quote -- "balancing the budget" -- unquote. what is the bill that congress can pass this year that best balances the budget? immigration reform. according to c.b.o., passing immigration would reduce budget deficits $197 billion over the 2014-2023 period and $700 billion, 2024-2033. a trillion dollars in savings that we can achieve by passing immigration reform. finally, with regard to immigration itself, the republican party platform says -- quote -- "our highest priority is to secure the rule of law at both our borders and ports of entry. under the senate immigration billing, anyone who wants to try to cross the border illegally will have to figure out a way to get over an 18-foot steel pedestrian fence, get past the border agents standing every

1,000 feet apart from ground groundsville to san diego 24 hours a day, and then there are the drones that will track th tm until they're caught or released." if you try to overstay your visa, your name will be placed 0en a list, given to immigration enforcement officials to find you, detain you and deport you. if you try work here i wil ille, you'll never be able to get a job because you won't have a haa name and a matching picture. future waves of illegal immigration will be prevent fundamental this bill is passed. for all the railing from the hard right about stopping illegal immigration, no one -- no one can deny that our bill is a huge improvement over current law. so let's take an inventory of what this bill does. stimulate the economy, check.

create jobs, check. help small businesses, check reduce the debt, check. secure the border, check. end visa overstays, check. end illegal employment, check. these are all of the things republicans claim they want to do, all in one bill. so why is it, mr. president, that all of these positive benefits to passing reform and all of the costs we pay for doing nothing, why is it with that that the house of representatives and the house republicans in particular refuse to do anything to fix our broken immigration system? why do house republicans not pass our broken immigration system, not change it, not pass a good law? this question can be answered with one simple word: fear.

one simple word: fear. fear is what often causes people to do things that are counter to their self-interest. fear makes people to succumb to their basic instincts instead of rising to their noblest ambitions. and fear paralyzes us during times we need to be taking action. house republicans, mr. president -- house republicans are afraid of immigration. they are not only afraid of voting on an immigration bill, they're -- they're even fraid of introducing legislation on immigration. let me give you some examples. june 2013, congressman joe hecht says he was going to address immigration reform that would address our broken system. he announced he would not be introducing any immigration bill of any kind. in april 2014, congressman joe barton said he was going to introduce major immigration

legislation. the bill was never introduced. eric cantor, who just this week claimed that his position on immigration never wavered, said last year he was going to introduce legislation to -- quote -- "deal with the kids who did not break any laws and themselves came into this country, in many cases, unbeknownst to them." this legislation was also never introduced. finally, house republican leadership has repeatedly announced they -- quote -- "think we have finally have the policy right on immigration." but, again, we have seen no bill even introduced, much less voted on. house republicans are so afraid of immigration that they have handed the policy and leadership gavel to steve king, who compares immigrants to dogs and livestock and who claims immigration is a slow-motion holocaust. eric cantor is actually right that his position on immigration reform never wavered.

his rhetoric was often pro-reform but his legislative and voting record was always anti-reform. cantor never introduced or voted for a single immigration bill that would help a single immigrant, but he loved to vagary reference the need for immigration reform when asked about it. that has been the real republican party position on immigration: pretend to be pro-immigration reform rhetorically but never, never permit an actual republican to actually introduce immigration reform legislation and definitely never allow immigration reform legislation to come to a vote. this is because house republicans may claim -- this is because house republicans may claim to disagree with steve king's words, but they certainly don't seem to disagree with steve king's policy objectives. they do not want immigration reform that will rationalize our legal immigration system and create a path to legality for

those who are already here. instead, they supposed the failed and tragic policies of self-deportation for the people who are already here and they want to reduce legal immigration to a trickle for the people who wish to come here and contribute to our society. mr. president, two nights ago when i watched our gritty u.s. soccer team win an amazing game against ghana, i saw an amazing team -- i saw an amazing team effort coached by an energetic german immigrant whose tactics and decisions helped the u.s. prevail in the final stages of an incredibly compelling game. did republicans watch the same game and ask, why is an immigrant coaching our team? these last two weeks i have watched the san antonio spurs play some of the greatest team basketball anyone has ever seen, with players from france,

argentina, brazil, australia, italy, canada, and of course the united states. did republicans watch those same games and ask, who cares about the quality of the basketball being played. why are immigrants allowed in the nba? and this is the problem the republicans face. republicans have a very important choice to make the next few days. if they continue on the same path they are on now where they feign sympathy for immigration reform in their rhetoric but do not introduce or vote on legislation to fix our broken system, it will be impossible for the average voter to distinguish between any republican and steve king. republican word of sympathy will not matter to people whose families are suffering, whose businesses can't find the workers they need, or whose churches are seeing their members deported. they will know that republicans are to blame for doing nothing

on immigration reform. even worse, republicans will get the worst of both worlds in this scenario. their most strident right-wing voters will actually punish them for their mack vei machiavellias to feign immigration reform. so what is the real answer for republicans? well, mr. president, lindsey graham showed us the way by being a man of principle. this weekend he said it best. he said -- quote -- "i don't think eric got beat because of his stand on imgraismtion i think he got beat because of his lack of defining himself on immigration. republicans nationally will accept an earned pathway to citizenship if you secure the border. for our party to let the 35% tell us how to engage on immigration, we'll lose a natural ally in the hispanic community." unquote. from senator graham who just won his election with 59%

