[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 3806-3823]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




            AMERICA'S SMALL BUSINESS TAX RELIEF ACT OF 2015

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
resume consideration of H.R. 636, which the clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 636) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 to permanently extend increased expensing limitations, 
     and for other purposes.

  Pending:

       Thune/Nelson amendment No. 3464, in the nature of a 
     substitute.
       Thune (for Gardner) amendment No. 3460 (to amendment No. 
     3464), to require the FAA Administrator to consider the 
     operational history of a person before authorizing the person 
     to operate certain unmanned aircraft systems.
       Thune amendment No. 3512 (to amendment No. 3464), to 
     enhance airport security.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, we have the FAA bill on the floor. I would 
like to discuss some of the amendments that are proposed and, 
hopefully, a couple that we will be voting on this morning. There are a 
couple of amendments--one offered by Senator Thune on behalf of himself 
and this Senator, the ranking member of the Commerce Committee, and 
another offered by Senator Heinrich. Both amendments deal with the 
issue of security but in different arenas.
  Let me explain. The Thune-Nelson amendment applies to the question of 
perimeter security, of allowing employees to get into an airport--not 
the sterile area controlled by TSA, although, as I will explain, it can 
definitely affect the sterile area as well. On the other hand, the 
Heinrich amendment addresses security in the areas where passengers 
bunch up outside of TSA security, such as in a queue-up line going 
through TSA security, or passengers bunched up at the ticket counters, 
checking in their luggage.
  Either way, as we saw from the experience of the Brussels airport 
explosion, those are very tempting targets for a terrorist. Therefore, 
the proposal in the Heinrich amendment, which I would commend to the 
Senate, is to increase the level of security, particularly with what 
are called VIPR teams, which, in essence, are not only at airports but 
at seaports and at transportation hubs.
  Remember that in Brussels there was a bombing in one of the train 
stations as well. So we need to increase the surveillance and the 
security there, including dogs. As a matter of fact, our K-9 friends 
are some of the best that we have when it comes to protecting us 
because their noses are attuned to being able to sniff out the 
explosives that you cannot detect with metal detectors or with the AIT 
machine that we go through where we hold up our hands to see if we have 
anything on us.
  It can detect if you have a package, if you have an explosive that is 
somewhere in one of your body cavities. It is going to be very, very 
difficult.
  Dogs, because of their God-given sense of smell, can detect that. A 
properly trained dog is just amazing to watch. Now, interestingly, 
concurrently there is research going on at NIST, the National Institute 
of Standards and Technology, for an artificial dog nose, a mechanical 
item or a piece of software and hardware that would actually do the 
same job.
  But that has not been perfected yet. That is going to be really 
interesting to see what they come up with. This Senator will report to 
the Senate later on that. But for the time being, the Heinrich 
amendment, which I hope we will vote on this morning, is concerned with 
that security that we have seen as a result of the Brussels bombing.
  We certainly want to enhance security in our airports. Thank goodness 
we have the intelligence apparatus that we do in this country to be 
able to smoke out the terrorist before he ever does his dirty deed. It 
is more difficult for them to do it here in America than it is in 
Europe because of the alienation of those communities that then harbor 
the terrorists. We see the result in Brussels as well as Paris. That is 
the Heinrich amendment. That is a broad characterization of it, but 
basically that is the thrust.
  The Thune-Nelson amendment is going at the perimeter security. OK, 
think Egypt and the Russian airliner. It was an airport employee who 
smuggled the bomb onto the plane, not as a passenger but as an airport 
employee. Think the Atlanta airport, 2 years ago. In a gunrunning 
scheme over 3 months, over 100 guns were transported from Atlanta to 
New York.
  The police in New York could not figure out how all of these guns 
were getting on the streets in New York. They kept checking the trains, 
and they kept checking the interstates. They could not figure it out. 
Here is how they did it. An employee at the Atlanta airport--because 
Atlanta was not checking their employees--would smuggle the guns in. 
Then that employee had access in the terminal to get into the sterile 
area--the TSA sterile area--and he would go into the men's room, meet 
the passenger who had already come through security and was clean, and 
give the guns to him to put them in his empty knapsack, his backpack. 
This employee, over the course of 17 times, over 3 months, smuggled 
over 100 guns. Thank goodness it was a criminal enterprise, not a 
terrorist, because you can imagine what would have happened.
  The Miami International Airport 10 years ago figured this out. What 
they did was, instead of having hundreds of entry points into the 
airport for airport employees in a very large airport like Atlanta, in 
Miami they boiled it down to a handful. There the employees went 
through similar security that passengers do to check to see if they had 
any weapons. They had a special identification card that they would 
have to stick into an electronic machine and put in their code, which 
was another way of checking to make sure that the employee was who they 
said they were.
  Miami solved the problem after having a problem with drugs 10 years 
ago. Interestingly, in the interim, the Orlando International Airport, 
likewise, about 4 years ago had a similar drug problem. They did the 
same thing. They boiled down hundreds of entry points for airport 
employees to a handful. They had those checks. I have gone to see those 
checks at those two airports. That is exactly how they do it.
  The fact is, we have 300 airports in the United States. There were 
only two that were doing this kind of perimeter checking. Atlanta then 
became the poster boy of what can happen in a gunrunning scheme. I am 
happy to report to the Senate that, in fact, the Atlanta airport has 
now done exactly what Miami and Orlando have done. But we have 297 
other airports that need to do the same thing.
  So the Thune-Nelson amendment is exactly getting at that kind of 
perimeter security situation. I highly commend both the Thune-Nelson 
amendment as well as the Heinrich amendment. There are a whole bunch of 
cosponsors--bipartisan--on each of these. I highly recommend both of 
these to the Senate. I hope we will vote on those today--hopefully, 
this morning.
  Now, there are going to be, of course, a series of many other 
amendments, some very well intentioned that have some technical 
glitches, and we have our very expert staff right now starting to try 
to work out some of these technical glitches. Then we can get moving 
with this FAA bill.
  I would mention one other amendment that this Senator will be 
offering, and that is on a cyber security bill. Did the Presiding 
Officer see the ``60 Minutes'' segment where people with a laptop could 
take over an automobile by going through the electronics of the 
automobile? They can speed it up, they can make it stop it, and they 
can make it turn and completely take over the operation of an 
automobile.
  Can the Presiding Officer imagine somebody being able to do that with 
an airliner with 250 people on board? Therefore, whether we want to 
face it or not, we better face it because we are in an era that what we 
need to do is to make sure technically that the systems in an airliner 
are separate, that there is an air gap, and that whatever those systems 
are--it might be Wi-Fi for the airplane, it might be music, or it may 
be whatever it is--there is an air gap so that someone cannot go into

[[Page 3807]]

that system and suddenly get into the aircraft controls.
  That is super important. One other thing I would mention is what we 
know as unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones. They have become quite 
popular. But, obviously, one of the things that is already in the bill, 
which Senator Thune and I have insisted on as we approach this FAA 
bill, is that we have to come face-to-face with the reality that drones 
are now impairing the safety of an ascending or a descending aircraft. 
We have seen--the two of us--an operation where you can now take over 
the operation of a drone.
  Education can do so much. People have to understand that you 
basically have to not fly a drone within 5 miles of an airport. Just 
recently, at Miami International Airport, there was an inbound American 
Airlines plane, and there was a drone about 1,000 feet off on the left 
side. Remember Captain Sully Sullenberger, when a flock of geese 
suddenly got sucked into the engines and all power was lost. 
Fortunately, he had the Hudson River that he could belly it in after he 
had taken off from LaGuardia.
  You put a drone with plastic and metal, let that get sucked into the 
engine, and you will have a catastrophic failure. You don't want to put 
your passengers in that kind of operation. Therefore, education is one 
thing, but there is always going to be a young person that does not 
know about this. We don't know the answer. We know we can take over the 
operation of the drone, send it over here, have it set down, and have 
it land. The technology is there, but how do we apply that technology 
so we avoid this aircraft collision? There is an increasing use of 
drones that are so helpful for so many commercial purposes, not to 
mention the pure pleasure of flying a drone around, which we are seeing 
has become exceptionally popular. We address that in the bill by giving 
the appropriate direction to the FAA to start coming up with the 
solutions of how we are going to protect aircraft in and around 
airports.
  On down the line, there are going to be so many different issues with 
regard to drones, far beyond the scope of the FAA bill. On the question 
of privacy--a drone suddenly coming down and coming at eye level 
outside your bedroom window snooping--there are all kinds of questions 
about privacy. What about the fact that you can now put a gun on a 
drone? We know in a war zone we have the capability of doing that with 
very sophisticated weapons, such as Hellfire missiles, but now some 
people are experimenting with putting a gun on a drone. We have the 
ramifications of what that means for society to deal with in the 
future. For the immediate future, the FAA bill on the floor--we have 
this problem of avoiding drones colliding into aircraft, and that is in 
the bill and it is addressed.
  We have a lot of interesting issues to talk about. Let's get the 
Senate on it, and hopefully we can get agreement so we can at least 
vote on two of these amendments this morning.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  Mr. 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. HEINRICH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


         Amendment No. 3482, as Modified, to Amendment No. 3464

  Mr. HEINRICH. Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 3482, as 
modified, and ask that it be reported by number.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from New Mexico [Mr. Heinrich] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 3482, as modified, to amendment No. 3464.

  The amendment, as modified, is as follows:

      (Purpose: To expand and enhance visible deterrents at major 
transportation hubs and to increase the resources to protect and secure 
                           the United States)

       At the end of title V, insert the following:

     SEC. 5032. VISIBLE DETERRENT.

       Section 1303 of the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/
     11 Commission Act of 2007 (6 U.S.C. 1112) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in paragraph (3), by striking ``; and'' and inserting a 
     semicolon;
       (B) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) if the VIPR team is deployed to an airport, shall 
     require, as appropriate based on risk, that the VIPR team 
     conduct operations--
       ``(A) in the sterile area and any other areas to which only 
     individuals issued security credentials have unescorted 
     access; and
       ``(B) in non-sterile areas.''; and
       (2) in subsection (b), by striking ``such sums as necessary 
     for fiscal years 2007 through 2011'' and inserting ``such 
     sums as necessary, including funds to develop not more than 
     60 VIPR teams, for fiscal years 2016 through 2017''.

     SEC. 5033. LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING FOR MASS CASUALTY AND 
                   ACTIVE SHOOTER INCIDENTS.

       Section 2006(a)(2) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 
     U.S.C. 607(a)(2)) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (E) through (I) as 
     subparagraphs (F) through (J), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the following:
       ``(E) training exercises to enhance preparedness for and 
     response to mass casualty and active shooter incidents and 
     security events at public locations, including airports and 
     mass transit systems;''.

     SEC. 5034. ASSISTANCE TO AIRPORTS AND SURFACE TRANSPORTATION 
                   SYSTEMS.

       Section 2008(a) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 
     U.S.C. 609(a)) is amended--
       (1) by redesigning paragraphs (9) through (13) as 
     paragraphs (10) through (14), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (8) the following:
       ``(9) enhancing the security and preparedness of secure and 
     non-secure areas of eligible airports and surface 
     transportation systems.''.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico.
  Mr. HEINRICH. Mr. President, this amendment would strengthen U.S. 
airport security, especially in nonsecure or soft-target areas of 
airports--places such as check-in and baggage claim areas. It would 
also update Federal security programs to provide active shooter 
training for law enforcement and increase the presence of Federal 
agents with bomb-sniffing canines at these nonsecure areas.
  I thank the cosponsors of the amendment: Senator Manchin, Senator 
Schumer, Senator Nelson, Senator Klobuchar, Senator Cantwell, Senator 
Carper, Senator Baldwin, Senator Durbin, Senator Bennet, and Senator 
Blumenthal.
  I urge all of my colleagues to join me in supporting the adoption of 
this amendment.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Rubio). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I wish to speak on the bill and ask consent 
to do so.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is recognized.
  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I am pleased to be joined by my colleague 
from Pennsylvania Senator Toomey to talk about an issue we began to 
discuss on the floor yesterday, but we have been working many months on 
this issue.
  It is a rather simple issue, but it is a matter that has some real 
urgency connected to it because we are talking about a secondary 
barrier on airplanes--meaning a barrier other than what we know now to 
be a reinforced cockpit door--to prevent terrorists from getting into 
the cockpit. What we need to do in addition to that, after Congress 
mandated the installation of these reinforced cockpit doors, is add a 
secondary barrier.
  This is something that arises because we not only know from the 
attack on 
9/11 but thereafter, we know that, No. 1, this is still an intention 
that terrorists have to take over an airplane. We know since 9/11, 51--
I will correct the record from yesterday, I think I said

[[Page 3808]]

