[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 163 (2017), Part 8]
[Senate]
[Pages 10765-10768]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           EXECUTIVE SESSION

                                 ______
                                 

                           EXECUTIVE CALENDAR

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the Hagerty 
nomination, which the clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read the nomination of William Francis Hagerty 
IV, of Tennessee, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of 
the United States of America to Japan.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.


             Unanimous Consent Requests--Executive Calendar

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, let me begin by reviewing the threats the 
United States is facing around the world today. The campaign against 
ISIS is far from over. We must build on the success of retaking Mosul 
and ensure an enduring defeat of terrorist threats in Iraq and Syria 
and throughout the region.
  Every day we learn more about Russia's asymmetric capabilities--from 
cyber attacks to disinformation campaigns--even as they modernize their 
military, occupy Crimea, destabilize Ukraine, and threaten our NATO 
allies. China continues to militarize the South China Sea and modernize 
its own military at an alarming rate. North Korea gets ever closer to 
developing the capability to strike the U.S. homeland with a nuclear-
armed missile.
  I could spend a lot of time going through all of the threats we face. 
We are at war. We are at war. There are brave young men and women 
serving in Afghanistan, as I speak. Some of them have been wounded and 
killed. We must always ask ourselves: Are we really doing all we can to 
support them?
  Our military is facing a crisis. Years of budget cuts from this 
Congress have failed our men and women in uniform. In order to rebuild 
the military, the Pentagon needs to ramp up readiness programs and 
embark on an ambitious plan for modernization to make sure our 
servicemembers are given the training, resources, and capabilities they 
need. To do that, the Department of Defense must have senior 
leadership.
  The position of Deputy Secretary of State is one of the most critical 
positions in our government. It is essentially the chief operating 
officer of the largest, most complex organization in the world--the 
Department that is entrusted with ensuring our national security.
  Patrick Shanahan is a well-qualified nominee who passed out of the 
Armed Services Committee on a voice vote. This body voted 
overwhelmingly, 98 to 1, to confirm General Mattis as Secretary of 
Defense. He had our overwhelming support to lead the Department during 
challenging times. Yet we have not given Secretary Mattis the senior 
leadership he needs to help him do his job.
  Tomorrow, I say to my colleagues, the current Deputy Secretary of 
Defense, Bob Work, will leave his office. There simply is no more time 
to delay moving the nomination of Patrick Shanahan. You can choose to 
vote no, you can choose to vote yes, but let's just vote. The 
obstruction has gone on long enough, and it has to stop.
  I wish to say, I understand the frustration my colleagues on the 
other side of the aisle feel with the process we have been through, 
particularly on the issue of healthcare. The issue of healthcare should 
have gone through the relevant committees. It should have had 
amendments, it should have had debate, it should have had discussion, 
and maybe we could have passed something going through the regular 
order, and we didn't. I understand the frustration my colleagues on the 
other side of the aisle are feeling. I felt the same thing in 2009 when 
we did ObamaCare, basically on the same basis. Yet amnesia seems to 
have set in here or new Members are not remembering or care.
  What is going on in this body, unfortunately, these days is plagued 
by partisanship and politics. This is a time to put aside all of that 
for the sake of our national security and come together as Republicans 
and Democrats to move this nomination. Our men and women in uniform 
deserve no less.
  Let me say again to my friend from New York, whom I have enjoyed 
doing battle with for many years, he is a man of honesty and integrity 
and a man of

[[Page 10766]]