of the vote while defending back at home in republican conservative state south carolina immigration reform. so, in conclusion, to speaker boehner, majority whip mccarthy, and others in the new house leadership, the choice is yours. join with us, the evangelical community, the catholic church, american farmers, american police chiefs, america's business community, and 65% of american voters in supporting tough, fair, practical immigration reform legislation or, alternatively, you can ignore the benefits of immigration reform, continue to fail to address our broken immigration system because of your fear, and you can eventually watch your party go into the bust bin of history. those are your two choices, republicans. there is no doubt that at the

moment steve king is winning. republicans are implementing his policy objective of inaction to perfection because they are so fearful. but hopefully, just like the u.s. team, house republicans can overcome their fears, appeal to their more noble aspirations, and we can pull vick fishery the jusjaws of defeat at the very ed here and pass the immigration reform legislation our country so desperately needs. mr. president, i yield the floor. and i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call: ms. mikulski: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. ms. mikulski: mr. president, i ask the call of the quorum be vacated. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. mikulski: mr. president, we've been on the motion to proceed to proceed to our three appropriations bills since 10:00 this morning. it's almost been four hours. and it's true, we can -- under the cloture, there are 30 hours of debate. we could let this go on until 11:00 tonight. we could. and actually members have had an

interesting day speaking about issues related to iraq, to immigration. but, you know, we would really like to focus on the bills beforehand. agriculture, f.d.a. how do we feed the people in our own country, save the family farm and be able to export food? we would like to be able to bring up a bill that funds f.d.a., the food and drug administration, that looks out for food safety but also the safety and efficacy of life science products like medical devices, biotech products, pharmaceuticals, which i know are important to the presiding officer's state. we want to be able to bring up transportation and housing and urban development, the highway trust fund is going to run out. in my own home state, we need the transportation money. we need it for the formula funding that will be important to roads. but we also need the money in

there that looks out for small airports like the hagerstown airport,ed frederick airport where the president's plane needs to get to camp david. up the road is the hagerstown airport for which there is a manufacturing hub. small manufacturing, employs 300 to 400 people. one company actually puts in the aeuf i don't -- avionics to the airplanes guarding our border. put that together, that's close to 900 to 1,200 jobs. hello. this is what we're talking about. public investment that creates private-sector jobs and does public safety. so we say to those who have considering how we could move

ahead, we encourage them now, let's -- i'd like to suggest that we follow the model when we were on the floor three years ago. that was the last time we had these appropriations on the floor. we had an amendment process. the managers of the bill, like my vice chairman, senator shelby, and i, we worked with members on a defined list. some we can actually take. there are some excellent ideas where members want to improve on what we've done. for those who have concern about spending, they can actually come and offer cuts or they can offer replacements. this is the place where, if you want government to work your way, this is your day. and you do it through the amendment process. most americans don't understand that in order to debate a bill on the united states senate

floor, you have to first file a motion to proceed. that's like -- that's asking permission to come to the floor to take up the bill. so we had to have a cloture vote on it. okay. it passed 95-3. i think it is the will of the senate to get it going, and let's get these amendments, get it on with the amendments. are there anxiety on both sides about the nature of those amendments? sure, but that's what amendments are. some we can take, some we need to debate. we are the greatest deliberative body in the world. we've got to start deliberating. and i say to my friends who are pondering how to proceed, the best way to proceed is look at the agreement that we had in 2011 that allowed for amendments, regular order and

methodical process for considering those amendments, and then -- and we would be able then to get on them, be able to debate them. my suggestion would be that we would alternate sides; a democratic amendment, a republican amendment. hey, maybe even a bipartisan amendment. so i hope that we do not spin our wheels and spin the clock for eight and a half more hours. because the american people know that after all is said and done, more gets said than gets done. so i'm suggesting really, let's follow the regular order. the process that i'm recommending is not new. there's no surprises. there's no stunts. it is a process that we have followed in the past. and i'm suggesting along with senator shelby the exact model that we used three years ago,

the last time appropriations were on the floor. now are those who say we -- in this country we have a spending problem, well, if you really think we have a spending problem, this is the time you come to the floor and debate it. if you think we have a spending problem and that we're spending too much on the justice department, you know, if you think it's too much money on bullet-proof vests for cops or shelters for battered women, come on. if you think you want to think that there's too much money in the space program and you don't like this rocket ship or that satellite, this is the place to come. you offer amendments, we're ready to debate. and i speak for my three subcommittee chairmen -- my two other subcommittee chairmen, senator murray on transportation

housing, senator pryor on agriculture. we're ready n. consultation with the other side of the aisle, senator collins on transportation and housing, senator blunt on agriculture, is also ready to debate. and so, i would hope that we could move forward, have a method for moving forward that promotes regular order. and if we do that, i think that members who really haven't experienced this too much because of our gridlock and deadlock and the lock on amendments that we actually -- i think they're going to like it because they like democracy. if you like the constitution, you like democracy, this is the place where we can put it into play today. so, mr. president, i'm going to yield the floor and note an -- before i yield the floor, i note that the leadership from the republican side is in conference