15, I had transposed the number--but it is 51 hijacking attempts around 
the world since 9/11. This is not a problem that is going away, and we 
have to deal with it.
  This is the barrier we are talking about. So people understand the 
nature of this barrier, this is a lightweight wire mesh gate that would 
prevent a terrorist from getting into the cockpit or even getting to 
the door of the cockpit, which, as we said, is already reinforced. What 
it does fundamentally is block access to the flight deck. That is what 
we are talking about. That is what our amendment does.
  We know the substantial number of groups that support this. I will 
just read the list for the record. And this actually is support for the 
underlying bill that Senator Toomey and I and others have been working 
on for a while. The underlying bill itself was S. 911. Also, the 
amendment, amendment No. 3458, is endorsed by the following groups: the 
Airline Pilots Association, the Allied Pilots Association, the 
Association of Flight Attendants, the Federal Law Enforcement Officers 
Association, the US Airline Pilots Association, the Coalition of 
Airline Pilots Association, the Port Authority of New York & New 
Jersey, and Families of September 11.
  There have been numerous studies done. I am holding a study--although 
you can't see it from a distance--which was conducted by the Cato 
Institute, among others, on terrorism risk and cost-benefit analysis of 
aviation security.
  So we not only have substantial support from virtually every group 
you could point toward, but we have some expertise on how to protect 
pilots in the cockpit, how to protect passengers on an airplane, and, 
of course, how to do that by preventing terrorists from getting through 
or near the cockpit because of a good secondary barrier.
  This effort started literally from folks we now know in Pennsylvania. 
It started with, among other people, the Saracini family, Ellen 
Saracini, the wife of Captain Victor Saracini, who piloted United 
Flight 175, which terrorists hijacked and flew into the World Trade 
Center on 9/11. So in memory of Captain Saracini and inspired by the 
great work of his wife Ellen Saracini, we offer this amendment.
  Again, I am very pleased to be working on this with my colleague 
Senator Toomey, and I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. President, I would like to underscore the points made 
by my colleague Senator Casey. I thank him for his leadership.
  This is a very simple matter that is very straightforward and common 
sense. We know there is a very real vulnerability in our commercial 
aircraft. We know this. There is no mystery here. And we have a very 
simple, affordable, reasonable solution that will provide the security 
we need.
  After September 11, 2001, Congress very rightly mandated that the 
cockpit door be reinforced so that it is virtually impossible to 
destroy that door, to knock down that door, to defeat the purpose of 
that door when it is closed and latched. The problem is that when it is 
open--which it must be open periodically during many flights--a very 
strong door is useless. We know what happens now on airlines because we 
have all witnessed it, right? When a pilot needs to come out or go in 
or there is access to the cockpit when that door is open, the flight 
attendant rolls a little serving cart in front of the door. I suppose 
that is better than nothing, but it is not much better than nothing. 
That cart can be rolled away.
  We are not the only ones who have observed this. An FAA advisory has 
observed this risk. The 9/11 Commission pointed out that the terrorists 
were very focused on the opportunity created by the opening of the 
cockpit door. As Senator Casey pointed out, there have been multiple 
attempts to breach that door. Several have been successful. We have an 
amendment that solves this problem in a very affordable, reasonable, 
sensible way. It is a lightweight, collapsible barrier made of wire 
mesh, and a flight attendant can simply draw it across the opening, 
lock it, and then at that point the cockpit door can be opened and 
there is no way someone would be able to rush through that wire mesh in 
time to get to the cockpit during that moment when the door is open. 
That is what our amendment does.
  It passed the Transportation Committee in the House unanimously. As 
Senator Casey pointed out, it has very broad support from many of the 
stakeholders who care about the security of our commercial aviation.
  It is our hope and understanding that we will be very soon 
propounding a unanimous consent agreement which will allow this 
amendment to be pending and that this will be one of the amendments 
which will be on the docket for a subsequent vote. I hope we will get 
to that momentarily. I hope we will get that locked in, and then I 
would urge my colleagues to vote yes on our amendment and enhance 
commercial aviation safety.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mrs. FISCHER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. FISCHER. Mr. President, I rise to discuss an important matter 
before the Senate, the reauthorization of our Nation's Federal Aviation 
Administration. The FAA is tasked with a critical mission to manage the 
safety and the security of our Nation's airspace.
  Our Nation's airspace is an incredible resource that fuels our 
economy. According to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, in 2015, 
a record 896 million passengers traversed America's skies. Our aviation 
system contributes $1.5 trillion to our Nation's economy and it 
supports 11.8 million jobs for hard-working Americans, as noted by the 
National Air Traffic Controllers Association.
  The Senate's FAA reauthorization bill will make our aviation system 
stronger for families, children, veterans, and the traveling public. It 
will also benefit Nebraska's rural airports and local aviation 
stakeholders. Notably, this carefully negotiated bill will strengthen 
America's aviation system without raising fees or taxes on airline 
passengers.
  Our robust, bipartisan legislation includes several major priorities 
I championed. I am proud of bipartisan language I worked to include in 
the bill, along with Senators Booker, Cantwell, and Ayotte. Our 
provision
would compel the FAA to work with the airline industry to 
comprehensively assess and update guidelines for emergency medical kits 
on commercial aircraft. These kits, which haven't been statutorily 
updated since 1998, provide lifesaving resources for passengers. It is 
well past time for the FAA to evaluate medications and equipment 
included in these kits. Doing so will ensure all passengers, 
particularly families with young infants facing unknown allergic 
reactions, have access to the medical supplies they might need in an 
emergency situation.
  In addition, I worked with Senator McCaskill to include an amendment 
that would make it easier for traveling mothers to care for their young 
infants. Our amendment unanimously passed the Commerce Committee. We 
worked closely with airport stakeholders, including Omaha's Eppley 
Airfield, to establish reasonable minimum standards for both medium- 
and large-hub airports to develop private rooms for nursing mothers in 
future capital development plans. Traveling as a new mom can be 
challenging and it can be stressful at times, but I believe this 
important change will provide increased flexibility and also peace of 
mind for mothers traveling through airports across our country.
  I also joined Senator Hirono to include an amendment that would 
ensure disabled veterans working at the FAA have access to service-
connected disability leave. The FAA was one of the few agencies not 
included in the recently passed Wounded Warriors Federal Leave Act. 
That bill required Federal agencies to ensure disabled vets

[[Page 3809]]

have access to service-connected disability leave. Our disabled 
veterans bravely served our country, and they deserve access to 
benefits they have earned. I am grateful for the achievements this bill 
will advance for the flying public. At the same time, the bill is also 
a victory for Nebraska's rural communities and airports.
  The Small Airport Regulation Relief Act, which is included in the FAA 
bill, would create a temporary exemption for small airports so they can 
continue to receive airport improvement program funds--those AIP 
funds--despite downturns in air service. The survival of smaller 
airports, such as Scottsbluff's Western Nebraska Regional Airport, 
depends on these crucial funds to provide service to local passengers 
and businesses. Several of Nebraska's small and community airports, 
such as Alliance, Chadron, Grand Island, McCook, North Platte, and 
Scottsbluff, will also benefit from a continuation of the Essential Air 
Service, or EAS, Program. The EAS Program incentivizes air carriers to 
provide service to underserved and rural areas, and it is critical to 
ensuring air service continues for Nebraska's rural communities.
  Meanwhile, the Central Nebraska Regional Airport in Grand Island is 
growing and hosts a privately operated Federal contract tower. I 
encouraged the inclusion of provisions to compel the FAA to complete a 
pending cost-benefit analysis for Federal contract tower airports. This 
analysis would reflect the cost-share arrangement more accurately 
between our local airports and the FAA for those contract towers. 
Through this legislation, we can help to reduce the burden on local 
airports such as Grand Island, NE.
  One of the major challenges facing aviation manufacturers has been 
the FAA's inconsistent and often unclear regulatory process. I 
collaborated with Duncan Aviation of Lincoln, NE, the largest family-
owned maintenance, repair, and overhaul organization in the world, to 
address this challenge. In fact, Chairman Thune toured the facilities 
at Duncan Aviation with me in Lincoln last fall.
  Our bill would provide clarity to aviation businesses like Duncan 
Aviation by compelling the FAA to establish a centralized safety 
guidance database. Moreover, the bill would require the FAA to 
establish a Regulatory Consistency Communications Board. The Board 
would set standards to ensure the consistent application of regulations 
and guidance at regional offices throughout our country. Agricultural 
aviators in Nebraska will also benefit from safety enhancements in this 
bill. Far too many of our agricultural pilots have died in recent years 
after collisions with unmarked utility towers.
  This legislation would ensure that towers are marked to create safer 
skies for our agriculture pilots. Passing our FAA bill will be a major 
accomplishment for the Senate. I appreciate and commend the hard work 
of Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, and their committee staffers 
on this meaningful FAA reauthorization bill. In the coming days, I look 
forward to working together to help pass this critical legislation that 
will benefit the flying public, our national aviation system, and 
Nebraska's rural airports and aviation stakeholders.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my amendment 
numbered 3512 be modified with the changes at the desk and that at 
12:05 p.m. today the Senate vote on the following amendments in the 
order listed: Thune No. 3512, as modified; and Heinrich No. 3482, as 
modified; further that at 1:45 p.m. today the Senate vote on the 
Schumer amendment No. 3483 and that no second-degree amendments be in 
order to any of the amendments prior to the vote and that there be 2 
minutes equally divided prior to each vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment (No. 3512), as modified, is as follows:

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:

      TITLE ___--TRANSPORTATION SECURITY AND TERRORISM PREVENTION

       Subtitle A--Airport Security Enhancement and Oversight Act

     SEC. _101. SHORT TITLE.

       This subtitle may be cited as the ``Airport Security 
     Enhancement and Oversight Act''.

     SEC. _102. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) A number of recent airport security breaches in the 
     United States have involved the use of Secure Identification 
     Display Area (referred to in this section as ``SIDA'') 
     badges, the credentials used by airport and airline workers 
     to access the secure areas of an airport.
       (2) In December 2014, a Delta ramp agent at Hartsfield-
     Jackson Atlanta International Airport was charged with using 
     his SIDA badge to bypass airport security checkpoints and 
     facilitate an interstate gun smuggling operation over a 
     number of months via commercial aircraft.
       (3) In January 2015, an Atlanta-based Aviation Safety 
     Inspector of the Federal Aviation Administration used his 
     SIDA badge to bypass airport security checkpoints and 
     transport a firearm in his carry-on luggage.
       (4) In February 2015, a local news investigation found that 
     over 1,000 SIDA badges at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta 
     International Airport were lost or missing.
       (5) In March 2015, and again in May 2015, Transportation 
     Security Administration contractors were indicted for 
     participating in a drug smuggling ring using luggage passed 
     through the secure area of the San Francisco International 
     Airport.
       (6) The Administration has indicated that it does not 
     maintain a list of lost or missing SIDA badges, and instead 
     relies on airport operators to track airport worker 
     credentials.
       (7) The Administration rarely uses its enforcement 
     authority to fine airport operators that reach a certain 
     threshold of missing SIDA badges.
       (8) In April 2015, the Aviation Security Advisory Committee 
     issued 28 recommendations for improvements to airport access 
     control.
       (9) In June 2015, the Inspector General of the Department 
     of Homeland Security reported that the Administration did not 
     have all relevant information regarding 73 airport workers 
     who had records in United States intelligence-related 
     databases because the Administration was not authorized to 
     receive all terrorism-related information under current 
     interagency watchlisting policy.
       (10) The Inspector General also found that the 
     Administration did not have appropriate checks in place to 
     reject incomplete or inaccurate airport worker employment 
     investigations, including criminal history record checks and 
     work authorization verifications, and had limited oversight 
     over the airport operators that the Administration relies on 
     to perform criminal history and work authorization checks for 
     airport workers.
       (11) There is growing concern about the potential insider 
     threat at airports in light of recent terrorist activities.

     SEC. _103. DEFINITIONS.

       In this subtitle:
       (1) Administration.--The term ``Administration'' means the 
     Transportation Security Administration.
       (2) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the 
     Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration.
       (3) Appropriate committees of congress.--The term 
     ``appropriate committees of Congress'' means--
       (A) the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 
     of the Senate;
       (B) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
     Affairs of the Senate; and
       (C) the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (4) ASAC.--The term ``ASAC'' means the Aviation Security 
     Advisory Committee established under section 44946 of title 
     49, United States Code.
       (5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Homeland Security.
       (6) SIDA.--The term ``SIDA'' means Secure Identification 
     Display Area as defined in section 1540.5 of title 49, Code 
     of Federal Regulations, or any successor regulation to such 
     section.

     SEC. _104. THREAT ASSESSMENT.

       (a) Insider Threats.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall conduct or 
     update an assessment to determine the level of risk posed to 
     the domestic air transportation system by individuals with 
     unescorted access to a secure area of an airport (as defined 
     in section 44903(j)(2)(H)) in light of recent international 
     terrorist activity.
       (2) Considerations.--In conducting or updating the 
     assessment under paragraph (1), the Administrator shall 
     consider--
       (A) domestic intelligence;
       (B) international intelligence;

[[Page 3810]]

       (C) the vulnerabilities associated with unescorted access 
     authority granted to domestic airport operators and air 
     carriers, and their employees;
       (D) the vulnerabilities associated with unescorted access 
     authority granted to foreign airport operators and air 
     carriers, and their employees;
       (E) the processes and practices designed to mitigate the 
     vulnerabilities associated with unescorted access privileges 
     granted to airport operators and air carriers, and their 
     employees;
       (F) the recent security breaches at domestic and foreign 
     airports; and
       (G) the recent security improvements at domestic airports, 
     including the implementation of recommendations made by 
     relevant advisory committees.
       (b) Reports to Congress.--The Administrator shall submit to 
     the appropriate committees of Congress--
       (1) a report on the results of the assessment under 
     subsection (a), including any recommendations for improving 
     aviation security;
       (2) a report on the implementation status of any 
     recommendations made by the ASAC; and
       (3) regular updates about the insider threat environment as 
     new information becomes available and as needed.

     SEC. _105. OVERSIGHT.

       (a) Enhanced Requirements.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to public notice and comment, and 
     in consultation with airport operators, the Administrator 
     shall update the rules on access controls issued by the 
     Secretary under chapter 449 of title 49, United States Code.
       (2) Considerations.--As part of the update under paragraph 
     (1), the Administrator shall consider--
       (A) increased fines and advanced oversight for airport 
     operators that report missing more than 5 percent of 
     credentials for unescorted access to any SIDA of an airport;
       (B) best practices for Category X airport operators that 
     report missing more than 3 percent of credentials for 
     unescorted access to any SIDA of an airport;
       (C) additional audits and status checks for airport 
     operators that report missing more than 3 percent of 
     credentials for unescorted access to any SIDA of an airport;
       (D) review and analysis of the prior 5 years of audits for 
     airport operators that report missing more than 3 percent of 
     credentials for unescorted access to any SIDA of an airport;
       (E) increased fines and direct enforcement requirements for 
     both airport workers and their employers that fail to report 
     within 24 hours an employment termination or a missing 
     credential for unescorted access to any SIDA of an airport; 
     and
       (F) a method for termination by the employer of any airport 
     worker that fails to report in a timely manner missing 
     credentials for unescorted access to any SIDA of an airport.
       (b) Temporary Credentials.--The Administrator may encourage 
     the issuance by airport and aircraft operators of free one-
     time, 24-hour temporary credentials for workers who have 
     reported their credentials missing, but not permanently lost, 
     stolen, or destroyed, in a timely manner, until replacement 
     of credentials under section 1542.211 of title 49 Code of 
     Federal Regulations is necessary.
       (c) Notification and Report to Congress.--The Administrator 
     shall--
       (1) notify the appropriate committees of Congress each time 
     an airport operator reports that more than 3 percent of 
     credentials for unescorted access to any SIDA at a Category X 
     airport are missing or more than 5 percent of credentials to 
     access any SIDA at any other airport are missing; and
       (2) submit to the appropriate committees of Congress an 
     annual report on the number of violations and fines related 
     to unescorted access to the SIDA of an airport collected in 
     the preceding fiscal year.

