[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 12]
[Senate]
[Pages 16365-16376]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017--CONFERENCE 
                                 REPORT

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
resume consideration of the conference report to accompany S. 2943, 
which the clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       Conference report to accompany S. 2943, a bill to authorize 
     appropriations for fiscal year 2017 for military activities 
     of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and 
     for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to 
     prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, 
     and for other purposes.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.


                         Tributes to Harry Reid

  Mr. HELLER. Mr. President, I stand in front of you to commemorate the 
long life and service of a fellow Nevadan who has given his all to 
serve our State and this country.
  It has been said it is better to be feared than loved if you cannot 
be both. My colleagues in the Senate and those in the Gallery probably 
agree with me, no individual in politics embodies that sentiment today 
more than my colleague from Nevada, Harry Mason Reid.
  Today I am on the floor to pay respect to Senate Minority Leader 
Harry Reid, after 30 years of service in this Chamber, in addition to 
the years of public service before entering into the Senate.
  I know Harry is notorious for his short conversations--minus today--
for hanging up the phone before our conversations end, and sometimes 
even midsentence, so I will try to keep my comments respectfully short.
  Before I truly get into the speech, I must first recognize Harry's 
family. As a public official, very often it is time with your family 
that is most often sacrificed the most, and it is very true, as stated 
by a leader in our shared faith when he said, ``Nothing compensates for 
failure in the home.''
  Harry has been keenly aware of this fact and he shows his adoration. 
He has shown it for his wife Landra and his five children: Lana, Rory, 
Leif, Josh, and Key. He has made sure to keep a very close bond with 
his wife, his children, and grandchildren. That is something we all 
respect and something I wish to emulate.
  So what can I say? It is an end of an era for my home State of 
Nevada. Harry has devoted his entire adult life to one cause, the State 
of Nevada and serving it.
  Trust me, though we have had our differences when it came to our 
State, I can attest to one thing; that is, there is no stronger partner 
to serve the people of Nevada than Harry Reid.
  It has been said victorious leaders feel the alternative to winning 
is totally unacceptable so they figure out what must be done to achieve 
victory, and then they go after it with everything at their disposal. I 
believe that describes Harry Reid in a nutshell.
  Another measure of success, something Harry and I have found amusing 
in the past, is being blamed for all things--all that is good, all that 
is bad, and all that is ugly. Let me assure you, Harry has been blamed 
for a lot, some fairly and some unfairly.
  Senator Reid has served in every level of government, from city 
attorney, the State assembly, Lieutenant Governor, U.S. Congressman, 
and Senator. As a Senator, he is one of only three to serve at least 8 
years as majority leader. Even in retirement, due to his far-reaching 
influence in just about every facet of State, local, and Federal 
Government, I totally expect he will operate as Nevada's third Senator.
  After 26 elections, Harry knows a thing or two about representing his 
constituency. He is one of the sharpest tactical minds ever to enter 
the political arena. Having worked together over the years, my hope is 
that we have sent a message, not only to all Nevadans but to everyone 
across this country, that two people who you can tell differ on many 
opinions can work well together, get things done for their constituents 
when both are willing.
  That is why it is fitting this week that the Lake Tahoe Restoration 
Act will pass the Senate and will be sent to the President's desk to be 
signed into law. After fighting for years to refocus Federal policy on 
the 21st century threats to the lake, we teamed up to ensure important 
work that preserves the ``Jewel of the Sierra'' for future generations 
and that it will advance.
  One of Harry's lasting legacies will be that he and I worked to 
improve water clarity, reduce wildfire threats, jump-start 
transportation and infrastructure projects, and combat invasive species 
at Lake Tahoe. Because of this work, Lake Tahoe has once again been 
made a national priority.
  Another policy initiative that we worked together on was the fight 
against Yucca Mountain. Harry, rest assured, I will continue to fight 
Yucca. My mantra is borrowed from one of your late friends, the late 
Senator Ted Kennedy, when he said: ``The work goes on, the cause 
endures. . . .''
  We will not allow Nevada to turn into America's nuclear dump against 
the will of its own people.
  Harry, you share the Nevada values such as faith in God, hard work, 
and commitment to family. I know, because you displayed these values at 
home, at work, and at church. In fact,

[[Page 16366]]

actually, that is how we first met Harry. It was during his tenure as 
Lieutenant Governor when he spent time in Carson City. Our families 
were able to meet each other and become friends. Eventually, I became 
very good friends with his son Leif. Harry, your dedication to family 
is extraordinary and it serves as a model to all of us.
  I would be remiss if I didn't share a couple of my favorite Harry 
Reid stories. There are a lot of them. There are a few I cannot share, 
there are a few I can so I will share with you the ones I can.
  Before serving in the Senate, I was elected to the House of 
Representatives in 2007, until my appointment to the Senate in 2011. 
Late one evening, I was sitting in my office with my chief of staff, 
Mac Abrams, discussing a few last-minute details before leaving for the 
day. It must have been near the end of the week because staffers in the 
House offices were milling around the hall celebrating a birthday 
party, enjoying each other's company, playing loud music, and taking a 
few moments to relax. I was having a hard time keeping the noise from 
the halls out of my office because of the thin walls. All of a sudden, 
it was if it all stopped immediately. A quiet hush came over the crowd. 
It became so quiet, to the point I could hear a small echoing--tap, 
tap, tap. The taps were magnified. The hallway, which was previously 
full of life, just immediately died. I began to walk toward the hall to 
see what it was. I could tell the tapping noise was the sound of 
footsteps. As they grew louder and closer, I barely heard a peep in 
that hallway. Sure enough, the next sound I heard was the doorknob to 
my office turning, and in walks Harry: ``Hi, Dean. Do you have a few 
minutes?'' To me, that story illustrates how much presence Harry has 
and the respect he commands no matter where he is. He quieted an entire 
hallway full of lively staffers by just passing through and walking 
down that hallway.
  The second story occurred more recently. We were in Harry's office on 
a January morning soon after I was elected to my first full term. 
During that campaign, Harry and his special friends gave me 12 million 
reasons why I shouldn't be standing there in his office that day, but, 
hey, this is the Senate and collegiality reigns supreme so I was at 
that breakfast because our constituents were there.
  Harry and I have known each other for many years, and he made it a 
point to tell those in attendance how close we were. We were having a 
good breakfast. He gets up to tell everyone how long he had known me, 
some of my background--but he kept highlighting how close we were.
  So after his short speech--a little shorter than today--Harry looks 
at me, offers for me to say a few of my own words. So I just got up in 
the front of the room and made sure that everybody knew I could attest 
that at least one Reid voted for me--Harry's son Leif. The look on 
Harry's face was priceless. Seeing Harry process the fact that there 
was a Reid who voted for me is a memory seared in my brain forever.
  For me, this speech is not a goodbye because I know we will be seeing 
you back home in our great State. Harry, people, like me, may disagree 
with you at times, but we will always respect you for three things: 
your devotion to your family, your service to our State and Nation, and 
your commitment to fighting for what you believe in.
  This Chamber has been blessed with some of the greatest men and women 
who have ever served our Republic. Today I recognize and rise to 
recognize your place among these figures and hope your career will give 
inspiration to a young child from Carson City or Searchlight or 
anywhere else in Nevada to follow in your footsteps.
  Again, congratulations on your career. We, the people of Nevada, 
thank you for your service. Lynne and I wish you and Landra all the 
best in the years ahead--and as your new senior Senator, I hope I can 
count on your vote.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Rubio). The assistant Democratic leader.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I wish to say a few words about Harry 
Reid, our departing, retiring, Democratic leader. It is appropriate he 
is not on the floor because it is painful for him to sit and hear 
anybody say anything nice about him. I am sure he is going to be happy 
not hearing these words, but I want the rest of the folks following the 
proceedings in the Senate to hear them.
  I was first elected to the House of Representatives the same year as 
Harry, 1982. A friend of mine, who is an attorney in Chicago named Ed 
Joyce, said: Be sure and look up this Harry Reid from Nevada because he 
is a great fellow and a great lawyer. So I did. We came in with a large 
class of over 50 Members. I went up to Harry and said: Hi. I am Dick 
Durbin from Illinois. We have a mutual friend in Chicago.
  He said: Well, great. I am looking forward to working with you.
  I said: So are you headed up to Harvard for the orientation? I will 
see you up there.
  He said: No, I am headed to Kansas City. We have settlement 
conference in a personal injury lawsuit that I couldn't miss.
  And I thought to myself, this is some lawyer. Up to the bitter end of 
his legal career, he was still devoted to the cause of representing 
clients and representing them effectively. When Harry makes a 
commitment, he keeps it. I knew at that moment and I have known it ever 
since.
  Four years later, he was in the Senate, I was still in the House, but 
the day came when I finally got elected to the Senate and joined Harry 
Reid.
  I know we had a good friendship to start because we came to the House 
together, but I remember the day and I remember the moment when that 
friendship became something special. It was right there in the well of 
the Senate.
  The most important bill in Harry's political career was up for a 
vote. It was on Yucca Mountain.
  He came before the rollcall was being announced and he said: How are 
you going to vote?
  I said: Well, Harry, I have kind of mixed feelings on this.
  He said: Stop. I need you. I think I have enough votes, but I may 
need you. So can you promise that if I need your vote you will be 
there?
  I said: Well, all right.
  But he said: But I don't think I will need your vote.
  You know what happened next. They called the roll, and at the very 
end, one of the Democratic Senators he counted on voted the other way. 
He turned to me and said: Well?
  I said: I am giving you my word.
  And I voted with Harry Reid on Yucca Mountain.
  That was the moment when our friendship became solid. In this 
business, your word is your bond. When you promise somebody you are 
going to stick with them come heck or high water, that is when it is 
tested.
  Our friendship grew from that point. I didn't know the time would 
come, but it did, amazingly, when Tom Daschle lost in the Senate race 
in South Dakota. The next day, I got a call from Harry Reid. He said: I 
hope you will consider running for whip. You ought to call every Member 
of the caucus, and I did.
  I quickly learned that many of them had called him and said: Whom do 
you want to be your whip? And he said: Well, I think Durbin would be a 
good choice.
  That is why I am sitting here today.
  Twelve years later, I am still serving as Harry Reid's whip and still 
counting the votes on key issues, and during those 12 years, I probably 
spent more time talking to Harry Reid, my colleague in the Senate, than 
to any other Member of this body. It is a close, personal friendship 
and relationship, and we have gone through a lot together.
  I listened to his stories. He told some of them today. He returns to 
his youth, growing up in Searchlight, which we heard about today in 
just wonderful detail, but he also returns to all of those friendships 
that were made during those years with people he grew up with in 
Searchlight and in Henderson, where he went to school. I have come