his word. I understand his frustration, and I understand the 
frustration on the other side of the aisle because we felt the same 
thing.
  I would again ask the indulgence of the leader of the Democrat Party 
on the other side to at least consider this unanimous consent request.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the 
consideration of Executive Calendar No. 157, the nomination of Patrick 
Shanahan to be Deputy Secretary of Defense; that the nomination be 
confirmed; that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid 
upon the table and the President be immediately notified of the 
Senate's action.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, first, 
there is no one I have more respect for on either side of the aisle 
than the Senator from Arizona. He said some nice words about me, and I 
extend them back to him five times over. He is a fine man. He has great 
integrity, great courage, great service to our country, and no one has 
helped defend America more--both when he was in the Armed Forces and 
here on the Senate floor--than the gentleman. I respect that.
  I respect that you always try to put yourself in the other person's 
moccasins. That was one of the great Indian proverbs.
  I know he is doing that, as he mentioned in his remarks.
  I would like to make a couple of quick points.
  First, our Republican leader has chosen this week to proceed with 
three nominees under regular order. He could have advanced this nominee 
and a few others from the DOD but instead chose a district court judge 
in Idaho, a nominee to OMB, Ambassador to Japan. So I say to my good 
friend from Arizona, given the frustration he remarked on that our side 
has on healthcare, which is so important to so many--as is keeping a 
strong and fully staffed Defense Department--I would say to the 
gentleman that we would be happy to consider the nominee in the regular 
order. And maybe once things change a little bit on healthcare, with 
the consent of my colleagues on this side of the aisle, we can move a 
lot of things quickly. But at this point, despite my great respect for 
my dear friend, I must object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  Mr. McCAIN. Before the Democratic leader leaves, may I ask one more?
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at 5 p.m. on Monday, July 
17, the Senate proceed to executive session for consideration of 
Executive Calendar No. 157. I further ask that there be 30 minutes of 
debate on the nomination equally divided in the usual form and that 
following the use or yielding back of time, the Senate vote on 
confirmation of the nomination with no intervening action or debate, 
and that, if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and 
laid upon the table and the President be immediately notified of the 
Senate's action.
  Before I ask for a ruling on that, may I just say that the Senator 
from New York has a legitimate comment. Why in the world we would be 
wasting time on the Ambassador to Japan when we have the Department of 
Defense nominees in line is something I can neither account for, nor 
can I condone. So I understand the frustration of the Senator from New 
York.
  Maybe sometime after our 2 weeks in August, perhaps some of us ought 
to sit down and talk and work out an agenda. We have a train wreck 
coming, as the Senator from New York knows. We have the debt limit. We 
have appropriations bills to pass. We have all these things piling up, 
we have about 30 days to do it in, and so far, I have seen no plan to 
address these challenges.
  The only way we are going to address some of these challenges, I say 
to my colleagues, with their partisanship and anger and dislike of 
anybody who lives over there, the fact is that we need to work together 
to work these things out, and we can do it without betraying principle, 
but we can also do it by understanding the priorities and the 
dedication and patriotism of those on the other side of the aisle.
  So I understand the Senator from New York. I don't agree with the 
Senator from New York, but I understand his frustration. So I renew my 
consent request.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. SCHUMER. Reluctantly, again, I must object. But I would say to my 
colleague from Arizona, I would like very much to sit down and work out 
these other problems. I think that if he and I sat in a room together, 
we could figure these things out ourselves pretty well, and it would be 
our job to persuade our colleagues to try to do the same. I understand. 
I used the same words--``train wreck''--earlier this morning. If we 
don't come to a good agreement, for instance, on appropriations and the 
budget, the defense forces that he so dearly holds and so many of the 
issues on our side would be hurt dramatically--the country would. So I 
promise him, I will endeavor to work with him in the most good-faith 
way.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  Mr. McCAIN. May I ask one more question of the Democratic leader? 
When would Mr. Shanahan's nomination be in order?
  Mr. SCHUMER. I think if it is filed--it will be up to the Republican 
leader. If it is filed tonight, the cloture motion would be voted on 
Monday night, and then maybe we could talk about--with the permission 
of my colleagues from the other side--speeding it up after that.
  Mr. McCAIN. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.


