
  While this is not the mandatory funding we had hoped for, I want to 
be very clear: This is real funding. So $4.8 billion is paid for within 
this bill, targeted to specific NIH initiatives, and available to 
appropriators above and beyond the budget caps. That means, as a result 
of this legislation--and thanks, in particular, to the leadership and 
vision of Vice President Biden--we will be able to invest billions 
right away in better understanding, preventing, and treating diseases 
that have impacted so many families.
  This bill also ensures that those investments in research will 
benefit all Americans, including women and children, LGBT individuals, 
and racial and ethnic minorities.
  This bill also puts $500 million above and beyond the budget cap 
toward helping the FDA meet the same high standards of patient and 
consumer safety in the face of increasing demands on the agency and new 
responsibilities under this legislation. As Democrats have made clear 
throughout this process, upholding the gold standard of FDA approval 
that patients and families across the country trust is a top priority.
  In light of the antibiotic-resistant infections linked to 
contaminated medical devices called duodenoscopes in Seattle and across 
the country, it was particularly important to me to make sure that this 
bill strengthened the FDA's authority to require that medical device 
manufacturers ensure their products will remain safe after they have 
gone into repeated uses at our hospitals.
  We also fought hard to move many of the other FDA reform policies 
that are included in this bill in the direction of greater patient and 
consumer safety. In particular, I was pleased that we were able to take 
out legislation that would have watered down transparency around drug 
and device industry payments to doctors, and I appreciate my colleagues 
on the other side of the aisle who were ultimately willing to work with 
us to make those changes.
  Now, looking ahead to next year, I plan to monitor implementation of 
this bill extremely closely, with a focus on making sure the incoming 
administration adheres to the policies laid out in this bill and 
upholds the FDA's responsibility to patients and families to ensure our 
medicines and treatments are safe and effective. This standard has been 
critical to fueling biomedical innovation in America for over half a 
century. And while I am disappointed that Republicans were unwilling to 
take action on this legislation to tackle the high cost of prescription 
drugs, I am very glad we were able to remove expensive provisions that 
could have driven up costs for consumers even more.
  While this bill is not what I would have written on my own, it is 
certainly not what my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would 
have written on their own, either. It locks in critical advancements 
ahead of the incoming administration and the partisan approach they are 
signaling they will take on health care, and it will make a real 
difference for patients and families across the country now and for 
years into the future.
  Before I wrap up, I want to acknowledge the extraordinary time and 
effort put in by all of our staffs. There have been a lot of late 
nights and weekends for our staffs, not just this year but last year as 
well on this bill, and I want to take just a minute to recognize their 
extra effort and sacrifice.
  On Senator Alexander's staff, I want to particularly acknowledge and 
thank his staff director, David Cleary, as well as Mary-Sumpter 
Lapinski and Grace Stuntz, his health and FDA policy leads, who worked 
very closely with my staff over many months. I also want to acknowledge 
and thank Margaret Coulter, Brett Meeks, Laura Pence, Melissa Pfaff, 
Kara Townshend, and Elizabeth Wroe for their efforts on this bill.
  In the House, I want to recognize and thank the staff of Congressman 
Pallone, including his staff director, Jeff Carroll, along with Tiffany 
Guarascio, his health policy lead. I thank the staff of Chairman Upton, 
particularly his staff director, Gary Andres, and Paul Edattel, his 
health policy lead.
  In addition, I thank the staff of my members on the HELP Committee, 
who worked so closely with my staff to make this a reality. In 
particular, I thank David Bonine and Joe Dunn with Senator Murphy.
  I want to acknowledge the assistance of Amy Rosenbaum, Jeanne 
Lambrew, Kate Mevis, and Dr. Francis Collins, among many others within 
the administration who helped make today possible.
  Finally, I want to close by thanking my staff. I can't say enough 
about my incredible staff, who have put their time and talents into 
this bill from the word ``go.'' In particular, I thank my staff 
director, Evan Schatz, and my health policy director, Nick Bath, for 
their extraordinary efforts on this legislation. Thank you.
  I would also like to acknowledge the hard work of Remy Brim, Julie 
Tierney, Andi Fristedt, Colin Goldfinch, Melanie Rainer, Madeleine 
Pannell, Megan Howard, Elizabeth Wagner, Wade Ackerman, Kalah 
Auchincloss, Jane Bigham, Helen Hare, Eli Zupnick, John Righter, Nick 
McLane, and my chief of staff, Mike Spahn. I want you to know that I 
noticed their long hours and unwavering commitment on this legislation. 
It means a lot.
  I urge my colleagues to join the House when we vote on this, which 
voted overwhelmingly in support of this bill--392 to 26--and to join us 
in sending this legislation to President Obama's desk.
  Thank you.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cruz). The Senator from Mississippi.
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, before the distinguished Senator from 
Washington moves on to her other duties, I want to commend her and 
Senator Alexander for the outstanding job they have done and for the 
long hours she and her colleagues on the HELP Committee have put in to 
making the Cures Act the reality that it will be in a few days.
  I know the distinguished Senator is on her way to other meetings. I 
have a few things to say about it, but I want to express that before 
she leaves the Chamber.