     SEC. _106. CREDENTIALS.

       (a) Lawful Status.--Not later than 90 days after the date 
     of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall issue 
     guidance to airport operators regarding placement of an 
     expiration date on each airport credential issued to a non-
     United States citizen no longer than the period of time 
     during which that non-United States citizen is lawfully 
     authorized to work in the United States.
       (b) Review of Procedures.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall--
       (A) issue guidance for transportation security inspectors 
     to annually review the procedures of airport operators and 
     air carriers for applicants seeking unescorted access to any 
     SIDA of an airport; and
       (B) make available to airport operators and air carriers 
     information on identifying suspicious or fraudulent 
     identification materials.
       (2) Inclusions.--The guidance shall require a comprehensive 
     review of background checks and employment authorization 
     documents issued by the Citizenship and Immigration Services 
     during the course of a review of procedures under paragraph 
     (1).

     SEC. _107. VETTING.

       (a) Eligibility Requirements.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, and subject to public notice and 
     comment, the Administrator shall revise the regulations 
     issued under section 44936 of title 49, United States Code, 
     in accordance with this section and current knowledge of 
     insider threats and intelligence, to enhance the eligibility 
     requirements and disqualifying criminal offenses for 
     individuals seeking or having unescorted access to a SIDA of 
     an airport.
       (2) Disqualifying criminal offenses.--In revising the 
     regulations under paragraph (1), the Administrator shall 
     consider adding to the list of disqualifying criminal 
     offenses and criteria the offenses and criteria listed in 
     section 122.183(a)(4) of title 19, Code of Federal 
     Regulations and section 1572.103 of title 49, Code of Federal 
     Regulations.
       (3) Waiver process for denied credentials.--Notwithstanding 
     section 44936(b) of title 49, United States Code, in revising 
     the regulations under paragraph (1) of this subsection, the 
     Administrator shall--
       (A) ensure there exists or is developed a waiver process 
     for approving the issuance of credentials for unescorted 
     access to the SIDA, for an individual found to be otherwise 
     ineligible for such credentials; and
       (B) consider, as appropriate and practicable--
       (i) the circumstances of any disqualifying act or offense, 
     restitution made by the individual, Federal and State 
     mitigation remedies, and other factors from which it may be 
     concluded that the individual does not pose a terrorism risk 
     or a risk to aviation security warranting denial of the 
     credential; and
       (ii) the elements of the appeals and waiver process 
     established under section 70105(c) of title 46, United States 
     Code.
       (4) Look back.--In revising the regulations under paragraph 
     (1), the Administrator shall propose that an individual be 
     disqualified if the individual was convicted, or found not 
     guilty by reason of insanity, of a disqualifying criminal 
     offense within 15 years before the date of an individual's 
     application, or if the individual was incarcerated for that 
     crime and released from incarceration within 5 years before 
     the date of the individual's application.
       (5) Certifications.--The Administrator shall require an 
     airport or aircraft operator, as applicable, to certify for 
     each individual who receives unescorted access to any SIDA of 
     an airport that--
       (A) a specific need exists for providing that individual 
     with unescorted access authority; and
       (B) the individual has certified to the airport or aircraft 
     operator that the individual understands the requirements for 
     possessing a SIDA badge.
       (6) Report to congress.--Not later than 90 days after the 
     date of enactment, the Administrator shall submit to the 
     appropriate committees of Congress a report on the status of 
     the revision to the regulations issued under section 44936 of 
     title 49, United States Code, in accordance with this 
     section.
       (7) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this subsection may 
     be construed to affect existing aviation worker vetting fees 
     imposed by the Administration.
       (b) Recurrent Vetting.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator and the Director of 
     the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall fully implement the 
     Rap Back service for recurrent vetting of eligible 
     Administration-regulated populations of individuals with 
     unescorted access to any SIDA of an airport.
       (2) Requirements.--As part of the requirement in paragraph 
     (1), the Administrator shall ensure that--
       (A) any status notifications the Administration receives 
     through the Rap Back service about criminal offenses be 
     limited to only disqualifying criminal offenses in accordance 
     with the regulations promulgated by the Administration under 
     section 44903 of title 49, United States Code, or other 
     Federal law; and
       (B) any information received by the Administration through 
     the Rap Back service is provided directly and immediately to 
     the relevant airport and aircraft operators.
       (3) Report to congress.--Not later than 60 days after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit 
     to the appropriate committees of Congress a report on the 
     implementation status of the Rap Back service.
       (c) Access to Terrorism-Related Data.--Not later than 30 
     days after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
     Administrator and the Director of National Intelligence shall 
     coordinate to ensure that the Administrator is authorized to 
     receive automated, real-time access to additional Terrorist 
     Identities Datamart Environment (TIDE) data and any other 
     terrorism related category codes to improve the effectiveness 
     of the Administration's credential vetting program for 
     individuals that are seeking or have unescorted access to a 
     SIDA of an airport.
       (d) Access to E-Verify and SAVE Programs.--Not later than 
     90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
     Secretary shall authorize each airport operator to have 
     direct access to the E-Verify program and the Systematic 
     Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) automated system 
     to determine the eligibility of individuals seeking 
     unescorted access to a SIDA of an airport.

[[Page 3811]]



     SEC. _108. METRICS.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall develop and 
     implement performance metrics to measure the effectiveness of 
     security for the SIDAs of airports.
       (b) Considerations.--In developing the performance metrics 
     under subsection (a), the Administrator may consider--
       (1) adherence to access point procedures;
       (2) proper use of credentials;
       (3) differences in access point requirements between 
     airport workers performing functions on the airside of an 
     airport and airport workers performing functions in other 
     areas of an airport;
       (4) differences in access point characteristics and 
     requirements at airports; and
       (5) any additional factors the Administrator considers 
     necessary to measure performance.

     SEC. _109. INSPECTIONS AND ASSESSMENTS.

       (a) Model and Best Practices.--Not later than 180 days 
     after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator, 
     in consultation with the ASAC, shall develop a model and best 
     practices for unescorted access security that--
       (1) use intelligence, scientific algorithms, and risk-based 
     factors;
       (2) ensure integrity, accountability, and control;
       (3) subject airport workers to random physical security 
     inspections conducted by Administration representatives in 
     accordance with this section;
       (4) appropriately manage the number of SIDA access points 
     to improve supervision of and reduce unauthorized access to 
     these areas; and
       (5) include validation of identification materials, such as 
     with biometrics.
       (b) Inspections.--Consistent with a risk-based security 
     approach, the Administrator shall expand the use of 
     transportation security officers and inspectors to conduct 
     enhanced, random and unpredictable, data-driven, and 
     operationally dynamic physical inspections of airport workers 
     in each SIDA of an airport and at each SIDA access point--
       (1) to verify the credentials of airport workers;
       (2) to determine whether airport workers possess prohibited 
     items, except for those that may be necessary for the 
     performance of their duties, as appropriate, in any SIDA of 
     an airport; and
       (3) to verify whether airport workers are following 
     appropriate procedures to access a SIDA of an airport.
       (c) Screening Review.--
       (1) In general.--The Administrator shall conduct a review 
     of airports that have implemented additional airport worker 
     screening or perimeter security to improve airport security, 
     including--
       (A) comprehensive airport worker screening at access points 
     to secure areas;
       (B) comprehensive perimeter screening, including vehicles;
       (C) enhanced fencing or perimeter sensors; and
       (D) any additional airport worker screening or perimeter 
     security measures the Administrator identifies.
       (2) Best practices.--After completing the review under 
     paragraph (1), the Administrator shall--
       (A) identify best practices for additional access control 
     and airport worker security at airports; and
       (B) disseminate the best practices identified under 
     subparagraph (A) to airport operators.
       (3) Pilot program.--The Administrator may conduct a pilot 
     program at 1 or more airports to test and validate best 
     practices for comprehensive airport worker screening or 
     perimeter security under paragraph (2).

     SEC. _110. COVERT TESTING.

       (a) In General.--The Administrator shall increase the use 
     of red-team, covert testing of access controls to any secure 
     areas of an airport.
       (b) Additional Covert Testing.--The Inspector General of 
     the Department of Homeland Security shall conduct red-team, 
     covert testing of airport access controls to the SIDA of 
     airports.
       (c) Reports to Congress.--
       (1) Administrator report.--Not later than 90 days after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit 
     to the appropriate committee of Congress a report on the 
     progress to expand the use of inspections and of red-team, 
     covert testing under subsection (a).
       (2) Inspector general report.--Not later than 180 days 
     after the date of enactment of this Act, the Inspector 
     General of the Department of Homeland Security shall submit 
     to the appropriate committee of Congress a report on the 
     effectiveness of airport access controls to the SIDA of 
     airports based on red-team, covert testing under subsection 
     (b).

     SEC. _111. SECURITY DIRECTIVES.

       (a) Review.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the 
     Administrator, in consultation with the appropriate regulated 
     entities, shall conduct a comprehensive review of every 
     current security directive addressed to any regulated 
     entity--
       (1) to determine whether the security directive continues 
     to be relevant;
       (2) to determine whether the security directives should be 
     streamlined or consolidated to most efficiently maximize risk 
     reduction; and
       (3) to update, consolidate, or revoke any security 
     directive as necessary.
       (b) Notice.--For each security directive that the 
     Administrator issues, the Administrator shall submit to the 
     appropriate committees of Congress notice of--
       (1) the extent to which the security directive responds to 
     a specific threat, security threat assessment, or emergency 
     situation against civil aviation; and
       (2) when it is anticipated that the security directive will 
     expire.

     SEC. _112. IMPLEMENTATION REPORT.

       Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall--
       (1) assess the progress made by the Administration and the 
     effect on aviation security of implementing the requirements 
     under sections _104 through _111 of this Act; and
       (2) report to the appropriate committees of Congress on the 
     results of the assessment under paragraph (1), including any 
     recommendations.

     SEC. _113. MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS.

       (a) ASAC Terms of Office.--Section 44946(c)(2)(A) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(A) Terms.--The term of each member of the Advisory 
     Committee shall be 2 years, but a member may continue to 
     serve until the Assistant Secretary appoints a successor. A 
     member of the Advisory Committee may be reappointed.''.
       (b) Feedback.--Section 44946(b)(5) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(5) Feedback.--Not later than 90 days after receiving 
     recommendations transmitted by the Advisory Committee under 
     paragraph (2) or paragraph (4), the Assistant Secretary shall 
     respond in writing to the Advisory Committee with feedback on 
     each of the recommendations, an action plan to implement any 
     of the recommendations with which the Assistant Secretary 
     concurs, and a justification for why any of the 
     recommendations have been rejected.''.

                 Subtitle B--TSA PreCheck Expansion Act

     SEC. _201. SHORT TITLE.

       This subtitle may be cited as the ``TSA PreCheck Expansion 
     Act''.

     SEC. _202. DEFINITIONS.

       In this subtitle:
       (1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the 
     Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration.
       (2) Department.--The term ``Department'' means the 
     Department of Homeland Security.
       (3) Precheck program.--The term ``PreCheck Program'' means 
     the trusted traveler program implemented by the 
     Transportation Security Administration under section 
     109(a)(3) of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (49 
     U.S.C. 114).
       (4) TSA.--The term ``TSA'' means the Transportation 
     Security Administration.

     SEC. _203. PRECHECK PROGRAM AUTHORIZATION.

       The Administrator shall continue to administer the PreCheck 
     Program established under the authority of the Aviation and 
     Transportation Security Act (Public Law 107-71; 115 Stat. 
     597).

     SEC. _204. PRECHECK PROGRAM ENROLLMENT EXPANSION.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall publish 
     PreCheck Program enrollment standards that add multiple 
     private sector application capabilities for the PreCheck 
     Program to increase the public's enrollment access to the 
     program, including standards that allow the use of secure 
     technologies, including online enrollment, kiosks, tablets, 
     or staffed laptop stations at which individuals can apply for 
     entry into the program.
       (b) Requirements.--Upon publication of the PreCheck Program 
     enrollment standards under subsection (a), the Administrator 
     shall--
       (1) coordinate with interested parties--
       (A) to deploy TSA-approved ready-to-market private sector 
     solutions that meet the PreCheck Program enrollment standards 
     under subsection (a);
       (B) to make available additional PreCheck Program 
     enrollment capabilities; and
       (C) to offer secure online and mobile enrollment 
     opportunities;
       (2) partner with the private sector to collect biographic 
     and biometric identification information via kiosks, mobile 
     devices, or other mobile enrollment platforms to increase 
     enrollment flexibility and minimize the amount of travel to 
     enrollment centers for applicants;
       (3) ensure that any information, including biographic 
     information, is collected in a manner that--
       (A) is comparable with the appropriate and applicable 
     standards developed by the National Institute of Standards 
     and Technology; and
       (B) protects privacy and data security, including that any 
     personally identifiable information is collected, retained, 
     used, and shared in a manner consistent with section

[[Page 3812]]