                         Healthcare Legislation

  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. President, I am speaking today because proponents of 
TrumpCare have their heads stuck in the sand. Many of the Republicans 
in this Chamber are clearly in denial that we live in a country where 
91 Americans die each and every day from an opioid overdose; where 1.3 
million Americans went to the hospital for an opioid-related issue in 
2014; where 2,000 Massachusetts residents died from an opioid overdose 
just last year, and 69 percent of those cases had the illicit opioid 
fentanyl in their bodies. If people across the country were dying from 
overdoses at the same rate as in Massachusetts, that would be 100,000 
people per year--two Vietnam wars' worth of deaths every single year. 
Over 10 years, that would be 1 million people who die if they were 
dying at the same rate as they are in Massachusetts--1 million people 
over 10 years dying from opioid overdoses in our country.
  If these Republicans took their heads out of the sand, they would 
hear the near-unanimous calls from the experts and the pleas of mothers 
and fathers to stop this machete to Medicaid which they have brought 
with their new healthcare reform bill. They would hear the alarm bells 
Americans across the country are ringing against this cruel and 
heartless and immoral legislation.
  These desperate voices should be enough to get Republicans to abandon 
their efforts to rip away insurance coverage for treatment and recovery 
services for Americans struggling with substance use disorders, but 
instead of accepting the truth and listening to their constituents, 
they have decided to take a cynical path and replace these lifesaving 
services with a paltry opioid fund of $45 billion over 10 years.
  There has been a lot of talk from the Republicans about so-called 
fixes that they can work on with Democrats, but this opioid fund isn't 
a fix, it is a falsehood. It is a false promise to the people suffering 
from opioid addiction. It is a false future that won't include critical 
Medicaid funding for treatment and recovery services. It is a false 
bargain that Republicans will make at the expense of families desperate 
for opioid addiction treatment.
  This opioid fund is a politically craven effort to buy votes from 
Republicans whose States are being ravaged by the prescription drug, 
heroin, and fentanyl crisis, but the American people will not be 
fooled. This opioid funding is nothing more than a public health 
pittance, a wholly inadequate response to our Nation's preeminent 
healthcare crisis. In fact, the amount

[[Page 10767]]