with senator shelby. i hope that's good news. and then for those on both sides of the aisle kind of watching the floor, the process on the floor, if you have amendments, start to gear up and get ready to bring them over. senator shelby and i are here. we're ready to receive them. we're ready to get ready to do them. we're ready to talk about them and set the stage for a debate on them. mr. president, i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from texas is recognized. mr. cornyn: i would ask that the quorum call be rescinded. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: mr. president, with what's happening in iraq, what's happening with the claim of lost i.r.s. e-mails from lois lerner, what happened -- the developments in the benghazi investigation, what's happening in ukraine, what could happen in afghanistan, it's easy to overlook perhaps -- too easy to overlook perhaps a crisis occurring right here in america on our southern border. and that crisis is easily described as a wave of humanity coming across our southern border from central america and, tragically, tens of thousands of the people coming across our borders seeking refuge seeking e

united states are children, unaccompanied minors from honduras, guatemala, el salvador. and the question we should ask ourselves is, why are we seeing this unprecedented increase in the number of unaccompanied minors coming from -- coming across our southwestern border? as you can see, in 20 i 2011, te were 6,560 detains. but that number has grown steadily, from 2012, 2013, and now 2014, so far 60,000 unaccompanied minors have come across our borders, primarily from central america. it is estimated that this 60,000 number will likely double next year, unless something is done. wcialtioyou well, these childred

their parents who are enabling this, are crossing the border because of a widespread perception that they will be allowed to stay here. and the reason for that perception is a series of events, a series of stated changes in policy that have given the impression that president obama does not have a commitment to enforce our immigration laws. now, none of us denies that central america's northern triangle is plagued by drug car tecialtio--drug cartels, drug g. the majority of people coming across the border are not from mexico. they're from central america, they're coming through a 500-mile strip of border making their way up the mexican coast

in areas largely controlled by a criminal organization, a drug cartel that's basically figured this is another way to make money. in other words, they not only traffic in drugs, they traffic in people, and now, quite obviously, they're trafficking in tens of thousands of childr children. the massive spike in unaccompanied minors, of course, seemed to start to take off when president obama announced in 2012 his so-called deferred action plan. now, to be clear -- and to be fair -- this deferred action announcement where the president said he would not deport certain categories or classes of children would not apply to the children coming across the border today. so you might wonder, why in the

world do they keep coming? well, that's not an isolated event in 12012. -- in 2012. just to remind my colleagues, this deferred action announcement came two years after john morton, who was the director of immigration and customs enforcement -- or i.c.e. -- circulated a memo enforcement laws against most illegal aliens was now a lower priority. that memo went out in june of 2010. a few months later, several colleagues and i sent a letter to then-department of homeland security secretary janet napolitano expressing our concern that the administration's selective enforcement of our immigration statutes was jeopardizing public safety and breeding contempt for the rule of law. this letter read, in part,

"numerous criminal aliens were being released into society and are having proceedings terminated simply because i.c.e. has decided that such cases do not fit within the department's chosen enforcement priorities." it appears that i.c.e. is enforcing the law based on criteria it arbitrarily chose with complete disregard for the enforcement laws created by congress." close quote. then the following june, in the second morton memo, the following june, then-director morton sent around another memo which further advised u.s. immigration authorities to systematically reconsider hundreds of thousands of immigration cases and to make them low-priority to enforce immigration laws against millions of people illegally present in the united states.

so that second morton memo went even further than the first in saying looking at everyone, all the undocumented population that's here in the united states, we're going to reconsider our priorities in terms of repatriation of those individuals, should they be detained by i.c.e. that june 2011 memo laid the groundwork for the deferred action program that the president announced a year later, which is 2012. and these programs were extended earlier this month. well, so you might say, well, the arch average was about 6,50. then it doubled in 2012. and then it doubled again in 2013. and then it is scheduled to double again in 2014. the administration has continued to treat the vast majority of

illegal immigrants as low-priority offenders, thereby creating perverse incentives for people to cross the border. if people don't believe there's any consequence associated with entering the country in violation of our immigration laws, they are going to continue to do it. and, as the distinguished presiding officer knows, that law enforcement has more than just what i would call a goal line defense priority. in other words, deterrence is very important. and, obviously, people are not being deterred -- perversely, people are being encouraged by this series of events to show up at the border and, of course, in huge numbers overwhelming border patrol, which is now no longer looking uniformly at drug dealers and human smuggling operations. now they're trying to take care of children and try to get them a safe mace to live and to take

care of -- a safe place to live and to take care of them. john ic eiswig recently told the "u.s. times" "if you are an illegal immigrant your odds of getting deported are like lie zero. it is just unlikely to happen." that message has gotten through to folks in central america, who are living in a very tough neighborhood. and it has encouraged many of them to risk their lives and their children's lives on an extremely dangerous journey through this region of mexico covered by the drug cartels. and, actually, it's in part of the business model of the drug cartels to e encourage this flow because they effectively get

paid a tax by the coyotes. one of the ways they come is on the top of one of these trains. you can see this is a shot of a train they call "the beast." it is a wel well-documented, wrn about by mr. martinez in book he wrote in 2013 which is chilling. but it describes the journey from central america through mexico on the top of one of these trains and the risk of accident, the likelihood of sexual assault, six to eight to ten mexican women are assaulted, people who are kidnapped for ran system and people who are just killed, who don't comply with the dictates of the drug cartels. well, don't take just my word for it.