[[Page 15782]]

  Truly, as Senator Murray said, the 21st Century Cures Act is a world-
changing piece of legislation. It seems rather quiet and unremarkable 
today, but I actually believe we are taking a major step toward disease 
cure and health care research that rivals the legislation which 
actually founded the National Institutes of Health some decades ago. So 
we are about important business here at Christmastime as we near the 
end of this lameduck session.
  Senator Blunt and I and perhaps other Senators were over in the 
Chamber of the other body last Wednesday afternoon when the House of 
Representatives passed the 21st Century Cures Act by an overwhelming 
bipartisan vote, 392 to 26. I appreciated the work House leaders did 
from top to bottom and on both sides of the aisle on this important 
legislation.
  Of course, I am always pleased to visit my colleagues over there. A 
number of our House colleagues were over here last night when the 
Senate invoked cloture on the Cures Act by an overwhelming vote of 85 
to 13. We will get to the vote either this afternoon or early tomorrow, 
and I have every confidence that there will be a strong vote on final 
passage.
  The 21st Century Cures Act is the product of several years of 
bipartisan work in both Houses. My friend from Washington State gave a 
comprehensive overview of the legislation, which is indeed 
breathtaking. I wish to come behind her and mention what an 
accomplishment this is in three areas--first, in Alzheimer's research; 
second, in pediatric research; and finally, in the drug approval 
process.
  I appreciate my friend from Washington and 62 others agreeing to take 
into this legislation the EUREKA Act, which I was happy to sponsor and 
which 62 of my colleagues cosponsored. EUREKA would and will initiate 
prize competitions in the fight against some of our Nation's most 
terrible diseases, including Alzheimer's. These prizes would pay only 
for success, and they would complement current funding that is and will 
be ongoing, according to the legislation. So this will be over and 
above what we are already doing for Alzheimer's. The Senator from 
Washington is correct about how costly Alzheimer's is. It will top $1 
trillion in taxpayer cost by the year 2050 unless we get a cure or 
unless we achieve major goals with regard to stopping Alzheimer's. So 
it is an expensive disease--the most expensive disease in the history 
of this country--but it is also terribly expensive in terms of human 
suffering. I know many Americans, including my family, have been 
touched in a very terrible and dramatic way by Alzheimer's.
  I am pleased that the EUREKA prizes are part of this legislation. I 
want to thank everyone who helped us in this regard.
  I am thankful for the advice we got from the XPRIZE Foundation and 
from all of the Alzheimer's groups, including the Alzheimer's 
Association and UsAgainstAlzheimer's.
  Thanks should also go to Dr. Francis Collins and the entire team at 
the National Institutes of Health for making this legislation work and 
for listening to a different idea--the concept of prizes for health 
care research--and giving it an attentive ear and being willing to 
agree that, in addition to the funding, we would attack these diseases 
with a prize competition.
  The NIH funding in Cures includes additional dollars for the BRAIN 
Initiative, and these EUREKA prizes will ensure that our researchers 
have the tools they need.
  Secondly, another important part of the NIH section of the Cures Act 
is the National Pediatric Research Network, inspired by the Pediatric 
Research Improvement Act that I was happy to cosponsor with Senator 
Brown earlier this year. Senator Brown and I have been working together 
tirelessly to see NIH implement the National Pediatric Research 
Network, and I am glad to see this provision in the bill. Very simply, 
the goal is to expand access to clinical trials and treatments for 
children, especially those with rare diseases. That is a second aspect 
of this Cures bill that I am so pleased to see the leadership of this 
committee being attentive to.
  Thirdly, this bill makes major breakthroughs in the way we approve 
drugs in this country. I am pleased that language from another bill I 
cosponsored, the Patient-Focused Impact Assessment Act, was included in 
the bill. This section of the Cures bill would ensure that patients 
understand the way FDA considers the patient experience and the way FDA 
considers data in the drug approval process. So for patients like those 
living with Duchenne and their families, for people who are interested 
in the drug approval process, and for the parents of children, this is 
a truly bipartisan achievement.
  I am happy that Senator Murray was here so I could congratulate her 
in person. Certainly Senator Lamar Alexander, chairman of our HELP 
Committee, deserves high praise from both sides of the aisle for his 
leadership in this regard, as well as the bipartisan leadership of the 
House of Representatives.
  As we enter this holiday season, patients, advocates, and providers 
have an extra reason to rejoice as this bill heads to the President's 
desk.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.