     552a of title 5, United States Code (commonly known as 
     ``Privacy Act of 1974''), and with agency regulations;
       (4) ensure that the enrollment process is streamlined and 
     flexible to allow an individual to provide additional 
     information to complete enrollment and verify identity; and
       (5) ensure that any enrollment expansion using a private 
     sector risk assessment instead of a fingerprint-based 
     criminal history records check is evaluated and certified by 
     the Secretary of Homeland Security, and verified by the 
     Government Accountability Office or a federally funded 
     research and development center after award to be equivalent 
     to a fingerprint-based criminal history records check 
     conducted through the Federal Bureau of Investigation, with 
     respect to the effectiveness in identifying individuals who 
     are not qualified to participate in the Pre-Check Program due 
     to disqualifying criminal history; and
       (6) ensure that the Secretary has certified that reasonable 
     procedures are in place with regard to the accuracy, 
     relevancy, and proper utilization of information employed in 
     private sector risk assessments.
       (c) Marketing of PreCheck Program.--Upon publication of 
     PreCheck Program enrollment standards under subsection (a), 
     the Administrator shall--
       (1) in accordance with those standards, develop and 
     implement--
       (A) a continual process, including an associated timeframe, 
     for approving private sector marketing of the PreCheck 
     Program; and
       (B) a long-term strategy for partnering with the private 
     sector to encourage enrollment in such program;
       (2) submit to Congress, at the end of each fiscal year, a 
     report on any PreCheck Program application fees collected in 
     excess of the costs of administering the program, including 
     to access the feasibility of the program, for the preceding 
     fiscal year; and
       (3) include in the report under paragraph (2) 
     recommendations for using such amounts to support marketing 
     of the program under this subsection.
       (d) Identity Verification Enhancement.--Not later than 120 
     days after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
     Administrator shall--
       (1) coordinate with the heads of appropriate components of 
     the Department to leverage department-held data and 
     technologies to verify the citizenship of individuals 
     enrolling in the PreCheck Program;
       (2) partner with the private sector to use biometrics and 
     authentication standards, such as relevant standards 
     developed by the National Institute of Standards and 
     Technology, to facilitate enrollment in the program; and
       (3) consider leveraging the existing resources and 
     abilities of airports to conduct fingerprint and background 
     checks to expedite identity verification.
       (e) PreCheck Program Lanes Operation.--The Administrator 
     shall--
       (1) ensure that PreCheck Program screening lanes are open 
     and available during peak and high-volume travel times at 
     appropriate airports to individuals enrolled in the PreCheck 
     Program; and
       (2) make every practicable effort to provide expedited 
     screening at standard screening lanes during times when 
     PreCheck Program screening lanes are closed to individuals 
     enrolled in the program in order to maintain operational 
     efficiency.
       (f) Vetting for PreCheck Program Participants.--Not later 
     than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
     Administrator shall initiate an assessment to identify any 
     security vulnerabilities in the vetting process for the 
     PreCheck Program, including determining whether subjecting 
     PreCheck Program participants to recurrent fingerprint-based 
     criminal history records checks, in addition to recurrent 
     checks against the terrorist watchlist, could be done in a 
     cost-effective manner to strengthen the security of the 
     PreCheck Program.

 Subtitle C--Securing Aviation From Foreign Entry Points and Guarding 
             Airports Through Enhanced Security Act of 2016

     SEC. _301. SHORT TITLE.

       This subtitle may be cited as the ``Securing Aviation from 
     Foreign Entry Points and Guarding Airports Through Enhanced 
     Security Act of 2016''.

     SEC. _302. LAST POINT OF DEPARTURE AIRPORT SECURITY 
                   ASSESSMENT.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the 
     Transportation Security Administration shall conduct a 
     comprehensive security risk assessment of all last point of 
     departure airports with nonstop flights to the United States.
       (b) Contents.--The security risk assessment required under 
     subsection (a) shall include consideration of the following:
       (1) The level of coordination and cooperation between the 
     Transportation Security Administration and the foreign 
     government of the country in which the last point of 
     departure airport with nonstop flights to the United States 
     is located.
       (2) The intelligence and threat mitigation capabilities of 
     the country in which such airport is located.
       (3) The number of known or suspected terrorists annually 
     transiting through such airport.
       (4) The degree to which the foreign government of the 
     country in which such airport is located mandates, encourages 
     or prohibits the collection, analysis, and sharing of 
     passenger name records.
       (5) The passenger security screening practices, 
     capabilities, and capacity of such airport.
       (6) The security vetting undergone by aviation workers at 
     such airport.
       (7) The access controls utilized by such airport to limit 
     to authorized personnel access to secure and sterile areas of 
     such airports.

     SEC. _303. SECURITY COORDINATION ENHANCEMENT PLAN.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 240 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the 
     Transportation Security Administration shall submit to 
     Congress and the Government Accountability Office a plan--
       (1) to enhance and bolster security collaboration, 
     coordination, and information sharing relating to securing 
     international-inbound aviation between the United States and 
     domestic and foreign partners, including U.S. Customs and 
     Border Protection, foreign government entities, passenger air 
     carriers, cargo air carriers, and United States Government 
     entities, in order to enhance security capabilities at 
     foreign airports, including airports that may not have 
     nonstop flights to the United States but are nonetheless 
     determined by the Administrator to be high risk; and
       (2) that includes an assessment of the ability of the 
     Administration to enter into a mutual agreement with a 
     foreign government entity that permits Administration 
     representatives to conduct without prior notice inspections 
     of foreign airports.
       (b) GAO Review.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     submission of the plan required under subsection (a), the 
     Comptroller General of the United States shall review the 
     efforts, capabilities, and effectiveness of the 
     Transportation Security Administration to enhance security 
     capabilities at foreign airports and determine if the 
     implementation of such efforts and capabilities effectively 
     secures international-inbound aviation.

     SEC. _304. WORKFORCE ASSESSMENT.

       Not later than 270 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Administrator of the Transportation Security 
     Administration shall submit to Congress a comprehensive 
     workforce assessment of all Administration personnel within 
     the Office of Global Strategies of the Administration or 
     whose primary professional duties contribute to the 
     Administration's global efforts to secure transportation 
     security, including a review of whether such personnel are 
     assigned in a risk-based, intelligence-driven manner.

     SEC. _305. DONATION OF SCREENING EQUIPMENT TO PROTECT THE 
                   UNITED STATES.

       (a) In General.--The Administrator of the Transportation 
     Security Administration is authorized to donate security 
     screening equipment to a foreign last point of departure 
     airport operator if such equipment can be reasonably expected 
     to mitigate a specific vulnerability to the security of the 
     United States or United States citizens.
       (b) Report.--Not later than 30 days before any donation of 
     security screening equipment pursuant to subsection (a), the 
     Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration 
     shall provide to the Committee on Homeland Security and 
     Governmental Affairs and the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
     and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on 
     Homeland Security of the House of Representatives a detailed 
     written explanation of the following:
       (1) The specific vulnerability to the United States or 
     United States citizens that will be mitigated by such 
     donation.
       (2) An explanation as to why the recipient of such donation 
     is unable or unwilling to purchase security screening 
     equipment to mitigate such vulnerability.
       (3) An evacuation plan for sensitive technologies in case 
     of emergency or instability in the country to which such 
     donation is being made.
       (4) How the Administrator will ensure the security 
     screening equipment that is being donated is used and 
     maintained over the course of its life by the recipient.
       (5) The total dollar value of such donation.

     SEC. _306. NATIONAL CARGO SECURITY PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--The Administrator of the Transportation 
     Security Administration may evaluate foreign countries' air 
     cargo security programs to determine whether such programs 
     provide a level of security commensurate with the level of 
     security required by United States air cargo security 
     programs.
       (b) Approval and Recognition.--
       (1) In general.--If the Administrator of the Transportation 
     Security Administration determines that a foreign country's 
     air cargo security program evaluated under subsection (a) 
     provides a level of security commensurate with the level of 
     security required by United States air cargo security 
     programs, the Administrator shall approve and officially 
     recognize such foreign country's air cargo security program.
       (2) Effect of approval and recognition.--If the 
     Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration 
     approves and officially recognizes pursuant to paragraph (1) 
     a

[[Page 3813]]

     foreign country's air cargo security program, cargo aircraft 
     of such foreign country shall not be required to adhere to 
     United States air cargo security programs that would 
     otherwise be applicable.
       (c) Revocation and Suspension.--
       (1) In general.--If the Administrator of the Transportation 
     Security Administration determines at any time that a foreign 
     country's air cargo security program approved and officially 
     recognized under subsection (b) no longer provides a level of 
     security commensurate with the level of security required by 
     United States air cargo security programs, the Administrator 
     may revoke or temporarily suspend such approval and official 
     recognition until such time as the Administrator determines 
     that such foreign country's cargo security programs provide a 
     level of security commensurate with the level of security 
     required by such United States air cargo security programs.
       (2) Notification.--If the Administrator of the 
     Transportation Security Administration revokes or suspends 
     pursuant to paragraph (1) a foreign country's air cargo 
     security program, the Administrator shall notify the 
     Committee on Homeland Security of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation of the Senate not later than 30 days after 
     such revocation or suspension.

                       Subtitle D--Miscellaneous

     SEC. _401. INTERNATIONAL TRAINING AND CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT.

       (a) In General.--In accordance with section 114 of title 
     49, United States Code, the Administrator of the 
     Transportation Security Administration shall establish an 
     international training and capacity development program to 
     train the appropriate authorities of foreign governments in 
     air transportation security.
       (b) Contents of Training.--If the Administrator determines 
     that a foreign government would benefit from training and 
     capacity development assistance, the Administrator may 
     provide to the appropriate authorities of that foreign 
     government technical assistance and training programs to 
     strengthen aviation security in managerial, operational, and 
     technical areas, including--
       (1) active shooter scenarios;
       (2) incident response;
       (3) use of canines;
       (4) mitigation of insider threats;
       (5) perimeter security;
       (6) operation and maintenance of security screening 
     technology; and
       (7) recurrent related training and exercises.

     SEC. _402. CHECKPOINTS OF THE FUTURE.

       (a) In General.--The Administrator of the Transportation 
     Security Administration, in accordance with chapter 449 of 
     title 49, United States Code, shall request the Aviation 
     Security Advisory Committee to develop recommendations for 
     more efficient and effective passenger screening processes.
       (b) Considerations.--In making recommendations to improve 
     existing passenger screening processes, the Aviation Security 
     Advisory Committee shall consider--
       (1) the configuration of a checkpoint;
       (2) technology innovation;
       (3) ways to address any vulnerabilities identified in 
     audits of checkpoint operations;
       (4) ways to prevent security breaches at airports where 
     Federal security screening is provided;
       (5) best practices in aviation security;
       (6) recommendations from airport and aircraft operators, 
     and any relevant advisory committees; and
       (7) ``curb to curb'' processes and procedures.
       (c) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to the 
     appropriate committees of Congress a report on the results of 
     the Aviation Security Advisory Committee review, including 
     any recommendations for improving screening processes.


Amendments Nos. 3458, as Modified; 3495; and 3524 En Bloc to Amendment 
                                No. 3464

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, finally, I ask unanimous consent to set 
aside the pending amendment in order to call up the following 
amendments: Casey-Toomey No. 3458, as modified; Heller No. 3495; and 
Bennet No. 3524.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, I obviously support the agreement. This is 
a good first step in moving this FAA bill along.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendments en bloc.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from South Dakota [Mr. Thune], for others, 
     proposes amendments numbered 3458, as modified; and 3495 en 
     bloc to amendment No. 3464.
       The Senator from Florida [Mr. Nelson], for Mr. Bennet, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3524 to amendment No. 3464.

  The amendments are as follows:


                    amendment no. 3458, as modified

  (Purpose: To protect passengers in air transportation, pilots, and 
flight attendants from terrorists and mentally unstable individuals by 
  requiring the installation of secondary barriers to prevent cockpit 
                              intrusions)

       Strike section 5010 and insert the following:

     SEC. 5010. SECONDARY COCKPIT BARRIERS.

       (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the 
     ``Saracini Aviation Safety Act of 2016''.
       (b) Requirement.--Not later than one year after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal 
     Aviation Administration shall issue an order requiring 
     installation of a secondary cockpit barrier on each new 
     aircraft that is manufactured for delivery to a passenger air 
     carrier in the United States operating under the provisions 
     of part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations.


                           amendment no. 3495

(Purpose: To improve employment opportunities for veterans by requiring 
 the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to determine 
whether occupations at the Administration relating to unmanned aircraft 
    systems technology and regulations can be incorporated into the 
           Veterans Employment Program of the Administration)

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:

     SEC. ___. INCORPORATION OF FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 
                   OCCUPATIONS RELATING TO UNMANNED AIRCRAFT INTO 
                   VETERANS EMPLOYMENT PROGRAMS OF THE 
                   ADMINISTRATION.

       Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration, in consultation with the Secretary of 
     Veterans Affairs, the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary 
     of Labor, shall determine whether occupations of the 
     Administration relating to unmanned aircraft systems 
     technology and regulations can be incorporated into the 
     Veterans Employment Program of the Administration, 
     particularly in the interaction between such program and the 
     New Sights Work Experience Program and the Vet-Link 
     Cooperative Education Program.


                           Amendment No. 3524

   (Purpose: To improve air service for families and pregnant women)

       Strike section 3113 and insert the following:

     SEC. 3113. LASTING IMPROVEMENTS TO FAMILY TRAVEL.

       (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the 
     ``Lasting Improvements to Family Travel Act'' or the ``LIFT 
     Act''.
       (b) Accompanying Minors for Security Screening.--The 
     Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration 
     shall formalize security screening procedures that allow for 
     one adult family caregiver to accompany a minor child 
     throughout the entirety of the security screening process.
       (c) Special Accommodations for Pregnant Women.--Not later 
     than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     the Secretary of Transportation shall prescribe regulations 
     under section 41705 of title 49, United States Code, that 
     direct all air carriers to include pregnant women in their 
     nondiscrimination policies, including policies with respect 
     to preboarding or advance boarding of aircraft.
       (d) Family Seating.--Not later than 180 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall prescribe 
     regulations directing each air carrier to establish a policy 
     that ensures that, if a family is traveling on a reservation 
     with a child under the age of 13, that child is able to sit 
     in a seat adjacent to the seat of an accompanying family 
     member over the age of 13 at no additional cost.


                    Amendment No. 3512, as Modified

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, if I might just speak to amendment No. 
3512, which we will be voting on momentarily, I know Senator Nelson has 
already spoken on this issue. We worked very hard on a series of 
security bills that we could bring to the floor. We are trying to move 
them separately, but I think they fit nicely into the debate we are 
having on the FAA reauthorization.
  Senators Nelson, Ayotte, Cantwell, and I have been leading oversight 
of airport and airline workers abusing their secure area access badges. 
This oversight led our committee to approve bipartisan legislation--S. 
2361, Airport Security Enhancement and Oversight Act--to tighten the 
vetting of airport workers with ties to terrorists and serious criminal 
behavior that should disqualify them from accessing sensitive airport 
areas.
  Just in the past few weeks, a number of badged aviation industry 
workers have been caught in the act of helping criminal organizations. 
On March 18, a flight attendant abandoned a suitcase with 68 pounds of 
cocaine after being

[[Page 3814]]

confronted by transportation security officers in California. On March 
26 in Florida, an airline gate agent was arrested with a backpack 
containing $282,400 in cash that he intended to hand off to an 
associate.
  As we work to address the threat of an aviation insider helping 
terrorists, criminals who break laws for financial gain and those with 
a history of violence are a really good place to start. It is high time 
that we start cracking down on these types of offenses for people who 
are working in sensitive areas of our airports.
  U.S. terrorism experts believe that ISIS is recruiting criminals to 
join its ranks in Europe, and some of the perpetrators in the deadly 
attacks in Brussels were previously known to authorities as criminals. 
Ensuring that airport workers with security credentials are trustworthy 
is especially important, considering that experts believe an ISIS 
affiliate may have planted a bomb on a Russian Metrojet flight leaving 
Egypt with the help of an airport employee, which killed 224 people on 
board. The recent attacks by ISIS in the unsecured area of the Brussels 
Airport also underscore the vulnerability of airport areas outside of 
TSA security screening checkpoints.
  The House of Representatives and the Commerce Committee also approved 
legislation--H.R. 2843, the PreCheck Expansion Act--in December of 2015 
to expand the PreCheck program by developing private sector 
partnerships and capabilities to vet and enroll more individuals. These 
private sector partners would be required to use an assessment 
equivalent to a fingerprint-based criminal history record check 
conducted through the FBI. These changes would increase the number of 
passengers who are vetted before they get to the airport. As a result, 
more passengers would receive expedited airport screening and get 
through security checkpoints more quickly, ensuring they don't pose the 
kind of easy target that the ISIS suicide bombers exploited at the 
Brussels Airport.
  In addition to the bills approved by our committee on March 23, the 
House Homeland Security Committee approved H.R. 4698, the SAFE GATES 
Act of 2016, which would strengthen security at international airports 
with direct flights to the United States. Specifically, the bill would 
require TSA to conduct a comprehensive risk assessment of all last-
point-of-departure airports, a security coordination enhancement plan, 
and a workforce assessment. It would authorize the TSA to donate 
security screening equipment to foreign last-point-of-departure 
airports and to evaluate foreign countries' air cargo security programs 
to prevent any shipment of nefarious materials via air cargo.
  I believe these bills will help make air travel more secure, and they 
should advance in the full Senate in this amendment to the FAA bill. I 
encourage my colleagues to support the Thune-Nelson amendment and then 
also follow-on with the Heinrich amendment, which will come up shortly 
after a vote on that amendment. I think the Heinrich amendment also 
makes a number of important security improvements that will also 
strengthen airport security.
  There has been a discussion about whether there ought to be more VIPR 
teams. I think there are 30 or so at this point, and the amendment 
would allow that number to go up to 60. Yesterday we had the 
opportunity to question the TSA Administrator, Admiral Neffenger, about 
whether additional VIPR teams would be useful. He said they could put 
to use anything they were given in terms of additional units that might 
be deployed to places around the country where they think there is a 
need. So that is the principal component of the Heinrich amendment, 
which also addresses some of the security issues.
  I don't think we can understate how important security is in light of 
everything that is going on in the world today. We have people who want 
to harm Americans, and it is our job to make sure we are giving those 
authorities who are there to prevent those types of attacks against 
Americans all the tools they need in order to do their jobs 
effectively.
  I encourage our colleagues here in the Senate--when we have an 
opportunity to vote here momentarily on both of these security 
amendments--to support those amendments. They improve and strengthen 
security at our airports around this country, and I think they fit 
nicely within the context of the FAA reauthorization bill and the 
debate we are currently having on the floor of the U.S. Senate.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The senior Senator from Florida.


                Amendment No. 3483 to Amendment No. 3464

  Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to call up Schumer 
amendment No. 3483 and ask that the Schumer and Bennet amendments be 
Nelson for Schumer and Bennet.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Florida [Mr. Nelson], for Mr. Schumer, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 3483 to amendment No. 3464.

  Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading 
of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

 (Purpose: To require the Federal Aviation Administration to establish 
   minimum standards for space for passengers on passenger aircraft)

       At the end of subtitle A of title III, add the following:

     SEC. 3124. REGULATIONS RELATING TO SPACE FOR PASSENGERS ON 
                   AIRCRAFT.

       (a) Moratorium on Reductions to Aircraft Seat Size.--Not 
     later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this 
     Act, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration 
     shall prohibit any air carrier from reducing the size, width, 
     padding, or pitch of seats on passenger aircraft operated by 
     the air carrier, the amount of leg room per seat on such 
     aircraft, or the width of aisles on such aircraft.
       (b) Regulations Relating to Space for Passengers on 
     Aircraft.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall prescribe 
     regulations--
       (1) establishing minimum standards for space for passengers 
     on passenger aircraft, including the size, width, padding, 
     and pitch of seats, the amount of leg room per seat, and the 
     width of aisles on such aircraft for the safety, health, and 
     comfort of passengers; and
       (2) requiring each air carrier to prominently display on 
     the website of the air carrier the amount of space available 
     for each passenger on passenger aircraft operated by the air 
     carrier, including the size, width, padding, and pitch of 
     seats, the amount of leg room per seat, and the width of 
     aisles on such aircraft.
       (c) Consultations.--In prescribing the regulations required 
     by subsection (b), the Administrator shall consult with the 
     Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the Centers 
     for Disease Control and Prevention, passenger advocacy 
     organizations, physicians, and ergonomic engineers.
       (d) Air Carrier Defined.--In this section, the term ``air 
     carrier'' means an air carrier (as defined in section 40102 
     of title 49, United States Code) that transports passengers 
     by aircraft as a common carrier for compensation.

  Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, in just 5 minutes we will have our first 
series of votes on amendments on this bill. This is a good start to the 
FAA bill. It is improving the underlying bill that has a lot of 
attention to security already in it. But these are clearly amendments 
that will improve the bill.
  I spoke about it earlier today. I certainly commend these amendments 
to the Senate.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Fischer). The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                Vote on Amendment No. 3512, as modified.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will now be 2 
minutes of debate equally divided prior to a vote on amendment No. 
3512, as modified, offered by the Senator from South Dakota.

[[Page 3815]]


  Mr. THUNE. Madam President, I yield back whatever time remains.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment, 
as modified.
  Mr. THUNE. 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 bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Texas (Mr. Cornyn) and the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cruz).
  Further, if present and voting the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cornyn) 
would have voted ``yea.''
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Durbin), the 
Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), and the Senator from New Mexico 
(Mr. Udall) are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 85, nays 10, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 41 Leg.]

                                YEAS--85

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

                                NAYS--10

     Booker
     Brown
     Casey
     Hirono
     Leahy
     Markey
     Merkley
     Murray
     Warren
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Cornyn
     Cruz
     Durbin
     Sanders
     Udall
  The amendment (No. 3512), as modified, was agreed to.


                    Amendment No. 3482, as Modified

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will now be 2 
minutes of debate equally divided prior to a vote on amendment No. 
3482, as modified, offered by the Senator from New Mexico.
  The Senator from New Mexico.
  Mr. HEINRICH. Madam President, airports, bus depots, and train 
stations are things that we all rely on every day to have the freedom 
of movement we enjoy in this country.
  In the wake of the recent terror attacks in the Brussels Airport and 
Metro, Americans are worried about their security, and they want to 
feel safe when traveling with their loved ones.
  While we relentlessly target terrorists overseas, we must also do all 
we can to intelligently protect Americans here at home. My amendment 
would increase the number of TSA VIPR teams, who provide a visible 
deterrent to terrorist threats in high-priority locations. These teams 
are recognizable as they often have bomb-sniffing canines. My amendment 
would also provide active shooter training for law enforcement and 
strengthen security in nonsecure so-called soft-target areas, such as 
check-in and baggage claim areas.
  By employing these additional commonsense safeguards, we will 
intelligently respond to these threats. Most importantly, by preserving 
our freedom to go about our daily lives, we will ensure that the 
terrorists have failed to change how we live and who we are.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  The Senator from South Dakota.
  Mr. THUNE. Madam President, I urge my colleagues to support the 
Heinrich amendment.
  I yield back the remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 
3482, as modified.
  Ms. KLOBUCHAR. 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. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Texas (Mr. Cornyn) and the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cruz). Further, 
if present and voting, the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cornyn) would have 
voted ``yea.''
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Durbin) and 
the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Rounds). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 91, nays 5, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 42 Leg.]

                                YEAS--91

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

                                NAYS--5

     Barrasso
     Enzi
     Flake
     Paul
     Scott

                             NOT VOTING--4

     Cornyn
     Cruz
     Durbin
     Sanders
  The amendment (No. 3482), as modified, was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.


                Iranian Access to U.S. Financial System

  Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, when Obama administration officials sold 
the President's nuclear deal last summer to the American people, they 
were clearly sensitive to charges that they gave too much away. They 
knew that giving Iran $100 billion that we could never get back in 
exchange for a mere temporary deal that expired in 10 to 15 years would 
be viewed with deep skepticism.
  They knew that an inspection system that gives the ayatollahs a 24-
day heads-up before an inspection would not pass the laugh test. They 
knew that granting the ayatollahs massive sanctions relief while still 
allowing them to develop an industrial-scale nuclear enrichment program 
would invite accusations that the President was, to put it frankly, 
swindled.
  So in their sales pitch, these administration officials sought to 
blunt these expected criticisms. They repeatedly stated that the United 
States would maintain certain tough sanctions, even after the deal 
became effective. They said the United States would hold the line on 
measures that punish and suppress Iran's nonnuclear malign activities. 
They emphatically stated that in no way would the U.S. economy be 
allowed to bolster an Iranian economy that is significantly controlled 
by the Iranian regime, tainted by illicit financing of terrorism, and 
used by the ayatollahs to fund domestic oppression and international 
aggression--including blowing up hundreds of American soldiers in Iraq 
with roadside bombs.
  In particular, these administration officials were emphatic that the 
United States would never, ever, ever grant

[[Page 3816]]

Iran access to the U.S. financial system and U.S. dollars to facilitate 
Iran's trade in oil and other goods.
  For instance, when testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations 
Committee in July, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew stated:

       Iranian banks will not be able to clear U.S. dollars 
     through New York, hold correspondent account relationships 
     with U.S. financial institutions, or enter into financing 
     arrangements with U.S. banks. Iran, in other words, will 
     continue to be denied access to the world's largest financial 
     and commercial market.

  Likewise, Adam Szubin, the Acting Under Secretary for Terrorism and 
Financial Intelligence, echoed that sentiment and was even more 
precise. In September he stated:

       Iran will not be able to open bank accounts with U.S. 
     banks, nor will Iran be able to access the U.S. banking 
     sector, even for that momentary transaction to, what we call, 
     dollarize a foreign payment. . . . That is not in the cards. 
     That is not part of the relief offered under the JCPOA. So, 
     the U.S. sanctions on Iran, which, of course, had their 
     origins long before Iran had a nuclear program, will remain 
     in place.

  It is difficult to overstate the importance of these statements 
uttered just a few months ago. The U.S. dollar is the standard currency 
in which international trade is conducted. Because the ayatollahs can't 
deal in dollars, they haven't fully opened their economy to the world--
thankfully. In addition, the U.S. financial system hasn't yet been 
tainted by Iran's terror financing, its international aggression, and 
its crackdown on domestic democratic dissent.
  But now, a mere 7 months into a 15-year agreement, the Obama 
administration is shedding the resolve its officials tried to so hard 
to display before Congress. According to numerous reports, the 
administration intends to backtrack on the statements of Secretary Lew 
and Adam Szubin. It is looking for some way, somehow to give Iran 
access to U.S. dollars to boost Iranian trade and investment.
  I want to be very clear. If the President moves to grant Iran access 
to the U.S. dollar--whether directly or indirectly--there will be 
consequences. If there is any statement, guidance, regulation, or 
Executive action that opens the U.S. banking sector to Iran even a 
crack, the Senate will hold hearings with each official who assured the 
American people last summer that the ayatollahs would never access the 
dollar. We will explore whether they lied back then or whether they 
intend to resign in protest now.
  If this policy change moves forward, I will dedicate myself to 
working with my colleagues to pass legislation blocking the change. If 
the Obama administration proceeds with this massive concession to the 
ayatollahs, every Member of the Senate who voted to accept the Iranian 
deal will have to go home and explain why the U.S. economy is now 
complicit in Iran's financing of terrorist attacks against Americans 
and American allies.
  That the Obama administration would even consider allowing Iran 
access to the U.S. banking sector is extremely disconcerting, but it is 
not surprising. It follows a steady pattern that has become 
increasingly clear since the conclusion of the nuclear deal. Time and 
again, Iran provokes the United States, commits brazen acts to 
destabilize its neighbors, and threatens to undo the Iran deal. In 
response, the United States rushes to grant the ayatollahs more 
concessions in order to placate them.
  Iran has tested ballistic missiles, captured U.S. sailors, and fueled 
conflicts in Syria and Yemen with fresh arms and troops--all while 
employing ``Death to America'' as a rallying cry.
  But in the face of Iran's continued aggression, the President has 
displayed only weakness. Instead of steeling himself for a fight with 
the ayatollahs, he has laid down and rolled over for them.
  He has repeatedly refused to designate Iran's tests of ballistic 
missiles as the violations of U.N. Security Council resolutions they so 
clearly are.
  The President also agreed to send an additional $1.7 billion to the 
ayatollahs, ostensibly to settle outstanding claims. For good measure, 
that $1.7 billion includes $1.3 billion in gratuitous interest 
payments.
  The President granted clemency to seven convicted Iranian criminals 
and dismissed arrest warrants for 14 Iranian fugitives who faced 
charges for sanctions violations. Now the President may be on the verge 
of granting the largest concession yet--dollarizing Iran's 
international trade and declaring Iran truly open for business.
  We should call this for what it is--concession creep. In the same 
manner that no Member of the Senate should trust Iran to abide by its 
commitments made in the Iranian nuclear deal, we can no longer trust 
the administration to hold fast to the specific concessions contained 
in the four corners of that deal. The ink is hardly dry on the deal, 
and the President has already shown himself all too susceptible to the 
temptations of appeasement.
  The ayatollahs reportedly have complained to U.S. officials that it 
is too hard to transact business without access to U.S. dollars. The 
answer to that should be ``too bad.''
  It should not be easy for the world's worst sponsor of terrorism to 
do business with the global economy. It should not be easy for 
industries dominated by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps to trade 
in financial markets. International business leaders, directors, CEOs, 
and general counsels should not rush into Iran for fear of the grave 
reputational, financial, political, and legal consequences of doing 
business with this outlaw regime.
  The Iranians know the Obama administration is desperate to preserve 
the nuclear deal. They hold the possibility of walking away from the 
agreement as a sword of Damocles over the President's head in order to 
extract concession after concession. They lord it over him in order to 
forestall any U.S. action that would meaningfully stop their regional 
aggression and campaign of terror. So intense is President Obama's fear 
that the Ayatollah will rip up the nuclear agreement, he has completely 
upended U.S. strategy in the Middle East to the point where adversaries 
are allies and allies are becoming adversaries.
  This parade of concessions must stop, and it must stop now. The 
administration must fully implement all new sanctions passed by 
Congress to punish Iran's development of ballistic missiles, its 
sponsorship of terrorism, and its human rights abuses. It must work 
with our traditional allies in the Middle East to neutralize Iran's 
attempt to foment instability throughout the region. The President 
should issue a very clear order that Iran will not be granted any 
direct or indirect access to the U.S. banking system and the dollar.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
  (The remarks of Mr. Merkley pertaining to the introduction of S. 2760 
are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills 
and Joint Resolutions.'')
  Mr. MERKLEY. Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.