last week "the washington post" confirmed that the influx of unaccompanied minors is being driven in large part -- this is "the washington post" -- confirmed the influx of unaccompanied minors is being driven in large part by the perception that they will be allowed to stay under the obama administration's immigration policies. "the new york times" recently told the story of a 13-year-old honduran boy who was detained in mexico while trying to reach the united states. like so many are others across america the tao*eupls reported, this boy said his mother believed the obama administration quietly changed its policy regarding unaccompanied minors and if he made it across he would have a better shot at staying. obviously the distinguished senator from maryland is here. not only is this affecting states like texas, but these

children, 1,000 of whom are being effectively warehoused in lackland air force base in san antonio, texas, some are being shipped to california and some are being sent to virginia and maryland because these 47,000 children that have been detained since october of last year are overwhelming the capacity of local communities and state and federal authorities to deal with them. so as i said, the beast which transports people, 1,000-mile or so trip from southern mexico up to the southern border of texas, is a horrific place to transit that huge expanse. migrant women are preyed upon by drug cartels like the zetas. officials from a mayor's officed

arthur martinez, the author of "the beast" said in ciadad jeldago the cartels control all trafficking, sending women to recruit and sometimes kidnapping migrant women riding the buses. they sell the women to truck drivers for a night and then throw them away like unwanted scraps. so my point, mr. president, is there is nothing humane -- nothing humane about encouraging people to travel through cartel-dominated smuggling routes in the hopes of reaching the united states. if that has been the effect -- yet, that has been the effect of the perception that the president and his administration is not committed to enforcing our immigration laws.

i know that wasn't their intention, but that has been the consequence. even before the ongoing border crisis erupted, people were taking notice of the president's disregard for the rule of law. last december, for example, a federal district court judge in brownsville, texas, absolutely excoriated the obama administration for making a mockery of enforcement, noting that the president's policies were incentivizing human traffickers and endangering the lives of children. here's what judge -- federal judge andrew haynon said -- quote -- "by fostering an atmosphere whereby illegal aliens are encouraged to pay human smugglers for services the government is not only allowing them to fund the evil activities of these cartels but is also inspiring them to do so." that's a federal district skwr-pblg in -- judge in

brownsville, texas. one final point, mr. president. some of my friends across the aisle have argued that if only congress would pass obama's preferred immigration reforms -- president obama's preferred immigration reforms the current border crisis would never have happened. that ignores the fact that none of these children qualify for any of the deferred action policies either ordered in 2012 or any of the others i mentioned. but there is the perception caused by the first morton memo, the second morton memo, then the deferred action announcement, and now the widely publicized news that the president has instructed jeh johnson, the secretary of homeland security, to reconsider its entire repatriation and deportation policy. and it's clear this is related to the upcoming midterm election

and the president's desire to try to make a point. the problem is his point has backfired. it is victimizing the very same people that the president believes, i think, that he's trying to help. and that's what happens when the rule of law is no longer your priority. unintended consequences. as i explained today, the president's actions have helped cause this humanitarian crisis. i know the finance committee has in subcommittee appropriated, i think, roughly $2 billion to help the federal authorities to deal with this humanitarian crisis. unfortunately, unless we're able to process appropriations bills across the floor of the united states senate, i don't know when that money is going to be available. and that's another problem. but the problem -- the most

fundamental problem is the american people's confidence that the federal government will enforce the laws until such time as those laws are changed has been undermined. passing new legislation will do nothing to fix that unless the president is willing to enforce laws that have already been passed by congress. so this isn't a problem of passing some more laws. this is a problem of the president and his administration effectively conveying the message that they're not going to enforce the laws that they don't want to enforce. unless we send a clear, unambiguous message that our border is secure and our immigration laws are being enforced, we can expect more and more central american migrants to embark on the harrowing journey from central america up through mexico, which means more of them will be robbed, kidnapped, raped, and killed. we don't know how many start out on this journey. all we know is how many show up on the border.

we ought to be concerned about that. just to be clear, i remain personally committed to fixing all aspects of our broken immigration system, but i cannot and will not support any policy that effectively empowers human traffickers and endangers the lives of these children. mr. president, i yield the floor. ms. mikulski: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from maryland is recognized. ms. mikulski: mr. president, before the gentleman from texas leaves -- and i know we'll have other matters to discuss -- first of all, i'm going to just make a comment and then ask a question. i want to really thank you for that very compelling presentation. i might not agree with every sentence, but i think he painted a picture of what is really happening at the border. we do have a humanitarian crisis. as the chair of the appropriations committee, i was made aware of this really last

year by secretary sebelius where they needed more money. and i said more money, yes, to help, but we needed a plan. where were we getting with this? so now these numbers have just surged. what it has become is these children effectively function as refugees. now this portrait that you portrayed, the just horrific sense of the beast, human beings, women and children, and boys as well-being sold as if they were commodities. like commodities. it gives you goose bumps. you painted a very compassionate and compelling picture. my question, though, is, one, we have to deal with the immediate crisis now. but as you talk about the enforcement on the border, what would you recommend that we do? in other words, the pictures i've seen -- and i hope to go