[[Page 16367]]

to know these people as if they were my own classmates because I have 
heard these stories so many times. It is part of who he is, and it is 
part of his value system. It explains some important decisions in his 
life.
  When he talks about the Affordable Care Act, we understand that he 
still remembers that his mother needed dentures, and he saved up money 
to buy his mother a set of teeth. He thought about the fact that there 
was no medical care for his family when they needed it the most. He 
thought about the depression that took his father's life and how that 
might have been averted with the right medical care. That is what has 
inspired him to public life.
  The one thing that has inspired him the most is Landra. Over and 
over, I have heard these stories about this courtship. Now, by most 
standards, getting married when you are 19 is not recommended but, 
clearly, in this case, it worked out beautifully. When he tells the 
story of how he finally got Landra to marry him, it appears there was a 
little bit of tension between Landra's family and this young Harry 
Reid, to the point where Landra's dad basically said to him: Stay away; 
I don't want you dating my daughter. Well, they had words and other 
things, and Harry insisted. He dated Landra, and they were married. The 
interesting thing about that is that despite that tension with her 
father in those early years, Harry wears a ring that her father used to 
wear, and he carries it around with pride in memory of her father and 
her family. He manages to keep those memories as part of his life and 
his inspiration.
  Another thing my colleagues may or may not know is that Harry is a 
voracious reader. He reads books constantly. Even after he lost the 
sight in his right eye, he has continued to read. I love to read as 
well. It has been one of my real joys in life, exchanging books with 
Harry. He reads everything under the sun. One time he told me he was 
reading the Koran cover to cover. I thought: Man, that is something I 
am not sure I could even do. He has this curiosity, this interest in 
learning. Even at this point in his life, as he nears the end of his 
public career, he wants to continue to learn about people and history 
and important things.
  I look back on experiences we have had together. It was 9/11 when 
Harry and I were in a room just a few feet away from here when there 
was an attack in New York, and in Virginia, and we thought the Capitol 
would be the next target. We had to race out of this building and stand 
outside, not knowing which way to turn as we were afraid that we were 
the next target here at the U.S. Capitol. Those were moments we spent 
together that I won't forget.
  I remember as well that he was one of the first to say to my junior 
Senator from Illinois, Barack Obama, that he should seriously consider 
running for President. President Obama the other night said that was 
one of the most important pieces of advice he received in making his 
decision to be a candidate for President of the United States. It is an 
indication of Harry's credibility--how much people trust him, and how 
when he gives his word, you know he is going to be there.
  When President Obama was elected, he needed a person--more than one, 
but he certainly needed a leader in the Senate whom he could count on. 
He couldn't have had a better ally than Harry Reid. When I look back on 
the battles over the last 8 years that were waged on behalf of America 
and Harry's leadership role with the President, there wasn't another 
person in this Chamber who could really take as much credit. He would 
be the last person in the world to do so.
  When it came to the stimulus package to turn this economy around, it 
was Harry Reid counting the votes. It was Harry Reid working every 
single day the holding hands of those Members of the Senate who weren't 
quite sure they could be there when he needed them.
  It was Harry Reid who was counting up to 60 votes to pass the 
Affordable Care Act. It took every single Democrat. Not a single 
Republican would join us in that effort. And Harry Reid had to do it. 
What was he up against? He was up against Ted Kennedy, who sadly was 
giving his life up to cancer at that moment and fighting to stay alive 
until he could vote for that important bill. It was Harry Reid working 
with other Members of the Senate who would get cold feet on the issue 
and had to be brought back in. He did it time and again, day after day 
after day. In the end, 20 million Americans have health insurance 
because of Harry Reid's determination that what he went through as a 
kid growing up in Searchlight would not be repeated for families across 
the United States.
  When it came to Wall Street reform and the Frank and Dodd bill that 
passed through the Senate, Harry stuck with it and made sure we passed 
it, hoping to avoid the kind of recession we have been through and the 
damage that was done to businesses and families and individuals all 
across the United States.
  I knew he was a fighter because I knew his record when it came to 
being a lawyer. There are so many stories about his clients that I have 
heard over and over. I feel like they were my clients because I have 
heard those stories so often.
  One of the things I remember and read about in his book I want to 
share with you. There was a woman named Joyce Martinez who was working 
in Las Vegas, and the police came in to the casino where she was 
working and arrested her for writing bad checks at the local grocery 
store. Joyce tried going to several lawyers and kept insisting they 
were wrong. She had never done anything like that, but none of these 
lawyers would take the case. Then she met Harry Reid. Harry believed 
her. Harry said she reminded him of the people he had grown up with--
real people who had nothing but hard work as their life. Like many of 
the cases Harry decided to take, his colleagues said: What are you 
doing wasting your time on this case? Spend your time on worthwhile 
cases. But every step of the way, despite the ridicule, Harry decided 
to stand up for this cocktail waitress. Harry was determined to keep at 
it and to make sure that she had a strong voice in court. Ultimately, 
Joyce won her case, and Harry Reid ended up with a victory that he 
still counted many years later as one of his great successes as a 
lawyer.
  He also made sure the store that brought the charges against her had 
to follow the law in the future. So he didn't just help Joyce, he 
helped a lot of other people as well.
  For Harry, this is what the law was all about as a lawyer and what it 
was all about as a Senator--making life better for people and families 
across the United States.
  He has fought for so many important causes, and there is one that I 
want to give special thanks for. It was his commitment to the DREAM 
Act. I introduced this legislation 16 years ago when I discovered a 
young woman in Chicago, undocumented, who sadly couldn't go on with her 
life and go to college because of her legal status. I introduced the 
DREAM Act to say those young people brought to the United States as 
kids deserve a second chance. Harry Reid heard my speeches and then met 
his own DREAMer in Nevada: Astrid Silva, a DREAMer who would often 
write to Harry with updates on her life. On December 8, 2010, Harry 
Reid kept his promise to me and a promise to Astrid and to other 
DREAMers by allowing the DREAM Act to be brought to the floor for a 
vote. The Senate Gallery was filled with DREAMers wearing their 
graduation gowns and caps to remind people they were students who 
wanted to use their education and talents for the future of America. 
Fifty-five Senators voted for the DREAM Act that day. Harry had given 
us our chance. But it wasn't enough to pass because we needed 60 votes 
under the Senate rules.
  Harry Reid joined me and 22 other Senators in sending a letter to the 
President of the United States asking that he do everything he can to 
protect these DREAMers, and he did, with an Executive order known as 
DACA. To date, 744,000 of these young people have been protected with 
President Obama's Executive order, because Harry Reid