included in this latest version of TrumpCare is not even half of the 
amount that the Affordable Care Act would have spent on covering opioid 
use disorder treatment if we just left that law alone to work as 
intended.
  Here are the numbers. The Center for American Progress has estimated 
that the Affordable Care Act would spend $91 billion for opioid 
coverage alone over the next decade, compared to the $45 billion the 
Republicans are putting into their bill which they announced today.
  We already know that access to treatment is a challenge. Only 1 in 10 
Americans with substance addiction receives treatment. There are 
estimated to be 2 million people with an opioid use disorder who are 
not receiving any treatment for this disorder.
  It should not be a surprise to anyone that the epidemic of opioid 
abuse will only get worse as long as we have a system that makes it 
easier to abuse drugs than to get help for addiction disorders. And the 
paltry GOP fund that provides less than half of the funding of the 
Affordable Care Act is only going to accelerate the death sentence for 
the millions of people with substance use disorders.
  Sadly, we know that my Republican colleagues who are attempting to 
jam this immoral and callous TrumpCare bill through this body actually 
are aware of the crisis facing their States. They speak to the same 
constituents. They read the same newspapers. They see the same 
obituaries of Americans who lost their lives to the opioid overdose 
epidemic. And that is why we have been able to make some bipartisan 
progress. Last year, we passed the CARA bill. We passed legislation to 
fund $1 billion for treatment. But support for the TrumpCare bill and 
this opioid fund is a betrayal of all of that hard-fought progress we 
were making.
  Republicans are turning their backs on their vow to combat the opioid 
epidemic, and President Trump is breaking his promise from the campaign 
trail to ``expand treatment for those who have become so badly 
addicted.'' Instead, they are moving forward with a proposal that would 
rip insurance away from 22 million people and threaten insurance 
coverage for 2.8 million Americans with a substance use disorder.
  This bill would eviscerate Medicaid--the leading payer of behavioral 
health services, including substance use treatment--by nearly $800 
billion, and all of this to give billions in tax breaks to billionaires 
and big corporations.
  One analysis has found that under the Senate's previous version of 
TrumpCare, Republicans provided a nearly $33 billion tax break to the 
top 400 earners, the top 400 billionaires in America, which is the 
equivalent of ending Medicaid expansion for too many people in our 
country.
  Let's look at what they are planning. They are planning to cut from 
$91 billion down to $45 billion the amount of money we spend on opioid 
treatment in the United States. At the same time, they have $33 billion 
that they are going to give in a tax break to the wealthiest 400 
billionaires in America. Where is that money going to be better spent 
in our country over the next 10 years--$33 billion for the 400 
wealthiest people or adding that money back in so that we can have 
treatment for people who have opioid addiction problems in their 
families? What is going to be better for America?
  Well, the Republicans say: We need all that money that would go for 
treatment to give it to the wealthiest people in our country.
  They can afford their treatment. Their families will have all the 
healthcare coverage they need if they have problems in their families. 
But the Republicans don't care. If you kicked this bill in the heart, 
you would break your toe. That is how bad it is.
  So, for me, this is without question, at the heart, a simple 
explanation of what is fundamentally wrong with this Republican bill. 
There are many other things wrong with it--preexisting conditions, go 
all the way down the line--but how can you, when we have this plague 
hitting our country, take all that money away and give it away to 
billionaires? It is just wrong. There are too many families, too many 
letters, too many conversations that we have all had with these 
families. There are too many tears that we have seen. So, for me, there 
can be nothing that is worse than doing that to families--taking away 
their hope.
  This is going to be a battle of monumental proportions. All I can 
tell you is that for the 2,000 families who had someone who died in 
Massachusetts last year, we are going to make sure this is a battle 
that everyone knows because if the American people understood that they 
are doing this to all of those families who have an opioid problem 
right now, there would be a revolt that would rise up across this 
country. Over this next week, the American people are going to learn 
about what is in the soul of this bill.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I am here with Senator Corker today to 
address the Senate and encourage this body to vote in support of Bill 
Hagerty as our Ambassador to Japan.
  In 2013, when Bill Hagerty was the commissioner of economic and 
community development for Tennessee, he gave a speech entirely in 
Japanese at the American Embassy in Tokyo.
  I have looked it up. There have been 16 U.S. Ambassadors to Tokyo, a 
very distinguished group since World War II: a five-star general, two 
former Senate majority leaders, a former Vice President of the United 
States, a former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, the 
daughter of a former President of the United States. So far as I know, 
none of them were able to do what Bill Hagerty did in 2013 when he made 
a speech entirely in Japanese at the American Embassy in Tokyo.
  That is just one reason I think Bill Hagerty is one of President 
Trump's best appointees.
  He was born in Tennessee, graduated from Vanderbilt University, was 
associate editor of the law review, worked as a consultant for the 
Boston Consulting Group. During his final 3 years, he lived in Tokyo, 
and he served as senior managing executive for their clients around 
Asia.
  He was selected by President George H.W. Bush to be on his staff, and 
there he worked on trade, commerce, defense and telecommunications 
issues. He was a White House fellow. He was founder and chairman of a 
company in private life that became the third largest medical research 
company in the United States. He founded his own private equity and 
investment firm.
  From 2011 to 2015, he was the commissioner of economic and community 
development for Tennessee. In that role, working with Governor Haslam, 
he was enormously successful. They secured $15 billion in investments 
and 90,000 jobs for our State. For 2 of those years, Tennessee was the 
No. 1 State for economic development and the No. 1 State in job 
creation through foreign direct investment.
  Bill Hagerty is a distinguished Eagle Scout. He was head of a capital 
campaign for the Scouts. He served on the board for the Far East 
Council of the Scouts, encouraging the growth of Boy Scouts throughout 
Asia. One way he intends to continue that mission is that his two sons 
will join their respective troops in Japan following his confirmation. 
His wife, Chrissy, would want me to quickly add that there are two 
aspiring Girl Scouts in their family who will have time to do the same.
  This is not only one of the best appointments but one of the most 
important of this President. There is a reason we have had such a 
distinguished list of Ambassadors since World War II, including our 
former majority leader, Senator Howard Baker from Tennessee.
  Mike Mansfield, another former majority leader of this body, was also 
Ambassador. He used to say in every speech he made that the Japanese-
American alliance is the most important two-country relationship in the 
world, bar none. Ambassador Mansfield said that so often that Americans 
in Tokyo used to call our Embassy there the ``Bar None Ranch.''
  If you will permit a little parochialism, Mr. Hagerty comes from a 
state, Tennessee, which has the most important relationship with Japan 
of any State, bar none.

[[Page 10768]]

  That began about 40 years ago. I remember President Carter saying to 
me as a new Governor and to other Governors: ``Go to Japan. Persuade 
them to make in the United States what they sell in the United 
States.''
  Off we all went. During my first 24 months as Governor, I spent 3 
weeks in Japan and 8 weeks on Japanese-American relations. I explained 
to Tennesseans that I thought I could do more good for our State in 
Japan than I could in Washington, DC. It turned out to be true. Nissan, 
Bridgestone, Komatsu, and other companies came, and so did the jobs.
  By the mid-eighties, Tennessee had 10 percent of all the Japanese 
capital investment in the United States, and this has continued. Nissan 
and Bridgestone have North America's largest auto plants and tire 
plants in Tennessee. With Mr. Hagerty's help, Bridgestone, as well as 
Nissan, have decided to locate their North American headquarters in our 
State.
  Bill Hagerty, if approved by the Senate, would go to Japan not only 
able to speak the language but, having lived and worked there, 
understanding how close ties between Japan and the United States can 
create bigger paychecks for Americans, as well as for the Japanese.
  I join my colleague, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, 
Senator Corker, in enthusiastically saying it is my hope that the 
Senate will approve today his nomination and that he will soon be on 
the job, and his children will be in their respective Scout troops in 
Japan.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, I thank my friend, the senior Senator from 
Tennessee, Mr. Alexander, for his eloquent comments about this great 
nomination. I also thank him again, as I have many times, for the 
outstanding relationship he developed with Japan that has borne so much 
fruit for the citizens in our State and so many States across the 
Southeast. I thank him very much for that.
  I rise today also to offer my strong support for the nomination of 
Bill Hagerty to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to Japan. Bill is one of 
the most outstanding appointments that President Trump has made, and 
his confirmation is long overdue.
  The relationship between the United States and Japan speaks for 
itself, and hosting Prime Minister Abe as one of the first visitors 
speaks to how the Trump administration and our country feel about 
Japan.
  As a fellow Tennessean, I have had the privilege of knowing Bill 
Hagerty and his family on a personal level. I have seen him in business 
and the outstanding things he has done there. I have seen him represent 
our State as commissioner of economic development, and he caused it to 
be one of the most heralded States in the country relative to job 
creation. Much of that had to do with his ability to deal with other 
governments around the world and cause them to be attracted to our 
State.
  I also know that he and his wife Chrissy actually met in Japan, so 
this is an exciting time and sort of a homecoming for their family.
  There is no one more well-suited to fill this important role, and I 
know our Nation will benefit from Bill's leadership and experience as 
he carries on the tremendous legacy of U.S. Ambassadors to Japan, 
including the late Howard Baker, another fellow Tennessean.
  I am really, really proud of this nomination and know that Bill will 
represent the very best of our country during his service in Japan.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to support this confirmation. This is 
long overdue, and I know he will be going to Japan at a time when we 
truly need an ambassador with his capacity.
  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. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired.
  The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the Hagerty 
nomination?
  Mr. ALEXANDER. 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. CORNYN. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Kansas (Mr. Moran).
  Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Moran) 
would have voted ``yea.''
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Missouri (Mrs. 
McCaskill) is necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Perdue). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 86, nays 12, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 160 Ex.]

                                YEAS--86

     Alexander
     Baldwin
     Barrasso
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Burr
     Cantwell
     Capito
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Cochran
     Collins
     Coons
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Cortez Masto
     Cotton
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Donnelly
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Enzi
     Ernst
     Feinstein
     Fischer
     Flake
     Franken
     Gardner
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hassan
     Hatch
     Heitkamp
     Heller
     Hoeven
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johnson
     Kaine
     Kennedy
     King
     Klobuchar
     Lankford
     Leahy
     Lee
     Manchin
     Markey
     McCain
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Nelson
     Paul
     Perdue
     Portman
     Reed
     Risch
     Roberts
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Sasse
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Scott
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Strange
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Wyden
     Young

                                NAYS--12

     Booker
     Brown
     Gillibrand
     Harris
     Heinrich
     Hirono
     Merkley
     Peters
     Sanders
     Stabenow
     Udall
     Warren

                             NOT VOTING--2

     McCaskill
     Moran
       
  The nomination was confirmed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that with 
respect to the Hagerty nomination, the motion to reconsider be 
considered made and laid upon the table and the President be 
immediately notified of the Senate's action.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________