down and see this myself -- is that the little kids come up to the border control guy, some as young as four and five, and some go up to like early teens. some teens carry their younger siblings. are you saying we should turn them away? and these are not provocative questions. we've got to work together across the aisle to really deal with this issue constructively, humanely and effectively. mr. cornyn: mr. president, if i may respond to the distinguished senator's question. i appreciate your leadership and big heart. and this is not a political issue. the first and most important thing we do is to pursue the best interests of these children. but we can't simply deal with our immigration problem, illegal immigration problem at the border. it's got to start back in tral

america. that's one reason i'm glad vice president joe biden is traveling could guatamala, as i know jeh johnson, secretary of homeland security has, to see what they can do. we then need to try to persuade our friends in mexico to commit more resources. perhaps we can work with them to deal with their southern border, that 500-mile southern border which is basically now controlled by the cartels. the cartels are making money off of this, and so this is a governance issue in central america and mexico as well. i might point out that perhaps with the same reservations that the distinguished senator from maryland made about not agreeing with everything i said but much of what i said, what i have said is i think pretty much been echoed by my friend henry cuellar from laredo, texas, who by virtue of where he lives and where he was raised, very knowledgeable about the border

area around laredo and central america. i saw an interview with the former first lady and colleague hillary clinton who said unless we send a clear and loud message to the people in central america that you should not come, you should not risk your children making this long, harrowing journey because they will not ultimately be able to stay, then they're going to keep coming. because right now when these children come here, as the senator knows, our capacity to deal with them is overwhelmed at the local level, at the state level, and at the federal level. and they are essentially being treated like refugees and warehoused in places like lack land, air force base and other places around the country. and can you imagine the impact in the long run not only on the health care system, on education, and other services that would be required to take care of these children until they can be repatriated. but, i would align myself with what former senator clinton

said, former secretary of state, said the president and the administration need to send a very clear and loud message that anyone who comes to the united states will be returned to their country of origin once a safe family member can be identified to repatriate those children. but right now the system is so overwhelmed, and we don't even know who these children are being placed with in america. they might be some claimed family member but i'm not sure whether there's background checks being done for criminal history or perhaps sex offense. and this is overwhelming the whole system. so i'm sure working together, we can come up with an improvement over where we are now. and i would just point out this is not a partisan issue, but it is a very harsh reality. my concern is it's being over whepbd by the -- overwhelmed by the news out of the middle east and other concerns here in washington when it is front and center back home in texas.

ms. mikulski: i thank you for your comments. as the senator from texas, the senior senator from texas, a former attorney general, as i recall, i mean, you know the law, you know the border, you know text. -- you know texas. you know what's going on. i look at this too as not only the chair of the senate appropriations committee but a social worker and the care of the children even in our own country give me pause. they were originally looking at a closed social security administration building to house these children. no bathrooms except down the hall. they were going to be in office cubicles. we have a very serious problem. i want you to know i agree, sir, with the fact that we need to have a robust, strong and clear message in central america. first of all, these rumors are false. today's not the day to debate this. i thank you for your comments

and your compelling comments. i'd like to be able to work with you, also continue to work with the administration to focus. but the message really does have to go to central america. i think we need to up our game in central america in terms of this. from what i've heard, senator cornyn, is that there are all these radio ads and so on that are truly exploiting this. there is violence. there is ghoulish, grim violence against children in central america. desperate mothers or praying mothers and so on are trying to look for a way out. they are being exploited, and i'm going to work with you in any way i can to stem the flow, deal with the humanitarian crisis and get a long-range solution. but i appreciate this conversation and look forward to more on the topic. mr. cornyn: mr. president, i thank the senator and look

forward to that.

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from montana is

recognized. mr. walsh: thank you, mr. president. i rise today not only as the senator from montana but as a veteran of the long and difficult war in iraq. like most americans, the increasing instability in iraq and the disintegration of the country along sectarian boundaries has me deeply concerned. this past weekend, when i was home in montana talking with montanans, they were very concerned about what was going on in iraq, and they expressed their interest to me on a regular basis. the heinous advance of the islamic state of iraq and syria and their systematic execution of iraqi soldiers and the murder of innocent civilians gives pause to people everywhere. i stand here today as a veteran and as a father whose son has deployed multiple times, and i'd like to recognize my son today who is with me in the balcony, michael, please stand and be recognized.

we fought in the war that washington began based on false information, a war that ended and from which we must move on. i led an infantry battalion, the 163rd infantry, made up of more than 700 of montana's finest into combat. our area of operation was just north of tikrit from baji to kirkuk. the very same area being fought over today. it was late 2004 and the country had fallen into a bitter sectarian conflict, a conflict that unfolded after dismantling of the bathist-led army and fueled by ancient divides between the shias and the sunnies. those same disputes are again boiling over in iraq today. from the end of 2004 to late 2005, my unit fought to hold ground, secure roads and build

infrastructure. we worked with local sheiks and key leaders to forge a path to peace. we helped return iraq's government to its people. while there, we oversaw two successful elections and watched with hope and great satisfaction as the iraqis ratified their constitution. it was during this time that i also dispatched a team from my battalion to focus solely on training and assisting members of the newly found iraqi army. during our unit's entire deployment in iraq while fighting the insurgency, we faced rocket attacks, snipers and improvised explosive devices on a daily basis. four of my men were killed in action, and there isn't a day that goes by when i don't think of those men and their families. master sergeant robby mcnery