                            Order for Recess

  Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
stand in recess, following the remarks of Senator Casey, until 2:15 
p.m. today.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in 
morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                     Tributes to Departing Senators

  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, in the interest of time, I will limit my 
remarks.
  I rise this afternoon to commend and salute three Senators from the 
Democratic caucus who are leaving the Senate this year. I will have 
longer written statements for the Record to appropriately pay tribute 
to their service. In alphabetical order, Senator Boxer of California, 
Senator Mikulski of Maryland, and Senator Reid of Nevada.


                   Barbara Boxer and Barbara Mikulski

  I will offer some specific remarks about Leader Reid, in the interest 
of time, but I do want to commend and salute Senator Boxer for her 
service to the people of California and to our Nation, as well Senator 
Mikulski for her great work--two great advocates, two individuals whom 
we are going to miss terribly here in the Senate. As I said, I will put 
longer statements in the Record.


                               Harry Reid

  With regard to Senator Reid, I can't help taking the time to say a 
few words about him in the remaining minutes we have before we break 
for the caucus lunches.
  Mr. President, as many people know, Senator Harry Reid is a son of 
Searchlight, a small community in the State of Nevada, and he comes 
from humble beginnings. It is probably best to read his words about his 
beginnings rather than trying to describe or encapsulate them. Among 
many things he said about his background and his family, he said this, 
in short fashion, about his background:

       My dad was a hard rock miner. My mom took in wash. I grew 
     up around people of strong values.

  That is a direct quotation from Harry Reid about his background. I 
think those values have helped him his whole life. Those values, that 
work ethic, and that strength of character allowed him to go from 
Searchlight to rise up to become a leader in his home State of Nevada 
in many positions in State government, to be a Member of the United 
States House of Representatives, later to be elected to the United 
States Senate in 1986, and then, of course, to become the Democratic 
leader--and he remains so until the end of this Congress--but, of 
course, the pinnacle was his service as majority leader, one of the 
longest serving majority leaders in our history. That is kind of a 
summary of his positions in government, important though they are, 
leading a large and diverse caucus. It is a

[[Page 15783]]

difficult job whether you are leading that caucus in the majority or 
leading it as the minority party. So we salute and commend his service 
to his home State of Nevada and to the people of the United States.
  But maybe more important than just talking about positions he held is 
to talk for just a minute about who he is--a fighter. No person has 
fought harder for workers and for their families than Harry Reid. No 
Senator, no person I know in public life, has made that such a central 
part of who they are and a central part of their priorities, also, at 
the same time, being a fighter for those who often don't have a voice 
here--people who don't have power ever in their lives or often don't 
have power on a regular basis. They always had a friend in Harry Reid--
someone who would go to the end of the Earth fighting on behalf of 
them.
  Over and over in our caucus, he would say: We have to work on this 
issue, or we have to get this or that done for people who are hurting. 
There are so many different examples of that, which we don't have time 
to enumerate them today.
  I am recalling today a great line from a great Democratic leader, 
William Jennings Bryan, who talked about the power of one individual to 
make a difference and the power of an issue or set of issues to drive 
that person's success in public life or even beyond public life, as a 
citizen. William Jennings Bryan once said: ``The humblest citizen in 
all the land, when clad in the armor of a righteous cause, is stronger 
than all the hosts of error.'' So said William Jennings Bryan about one 
citizen clad in the armor of a righteous cause.
  Harry Reid is a Senator and he has been a leader, but he is also a 
very humble man at his core. His righteous cause wasn't just one issue, 
but if you had to encapsulate it or summarize it, the righteous cause 
for Harry Reid was fighting on behalf of those workers, fighting on 
behalf of those people who did not ever have power in their lives.
  His ability to not just articulate their concerns and their struggles 
but literally their hopes and their dreams was one of the reasons why 
so many of us have such a high regard for him. We commend and salute 
his service. We appreciate his commitment to strong values, but we 
especially appreciate his steadfast support for those who needed his 
voice, who needed his work, who needed his votes, and needed his 
leadership.
  To Senator Reid, we say thank you for your service, thank you for 
what you did for your home State of Nevada, and thank you for what you 
did for the United States of America.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________