[[Page 16368]]

believed, as I believe, that these young people deserve the chance.
  Let me tell my colleagues one last story that I think really defines 
Harry--his courage, as well as Landra's courage. It goes back to his 
days as chairman of the Nevada Gaming Commission. Being a Mormon, not 
gambling, not drinking, he was the perfect choice for gaming 
commissioner. It was hard to consider bribing him. In the 1970s, Harry 
wore a wire for the FBI to catch a bribery attempt. The tape that was 
transcribed from that wire ends with Harry jumping out of his seat and 
shouting: You SOB, you tried to bribe me. Harry couldn't tolerate that 
somebody thought he could be bought.
  In an effort to retaliate, the mob was mad at Harry, and they planted 
a bomb in his family car. Thank goodness, a watchful Landra spotted it 
and told Harry: Don't start the car. They are alive today because of 
Landra's vigilance, but they suffered that indignity because of their 
courage in standing up for ethics and integrity. Today, when we hear 
people talking about how rough politics can be, it certainly doesn't 
lead to a bomb, in most circumstances. In this case, Harry proved then 
and today that he is up to that kind of a challenge.
  Let me conclude with this. In Harry's childhood home in Searchlight, 
there were words embroidered on a pillowcase that his mom hung on the 
wall. As we have heard, it was a simple and barren little shack that 
they lived in, but this pillowcase had the following words: ``We can, 
we will, we must,'' Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
  Harry never forgot those words. They are engrained in his spirit. I 
want to thank him for what he has done for the Senate, for the State of 
Nevada, for me, and for his decades of service to the United States. I 
want to thank Landra and their five kids and their wonderful family for 
sharing her husband and their father with us for all of these years.
  Harry is leaving the Senate, but I am sure he is not going to quit. 
He is going to be fighting for Nevada to the end, and he will be 
fighting for the causes he believes in. He will continue to be a 
fearless advocate. I wish him and his family all the best.
  I yield the floor.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, Senator Harry Reid and I were both elected 
to the House in 1982, and over the last 34 years, Harry has become more 
than a colleague to me. He is like family.
  I call him the ``brother I never had,'' and he calls me the ``sister 
he never had.''
  Only a brother can hang up on you like Harry does.
  And because a sister's job is to embarrass her brother, I want to 
talk today about Harry's incredible, extraordinary career and how much 
he means to me.
  Harry, his wife, Landra, my husband, Stewart, and I have all grown to 
be dear friends and enjoy quiet dinners together. Stew and I even 
invited them to stay with us in our California desert home once--where 
I cooked, much to Harry's disbelief.
  Theirs is a truly beautiful love story. They met in high school and 
have been together ever since.
  There was one incident early on that could have derailed them. When 
Harry went to pick Landra up for a date, her father, a Jewish 
immigrant, was opposed to his daughter dating a man with no religion.
  But that wasn't going to stop Harry. He actually got into a fistfight 
with his future father-in-law and punched him in the face.
  As Harry simply said, ``It wasn't the greatest beginning.''
  But love always prevails. Harry and Landra eloped during college, and 
Landra's parents eventually came around to supporting them.
  And throughout Harry's career--throughout every campaign, every 
election, every bump in the road--Landra has been by Harry's side, and 
he by hers.
  Though he has risen to the highest levels of success, Harry has never 
forgotten where he came from and has always fought like hell for his 
State. He was born in what he calls a ``flyspeck on the map''--
Searchlight, NV in 1939, a year before me.
  To say he grew up poor is an understatement. His childhood home had 
no toilet or running water, and in order to attend high school, he had 
to move in with relatives 40 miles away.
  Nothing came easy for Harry, but he never let that deter him. In high 
school, he wanted to buy a car, so he took a job at a bakery that 
required him to wake up at 4 a.m. during the week--3 a.m. on weekends. 
In his spare time, he took up boxing, which earned him a college 
scholarship.
  His very humble beginnings taught him the value of hard work. We have 
all heard Harry tell the story of working six days a week as a U.S. 
Capitol Police Officer while putting himself through law school full-
time at George Washington University. For years, he proudly displayed 
his badge here in his D.C. office. Upon graduation from law school, he 
returned to Nevada as an attorney specializing in what he called, ``the 
cases nobody would take'' before starting his career in elected office: 
First, as the Henderson city attorney, then as an assemblyman, 
Lieutenant Governor, and chairman of the Nevada Gaming Commission, 
before winning election to the House of Representatives.
  After two terms in the House, Harry won a seat in the Senate, where 
he gained a reputation for integrity and fairness. He was elected as 
our leader in 2004, and I believe he will go down in history as one of 
the best.
  Harry is a workhorse, not a show horse.
  He is soft-spoken and a wonderful listener, but is not afraid to 
speak up.
  He doesn't seek the spotlight--in fact, he often avoids it at all 
costs--but he also knows how to use it to fight for those without a 
voice.
  And, he takes the time to know every member of his caucus--what makes 
us tick, what our core issues are, and where we each draw the line.
  I want to relate one particular story that truly exemplifies the 
leader Harry is.
  One December night in 2009, I got a call from Harry and Senator Chuck 
Schumer. They were trying to negotiate the final issue on the 
Affordable Care Act, and this was our last chance to get the bill 
passed.
  We needed every single Democrat in order to end the Republican 
filibuster, but we had reached a stumbling block: Senator Ben Nelson 
believed the Federal subsidy in the ACA should not go towards abortion.
  If he voted against the bill, Obamacare would be gone. So Harry 
trusted Senator Patty Murray and me with the crucial responsibility of 
finding a solution.
  For 13 grueling hours, my team and I would come up with an idea, 
Senator Schumer would run it over to Senator Nelson, and we would 
volley back and forth until we finally landed on a compromise.
  The bill was saved, and today, more than 20 million Americans have 
health care--many for the first time ever--thanks, in large part, to 
Harry Reid. He never gave up, and he trusted members of his caucus to 
help get this bill--one of the most important health care bills in a 
generation--across the finish line.
  Harry has perfected the art of strategy and negotiation. He knows 
when to compromise and when to stand up and fight--especially when it 
comes to his beloved Nevada.
  He has accomplished far too many things to mention, but I want to 
quickly talk about a few issues.
  No one fought harder against the plan to dump nuclear waste at Yucca 
Mountain, which would have threatened the health and safety of 
Nevadans. Since he was first elected to Congress 34 years ago, Harry 
fought proposal after proposal until the plan was finally scrapped--
almost entirely because of him.
  He has been instrumental in the fight to protect and restore Lake 
Tahoe--which is shared between our two States. Harry created the Lake 
Tahoe Summit and worked across party lines to help keep Tahoe blue.
  He has protected more than three million acres of wilderness, 
established Great Basin National Park, and has fought to protect our 
landmark environmental laws.

[[Page 16369]]

  And when we were in the throes of the worst economic crisis in a 
generation, Harry fought tooth and nail to stop the hemorrhaging of 
jobs and help Americans keep their homes--especially in Nevada, which 
was one of the hardest hit States.
  Harry worked tirelessly to shepherd the Recovery Act through 
Congress--a monumental task in our political environment. At every 
turn, the right wing threw everything they had at us, but Harry took it 
all on the chin with his strength, stamina, and fortitude.
  He stepped up and helped us avoid Armageddon, and I give a great deal 
of credit to Senator Reid and President Obama for that.
  At his core, that is who Harry Reid is: When he believes something to 
be right, he doesn't think twice about putting the gloves on, hopping 
in the ring and fighting for what he believes in. He just does it.
  For this, and for so many other reasons, Harry has made the 
Democratic Party better. He has made Nevada better. He has made our 
country better. And on a personal level, Harry has made me better. I 
will forever be grateful for his leadership, his mentorship, and most 
of all, his friendship.
  In closing, I would like to read the words I wrote about him.

     Harry . . . thank you for the strength you give to us.
     Harry . . . thank you for the way you make them cuss.
     So you're not a TV star,
     We just take you as you are.
     Harry, blue and true,
     No one like you.
     Harry . . . working from the day until the night.
     Harry . . . never turns away when there's a fight.
     Good thing there are no Senate duels!
     Harry, blue and true,
     No one like you.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.