                Amendment No. 3490 to Amendment No. 3464

  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 3490.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Washington [Ms. Cantwell] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 3490 to amendment No. 3464.

  Ms. CANTWELL. I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the 
amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To extend protections against physical assault to air carrier 
                   customer service representatives)

       Strike section 5009 and insert the following:

     SEC. 5009. INTERFERENCE WITH AIR CARRIER EMPLOYEES.

       (a) In General.--Section 46503 is amended by inserting 
     after ``to perform those duties'' the following ``, or who 
     assaults an air carrier customer representative in an 
     airport, including a gate or ticket agent, who is performing 
     the duties of the representative or agent,''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 46503 is amended in the 
     section heading by inserting ``or air carrier customer 
     representatives'' after ``screening personnel''.

[[Page 3817]]

       (c) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 465 is 
     amended by striking the item relating to section 46503 and 
     inserting the following:

``46503. Interference with security screening personnel or air carrier 
              customer representatives.''.

  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I call up this amendment and offer it 
because the issue is making sure that those who work in the air 
transportation system are safe and secure. This is an important issue 
to the men and women who work at Sea-Tac and at other airports and are 
part of the delivery system of making sure air transportation is safe. 
They are an integral part of air transportation at every airport in the 
United States of America.
  This issue is something that has been considered in the House of 
Representatives as part of the transportation package as well, and it 
is part of what we think should be in this package in the Senate; that 
is, making sure that those who are part of the delivery system--ticket 
counter agents, agents who are aiding and assisting in getting 
passengers through the terminals and onto planes at the gate, 
assisting, as many of the challenging days go by, in delivering good 
air transportation service. What has happened is that these individuals 
have become victims--the victims of physical, violent abuse; that is, 
the public has taken to bodily harm against these individuals. So this 
amendment puts in similar safeguards that are in line with other 
transportation officials who are protected from this kind of physical 
abuse.
  I will have more to say on it, but I know my colleague is trying to 
get to the floor to speak as well. I will put into the Record examples 
of individuals who are ticketing agents, baggage agents, air 
transportation delivery system workers who have been hurt, and they 
deserve to have protection.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 3483

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I rise today to urge a ``yes'' vote on 
the upcoming amendment to require the FAA to set a minimum standard 
seat size.
  This amendment would ensure that airlines can't keep chopping down on 
seat size and legroom until consumers are packed in like sardines in a 
can on every flight.
  Over the last few decades, between the size of the seat and the 
distance between the seats, the flying public has lost half a foot of 
their space. Flying
is not pleasant anymore. You are crammed in. I am not that tall--a 
little under 6-foot-1. What I do when I fly is I take out the magazine 
and the air-sickness bag and the little folder that shows you where the 
exits are to gain one-sixteenth of an inch more legroom. Moms with kids 
have a lot of trouble in those very narrow seats. Have you ever been in 
the situation where you are in the middle and there are two sort of 
large people on either side of you? It is not the most pleasant flying 
experience.
  We don't have too much competition anymore. We have very few 
airlines. This is a place where the public is clamoring for change. 
When I said I was going to offer this amendment, I got more feedback on 
it than most other things. And you don't have to be 6-foot-4 to 
understand the problem.
  You would think that by cramming in more and more passengers on each 
flight, the airlines could lower their prices. Instead, several major 
airlines went in the other direction: They started charging for the 
extra inches and legroom that were once considered standard. So it 
practically costs you an arm and a leg just to have space for your arms 
and legs.
  At a time when airlines are making record profits, at a time when 
fuel costs are extremely low, we need this amendment to protect 
consumers' safety and comfort.
  This amendment would do three things. It doesn't set a standard seat 
size; it freezes the current seat size in place so they can't shrink it 
any further. It directs the FAA to set minimum standard seat size and 
pitch for all commercial flights. And some of this involves comfort, 
but some of it involves safety. God forbid there is something terrible 
happening on a plane--the seats are so narrow, it is harder for people 
to get out. Finally, we focus on transparency. We require airlines to 
post their seat sizes on their Web sites, providing at least a 
commercial incentive for airlines to offer more comfortable seat 
arrangements.
  Most folks travel under the expectation that the airlines are going 
to set the guidelines and that is that; there is nothing they can do 
about it. We actually had to put in the underlying bill that airlines 
should refund bag fees charged to consumers if the airline lost their 
bags. And I would say to my good friends on the other side, if we can 
mandate that bag fees be returned--not leave it up to the free market--
we can mandate that the FAA at least set a proper seat size. They can't 
say: Well, leave it up to the free market on one but not on the other. 
It is not a little fair.
  Now we see why we need these amendments. The bag fee--and I agree 
that if they lose your bags or delay your bags, they shouldn't keep the 
extra bag fee. It should be refunded. In most industries, that would be 
a standard practice. If you fail to deliver a service somebody paid 
for, they should get their money back. But sometimes in the airline 
industry you have to require basic courtesy.
  In conclusion, the great Abraham Lincoln was once asked how long a 
man's legs should be, and he famously answered: Long enough to reach 
from the body to the ground. If you asked a major airline today how 
long a man's legs should be, they would say: Short enough to miss the 
tray table. That is no way to fly.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and move this bill in 
a more consumer-friendly direction.
  Mr. President, 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. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, some of my colleagues have to catch 
planes, and it takes extra time for them to squeeze into those small 
seats with no legroom. So I yield back my time, and I ask unanimous 
consent that we move the vote up to right now.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 3483.
  Mr. SCHUMER. 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 legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Texas (Mr. Cornyn) and the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cruz).
  Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cornyn) 
would have voted ``nay.''
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Durbin) and 
the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Hoeven). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 42, nays 54, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 43 Leg.]

                                YEAS--42

     Baldwin
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Booker
     Boxer
     Brown
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Casey
     Collins
     Coons
     Donnelly
     Feinstein
     Franken
     Gillibrand
     Heinrich
     Heitkamp
     Hirono
     Kaine
     King
     Klobuchar
     Leahy
     Manchin
     Markey
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Nelson

[[Page 3818]]


     Peters
     Reed
     Reid
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Stabenow
     Udall
     Warner
     Warren
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                                NAYS--54

     Alexander
     Ayotte
     Barrasso
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Burr
     Capito
     Carper
     Cassidy
     Coats
     Cochran
     Corker
     Cotton
     Crapo
     Daines
     Enzi
     Ernst
     Fischer
     Flake
     Gardner
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hatch
     Heller
     Hoeven
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johnson
     Kirk
     Lankford
     Lee
     McCain
     McCaskill
     McConnell
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Paul
     Perdue
     Portman
     Risch
     Roberts
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Sasse
     Scott
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Vitter
     Wicker

                             NOT VOTING--4

     Cornyn
     Cruz
     Durbin
     Sanders
  The amendment (No. 3483) was rejected.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.


               Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Bill

  Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to urge my colleagues in the 
House of Representatives to pass the legislation we passed here in the 
Senate a few weeks ago called the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery 
Act, or CARA. We passed it on March 10, which was 27 days ago--almost a 
month. It is estimated that we lose about 120 Americans every day to 
drug overdoses. That means that during that time period--those 27 
days--we lost about 3,240 additional Americans who we represent to 
substance abuse and death from heroin and prescription drug overdoses.
  Since 2007, drug overdoses have killed more people in Ohio than any 
other cause of accidental death, even surpassing car accidents. It is 
probably true nationally now as well. Addiction is treatable, but 9 out 
of 10 people who need treatment aren't getting it. That is a tragedy. 
It shows that the system we have right now just isn't working, and that 
is what our legislation addresses, among other things. In one 5-day 
span since we passed CARA, just in the last month, we had five people 
die from heroin and Fentanyl overdoses in one of the cities I 
represent--Cleveland, OH.
  I was in Athens, OH, more than 2 weeks after we passed CARA, and 
received a tour of the Rural Women's Addiction Recovery Bassett House 
facility. Dr. Joe Gay and Ruth Tarter took me around so I could meet 
some of the brave women who stepped forward to treat their addiction 
issues. Some of them were there with their kids. They have an amazing 
success rate.
  I will tell you that 3 days after I left Athens, OH, $40,000 of 
heroin was seized at a traffic stop very close to this treatment 
facility. It is everywhere. It knows no ZIP code. It is in rural areas, 
suburban areas, and inner cities. States are starting to take action. 
Ohio is taking action, your States are taking action, and communities 
are taking action. Local leaders know this is a problem, but they want 
the Federal Government to be a better partner. That is what CARA 
provides. It provides best practices from around the country. It 
provides more funding for some critical elements that are evidence-
based--based on research and what actually works. Our States and local 
communities are desperate for this right now.
  By the way, this legislation is not just bipartisan. It is also 
bicameral. In other words, not only have Republicans and Democrats 
worked across the aisle here in the Senate over the last 3 years 
putting this bill together, but our colleagues in the House have worked 
together as well. I am encouraged by the fact that the CARA legislation 
in the House has 113 cosponsors. It is bipartisan. It is based on good 
evidence. It is based on a lot of work and effort. Today I heard 
through a media account that one of the House leaders said there is 
interest in moving something even this month. That is great. But he 
also talked about hearings and markups and so on. Let's be sure the 
hearings and markups don't delay what we know we should do, which is to 
pass the CARA legislation. It has been bicameral and bipartisan. It 
passed the Senate with a 94-to-1 vote. That never happens around here--
94 to 1. This is legislation which we know will make a difference right 
now in our communities that are dealing with a crisis we all face. 
Let's move this legislation.
  I say to my friends in the House with all due respect, this 
legislation has been carefully crafted and we have done the hard work. 
I mentioned that we spent 3 years of factfinding on this bill. We 
didn't think we had all the right answers, so we went out to experts 
all over the country. We took time to listen. We consulted with them. 
We listened to experts, doctors, law enforcement, and patients in 
recovery. We listened to the drug experts in the Obama administration, 
such as the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, ONDCP. 
They have been very helpful. We brought in people from Health and Human 
Services and listened to them. We brought in people from my home State 
of Ohio and other States around the country.
  We heard from family members, many of whom have channelled their 
grief at losing a loved one into advocacy for the CARA legislation 
because they know it is going to help. One testified in the Judiciary 
Committee when we marked up the legislation. Tonda DaRe from 
Carrollton, OH, talked about having lost her daughter, who was a very 
successful high school student and engaged to be married. Everything 
was going great. When she turned 21, she made a mistake: She tried 
heroin. She went into recovery. She relapsed. She ended up dying of an 
overdose.
  Unfortunately, this is a story that is retold all over our country. 
There are moms, there are dads, there are aunts and uncles and brothers 
and sisters who come forward to tell us these tragic stories about 
losing a loved one. They want this legislation to pass because they 
know it is going to help another family member or a friend or a 
coworker or someone whom they have never met but whom they want to help 
so they don't have to go through the grief they have gone through.
  Senator Sheldon Whitehouse--a Democrat--and I have worked on this 
legislation together, along with many other people in this Chamber. We 
have also worked, as I said, with many on the House side. We worked 
with folks on both sides of the aisle and both sides of the Capitol 
because this has become an issue that affects us all. It is a 
nonpartisan issue. We have to move it forward.
  We held five forums here in Washington, DC, and brought in experts to 
get counsel and advice. They helped us develop a legislative proposal 
that was thoughtful because it actually addressed the real problem.
  In April 2014, we had a forum on the criminal justice system which 
included alternatives to incarceration, and you will see that in our 
legislation. The notion is, for users who get arrested for possession, 
let's not just throw them in jail because that hasn't worked. Let's get 
them into treatment and get them into a recovery program that works.
  In July 2014, we held a forum on how women are impacted by this drug 
epidemic, looking particularly at addiction and treatment responses. 
Some new data that is out there now shows that most of the people who 
are suffering from heroin and prescription drug addiction are women.
  In December 2014, we held a forum on the science of addiction--how we 
could get at this from a medical point of view, how we could come up 
with better medical approaches to this to be able to stop the craving, 
to deal with the addiction problem, to get people through withdrawal. 
We also talked about how to address some of the collateral consequences 
of addiction.
  In April of 2015, we held a forum on our youth and how we can better 
promote drug prevention. After all, keeping people from getting into 
the funnel of addiction in the first place has to be a priority. To 
help people avoid going down that funnel of addiction, we need better 
prevention, better education. That is part of our legislation. We also 
had input about what is working in recovery and what is not working in 
recovery.
  We held a forum in July of 2015 to talk about our veterans, to talk 
about the very sad situation with veterans who are coming back to our 
shores who