of lewistown, montana, died on march 31, 2005. sergeant kevin davis of lebanon, oregon, died on april 8, 2005. sergeant timothy kaiser of thema, california, died on april 28, 2005. and sergeant travis arndt died on september 21 of 2005. travis was from bozeman, montana. and scores of others were injured. one of my soldiers died by suicide after returning home to montana. he was a victim of the invisible wounds of war. nearly 4,500 americans have been killed in iraq. among them, 28 montana heroes. some 32,000 americans have also been wounded. the war cost us more than $2 trillion. i say more than $2 trillion,

most of which congress put on a credit card. and have left our grandchildren to pay the debt. because this nation has failed to prepare for new veterans returning home, we now have a crisis of care within our v.a. health care system, a system that is overwhelmed after more than a decade of war. today, we are seeing 22 veterans die by suicide each and every single day across this country. these are the true costs of war. montanans understand this and americans understand this. and because i work for montanans and i'm listening to them, i call on president obama to use extreme caution when considering options to deal with this sectarian violence that we are seeing take place in iraq today. america cannot afford another iraq financially or the human costs that are associated with

war. we did our job there and we did it with honor and integrity and our men and women should be very proud of their success and the citizens of this country should be proud of the accomplishments of the men and women who served in our armed forces. but today, some are suggesting we make an open-ended commitment to iraq to keep american troops on the ground indefinitely, sending thousands of america's young men and women back into iraq to step into the middle of a civil war is not a solution. so to my fellow members of congress, i urge temperance as we navigate this difficult terrain because i know that foreign policy failures made in washington fall disproportionately on the backs of young men and women from small towns across montana and across america. i have seen war up close, and

like too many american families, i have seen the costs of war up close. on families, on communities, all across this country. so, mr. president, i believe it is now time for the iraqis to secure and defend their own nation, to embrace their own self-determination is the only path to a true and everlasting peace in iraq. i would like to remind the american people of the costs that have been associated with the war in iraq. our v.a. system, we are dealing with a crisis within the v.a. health care system. at one time over a year ago, we had over 450,000 men and women on a backlog list that were trying to get in to see a health care provider. today, that backlog has been significantly reduced, but we still have a problem within the v.a. health care system. we have put over two million american veterans into that

health care system without making sure that the system was ready for them when they came home. could you imagine sending over two million american service members, men and women, into iraq or afghanistan or anywhere else around the world that we weren't -- that we didn't train, that we didn't equip and that we didn't provide the resources for them to go into iraq? when people talk to me about the cost of war, i think this is a cost that we sometimes overlook, because when our men and women return from iraq, the war is not over. we will be dealing with this cost for many, many years. as we talk about the men and women in iraq and afghanistan and we're contemplating our continued deployment, our extension of deployment into afghanistan, i have heard a figure recently that has been thrown around. today it costs approximately $1.2 million per soldier for a soldier in afghanistan.

when we reduced that number in afghanistan from the 32,000 figure to the less than 10,000 figure, that cost goes up to $2.3 million. and again, we are planning to put that cost on the credit card. mr. president, we have a responsibility, and that responsibility lies to the citizens of this nation and to the citizens of montana, and we must continue to look out for these people. i don't want to be an isolationist. i understand that there are problems in iraq and afghanistan, but we have to take care of our problems here in washington, d.c. as i travel back to montana and i talk with montanans, montanans are concerned about our debt. they know we have a spending problem, and we have to take care of that spending problem, but extending soldiers to iraq or into afghanistan is not going to solve the problems that they are dealing with there. again, mr. president, america

cannot afford another iraq, financially or the human costs that are associated with the things that are going on in iraq, and we owe it to the citizens of this nation. i would ask my fellow members of this house or the senate that if it was their son or daughter that they whether going -- were going to send into iraq to fight in a sectarian conflict, would they be as willing to do that as they are today without having a relationship to be sent over there? we hear about suggestions on a daily basis, how long we should be -- what we should be doing in iraq and afghanistan, and i know that it's a difficult situation that we are dealing with there, but we have to make the right decision. we have to look out for the united states of america and what's happening here in america. i think that too many of my fellow members of congress are

too abrupt and think too quickly about what we should do in iraq. i think they need to take a step back and think about the impacts, the second and third order effects of continuing to send our men and women back over to iraq. because like i said, i know that foreign policy failures made in washington will fall dispoe portion atly on the backs of small-town america, towns like cull bertson, montana, livingston, montana, boulder, montana. it's not the large cities that are going to bear all the burden of sending men and women to -- back into iraq. i have also mentioned that i have seen war up close. i still recall the -- the ramp ceremonies that we held shortly after the deaths of the men and women in iraq. we had to have those men and women out of there within a