                      Department of Defense Audit

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to alert the 
new Trump administration to a problem in the Defense Department. There 
is a festering sore needing high-level attention. I am talking about 
what turns out to be a formidable barrier. It stands in the way of an 
important goal: auditing the books of the Department of Defense. At 
times, this barrier makes the goal seem unattainable.
  The need for annual financial audits was originally established by 
the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990. By March of 1992, each agency 
was to present a financial statement to an inspector general for audit. 
Today, all have earned unqualified or clean opinions, except one, and 
guess what. The Department of Defense is that one. It has the dubious 
distinction, out of all of the Federal Government, of earning an 
unblemished string of failing opinions known as disclaimers.
  In the face of endless stumbling, Congress drew a new line in the 
sand. It is in section 1003 of the fiscal year 2010 National Defense 
Authorization Act. The Pentagon was given an extra 7 years to clean up 
the books and get ready. Guess what. The slipping and sliding never 
stopped. The revised September 2017 deadline is staring us in the face, 
and all the evidence tells us the Department will never make it.
  The 25-year effort to audit the books is stuck in the mud.
  Billions of dollars have been spent trying to solve the root cause of 
the problem, and that root cause is a broken accounting system. But the 
fix is nowhere in sight. Until control at the transaction level is 
achieved, auditing the books is nothing more than a pipedream.
  Under the fiscal year 2010 law, the Financial Improvement and 
Auditing Readiness Plan, called FIAR, is supposed to tell us whether 
the financial statements of the Defense Department ``are validated as 
ready for audit by not later than September 30, 2017.''
  The latest FIAR report hit the street last month, but it does not 
answer the key question: Is the Department of Defense ready for audit? 
I read it, and I don't know for sure. It is a study in fuzzy thinking. 
It is kind of like a riddle, and here is why.
  True, the Department boldly declares that it is audit-ready. But in 
the very same breath, the Comptroller and Chief Financial Officer, Mr. 
Mike McCord, takes a step backward. He warns that earning a clean 
opinion is ``many years'' away. Being audit-ready should offer a 
reasonable prospect for success, but something is really out of whack 
here.
  So the ultimate objective of section 1003 is a successful audit or 
clean opinion. Mr. McCord's words seem to turn that objective upside 
down. How can the Department be audit-ready and meet the deadline if it 
is still years away from a clean opinion?
  Mr. McCord's message appears to be downright confusing, 
contradictory, and possibly misleading. If he knows the Department of 
Defense is years away from a clean opinion, then he must also know that 
it is not audit-ready or even close to it. He has to know that the 
accounting system is incapable of producing reliable information that 
meets prescribed standards. That tells me the Department of Defense is 
not audit-ready yet, and he knows it--like everyone else.
  Before he steps down, Mr. McCord owes us an explanation for the 
confusing statements. And once the new Pentagon leadership is up to 
speed, I look forward to further clarification.
  I also hope this new team will address the wisdom of doing full 
financial statement audits when there is limited control at the 
transaction level. By proceeding with full-scale audits without it, Mr. 
McCord has put the cart in front of the horse. Spending hundreds of 
millions of dollars a year for audits with a zero probability of 
success is wasteful.
  I would like to remind my colleagues why a successful audit is so 
important. First and foremost, it would conform with constitutional 
requirements. It would strengthen internal controls and facilitate the 
detection of fraud and theft. But it is also important for more 
practical reasons: It would help bring about better, more informed 
decisionmaking. Management can't make good decisions with bad 
information. If accounting information is inaccurate and incomplete--as 
it is today at the Department of Defense--then management doesn't know 
what anything costs or how the money is being spent, and if they don't 
have that information at their fingertips, how could they possibly make 
good decisions?
  January 2015 was when the report I was referring to was first put 
out, but it was just now made public. Recent revelations about the $125 
billion in ``administrative waste,'' which was allegedly suppressed by 
senior defense officials, is living proof of bad decisions. If the time 
ever comes when the Department of Defense's accounting system can 
generate reliable information, then such mistakes could be avoided.
  So I keep coming back to the same old questions: Why has faulty 
accounting information been tolerated at the Pentagon for all these 
years? How is it that the Pentagon is able to develop the most advanced 
weapons the world has ever known with relative ease and yet, for some 
strange reason, it seems unable to acquire the tools it needs to keep 
track of the money it spends? Why is this national disgrace being 
tolerated at the Pentagon?
  There are never-ending bureaucratic explanations, but there don't 
seem to be any solutions.
  With good leadership, this problem can be solved. The man nominated 
to be the next Secretary of Defense, Mr. James Mattis, strikes me as 
the kind of person who will tackle this problem head-on and run it to 
the ground until fixed. His record suggests he will not tolerate this 
kind of endless foot-dragging and inexcusable failure. Twenty-five 
years of lameduck excuses probably won't sit too well with this marine 
general. Either he will whip the accounting system into shape or heads 
will roll. According to press reports, ``failure'' is not a word that 
he knows or uses.
  With a new sheriff in town, maybe the endless, helpless ``woe is me'' 
hand-wringing at the Pentagon is about to come to a screeching halt. A 
modern, fully integrated finance and accounting system might be more 
than just the dream it has been.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.

[[Page 16370]]


  Mr. KIRK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be allowed to 
have a prop with me.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                         Farewell to the Senate

  Mr. KIRK. Mr. President, I rise here in the Chamber to give my last 
speech in the Senate. I want to describe some experiences I have had 
that are at the heart of my service in the Congress.
  As a staffer, I worked for the House International Relations 
Committee and for Chairman Benjamin Gilman. He had been asked by 
Cardinal John O'Connor of New York to investigate the plight of 
Catholics in northern Bosnia. From that assignment, I went to northern 
Bosnia to meet with Bishop Komanic, who started out the meeting in a 
very difficult fashion.
  He started by saying: Am I a human? Am I a human? Am I?
  I said: Yes, you are.
  He said: You foreign delegations always don't do anything for me.
  I said to Bishop Komanic: Please give me one task that I can take on 
for you.
  He said: If there is one thing I need, it is to get my human rights 
office head, Father Tomislava Matanovic--who was recently captured by a 
very notorious criminal, the police chief of Prijedor, Bosnia, who was 
infamous for starting the first concentration camp in Europe after 
1945. It was called the Omarska Camp. The man who ran this place was 
named Simo Drljaca. He pushed 700 bodies down the shaft of this mine. 
In this work, he had probably captured the priest I wanted, Tomislava 
Matanovic.
  When I went back to the States, as a reservist, I ransacked the DOD 
databases. We found from intelligence reports that we suspected this 
police chief of Prijedor had been the kidnapper of Tomislava Matanovic. 
I went to the CIA and asked to meet with this man so I could urge him 
to give this priest back to me. When Simo Drljaca met with me, he gave 
me this memento of Serbia. It has the markings of St. George slaying a 
dragon, with a date of 1994, and various Serbian markings.
  After I learned so much about Simo Drljaca, I asked the Clinton 
administration to make sure they could indict him for war crimes, 
crimes against humanity, to make sure we could eventually bring him 
down.
  When the Bosnian secret police brought him to me, he gave me this 
memento, which I have kept under my desk. He gave that to me hoping 
maybe he would not get picked up. Luckily, the Clinton administration 
had decided to pick him up. They had a typically obscure DOD acronym to 
cover the status of this kind of person. They called them PIFWC, 
persons indicted for war crimes.
  Eventually we got an operation together to arrest Simo Drljaca, and 
the British Special Air Service carried it out. When they waited for 
Simo, they waited by a riverbank for him to do his Sunday fishing with 
his son.
  An officer had painstakingly memorized the Serbian's arrest record 
and indictment so he could read it to Drljaca in his British accent. 
When he started reading the indictment, Drljaca reached down into his 
fishing tackle box and shot the British arresting officer. Luckily, the 
British officer did survive, was wearing body armor. When that shot 
rang out, the security team across from the river put several rounds 
into Drljaca's chest. He dropped dead right there at the beach.
  After I heard about this, I was so proud to be part of this 
congressional team and to still be an officer in the U.S. Navy.
  I will say that this institution, and the U.S. military that has 
given rise from the appropriations we have given, is the greatest force 
for human dignity that has ever been put forward. I was so proud we 
brought this monster to justice. The guy who put together the first 
concentration camp in Europe had been stopped, and he could no longer 
hurt anyone. And this memento has been underneath my desk here in the 
Senate ever since to remind me of the basic human values that we share 
so dear--that we have here. I would say the United States is now the 
greatest force for human dignity that we have ever seen. To make sure 
those values continue has been at the heart of my service here in the 
Senate and in the Congress.
  Let me conclude by thanking some critical people.
  I thank Congressman John Porter for hiring me back in 1984, when I 
started my service here in the Congress; Chairman Ben Gilman of New 
York for putting me on that international committee; the people of the 
10th Congressional District of Illinois who first sent me to the House 
and the people of Illinois who also sent me to represent their State 
here; all the family and friends who put me here: Karen Garber and 
Michael Morgan, especially Dodie McCracken, who was always at my side--
people who wanted to make sure we had a person of thoughtful, 
independent values who could serve here in the Congress.
  To conclude, I want to give a message to the people of Illinois. For 
the people of Illinois, I would say: Take heart, Illinois, that you 
come from one of the most industrious States in the Union, the fifth 
largest industrial State.
  Especially after the problems we had with Governor Blagojevich, we 
have been a little down in the dumps.
  A lot of times, I will pull out my iPhone and ask people in the State 
the same question: Who invented the iPhone, the cell phone? And the 
answer is, Martin Cooper from Winnetka, IL. On the top of the iPhone is 
a transmitter, and I remind us that the first cell phone call in the 
world was made from the 50 yard line of Soldier Field in Chicago. That 
trillion-dollar industry started right in the middle of our State. 
That, we should always remember.
  Lots of times when I am giving this speech, I will say: If it weren't 
for the people of Illinois, a lot of the people you know would be 
missing teeth, because we invented modern dentistry with GV Black in 
Jacksonville, and our houses would not be so clean, because we invented 
the vacuum cleaner.
  People on the southwest side of Chicago say: Kirk, tell them that we 
invented the zipper--which they did.
  People in Peoria will say: Hey, remind them that we invented the 
electric blanket. And they did.
  From the electric blanket to the vacuum cleaner and the cell phone, 
the people of Illinois have been so innovative.
  Now we have a unique time in history. I can safely say without 
contradiction here in the Senate that the Chicago Cubs are now the 
World Series champions. As I have said so many times, any professional 
baseball team can have a bad century, but we have finally killed the 
curse of the goat and all the curses that befell our professional 
baseball team.
  I would say take heart, Illinois. You are so inventive that you 
produce most of the pumpkins in the country. When we sit down to 
Thanksgiving pumpkin pie, that is 80 percent Illinois.
  Mr. President, with that, I yield the remainder of my time to the 
victor of the Illinois Senate race, Senator-Elect Tammy Duckworth.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, it is becoming too common a theme that the 
U.S. Senate, in the closing days of session, rushes to consider a 
conferenced defense authorization bill. Earlier this year, we 
considered one of the largest defense authorization bills in history, 
and the Senate considered few amendments and was afforded a truncated 
debate period. Worse, the authorization threatened to bust a carefully 
balanced budget agreement, by misusing overseas contingency operations, 
OCO, funds for base spending. I opposed that bill. Now, in the closing 
hours of the Congress, we are faced with a vote on a conferenced 
version of that bill. It is far from perfect.
  However, like open government groups across the spectrum, I am 
pleased to see that a dangerous provision concerning the Freedom of 
Information Act, FOIA, that Senator Grassley and I strongly opposed has 
been removed from the final bill. This overbroad provision, which was 
part of the reason I opposed the Senate bill, could have categorically 
exempted a vast amount of Department of Defense information from public 
disclosure, including potentially the Pentagon's

[[Page 16371]]

handling of sexual assault complaints, reports about defective 
equipment issued to soldiers in combat zones, and documented health 
hazards faced by military families living on bases abroad. Hiding such 
information from public scrutiny would directly undermine the 
transparency required to address threats to the safety and security of 
our troops. As the chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary 
Committee, the committee with jurisdiction over FOIA matters, Senator 
Grassley and I are glad that our concerns were taken seriously and 
addressed. Now that this provision has been struck, our Nation's 
premier transparency law can continue its critical mission of watching 
over the safety of those who risk it all to keep us safe.
  I am also grateful for the vital support this bill provides to our 
military personnel and their families and the augmentation of our 
preparedness to deter, or meet, future threats through a wise 
investment in technology and people. As the world becomes less stable, 
this bill includes a number of measures to reaffirm our long-standing 
commitments to our partners abroad who work with us to make the world 
safer.
  Nonetheless, I still have concerns with a number of ill-considered 
provisions in this bill. I am not yet satisfied that sufficient 
consideration has been given to how the caps on general officers affect 
the National Guard, where leadership often alternates between Army and 
Air Force officers. No one has accounted for why the vice chief of the 
National Guard Bureau is the only Vice Chief to not have a grade 
established by statute. And I remain concerned that this bill removes 
the requirement that the deputy commander of the U.S. Northern Command 
be drawn from the ranks of the National Guard. It is our National Guard 
leaders who are most capable of responding to domestic disasters.
  Regrettably, this year's defense authorization bill also misses an 
opportunity to provide the Obama administration with the flexibility it 
needs to finally close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay. Rather 
than putting an end to this shameful chapter in our Nation's history, 
the bill maintains the status quo by extending the unnecessary 
prohibition on constructing facilities within the United States to 
house Guantanamo detainees and continues the counterproductive ban on 
transferring detainees to the United States for detention and trial. 
Closing the detention facility at Guantanamo is in our national 
security interest. It is the right thing to do. I strongly oppose the 
needless barriers to doing that in this bill.
  In the end, I do believe this authorization bill more appropriately 
provides for the common defense. Nonetheless, Members of Congress, on 
either side of the aisle, should not tolerate this perennially 
constrained debate over the authorization of over half of our Nation's 
budget. Similarly, if Congress considers legislation next year about 
the important question of civilian control of the military, it should 
not do so under the abbreviated, restricted debate by which we will 
finally approve the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 
2017.
  It was my highest honor when Vermonters voted to send me back to the 
Senate this past November. In a time of uncertainty, they are looking 
for leaders. I am, too. I hope Senate leaders next year will insist on 
regular order and the deliberative process that has long been the 
hallmark of this body.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I wish to discuss the passage of my 
legislation, the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act, 
which was included in the fiscal year 2017 National Defense 
Authorization Act, NDAA, conference report. I especially want to thank 
Senator McCain who partnered with me on this legislation and who has 
been a true champion in the Senate for human rights and the fight 
against corruption. I also thank Senator Bob Corker, Senator Jack Reed, 
Congressman Ed Royce, and Congressman Eliot Engel for their help 
getting this important bill over the finish line.
  Before I discuss the specifics of the Global Magnitsky Human Rights 
Accountability Act, I want to discuss how we got here. In the 112th 
Congress, we passed the Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability 
Act. That act placed sanctions on Russian officials responsible for the 
death of Sergei Magnitsky, a Russian lawyer who was arrested after he 
uncovered massive corruption in Russia. In 2009, Sergei Magnitsky died 
after suffering torturous conditions in pretrial detention. Those 
responsible for his torture and death were not brought to justice in 
Russia and some were even decorated and promoted.
  With enactment of the Magnitsky legislation in 2012, the United 
States sent an unambiguous warning to gross violators of human rights 
in Russia that we will not allow them to travel to our shores and to 
use our financial system. The Magnitsky Act resulted in dozens of 
Russians implicated in his death from receiving travel visas and from 
benefiting from our financial system--and represented an extraordinary 
victory for human rights defenders in Russia.
  As we know all too well, however, human rights violations against 
dissidents, journalists, whistleblowers, and rights advocates aren't 
unique to Russia. That is why Senator McCain and I introduced the 
Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act, which gives the 
President the authority to deny human rights abusers and those engaged 
in significant acts of corruption entry into the United States and 
access to our financial institutions.
  Including significant acts of corruption as a sanctionable offense is 
an important addition to this legislation. The correlation between 
corruption, human rights abuses, and repressive governments is clear. 
Corruption destabilizes democracies, weakens a country's rule of law 
and can stall a nation's development. And those who call out these 
abuses are often threatened, physically or psychologically abused, or 
worse.
  As many of my colleagues know, the United States has long struggled 
with the best way to address human rights violations and corruption 
around the globe. With passage of the Global Magnitsky Human Rights 
Accountability Act, I believe we now have the tools to hold accountable 
gross violators of human rights and those who engage in serious acts of 
corruption in a way that bolsters both our national security and 
foreign policy goals. Bad actors from South Sudan to Venezuela and 
Azerbaijan to Cambodia are on notice that they can no longer escape the 
consequences of their actions, even when their home country fails to 
act. But in my view, the most important message this legislation sends 
is that the United States stands in solidarity with all those who stand 
up against corruption and human rights violations--and we do so through 
both words and actions.
  I, again, thank my Senate colleagues for their support for this 
important bill and for joining me in standing up for all those who seek 
a more just world, even though doing so often puts their own lives in 
jeopardy.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.


                     Tributes to Departing Senators

  Mr. REED. Mr. President, I want to take an opportunity to salute and 
thank and commend my colleagues who are departing.


                               Mark Kirk

  Mr. President, Senator Kirk, my colleague from Illinois, just 
finished his remarks.
  Mark and I had the opportunity and the privilege to work on many 
things together. He is a Navy commander. He never lets me forget that. 
He always called me Major; I always called him Commander. He served the 
State of Illinois with great integrity, great energy, and great spirit, 
and we thank him for that very much.
  Thank you for your service to the Nation in the uniform of the United 
States Navy.
  We also have other colleagues departing: Senator Ayotte from New 
Hampshire; Senator Boxer of California,

[[Page 16372]]

Senator Coats of Indiana; as I mentioned, Senator Kirk of Illinois; 
Senator Mikulski of Maryland; Senator Reid of Nevada; and Senator 
Vitter of Louisiana. Each has brought passion in their work to best 
serve their constituents, and the institution of the Senate and the 
Nation are better for this service. I am better for knowing them, 
working with them, and having the opportunity to share with them, and I 
want to thank them for their service. Let me mention a few words with 
respect to all of these distinguished Senators.


                              Kelly Ayotte

  Mr. President, Kelly Ayotte and I worked together for many years on 
the Armed Services Committee. What she brought was an unparalleled 
commitment to and passion for the men and women who wear the uniform of 
the United States. She wanted them to have a quality of life that 
reflects their service and their sacrifice. She wanted them to have the 
training and the equipment that would protect them as they engage our 
foes, and she wanted to make sure they knew that we were always 
conscious of their sacrifice and service. She did this in so many 
different ways, and she did it so well.
  She was particularly committed to making sure that the A-10 aircraft 
remained in our inventory. As someone who as a younger person was an 
infantry officer, I appreciated having seen in training how effective 
that system is to protect our forces on the ground, and her efforts 
were unstinting to make sure that our forces were fully protected. 
Again, that is just one example of her commitment.


                             Barbara Boxer

  Mr. President, Barbara Boxer and I had the privilege to serve both in 
the House and the Senate together. My first term in the House of 
Representatives was Barbara's last term in the House before she was 
elected to the Senate. She is an extraordinary, tenacious fighter--
remarkably so. She has fought for women's rights. She has fought for 
the rights of families, for people who needed economic assistance, and 
for people who needed a chance because she realized that the essence of 
America is opportunity--opportunity for all, not just for those who are 
privileged or who have the benefit of wealth or power but for all. She 
has done this extraordinarily well.
  A great deal of her energy was directed to environmental protection 
because that is something that benefits all of us and that is something 
that is really the biggest legacy we will give to the next generation 
and the generations that follow. No one has more fiercely defended the 
environment--not just for a narrow interest, not just for a temporary 
expedient but for the long-term health and wealth of the American 
people.


                               Dan Coats

  Mr. President, Dan Coats and I served together. This goes back to 
both his tenures in the Senate. Dan and I served in the Armed Services 
and HELP Committees. He was a remarkable Member. He continues to be a 
remarkable Member. He left us for a while to serve as Ambassador to 
Germany. Once again--no surprise--he distinguished himself with his 
thoughtful support of American policy, with his international approach 
to issues of concern, and with the ability to bring people together, 
not just colleagues in the Senate but, also, international colleagues.
  When he returned, I was very, very grateful for his help. Senator 
Dean Heller and I were working very hard together on a bipartisan basis 
to help unemployment insurance extension. Dan joined us in that effort, 
and I thank him for that. It reflects the huge range of talent and 
interests that he has and, also, his commitment to the men and women of 
Indiana, particularly the working men and women of Indiana.


                               Mark Kirk

  Mr. President, Mark Kirk I have mentioned. I had the privilege, the 
opportunity, and the pleasure of being able to salute him as he was 
here. Again, we always greet each other as Major Reed and Commander 
Kirk, and I see deep symbolism and deep affection in regard to that 
exchange. I wish him well as he goes forth.


                              David Vitter

  Mr. President, David Vitter and I served together on the Armed 
Services Committee, and we continue to serve together on the Banking 
Committee. As a senior member of the Environment and Public Works 
Committee, he has been very critical in ensuring that we continue our 
commitment to infrastructure. Infrastructure is a word now that is 
getting a lot of attention. Years ago, David was interested in that, 
not only interested but instrumental in making sure we did our best to 
keep up with infrastructure so that we could have a productive America, 
so that people could enjoy the benefits, and so that we could be 
competitive in a global economy.
  He has done a great deal. One area where we also shared an interest 
is his Home Owner Flood Insurance Affordability Act, which became law 
in 2014. This was critical not just to Louisiana but to every coastal 
State, including Rhode Island. His energy, his commitment, and his 
dedication made it a success. I want to thank him for that, and I wish 
him well as he goes forward.


                            Barbara Mikulski

  Mr. President, Barbara Mikulski--what an extraordinary individual. 
She is a pioneer. She was the first Democratic woman Senator elected in 
her own right. She is the longest serving woman in the history of the 
Congress. Barbara Mikulski and history are one in the same. She has 
made it. She came from very modest roots in Baltimore. She talked 
yesterday on the floor about her father and mother running a small 
grocery store in her neighborhood. She took that sense of community, 
that sense of dedication, and that sense of selfless service to others. 
As she said, she was inspired by the nuns that taught her, and that 
inspiration was extraordinary and fully realized in her life. There are 
a lot of Sisters of Mercy and Sisters of Notre Dame who are sitting 
back today thinking: I knew that young lady had it in her.
  She certainly did. She led us on the Appropriations Committee, the 
first woman to chair the committee. She has done so much to assist me 
on issues that are so important to Rhode Island. I must say that she 
and Kit Bond, one of her colleagues, were extraordinary in recognizing 
the problems of lead exposure in children and providing needed 
resources. I thank her for that.
  She has assisted the fishermen in communities in Rhode Island with 
real assistance and real aid. She has done it over and over. She has 
given me profound advice, counsel, and kindness.
  She said yesterday on the floor: The best ship in the world is 
friendship. I agree, but ultimately the measure of our service and of 
our days is kindness. I must say that by that measure, she is a very 
towering figure in the Senate, in the history of the United States, and 
I thank her.


                               Harry Reid

  Mr. President, finally, there is our leader, Harry Reid. Much has 
been said about Harry today. I will not go over the extraordinary tale 
of a young man from Searchlight, NV. He was a boxer and a Capitol 
Police officer while he was working his way through law school. He has 
always been a fighter--and a fighter for those who need help, not for 
the powerful but for the people without power. For those without a 
voice, he has given a voice.
  I have always appreciated his counsel, his guidance, and his support, 
which were important to my constituents and important to all Americans. 
We have worked on numerous pieces of legislation together to address 
the housing crisis, to extend unemployment insurance, to make college 
more affordable, and to improve mental health services, to name just a 
few.
  As he said today in his remarks, one of his achievements is to be 
able to give health care protection to millions of Americans who didn't 
have it and if it is taken away will not have it. He did that because 
it was the right thing to do, because he understood from his own 
personal experience how traumatizing and how debilitating and, 
ultimately, how destructive the lack of access to good health care--
both physical

[[Page 16373]]

health care and mental health care--is to America, and, also, how it 
does make us productive. Simply having health care is not just a good 
thing to do, it is a smart economic thing to do. He led that fight for 
us.
  It has been an honor to serve alongside Harry Reid and to see this 
extraordinary legislator work his way quietly sometimes--many times--
but persistently. There is no one more persistent than Harry. His 
steady, unselfish leadership will continue to guide us and his example 
will continue to guide us.
  I have been very fortunate. I have had the privilege to serve with 
these ladies and gentlemen, and I want to thank them for their service.


                  Tribute to Vice President Joe Biden

  Mr. President, I was also very privileged to serve with the Vice 
President of the United States, Joe Biden. The Vice President was here 
yesterday. I was here listening to the comments. I must add, if I 
could, some words of my own.
  Joe Biden is a true statesman. I had the privilege of serving with 
him for over a decade. We traveled together to places such as 
Afghanistan and Iraq. I am honored to have gotten to know him and his 
wonderful family. Even though he is Vice President of the United States 
of America--the second highest office of the land--I know the titles he 
is proudest to hold are father, grandfather, husband, brother, and, 
after that, Senator.
  A tribute to Joe Biden really has to extend to some others, and one 
person I want to single out is his sister, Valerie Biden Owens. Val is 
not only his closest adviser but the architect of his first campaign 
and every one thereafter. At a time when very few women were running 
U.S. Senate campaigns, Val was responsible for electing a 29-year-old 
newcomer. When tragedy struck, she was the one who helped bring him 
back, who enabled him to serve the people of Delaware and, ultimately, 
the people of the United States and of the world. She is a brilliant 
strategist who has gone on to advise many officeholders. We thank her 
for her lasting contributions, and I wanted to make sure she got some 
credit.
  Both the Vice President and Val are quick to note the real credit 
goes to their parents--Catherine Jean Finnegan Biden, his mom, and his 
late, great father, Joe Sr. The Vice President and I would often joke--
and it is not a joke; it is actually a truth: Always aspire to be half 
as good as mom and dad. That is an Irish aspiration. Joe has made it. I 
am still working on it, but he is at least half as good as these 
extraordinary people.
  If you have spent any time with the Vice President, you know that he 
is famous for quoting his father and his mother and the wisdom they 
imparted to all the children--Joe, Val, Jimmy, and Frank. I think you 
have heard Senator Biden, Chairman Biden, and Vice President Biden say: 
``I give you my word as a Biden.'' You know you can take that to the 
bank. He meant it.
  Once you heard that, without hesitation, you know he was there with 
you and would not equivocate, would not deviate, and would be with you.
  I had the privilege of not only working with Senator Biden, but I 
also had the privilege of working with a young captain in the U.S. 
Army, at least briefly, as we visited him, and that was CPT Beau Biden 
of the Delaware National Guard. Beau Biden didn't have to join the 
National Guard. He didn't have to volunteer for Iraq, but he felt it 
was his duty and his obligation. When we were together with him in 
Iraq, you saw someone who personified the very best of this Nation--a 
soldier, someone conscientious, someone who would give his all, give 
his life for others and, particularly, give every ounce of energy and 
service to this great Nation.
  Anyone who met Beau knew he was a Biden. He didn't have to say it. He 
looked like his dad but, more importantly, he acted like his dad--
strong, tough, proud, dedicated, committed to helping others, 
particularly those who needed a chance, who needed a hand up. He had a 
passion for social justice, compassion, and that element of kindness. 
In the sum of his days--of Beau's days--he certainly surpassed that 
test of kindness, decency, and compassion.
  The Biden family has known a great deal of tragedy--more than most 
families--but they have stuck together, and they have shared both 
moments of triumph and moments of profound sadness. Together, they have 
shaped history and made this a better nation and a better world. All of 
us who have had the privilege of knowing Joe, Jill, and their family 
are better people.
  Mr. President, let me thank you. Mr. Vice President, Senator, Joe, 
thank you.
  With that, 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. McCAIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Fischer). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, the Constitution gives the Congress the 
power and responsibility to provide for the common defense, raise and 
support armies, provide and maintain a Navy, make rules for the 
government and regulation of the land naval forces. For 54 consecutive 
years, Congress has fulfilled these more important constitutional 
duties by passing the National Defense Authorization Act. Today the 
Senate has a chance to make it 55 years.
  It is precisely because of this legislation's critical importance to 
our national security that it is still one of the few bills in Congress 
that enjoys bipartisan support year after year. Indeed, this year's 
NDAA has been supported by Senators on both sides of the aisle. The 
Senate Armed Services Committee overwhelmingly approved the NDAA in a 
23-to-3 vote back in May. The full committee followed by passing the 
NDAA with a bipartisan vote of 85 to 13. After a collaborative and 
productive conference process, the House passed the NDAA conference 
report with an overwhelming vote of 375 to 34. I hope the Senate will 
deliver another resounding vote today.
  I thank the committee's ranking member, the Senator from Rhode 
Island, Jack Reed. Despite his lack of education at West Point and the 
impending doom of the Army football team this weekend, I appreciate the 
thoughtfulness and bipartisan spirit with which he approaches our 
national security. This is a much better bill thanks to the Senator 
from Rhode Island. I appreciate his friendship, and more than that, I 
appreciate the commitment he and I share to the defense of this Nation 
and the men and women who serve it.
  I also thank the majority leader, the Senator from Kentucky, for his 
commitment to bringing the NDAA to the floor and for his support 
throughout the year to make sure this legislation received full 
consideration and debate.
  Our Nation faces the most diverse and complex array of crises since 
the end of World War II--great power competition with Russia and China, 
rogue states like Iran and North Korea, and the enduring threat of 
radical Islamist terrorism. Rising to the challenges of a more 
dangerous world requires bold reform to our national defense, and that 
is exactly what the NDAA delivers.
  The last major reorganization of the Department of Defense was the 
Goldwater-Nichols Act, which marks its 30th anniversary this year. Last 
fall, the Senate Armed Services Committee held a series of 13 hearings 
on defense reform with 52 of our Nation's foremost defense experts and 
leaders. We followed up these hearings with a comprehensive review of 
the roles, missions, and organization of the major actors in the 
Department of Defense.
  This review was borne out of concern that the organization of the 
department too often inhibits, rather than enables, the talented people 
serving there to fulfill their duties at a time of major strategic and 
technological change. Building on this work, the NDAA seeks to improve 
strategic integration across functional components of the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense.

[[Page 16374]]

  At a time when the Department of Defense faces numerous threats that 
all span different regions, functions, and military domains, the 
Secretary of Defense needs better tools to more effectively develop 
integrated solutions and strategies for critical department objectives. 
To this end, the NDAA would allow the next Secretary of Defense to 
create and delegate decisionmaking authority to a series of cross-
functional teams to achieve core objectives of the Department. These 
cross-functional teams would support the Secretary and Deputy Secretary 
in performing strategic integration more effectively in efficiency.
  Improving the effectiveness of our defense enterprise also requires 
targeting excess bureaucracy. Over the past 30 years, the end strength 
of the joint forces has decreased by 38 percent. I want to emphasize 
that. The end strength of the uniformed military has decreased by 38 
percent, but the ratio of four-star officers to the overall force has 
increased by 65 percent. Especially at a time of constrained defense 
budgets, the military services must right-size their officer corps and 
shift as many personnel as possible from staff functions to operational 
and other vital roles. That is why the NDAA directs a reduction of 110 
general and flag officers on Active Duty, and it requires the Secretary 
of Defense to conduct a study that will identify a further 10-percent 
reduction. Likewise, the NDAA includes a reduction to the number of 
senior executive service civilian employees in the Department of 
Defense commensurate with a reduction to general and flag officers.
  The legislation also imposes a limitation on funds used for staff 
augmentation contracts in the Office of the Secretary of Defense and 
the military department, a practice which has gotten completely out of 
control.
  The NDAA also caps the size of the National Security Council staff at 
200 professional staff and detailees. The past 25 years has brought a 
consistent and steady growth of the NSC staff from 40 during the George 
Herbert Walker Bush administration to more than 100 in the Clinton 
administration, to more than 200 during the George W. Bush 
administration, to reports of nearly 400 under the current 
administration.
  In addition to the growth and size, and largely enabled by it, we 
have seen an expansion of the NSC's staff role into tactical and 
operational issues. NDAA will push the staff toward prioritizing the 
strategic mission that led Congress to create it in the first place. I 
will repeat that. The National Security Council was created to give 
advice and counsel to the President of the United States, not to give 
rules of engagement and specific instructions to officers, generals, 
and admirals in the field.
  Former Secretary Gates quite often tells the story of when he was 
visiting Kabul, Afghanistan, and walked by an office where there was a 
red phone, and Secretary Gates said: What is that? They said: That is 
our line to the NSC.
  My friends, we have 30-something staffers at the NSC who are giving 
directions as to how to carry out operations in the field. It is simply 
outrageous. By the way, it not only has an effect on morale but also on 
the ability to address the challenges on the battlegrounds.
  For years after the end of the Cold War, the United States enjoyed a 
near monopoly on advanced military technology, such as stealth, 
precision-guided munitions, unmanned systems, and the advanced 
communications that enable network-centric warfare. That is changing 
rapidly. From China and Russia to Iran and North Korea, we see 
militaries that are developing, fielding, and employing long-range, 
precision-guided weapons, advanced fighter aircraft, anti-access and 
aerial denial systems, and growing space in cyber capabilities. The 
result is that we are at real and increasing risk of losing the 
military technological dominance that we have taken for granted for 30 
years. That is why innovation cannot be an auxiliary office at the 
Department of Defense. It must be the central mission of its 
acquisition system. Unfortunately, that is not the case with the Office 
of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and 
Logistics, known as AT&L. It has grown too big, tries to do too much, 
and is too focused on compliance at the expense of innovation. That is 
why the NDAA disestablishes AT&L and divides its duties between two new 
offices, a new Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, 
and an Under Secretary for Acquisition and Sustainment.
  The job of research and engineering will be developing defense 
technologies that can ensure a new era of U.S. qualitative military 
dominance. The job of acquisition and sustainment will focus on the 
execution of acquisition functions, ensuring compliance, and lowering 
risks to taxpayers. God knows we need to lower risks to taxpayers. 
These organizational changes complement the additional acquisition 
reforms in the NDAA. The legislation creates new pathways for the 
Department of Defense to do business with nontraditional defense firms. 
It streamlines regulations to procure goods and services. It provides 
new authorities for the rapid prototyping, acquisition, and fielding of 
new capabilities, and, critically, the NDAA establishes a preference 
for fixed-price contracts. The overuse of cost-type contracts and the 
complicated and expensive government bureaucracy that goes with them 
serves as a barrier to entry for commercial, nontraditional, and small 
businesses that are driving the innovation our military needs.
  Continuing down the path of reform, the NDAA initiates a 
comprehensive modernization of the military health care system to 
provide beneficiaries with higher quality care, better access to care, 
and a better experience of care. The NDAA includes provisions that 
expand DOD telehealth capabilities, reform TRICARE health care plans, 
modernize TRICARE medical support contracts, streamline the 
administration of the Defense Health Agency and military medical 
treatment facilities, and establish high-performance military-civilian 
integrated health delivery systems.
  The NDAA ensures we maintain battlefield medicine as a pocket of 
excellence in the military health system by taking steps to improve 
trauma care in military hospitals and develop enduring partnerships 
with civilian military centers and hospitals. These reforms constitute 
an important first step in the evolution of the military health system 
from an underperforming, disjointed health system into a high-
performing, integrated health system that gives beneficiaries what they 
need and deserve--the right care, at the right time, in the right 
place.
  In a world of multiplying threats and increasing danger, we count on 
young Americans to enlist or commit to serve in the All-Volunteer Force 
that protects us and our families. The NDAA sustains the quality of 
life for the men and women and the total force and their families and 
addresses the needs of our wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers.
  The NDAA authorizes a 2.2-percent across-the-board pay raise for 
members of the uniformed services, the largest military pay raise for 
our troops since 2010. The legislation authorizes over 30 special pays 
and bonuses to support recruitment and retention and ensures fair 
treatment for our Reserve members under their survivor benefit plan.
  The NDAA also addresses a disturbing situation affecting members of 
the California National Guard who have been caught up in a scandal 
involving the improper issuance of bonuses. The legislation holds the 
Department of Defense responsible for expediting the review process, 
reaching out to each impacted servicemember, and notifying credit 
reporting agencies when debts have been forgiven.
  The NDAA also implements the recommendations of the Department of 
Defense Military Justice Review Group by incorporating the Military 
Justice Act of 2016. The legislation modernizes the military court-
martial trial and appellate practice, incorporates best practices from 
Federal criminal practice and procedures, and increases transparency 
and independent review in the military justice system.
  Taken together, the provisions contained in the NDAA constitute the

[[Page 16375]]

most significant reforms to the Uniform Code of Military Justice in a 
generation. As we implement these important defense reforms, we have to 
rebuild a modern and ready Armed Forces prepared to meet current and 
future threats. The NDAA authorizes a total of $619 billion for defense 
discretionary spending, which is $3.2 billion above President Obama's 
budget request. That includes the $5.8 billion in supplemental funding 
requested by President Obama for operations in Iraq, Syria, and 
Afghanistan. The NDAA prioritizes modernization to provide critical 
military capabilities to our warfighters, fifth-generation fighter 
aircraft, stealth attack submarines, vital munitions, more lethal and 
survivable armored vehicles and helicopters.
  The legislation also fully supports the modernization of our nuclear 
triad and makes timely investments in research and development efforts 
to produce cutting-edge military technologies. Through a combination of 
added funds and redirected savings, the NDAA directs $4.6 billion to 
address the military readiness crisis by reducing training shortfalls, 
supporting weapons maintenance, and sustaining facilities.
  Critically, the NDAA stems the drawdown of military end strength that 
has exacerbated the readiness crisis, especially in the Army and Marine 
Corps. As we meet our commitments to our warfighters, we must also 
uphold our commitment to American taxpayers. The NDAA imposes strict 
oversight measures on programs such as the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, 
B-21 Long Range Strike Bomber, the Ford-class aircraft carrier, the 
littoral combat ship.
  These provisions will ensure accountability for results, promote 
transparency, protect taxpayers, and drive the Department to deliver 
our warfighters the capabilities they need on time, as promised, and at 
a reasonable cost. The NDAA upholds America's commitments to its allies 
and partners. It authorizes $3.4 billion to support our Afghan partners 
as they take the fight to our common terrorist enemies.
  The legislation authorizes $3.4 billion for the European initiative 
to deter Russian aggression. This is a very critical item, as we see 
more and more aggressive behavior, both in cyber, propaganda, and 
actual on-the-ground activities by Vladimir Putin--a fourfold increase 
from last year in the European deterrence initiative.
  It provides $1.2 billion for counter-ISIL operations. It authorizes 
up to $350 million in security assistance to Ukraine, including lethal 
assistance. One of the things that has disappointed me as much as 
anything else, in some ways more, is that this President has refused to 
give defensive weaponry to the Ukrainians who are watching their 
country be dismembered by Vladimir Putin, the same Vladimir Putin whose 
anti-air system shot down an airline, the same one who is slaughtering 
and killing brave Ukrainians as we speak.
  This President has refused to give them weapons to defend themselves. 
This will be, again, the third year in a row where we have authorized 
it. This is another shameful chapter in the history of Obama's feckless 
administration as far as national defense is concerned.
  Finally, the legislation includes $600 million to modernize Israel's 
layered missile defense system. As we continue to support allies and 
partners against common threats, the NDAA makes major reforms to the 
Pentagon's complex and unwieldy Security Cooperation Enterprise, which 
has complicated the ability of the Department of Defense to effectively 
prioritize, plan, execute, and oversee these activities.
  The NDAA consolidates security cooperation authorities from Title 10 
and elsewhere in public law into a single chapter of U.S. Code. For the 
first time, this legislation requires the Secretary of Defense to 
submit a consolidated security cooperation budget, and the legislation 
modernizes the security cooperation workforce. Together, these steps 
will improve operational outcomes, program management, congressional 
oversight, and public transparency.
  This legislation takes several steps to bolster border security and 
homeland defense. It authorizes $933 million for Department of Defense 
counterdrug programs. The legislation codifies the authority of the 
Secretary of Defense to provide support to Federal, State, local, and 
tribal law enforcement for counterdrug and countering transnational 
organized crime operations. It enhances information sharing and 
operational coordination between the Department of Defense and the 
Department of Homeland Security.
  Finally, this legislation takes important steps to strengthen cyber 
security. The legislation elevates U.S. Cyber Command to a unified 
command. As our senior military leadership has testified, this step is 
critical to providing the Commander of U.S. Cyber Command with the 
necessary unity of command and streamlined decisionmaking.
  The NDAA also prevents the premature termination of the dual hat 
arrangement under which the Commander of U.S. Cyber Command also serves 
as the Director of the National Security Agency.
  Let me close by saying that we ask a lot of our men and women in 
uniform. They a never let us down. We must not let them down. So let's 
be bold on their behalf. This NDAA is an ambitious piece of 
legislation, but in the times we live in, we can't afford business as 
usual in the Department of Defense. We can't afford these terrible cost 
overruns. We just had a hearing on the littoral combat ship. It was 
supposed to cost $200 million each. Now it costs $460 million each, and 
it has a 30-millimeter gun and a helicopter pad on it.
  We cannot do this to the American taxpayers. There was a front page 
story in the Washington Post just a couple of days ago about some $125 
billion that, in the view of an outside study, had been wasted. We 
cannot continue to do that to the taxpayers of America, and we 
certainly cannot afford to continue to do it given the challenges we 
face all over the world, which are unprecedented in the last 70 years.
  Yesterday, I was honored to be asked to speak at the World War II 
Memorial commemorating the 75th anniversary of the attack on Pearl 
Harbor. It was an uplifting experience because, thank God, there were 
so many of our brave warriors who fought and were present in the war 
that was fought by our greatest generation. There were even a couple 
who had been on board the USS Arizona, which was sunk with 1,117 brave 
officers and men on board.
  You know, one of the lessons at Pearl Harbor was that we were not 
ready. We were not prepared. The Japanese airplanes that came in and 
bombed those ships and killed so many brave Americans--we had nothing 
that could combat them. At that time, the Japanese Zero was so far 
superior to anything that we had that it was a relatively easy mission 
for those Japanese Zeros to attack and destroy a good portion of 
America's Pacific Fleet at that time.
  What I fear is not another Pearl Harbor, but what I fear is that with 
sequestration and with the continuing resolution--which apparently we 
are going to do, although I will fight as hard as I can against it--we 
are reducing the ability of our men and women to serve this Nation with 
effectiveness.
  All of the four service chiefs--every one of them--when asked about 
sequestration and this kind of continuing resolution, have said one 
thing: We are putting the lives of the men and women who are serving 
our Armed Forces in uniform in greater jeopardy. Are we going to take 
the responsibility here with another continuing resolution to place the 
lives of the men and women serving this Nation at greater risk?
  That is a terrible burden--a terrible burden I say to my colleagues, 
who, maybe because they want to get out of here for Christmas, will be 
voting for a continuing resolution that again cuts defense spending--
cuts it--reduces it. That is not acceptable in light of the fact, by 
the way, that the President-elect has said he wants to spend more on 
defense. The President-elect has said: We are not spending enough. We 
are not doing enough.
  By the way, we have to do it right. We need to spend more. We need to 
do

[[Page 16376]]

it right. But when we see a front page story on the Washington Post 
that shows--I think it showed $125 billion was wasted, then we also 
have an obligation to spend those taxpayer dollars correctly. This 
legislation, which I urge my colleagues to vote for as followup to last 
year's, has significant reforms in the way the Pentagon does business.
  I would like to tell you that now we have reformed the Pentagon and 
everything is fine. My friends, we have a long way to go. We have a 
long way to go. I am proud of the bipartisanship that exists on our 
committee. I am proud of the seriousness with which most--not all, but 
most--of the members of the committee take their duties as members of 
the committee. I am proud that my friend and colleague from Rhode 
Island and I work so closely together, not only we but our staffs, in 
the spirit that is demanded if we are going to carry out our higher 
responsibilities to the men who serve.
  I am not proud--I am not proud--to see sequestration continue, the 
mindless, across-the-board cuts that have characterized the last few 
years. It is supported by both sides of the aisle, not just Democrats. 
I love to blame the Democrats for it, but both Democrats and 
Republicans have refused to address sequestration, which is destroying 
the readiness, which is--not destroying--it is harming the readiness of 
our men and women to serve and fight.
  Operations are being canceled, parts are not available, the training 
is not available. It goes on and on and on. Why don't we listen? I am 
not asking you to listen to the civilians. Ask the leaders that we have 
asked to be the chiefs of their services. Ask the leaders who are 
component commands. They will all tell you the same thing: We are going 
to have to spend more money, but we are also going to have to spend it 
more wisely.
  By the way, the Pentagon bureaucracy does not like many of these 
changes, just as last year we forced these changes on them, and now 
they all take credit for them. Fine, but now, there is another year of 
reforms. Next year, we are going to have to do more reforms, but unless 
we have the funding that is necessary to make these men and women who 
are serving in our military fully prepared to counter the new 
challenges, we are going to relive, in some form, December 7, 1941, in 
the words of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, ``A day that will live in 
infamy.''
  So I ask my colleagues to vote for this NDAA. We have had the input 
from literally every Member of this body, I am happy to say. I hope 
they will vote for this legislation. But I also--when they do--
recognize that unless we fund these programs, unless we fund these 
reforms, unless we provide sufficient funding, then they are not going 
to be able to carry out their mission in the most effective fashion.
  I say to my colleagues: Vote for this. Vote for this, but do not vote 
for another continuing resolution that will harm the ability of us and 
the men and women who are serving, and their leaders, to defend this 
Nation. It is a heavy responsibility you take on when you vote for the 
continuing resolution because that does not allow the Pentagon to move 
money around. It is an overall cut of many billions of dollars at a 
time that any observer will tell you is more challenging to our 
national security than any time since December 7, 1941.
  I urge my colleagues to vote for the NDAA.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.
  Mr. VITTER. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. ENZI. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  All postcloture time has expired.
  The question is on agreeing to the conference report.
  Mr. ENZI. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. CORNYN. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Arkansas (Mr. Cotton).
  Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. 
Cotton) would have voted ``yea.''
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sasse). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 92, nays 7, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 159 Leg.]

                                YEAS--92

     Alexander
     Ayotte
     Baldwin
     Barrasso
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Blunt
     Booker
     Boozman
     Boxer
     Brown
     Burr
     Cantwell
     Capito
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Coats
     Cochran
     Collins
     Coons
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Donnelly
     Durbin
     Enzi
     Ernst
     Feinstein
     Fischer
     Flake
     Franken
     Gardner
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hatch
     Heinrich
     Heitkamp
     Heller
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johnson
     Kaine
     King
     Kirk
     Klobuchar
     Lankford
     Leahy
     Manchin
     McCain
     McCaskill
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Nelson
     Perdue
     Peters
     Portman
     Reed
     Reid
     Risch
     Roberts
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Sasse
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Scott
     Sessions
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Stabenow
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Udall
     Vitter
     Warner
     Warren
     Whitehouse
     Wicker

                                NAYS--7

     Gillibrand
     Lee
     Markey
     Merkley
     Paul
     Sanders
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--1

       
     Cotton
       
  The conference report was agreed to
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.

                          ____________________