[[Page 3819]]

have PTSD--post-traumatic stress disorder--and who have brain injuries. 
Some recent data shows that about 20 percent of returning veterans with 
those issues are becoming addicted to prescription drugs or heroin; 
therefore, veterans courts are a major part of our legislation. These 
are drug courts that are focused on mental health and addiction 
specifically for our veterans. I have seen them in Ohio. They are 
working great. It is unbelievable.
  I talked to a guy who has been in and out of the system his whole 
life. He is about 45 years old now. He finally found this court that 
was going to help him--took him out of jail and got him into treatment. 
Hanging over his head was the possibility of incarceration if he didn't 
do the right thing and stay clean. He is now a senior at Ohio State 
University and is about to get his degree, and he reunited with his 
family for the first time in many years. He is clean. It can work.
  The final result was the legislative text that reflected this open 
and deliberative process I am talking about. This bill--just like the 
research it supports--is evidence-based. We didn't ask who had the 
idea; we just asked whether it was a good idea.
  It is no wonder that CARA now has support from 130 national groups, 
from the Fraternal Order of Police, to stakeholders in public health--
doctors and nurses, those in recovery, experts in the field, people who 
actually know what is going on because they are in the trenches working 
on this. They want this bill passed. They know it will help them and 
help them now.
  As I said, that vote was 94 to 1, which means 94 Senators say this 
bill is ready to go. These are Senators from every State in the Union 
who support this legislation, therefore representing every 
congressional district in the United States of America. It makes sense. 
It expands prevention and educational efforts to prevent opiate abuse, 
the use of heroin and prescription drugs.
  It increases drug-disposal sites to get medications out of people's 
hands and get it into the right hands. It takes this medication off the 
bathroom shelves.
  It has a drug-monitoring program to get at the overprescribing issue. 
So many people who are currently addicted to heroin started with 
prescription drugs. In fact, the majority did. There is different data 
out there, but it is very clear that prescription drugs are a huge part 
of heroin addiction.
  It also authorizes law enforcement task forces to combat heroin and 
meth. Law enforcement has an important role to play here. It expands 
training and the availability of naloxone, or Narcan, to law 
enforcement. This is for our firefighters. When you go to a firehouse 
in your State--for those listening in the House, in your district--ask 
them: Are you going on more fire runs or are you going on more runs to 
help people with overdoses? They will tell you what they tell me: 
overdoses. That is what it has come to. That is happening in your fire 
department in your community.
  By the way, to tell you how much this law can make a difference--
because we do help get the training for them to be able to use Narcan 
and get the Narcan or naloxone into the right hands--Ohio public safety 
officials have administered naloxone over 16,000 times since 2015--
16,000 overdoses that might otherwise have resulted in death. For the 
most part, this miracle drug works. First responders know how important 
it is. That is why the Fraternal Order of Police supports this bill. 
They want to equip their officers, but so do the firefighters.
  CARA also supports recovery programs, including those focused on 
youth and building communities of recovery. To avoid people getting 
into addiction in the first place, it also creates a national task 
force on recovery because there is a lot of information out there we 
need to bring together to find out what works and what doesn't work 
precisely in terms of dealing with the collateral consequences imposed 
by addiction.
  CARA expands treatment for pregnant women who struggle with addiction 
and provides support for babies who suffer from what is called neonatal 
abstinence syndrome. What does that mean? That means babies who are 
born addicted. In Ohio, tragically, we had a 750-percent increase in 
the number of babies born with addiction in the last 12 years. I have 
been to the hospitals. I have been to St. Rita's in Lima. I have been 
to Rainbow Babies in Cleveland. I have been to Cincinnati Children's 
Hospital. I have seen these babies. These are tiny babies who are 
addicted, and they have to be taken through withdrawal.
  The compassionate nurses and doctors who are doing it--God bless 
them--I asked them: What is going to happen to these babies?
  They told me: Rob, we don't know. We don't know the long-term 
consequences because it is so new.
  But it is dramatic and it is happening in all of your hospitals. 
These neonatal units are now taking on a whole other task, which is 
helping babies through withdrawal.
  I visited folks who are not only pregnant but are addicted, and I 
talked to them about what they are going through and what the 
consequences are going to be, and it is sad. Many say: Rob, the grip of 
addiction is so great. I am now in treatment, but I worry about what is 
going to happen to my baby.
  We also expand treatment for expectant and postpartum women for that 
reason. And these expectant and postpartum women who need this help can 
make the right decision with more help from us. It expands residential 
treatment programs for pregnant women who are struggling with 
addiction. It creates a pilot program to provide family-based services 
to women who are addicted to opiates.
  CARA also helps veterans, as I said. It allows those veterans to get 
into a veterans court, where they can get help to walk through how they 
get out of this addiction, how they get into recovery. They can get 
support from other veterans around them to provide the kind of help 
they need to get out of this cycle of incarceration and addiction.
  What do we say to the 40 million Americans who are struggling with 
addiction when they ask ``Why don't you guys act?'' The Senate acted 94 
to 1. Why can't we get this done? It is time to move. They shouldn't 
have to wait. We shouldn't have to wait.
  To those 40 million who struggle, to those who think they can't 
overcome this addiction, to those who believe there is no one out there 
to help them, the message is, you are not alone. There is hope. You can 
beat this. I have seen it. There are people who care and want to help.
  There are so many heartbreaking stories of addiction, but there are 
also so many stories of hope. I think about Vanessa Perkins from 
Nelsonville, OH. Vanessa became addicted to heroin. Once she became 
addicted, she also became a victim of sex trafficking.
  Those two are related. In Ohio, they tell me that most sex 
trafficking has now to do with heroin addiction. In other words, the 
trafficker gets these women--usually women--addicted to heroin, and 
that is one way they become dependent on their trafficker.
  What Vanessa tells me is that it took her a long time to turn her 
life around, but she was courageous and brave enough to seek treatment, 
and she is now back on track. For the last 6 years she has been helping 
others, taking her experience and using it to help others deal with 
their addiction. She is on the board of a group called Freedom a la 
Cart, which is a company in Columbus, OH, that I visited last month 
that provides job opportunities for trafficking victims. They do a heck 
of a job and teach these women a trade, too--culinary arts. Now so many 
of these women who had been trafficked, who had been heroin addicts, 
are back on their feet, reunited with their families, and know the 
dignity and self-respect that come from the work they are doing and 
from helping others.
  There is hope. Treatment can work.
  Mr. President, leaders in the House say they want to move anti-heroin 
legislation through regular order. Again, I heard today that one of the 
leaders said they are planning to take action. I had conversations with 
Speaker Ryan

[[Page 3820]]

on this issue. I had conversations with other leaders in the House on 
it. I take them at their word. I am hopeful we will see the House begin 
to act next week when that Chamber returns, but I will say this: The 
House must act, and they must act soon. I am not going to be patient on 
this. This is urgent, and people's lives are at stake. The House must 
pass this bill so the President can sign it and so it can begin to make 
a real difference in the lives of the people we represent. This is our 
responsibility. We need to take advantage of this opportunity that the 
Senate has given us by this huge vote--94 to 1--to get this legislation 
to the President and get it enacted into law.
  Mr. President, I yield back my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.


                     FLINT, MICHIGAN, WATER CRISIS

  Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, today I would like to speak about two 
different subjects. Both are connected in the sense that they involve 
lack of action and people counting on us to act as a Senate.
  The first involves the fact that today in the city of Flint, MI, we 
still have people who can't drink the water coming out of the tap. I 
think any one of us would have trouble if that happened for 1 day, but 
we are talking about months and months--going on 2 years now--that we 
have seen a system completely broken down because of decisions, because 
of lack of treating the water, a whole range of things.
  From my perspective, the most important thing is the fact that people 
still don't have access to clean, safe water. They can't bathe their 
babies. They can't take a shower themselves. I can't imagine what it 
must be like for families in Flint who are waiting and waiting for 
help.
  I want to thank President Obama for doing what he can do through the 
administration to help from the standpoint of health and nutrition and 
education, but the fundamental problem is replacing the damaged pipes.
  As my colleagues know, we have been working very hard and we have 
developed a bipartisan proposal. I wish to thank the chair and ranking 
member of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Senator Murkowski 
and Senator Cantwell, for working with us, and so many colleagues who 
are now bipartisan cosponsors on a bill with myself and Senator Peters. 
I wish to thank Senator Inhofe as chair of EPW and ranking member 
Senator Boxer and so many people who have come together to support this 
effort, not only for Flint, but we now are seeing headlines across the 
country about other areas where lead poisoning in water is a serious 
issue and where we have all kinds of communities with water 
infrastructure needs.
  We have put together a proposal. We have a bipartisan proposal. We 
are ready to move forward. We need a vote on this proposal. As people 
in this building know, the junior Senator from Utah is holding us up 
from being able to get that vote. We have spent weeks now--weeks--
trying to find a way to get beyond this objection. We thought we had an 
agreement, and then the bar just keeps changing.
  This is not a game. These are real people, and we are trying to solve 
a real problem. We have put forward a proposal fully paid for that 
actually reduces the deficit, paid for out of a program that I care 
deeply about because I authored it in 2007, and prior to Senator Peters 
being a Senator, when he was in the House, he was the champion of the 
program that we are offering to use as a payfor.
  So I just want to remind everyone--and I am going to continue to come 
to the floor and remind colleagues every day--that a group of Americans 
in a city of 100,000 where there has been a Federal emergency declared 
are still waiting for us to act to help them--not to do the whole 
thing, not to pay for all of what needs to be done in terms of water 
infrastructure, but to do our part as a Federal Government, as we have 
done in communities across the country for other kinds of emergencies.
  We need to help the children of Flint. Nine thousand children under 
the age of six are being exposed to lead poisoning; some homes have 
exposure higher than a toxic waste dump. I can tell my colleagues as a 
mother and now as a grandmother, I would never tolerate something like 
that. I can't imagine what is happening for families.
  We have the opportunity to do something. It is easy. It is fully paid 
for. It is fully paid for by something that colleagues on the other 
side of the aisle have wanted to eliminate--fully paid for. It helps 
communities across the country. Now we have a situation where one 
Member has indicated, well, it is not his problem. He doesn't care; it 
is not his problem.
  I hope as Americans we are willing to say that other people's 
problems--I would think we care about them, whether it is our own 
children, our own grandchildren, people we know or not. That is what we 
expect when there are emergencies and disasters across the country. And 
whether it is in the farm bill that I worked on with the distinguished 
Presiding Officer where we strengthened livestock disaster assistance--
even though that is not a huge issue to me in the State of Michigan, 
but I know it is for a lot of States and a lot of communities. That is 
what we do as Americans. We care about people and communities.
  We have a group of people right now who are not being seen. I want my 
colleagues to see this baby and the picture this represents of a group 
of people who are waiting for help and deserve help.


                   Filling the Supreme Court Vacancy

  Mr. President, I wish to address something else now and turn to 
history to talk about somebody else who is waiting. He can drink his 
water and take a shower. That is a good thing. But we have a very 
distinguished jurist, the Chief Judge of the DC Court of Appeals, 
nominated by the President of the United States to be a Supreme Court 
Justice, who is waiting for the opportunity to be heard, to have a 
hearing, to meet with people, to have a vote, yes or no.
  We have spoken a lot about the Constitution, about responsibilities, 
about debates. Our three branches of government are sworn to uphold 
both the written word of the Constitution and the spirit of the 
Constitution. This spirit was expressed in a series of articles 
beginning in 1787. I wasn't there at the time. But in reading what our 
Founding Fathers said--those who framed the Constitution--I think it is 
important to look at what they intended through the Federalist Papers.
  On April 1, 1788, Alexander Hamilton, writing in Federalist Paper No. 
76, outlined two specific roles for Supreme Court nominees: that the 
President nominate Justices and the Senate provide advice and consent. 
Hamilton explained how the Senate held the power to reject a nominee, 
to prevent the appointment of unfit characters from family connection, 
from personal attachment, or from other biases.
  As my colleagues know, Senators can investigate the character of a 
nominee by meeting the nominee in person, by holding hearings, and by 
looking at their writings. At the Senate Judiciary Committee they can 
ask the nominee questions in full view of the public. Based on 
responses, if they believe a nominee does not have the appropriate 
character, they can reject the nomination. They can vote no. That is 
our right as Senators.
  But Senators in the current Republican majority are refusing to do 
any of that. They have said they will not hold hearings. Most of them 
will not even meet with the nominee, Judge Merrick Garland. I want to 
commend Republican Senators who are, in fact, meeting with Judge 
Garland. This is their job. This is our job--the job established for us 
by America's Founding Fathers--and a majority of the majority is 
refusing to do it.
  Now, according to the average time for moving a Supreme Court nominee 
through the process, if the Republican majority did their job, as 
previous Senates did, then there would be a hearing of the Judiciary 
Committee by April 27, but there is none scheduled. The Judiciary 
Committee would hold a vote by May 12, but there is no vote coming. And 
based on historical precedent, the Supreme Court nominee would then 
come to the floor for a vote on confirmation before Memorial Day. But