12-hour period. those were very difficult times to deal with. not only for me but the other 700-plus men and women who were deployed with me to iraq. so again, i can't overemphasize how important i believe it is that we really step back, take a look at what's happening in iraq and determine if this is really the best thing for the united states of america. is it the best thing for our military to have to deal with. we have been at war for over 13 years in iraq and afghanistan. our military will do whatever we ask of it, but we also have to think about the families of our service men and women. the impacts that war in iraq and afghanistan have had on the families, the numbers of divorce, the broken marriages, the broken families. those are also the costs of war that we are having to deal with. these are not easy -- there are

no easy answers to what's happening in iraq, and i know that we will come together and come up with a solution, and i hope it's the right solution because these are very important times. and who knows what will happen next? what happened in the middle east, what happened in europe, i don't think anyone knows, and we have to be prepared. but again, i have said it once and i would really like to emphasize again, mr. president, i believe it's time for the iraqis to secure and defend their own nation. we have heard that they have over 17 divisions. think about the size of those divisions. a division in the united states is nearly 20,000 soldiers. i'm sure an iraqi division is somewhere in that same capacity. so they have 17 divisions, four which we are hearing have dropped their weapons and fallen back, but that still leaves 14

divisions to deal with -- or 13 division that is they have to -- to make this fight and make this stance to protect our country. and i am calling on this -- this senate, the members of this senate to ask the iraqi people to stand up and fight for their country. mr. walsh: mr. president, i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island is recognized.

mr. whitehouse: mr. president, i ask that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. whitehouse: thank you, mr. president. i'm over here to make an objection if necessary to an effort to submarine the president's climate change initiative, which two-thirds of all americans support, which a huge number of major name brand american corporations support, which is supported by those who we trust to lead our national defense and our national security interests, but something about this building, something about this place makes it a place where the polluting interests have wildly disproportionate sway, and so we keep seeing these attacks on environmental regulation. so it's actually kind of fortunate timing that i'm here because it gives me a chance for the 71st time to try to wake

this body up to the harm that carbon pollution is causing to our oceans, to our economy, to our wildlife, and to our health. i traveled recently to new hampshire, i've been traveling around the country going to states that are facing the carbon predicament and seeing how they're doing it and i'll tell you the granite staters are facing up to the daunting challenges of climate change. rhode island understands that new hampshire's challenges are like our own. at the newport, rhode island tide gauge sea level is up until 10 inches since the 1930's. in the winter we're three to four degrees warmer in narragansett bay. the climate assessment reports that rhode island will see rising sea levels, warmer temperatures and extreme weather. new hampshire showed that there was plenty of yankee good sense up there as well. the people of new hampshire get it and are taking steps to

tackle climate change. let me first say no one pretended it wasn't real. the first line of defense over here is that climate change isn't real. no one i spoke to in new hampshire was pretending interest wasn't real. the university of new hampshire has an expert named cameron wake who told me this, new hampshire is -- quote -- "getting wetter and getting warmer." and they pointed out it's happening fast. the climate assessment shows the northeast already has seen 70% more extreme precipitation in recent years. dramatic downpours that increase the risk of flooding. this university of new hampshire data also shows an even more severe problem for new hampshire. dr. wake told me that he and his university of new hampshire colleagues have collected data from southern new hampshire on what they call extreme precipitation events which you might call a rain burst. where over four inches of rain falls in just 48 hours. the data show that these rain

bursts have increased four to ten times since 1960, and they'll only grow more frequent through the rest of the century, wake and his university of new hampshire colleagues report. that brings us to the warmer part of the wetter and warmer equation. the university of new hampshire's recent studies show the state's temperature has increased by twice the global average. happening in large part due to what dr. wake calls snow dynamics. warmer temperatures during new hampshire's winter mean less snow. less snow exposes more dark ground underneath. the dark ground absorbs more heat. and it warms faster than if it were covered in reflective snow, what scientists would call high albido snow. so the ground then warms the air and on goes the cycle. at plymouth state university, the appalachian mountain club has data that shows temperature increases in pinkham notch in

new hampshire's white mountains. the average increase in temperature has climbed over 75 years, then if you look at the average over 50 years, you see that the line has steepened up and it's accelerating and if you look at the line for the last 25 years, it's steepened up again and the increase is accelerating further. so new hampshire's temperatures rns aren't just rising, they are rising faster. what do these temperatures mean for granite staters? well, big changes to their winter industries like skiing. six years ago, ben wilcox, the general manager of the ski resort north cochranmore in new hampshire was using 40 to 50 ski guns. now he's using 150. in the last five years wilcox reports ski mountains in his region have invested in over 1,700 new top-of-the-line snow guns capable of making three to four times the amount of snow of

previous models. so they can offset the snowpack loss from the shorter winters. that makes them lucky. but when people down the mountain don't see snow, they don't think skiing. so they don't go. stephan housman is ten the owner of zimmerman ski and snowboard shop in nashua, new hampshire. his business sees fewer new skiers and snowboarders buying equipment at his store. he's selling skis but less equipment for beginners. those lower end customers aren't coming in the door, says housman. of course, new hampshire's winter tourism industry goes far beyond skiing. the new hampshire department of travel and economic development says 34 million visitors travel to the granite state and spend roughly $4.6 billion. this makes tourism is state's second largest industry and climate change hits a lot of it.