[[Page 3821]]

because my colleagues across the aisle are refusing to do their job, 
that vote will not happen.
  My Republican colleagues like to say that the Senate does not confirm 
Supreme Court nominees during a Presidential year, but that doesn't 
square with the facts. More than a dozen Supreme Court nominees have 
been confirmed by the Senate in an election year. In 1988, also a 
Presidential year, the Senate did its job by confirming President 
Reagan's Supreme Court nominee, Justice Anthony Kennedy, with a 
Democratically controlled Senate. In 1940, another Presidential 
election year, the Senate did its job by confirming President Franklin 
Roosevelt's nominee, Justice Frank Murphy. In 1932, the Senate did its 
job by confirming President Hoover's Supreme Court nominee. In 1916, 
the Senate did its job twice by confirming President Wilson's two 
nominees for the Supreme Court.
  The U.S. Constitution was ratified in June 1788, just a few months 
after Hamilton published the Federalist Paper I mentioned a few minutes 
ago. And for nearly 228 years--228 years--during times of war, times of 
peace, periods of prosperity, and periods of economic hardship, America 
has balanced the powers between the executive and the legislative 
branches in selecting who would serve in the third branch of 
government. We have done it during Democratic majorities and Republican 
majorities for 228 years.
  To those who are refusing to hold hearings on a nomination, my 
question is this: What has changed? What has changed this year? What is 
it about this President that causes him to be treated this way? What is 
it that is leading my colleagues to question the judgment and the 
wisdom of Alexander Hamilton and the rest of the Founding Fathers who 
signed the Constitution and gave us the responsibility for advice and 
consent?
  In short, why now are you refusing to do your job? Just do your job. 
Do what we are paid to do.
  Last month, I went over in front of the Supreme Court on a beautiful, 
sunny day when a lot of people were here visiting, and I talked to a 
number of citizens and asked them what they thought about what was 
happening, the debate going on about filling a vacancy on the Supreme 
Court. I also asked them what would happen to you if during a year you 
told your employer that a major part of your job--a very big 
responsibility that you have in your job--you were going to refuse to 
do for a year or so. What would happen? Well, the answer is pretty 
easy. People said: I would be fired.
  People say: Why aren't you doing your job? Why isn't the majority 
doing its job? Because if you are not willing to do the work, why 
should you have the job? Nobody else can do that in their job.
  That is why the polls show overwhelmingly that the American people 
side with those of us on the Democratic side, with all of us who stand 
together as Democratic Senators to say: Do your job. We are willing to 
do our job. People stand with the Constitution and with the 
overwhelming history of our country.
  It is very simple. It is a very simple idea. It is a phrase we say 
all the time in all kinds of circumstances. We say to our children, we 
say to people we work with: Just do your job. Well, this is our job. 
Hold a hearing, meet with the nominee, have a vote. You can vote yes; 
you can vote no. You could skip that day. But this judge deserves a 
vote, and it is our responsibility to vote and to fill the vacancy on 
the highest Court in the land. That is what the American people expect 
us to do. That is what they deserve.
  It is time that the Senate do its job.
  Thank you, Mr. President.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss several 
provisions in an amendment to the FAA reauthorization bill that is 
currently before the Senate and that specifically benefits my home 
State of Louisiana.
  There are more than 253 air traffic control towers throughout the 
country operating through a successful public-private partnership 
called the Federal Contract Tower Program. This program is especially 
critical to rural areas--as I have in Louisiana and as does the 
Presiding Officer--to ensure that America's airspace and the traveling 
public are safe. However, there are currently 30 towers awaiting the 
FAA to finalize an internal agency formula called the benefit-cost 
analysis, referred to as the BCA, which will allow eligible towers to 
enter the Federal Contract Tower Program. One of these airports is the 
Hammond Northshore Regional Airport in Hammond, LA.
  The Federal Contract Tower Program has been in place for more than 30 
years and is a prime example of an effective public-private partnership 
between government and the private sector. Contract towers handle 
approximately 28 percent of the Nation's air traffic control tower 
operations but account for only 14 percent of the FAA's total tower 
operations budget. Repeated studies by the U.S. Department of 
Transportation inspector general have shown that the Contract Tower 
Program increases aviation safety while reducing costs to taxpayers and 
the Federal Government. It is also important to note that approximately 
80 percent of the contract controller workforce are veterans.
  Congress has demonstrated numerous times in bipartisan fashion the 
merit and need for the Federal Contract Tower Program. Given the 
success of the program and the increasing likelihood of further FAA 
delays, I am pleased the Commerce Committee included language in the 
FAA reauthorization bill to strengthen and improve the Federal Contract 
Tower Program. Senators Cornyn, Vitter, Portman, and Wicker have been 
leaders on this issue, and their work is greatly appreciated.
  Currently, America's trade and economy are being hampered because 
many cargo planes from other countries are prohibited from flying into 
U.S. airports because they have not been upgraded to newer types of 
technology. Some aircraft are what is called ``Stage 2 aircraft.'' 
These aircraft were phased out following the passage of the Airport 
Noise and Capacity Act of 1990, which mandated the phaseout for Stage 2 
aircraft over 75,000 pounds. I have introduced an amendment that would 
permit flights to a small number of airports under limited 
circumstances for revenue and nonrevenue flights of Stage 2 aircraft 
over 75,000 pounds.
  One of the airports that meets the criteria is the Acadiana Regional 
Airport in New Iberia, LA. This airport is located in a heavy 
industrial complex and surrounded by agricultural land. The Acadiana 
Regional Airport has an advantage over other types of airports because 
it is surrounded by land use compatible with airport operations. 
Additionally, it is situated near the Port of Iberia, which is home to 
more than 100 companies employing close to 5,000 people in industries 
such as construction, energy, equipment rental, and trucking. This 
would bolster Louisiana's economy, help working families, and improve 
America's ability to trade with the world.
  Louisiana's economy relies on the thriving maritime industry. In 2014 
a study from the Transportation Institute showed that 54,850 maritime-
related jobs contribute more than $11 billion annually to Louisiana's 
economy. One in every 83 Louisiana jobs is connected to the domestic 
maritime industry, nearly twice that of any other State.
  With ports along the Mississippi and Red Rivers, our State sees 
vessels of varying sizes and types. While loading cargo, these ships 
must drain ballast water that they have taken on to maintain the 
balance of the ship. This can have varying degrees of environmental 
effects, with costly and confusing State and Federal regulations making 
compliance difficult.
  Senator Rubio is sponsoring the Vessel Incidental Discharge Act, 
which

[[Page 3822]]

creates a uniform, enforceable, and scientifically based national 
standard on ballast water discharges. This is needed in order to 
simplify the highly complicated and overly burdensome patchwork of 
State and Federal regulations that are in place today.
  Everyone I talk to in Louisiana's maritime industry and also in the 
inland marine, which would take the agriculture products from States 
such as the State the Presiding Officer represents, says it is 
necessary for these regulations to be harmonized, and they emphasize 
the importance of passing this bill. I am a cosponsor of this bill, and 
I am glad to see that Senator Rubio has filed the amendment to the bill 
we are considering on the floor today.
  The FAA Reauthorization Act contains many measures that will protect 
Americans, improve our economy, and protect our environment. I urge all 
my fellow Senators to support the bill and these amendments.
  I yield the floor.


                    Amendment No. 3512, as Modified

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, aviation safety, as much as all national 
security, must be of paramount importance. I am increasingly concerned 
with reports from across the country that Secure Identification Display 
Area, SIDA, badges have gone missing, either through loss or theft. 
These badges, which grant access to secure areas of airports, allow 
employees to bypass traditional security checkpoints and, in the wrong 
hands, can pose a considerable security threat.
  An amendment considered and adopted earlier today by the Senate, 
Thune amendment No. 3512, is aimed at addressing this problem and would 
implement additional accountability and oversight methods to ensure 
that these SIDA badges do not fall into the wrong hands. It would 
provide for further employer accountability and allow for increased 
fines and enforcement actions against workers that fail to report the 
loss or theft of a badge. These are well-intentioned goals and ones 
that I support.
  I opposed this amendment, however, because extraneous provisions 
included in the amendment directly contradict bipartisan efforts in 
this Congress to reform our criminal justice system, including by 
reducing unnecessary barriers to employment for people with criminal 
records. The amendment will require the TSA Administrator to propose 
increasing the lookback period from 10 years to 15 years for background 
checks of airport and airline workers who have or are seeking SIDA 
badges. Under current regulations, there are a number of offenses that 
disqualify a potential employee, if the individual was convicted of the 
offense during the 10-year lookback period.
  The amendment would also require the TSA Administrator to consider 
adding more offenses to the list of disqualifying crimes. Disqualifying 
offenses already include a number of low-level offenses, such as felony 
drug possession. These provisions would exacerbate barriers to reentry. 
The scope of the changes will still exclude many potential employees 
and lead to the firing of a number of current employees. I ask 
unanimous consent to have printed in the Record at the conclusion of my 
remarks a letter from Transport Workers Union of America, the AFL-CIO, 
the Association of Flight Attendants, CWA--the Communication Workers of 
America, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace 
Workers, the Transportation Trades Department--AFL-CIO, the Leadership 
Conference on Civil and Human Rights, and the National Employment Law 
Project in opposition to this amendment.
  I am committed to working with Senator Thune to ensure greater 
accountability for Secure Identification Display Area badges. It must 
be a priority. I hope that he and others will work with me through the 
conference of this bill to eliminate these barriers to employment for 
individuals with certain criminal records.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:
                                                    April 6, 2016.

Oppose the Airport Security Enhancement and Oversight Act (S. 2361) as 
         an Amendment to the FAA Reauthorization Act (H.R. 636)

       Dear Senator: On behalf of the undersigned organizations, 
     we write to oppose any efforts to expand background checks on 
     aviation workers as proposed in the Airport Security 
     Enhancement and Oversight Act (S. 2361). In particular, we 
     are opposed to the inclusion of S. 2361 as an amendment to 
     H.R. 636, the FAA Reauthorization Act, which is currently 
     under consideration in the Senate. As drafted, S. 2361 would 
     undermine reforms around the nation that have reduced 
     barriers to employment of people with criminal records, thus 
     representing a serious setback for the bipartisan criminal 
     justice reform movement.
       The Airport Security Enhancement and Oversight Act would 
     alter the requirements for airport workers to obtain Secure 
     Identification Display Area (SIDA) badges by instructing the 
     Transportation Security Administration (TSA) Administrator to 
     propose increasing the lookback period on many aviation 
     workers' employment background checks from 10 years to 15 
     years. This provision undermines the goal of promoting 
     rehabilitation, and it conflicts with the substantial 
     research documenting that criminal history lookback periods 
     should not extend back more than seven years.
       The bill also instructs the TSA Administrator to consider 
     increasing disqualifying criminal offenses to include crimes 
     that do not appear to be related to transportation security. 
     These reforms would have far reaching impact and exacerbate 
     barriers to reentry. As many as one in three Americans have a 
     criminal record and nearly half of U.S. children have a 
     parent with a criminal record, creating life-long barriers to 
     opportunity, including employment, for entire families. This 
     change will also have an overwhelming discriminatory impact 
     on communities of color, who have been hardest hit by a 
     flawed criminal justice system. Moreover, this proposal does 
     not account for the compelling evidence documenting the 
     impact of gainful employment on those who have previously 
     been convicted of a crime. Full integration into society is 
     essential to successful anti-terror programs and efforts to 
     lower recidivism rates. By requiring the dismissal of many 
     current employees who have worked in a position for years, 
     the legislation ignores these widely accepted principles.
       We do support some elements of this legislation. The bill 
     would create a waiver process for those who are denied 
     credentials. This would ensure the consideration of 
     circumstances from which it may be concluded that an 
     individual does not pose a risk of terrorism or to security. 
     The waiver process would consider the circumstances 
     surrounding an offense, restitution, mitigation remedies, and 
     other factors. This provision is modeled on a very successful 
     program in the Transportation Worker Identification 
     Credential (TWIC), a credential that is similar to a SIDA, 
     which is used at secure areas of port facilities.
       We strongly encourage you oppose the inclusion of any 
     amendment providing blanket categorical exclusions that would 
     increase background checks on aviation workers and act as 
     additional barriers to the employment of people with criminal 
     records. Thank you for your consideration. If you have any 
     questions, please feel free to contact Brendan Danaher, 
     Director of Government Affairs at the Transport Workers 
     Union, or Greg Regan, Senior Legislative Representative at 
     the Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO.
           Sincerely,
     Transport Workers Union of America.
     AFL-CIO.
     Association of Flight Attendants--CWA.
     Communication Workers of America.
     International Association of Machinists and Aerospace 
     Workers.
     The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.
     National Employment Law Project.
     Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO.


                            VOTE EXPLANATION

 Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I was absent from today's votes on 
three amendments to the pending business, H.R. 636, the vehicle for a 
bill to reauthorize the Federal Aviation Administration, due to events 
I attended with President Obama in Illinois. Had I been present, my 
votes would have been as follows.
  On rollcall vote No. 41, Thune amendment No. 3512, as modified, I 
would have voted against adoption. I am concerned about the impact that 
a provision in this amendment will have on formerly incarcerated 
individuals who have successfully reintegrated into society after 
completing sentences for low-level crimes unrelated to transportation 
security. The provision, which will make it more difficult for these 
individuals to obtain certain aviation

[[Page 3823]]

jobs years after a criminal conviction, undermines efforts to reduce 
barriers to reentry, lower recidivism rates, and reform our criminal 
justice system.
  On rollcall vote No. 42, Heinrich amendment No. 3482, as modified, I 
would have voted in favor of adoption. This amendment will further 
strengthen the homeland by increasing security in soft targets at 
airports, in areas like check-ins and baggage claims, where terrorists 
recently carried out deadly attacks in Brussels. The amendment will 
expand and enhance visible deterrents, create a new eligible use under 
Homeland Security grants for training exercises to enhance preparedness 
for active shooter incidents, and authorize and make explicit that 
Homeland Security grants can be used for airport and surface 
transportation in these nonsecure soft target areas. I am proud to have 
cosponsored this amendment.
  On rollcall vote No. 43, Schumer amendment No. 3483, I would have 
voted in favor of adoption. This amendment would establish consumer 
safeguards like minimum standards for space for passengers on 
aircrafts, including the size and pitch of seats, the amount of leg 
room, and the width of aisles.
  As these votes demonstrate, after a series of temporary extensions, 
the Senate is finally considering a long-term FAA reauthorization bill. 
In light of recent threats both here and abroad, it is important that 
we get this right. I look forward to continuing to work with my 
colleagues on a bipartisan basis on these important security reforms, 
consumer protections, and other pressing aviation-related issues in the 
coming days and weeks.
  Mr. CASSIDY. 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. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cassidy). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.


            UNANIMOUS CONSENT AGREEMENT--EXECUTIVE CALENDAR

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that on Monday, 
April 11, at 5 p.m., the Senate proceed to executive session to 
consider the following nomination: Calendar No. 215; that there be 30 
minutes for debate only on the nomination, equally divided in the usual 
form; that upon the use or yielding back of time, the Senate vote on 
the nomination without intervening action or debate; that if confirmed, 
the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, 
the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the 
Senate then resume legislative session without any intervening action 
or debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________