for instance snowmobilers come to the back country for more than 7,000 miles of trails. if you're at ski mountain you can crank snow out onto your busy ski slopes. not so easy when you're talking about snowmobile trails or nordic skiing trails. so the ski business of trail skiing and the snowmobile business are taking a hit. the hubbard-brook research foundation base medicine woodstock, new hampshire has found snow cover has decreased by 22 days since i was born in 1955 and the frozen lakes included in thoatz trail -- those trail systems that nordic skiers and trail skiers use are covered in ice less, 33 fewer days on mirror lake since 1967, for example. as one granite stater told me, this hits not just the trails but the hotels, restaurants,

snowmobile shops and outfitters who depend on that market. it's not just sports. jamie french of portsmouth, the c.e.o. of northland forest products told me how climate change is affecting new hampshire eye two of their most valuable hard woods, the sugar maip. le and the yellow birch. sugar maples support the maple sugar industry but also drew leaf peepers in the autumn. as new hampshire as and neighboring states get warmer, the trees' geographic range moves north. future warning will mean more production of maple syrup in canadian canada and less in the united states. bad news for the sugar houses. and mr. french points out in the 1940's and 1950's most of the

furniture in new england was made out of yellow birch and it remains a valuable hard wood drawing good prices for the timber business. french fears the consequences for his industry if yellow birch and sugar maples are urnd pushed out by warmer weather trees. will there be a wood product industry, he asks, will there be a maple sugar industry in a climate changed new england? there's going to be a lot less of one, he concludes. new hampshire biologist eric orff is witnessing one of the most drament ig changes. he studies the moose, an animal bred to survive harsh winters. but what he says is a catastrophic decline in population mostly due to the success of moose ticks. this is a little bit gross so forgive me. they breed more easily and they survive longer in milder winters.

orff explains -- these are his his words -- what happens when we have an early spring, when winter ticks fall off on bare ground is they thrive. they lay their eggs. they're successful at reproducing. then in the fall, in november when the baby moose ticks are hanging together, if there is no snow, then by the thousands, tens of thousands, they get on the calves. now for these calves, they literally have to resupply their blood supply two times over to survive the winter. they suck them dry. now, i think one tick is pretty revolting. the idea of tens of thousands of ticks on a moose calf sucking the blood out so fast it can't keep up is a truly grisly

thought. they literally -- quote -- "suck them dry" according to brian orff. jim o'brien of the audubon society tells me how they affect birds. the state bird is the purple finch. it's a range up to canada. he said this -- the purple finch is at the southern end of its range and in likelihood our state bird isn't going to be found in the state of new hampshire anymore. so while we dawdle and delay in congress thanks to the influence of big polluters, there's work to be done out there. and thankfully, states across the country knowing the risks of doing nothing, the costs of doing nothing, are starting to act. i've been to the southeast coast, to the midwest, i've seen wind parts in iowa generating more than a quarter of the state's electricity. i went south and i saw republican mayors and county

officials in the southeast putting climate and energy policy at the center of their government's plans. i saw again in new hampshire granite staters who understand the risks all too well. the university of new hampshire recently released two, not one but two comprehensive reports about climate change. one for northern new hampshire, one for southern new hampshire. i have them with me. new hampshire governor maggie hassen has played a pivotal role making sure this work gets done and developing and operating the regional greenhouse gas initiative, which we call rggi which is already at work reducing carbon pollution and providing a model for how other states can succeed under the power plant regulations. mr. president, we are already seeing our states, our laboratories of democracy, taking sensible steps down the path to reducing carbon emissions. the e.p.a. rule which encourage that state role. and just this morning "the wall street journal" and nbc news

released polling saying two-thirds of americans support president obama's new climate rule and more than half say the u.s. should go for it and deal with global warming even if it means higher electricity bills for them. people in america get it. it's only this building that is isolated by polluter influence. it's time for congress to wake up and we will if the american people will give us a good shake. it's time to wake up. i yield the floor. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

a senator: mr. president? mr. manchin: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from west virginia is recognized. mr. manchin: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. manchin: mr. president, thank you so much. and i rise today to recognize a

remarkably brave, very young west virginian, a 10-year-old brianna vance, who helped save her father's life just last week. truly amazing. it was on twitter, all over the pages. but here, on june 10, as a severe storm -- all the severe storms we've been having all over the country -- tore through her neighborhood in hence lawson, west virginia, brianna's father, greg, and two of his friends were sitting on the porch when lightning struck a nearby very large tree that crashed down on top of them and their home. brianna tried to use her phone to call for help but the storm had knocked out all the cell services. she had nothing. she couldn't do a thing. remarkably, she was still able to access the internet and quickly logged on to facebook. just by miracle. and in an extraordinary demonstration of courage and resourcefulness, brianna posted a video -- and i've seen this video. if you haven't, please go to brianna's facebook page, brianna

vance, and look at it. she asked if anyone had cell phone service or access to please call 911 and an ambulance to her yellow house to save her daddy. now, she thought, had enough presence about her during this very trying, emotional time. when you see the video, i think it will plainly speak for itself. thankfully someone saw her post and a rescue team was able to save the three victims, including her father. because of that facebook. when all other options failed, brianna didn't give up. she still had presence of thought and her desire to help her father and his friends. because of her sharp witt and resourcefulness, her father is alive and recovering today. just in time, as we just finished up father's day, together with his daughter this past weekend. mr. president, i'm so proud of brianna and i know her family and community are as well as can be expected. and if you have situations not just in west virginia but in your own state of ohio and all

over this great country, we have family -- family bond such as this and we have family stories that have good outcomes that you don't hear enough of. so i want to thank brianna for her heroism that helped save the lives of her father and her friends. she should be recognized for her bravery, so i say, brianna, on behalf of a grateful state of west virginia, thank you for what you've done for your father and his friends in showing the courage you have as a young west virginian. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor and notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call: