centrifuges and the united states is supposedly open to allowing iran to retain thousands of them. the smear supreme leader said they need a largeer enrichment capability than they currently have. another thing is that they and the p-5 plus one countries are going to allow iran to get $2.8 billion in sanctions relief. they've forced the hand of the extension and get more relief as a result of it. i'm worried the administration seems willing to allow iran to have even more than four months to provide simple answers about its past work on nuclear weapons. if they're not willing to come clean on what they've done in the past how can we possibly treat them as a reliable and responsible actor? beyond that, there seems to be no need to address iran's ballistic missile program, its icbm's. these are long-range rockets capable of one day reaching the united states as they continue

to develop it. the only reason you would even have one of those is to put a nuclear warhead on it. and just imagine a world where iran has nuclear weapons capable of reaching this very city or new york or any part of the continental united states. it would be all-out chaos. they would now have to be treated very differently and they would basically be able to act with impunity anywhere in the world. and that reaches my last point. absent in this whole conversation and in all these negotiations is any discussion about iran's ongoing sponsorship of terrorism and their ongoing human rights violations, including a pastor, an american, being held with strong links to this country being held unjustly in that country. all this to say to this is the reason why this bill is so important. any final agreement of a matter of this consequence should be reviewed by this body, should come before congress, and should have the ability of congress to provide oversight over it. in the absence of that i believe unfortunately leaves us vulnerable not just to a terrible deal but to a dangerous

one that could potentially endanger the future of our allies and even of our own country. so i'm grateful in joining with these senators, and i don't know who would want to speak on this next. i know all of my colleagues. i know the senator from arizona has spent a tremendous amount of time sounding the alarm on the danger not just of this deal but that iran poses in the region. and i would be interested in hearing from the senator from arizona on his views about this extension. the presiding officer: the senator from arizona. mr. mccain: i thank the senator from florida and i thank him for his advocacy for democracy and freedom throughout the world. and, frankly, i am -- hav have n very -- incredibly impressed with his knowledge and depth, including in our own hemisphere, which i think he and i would agree has been very much ignored and there's enormous challenges ahead there as well. i'd just ask a couple of questions of my friend from tennessee and my friend from south carolina. isn't it true that in order to have a true nuclear capability, you have to have a warhead and

you have to have a delivery system? and the iranians are proceeding a pace forward in acquiring those capabilities? and would anybody believe that if they were truly interested in not going to nuclear weapons, they would not be spending time and effort on that capability? doesn't that makes a credible -- destroy any credibility they might have about a commitment to not continue the development of nuclear weapons? mr. graham: well, i would say that if there was a group of people in the world to be suspicious of, i would put iran pretty close to the top of that list. the international intelligence community believes that they have tried to militarize their program, nuclear program, in the past and senator rubio made a good point. they deny this. but before you go forward, you'd want to answer that question,

were they engaged in militarization of what was claimed to be a peaceful nuclear power program? secondly, why would you go through all of this upheaval, build a nuclear power plant secretly at the bottom of a mountain if all you wanted to do was have peaceful nuclear power? none of this really adds up. and why do you need an icbm if all you want to do is produce peaceful nuclear power? having said that, suspicion is warranted here, but more than anything else, the final deal that may be reached should come to this body because i would suggest of all the problems in the world today, this is the top of the list for me. if they did break out like north korea, if a bad deal turned into a dangerous deal just like north korea, sunni arabs would respond in kind and you're on the road to armageddon. i can't think of a worst

scenario for our national security than the ayatollahs with nukes. i can't think of a more direct threat to the survival of the state of israel than ayatollahs in iran with nukes. i can't believe the sunni arabs would alike the shia persians to have a nuclear capability unanswered. mr. mccain: i would ask my friend from tennessee, was he surprised and shocked that there would be an extension of these negotiations? was he shocked and surprised that the end date is now after the midterm elections that we have here in the united states of america? was he shocked that the -- even though there has not been -- quote -- "sufficient progress," there was still more relaxation of the sanctions which gives the iranians a billion-dollar boost to their economy. waeconomy? was he surprised and shocked that this took place?

mr. corker: obviously just the way you asked the question -- and there's nobody in this senate body that's spent more time on this issue than you and i thank you so much for your leadership on both the armed services committee but also on the foreign relations committee on all of these issues -- but absolutely not. you know, when you have a deal that's inked, that says there's a built-in extension, you know that people aren't going to focus until the very end. and so we expected there to be an extension. i was very disappointed, though, to know that we were giving additional sanctions relief. and i'm very concerned that because of the way this has happened, and as you know, in march, the administration agreed to allowing them to enrich you'ruranium, which was a big setback. i mean, we don't allow our best friends. we approve approved 1-2-3 agree. you and i did one just the other day in the committee with senator rubio. by the way, senator risch is also a part of this bill. but with our closest friends and allies, we do not approve

enrichment. and so here we are doing something that's going to really undo many of the agreements that we have and certainly have, as senator graham mentioned from south carolina, a tremendous impact on the region. i mean, there's no question people on the arabian peninsula, right across the strait, are looking at a country that has been their foe and looking at potentially them having the capability to enrich uranium. and, yes, this is -- this agreement started in a very bad place, but i think all of us, we want to see a diplomatic solution. we want this to be successful. i would add, bruhani has a supreme leader that he has to go back and talk to. he can always use that. the supreme leader, as senator graham mentioned, wants a hundred thousand centrifuges, not the 19,000 centrifuges they have. i would just say to our administration, to have us as a backstop where congress has to

approve this, would actually be an aid to them as they move down this negotiating path. and so i look at this as an asset to them and i look at us fulfilling our responsibilities if this bill becomes law. but thank you for asking. mr. mccain: finally, could i ask the senator from florida, we judge nations by their behavior, i believe. in fact, we don't view them in a vacuum. for example, the president of the united states said that if syria crossed the red line, the use of chemical weapons, we would have to respond. and obviously we didn't. meanwhile, 170,000 people have been slaughtered, huge percentage of those men, women and children. so isn't it appropriate for us to not look at the iranians in a very narrow spectrum but overall behavior going all the way back to the beirut -- bombing of the barracks in beirut, the u.s.s.

cole, the attempt to plot to kill the saudi ambassador here? maybe worst of all the revolutionary guard that's gone in to syria and the incredible flow of weapons and training on the part of the iranians which has turned the tide in favor of bashar assad? what about the iranian missiles that are now -- some of which are threatening and raining down on israel? shouldn't we -- shouldn't we understand better, shouldn't shouldn'theamerican people and d understand better what we're dealing with here, a country with leaders who are dedicated to the extinction of everything we stand for and believe in so, therefore, wouldn't that impact our calculations as to their sincerity about a nuclear weapons program? mr. rubio: i think the senator from arizona touches on the exact point. first of all, we have to

understand that iran is the world's leading state on the support of terrorism. they use terrorism the way we use, you know, our military forces when necessary. they view it as a very active part of their agenda. and so you're right, virtually every major terrorist organization in the middle east, absent a couple, they've provided extraordinary assistance to. and i think you touched on another point. what is their goal here? that's important to understand. what is the iranian goal in these negotiations? and in my mind, those goals are quite clear. and, in fact, it's shocking to me because i know the administration knows this as well. the goal of iran -- and this is pretty simple -- they want relief from as many sanctions as possible without agreeing to any irreversible concessions on their nuclear program. and let's go through what they've been able to achieve. they want to be able to retai retain -- or achieve an internationally recognized right to enrich. check. they want the capability to enrich and reprocess in the future and keep as much of that in place as possible. they've already gotten that.

check. they want to continue to develop their long-range rockets and missile capabilities so that one day they can be in that position where when we negotiate with them in future on anything else, they're untouchable because they can launch a nuclear attack against the united states and certainly against our allies? they continue to do that. check. so the iranians in this whole negotiation view themselves as income a position of strength. to be quite frank, they believe that our president wants this deal more than they do. they believe he wants this deal more than they do. and -- and that's what puts them in this tremendous position of strength. and the result is that these negotiations are not going to, in my view -- i hope that i'm wrong, i hope that tomorrow we open up and read, you know what? they've changed their mind. they don't want to do any more terrorism, no rockets and no nuclear weapon program and they've become just a normal government and a normal country. don't hold your hopes out for that because that is not what they've shown in the past, that is not what they're doing now and they are negotiating from a position of strength because they believe that the president

wants a deal much more than they want or need a deal. mr. mccain: so i would ask again, going full circle to the senator from south carolina, wouldn't we actually be helping the administration at the negotiating table to say, wait a minute, we've got a congress full of people who have spent a lot of time on this issue and are very skeptical and are going to have to be convinced this deal? wouldn't we actually be strengthening the united states hand at the bargaining table in your view if something of this magnitude that congress would have to be involved in? as we have other major treaties that have been made, and spf them much less -- and some of them much less significant than this agreement. mr. graham: the answer unequivocally to me would be yes, assuming one thing, that those of us in this body would handle this in a mature fashion. assuming that republicans would not vote "no" because it's the

obama deal and democrats would not be tempted to vote "yes" because their president did this, a democratic president. i have confidence in the body that we would not do that. let me tell you why. there are a lot of treaties out there, senator mccain, that affect our national security. i can't think of an event in my lifetime that's going to affect our national security one way or the other greater than the iranian nuclear deal that i think is coming. if a republican scuttled the deal that was good, you would have a very unique place in history because you would have done a disservice to our country and the world at large. is it possible to know that it's a good deal? yes, because the israelis would comment on it. the sunni arab world would comment on it. and if it's truly a deal unlike

north korea that led to a bad outcome, i think you would have a chorus of people, including me, that would acknowledge that the president did the world a great service. if it is a bad deal, if senator rubio is right, that they want to check a box and get a deal for the sake of getting a deal, i hope my democratic colleagues would stand up and say, this will come back to bite us as a nation. i have confidence the body can do this, senator mccain, because i can't think of anything more serious we will vote on other than going to war. mr. mccain: i'd like to thank the senator from tennessee and as the senator from south carolina noted, the relationship that exists between the senator from tennessee and the senator from new jersey i believe has reinvigorated the foreign relations committee in a very incredible way. and what has taken place, thanks

to that bipartisanship and the hard work, has really been some remarkable results. and, frankly, we've been able, thanks to your leadership and that of the chairman, to have a significant impact on the conduct of national security in what i would argue is probably the greatest turmoil in my lifetime. so i want to thank the senator from tennessee for his great work. mr. corker: and if i could, senator, since you and i have worked on the committee, the administration came to us, when they didn't have to. they came to us on the authorization for the use of force in syria. we came together over a very short amount of time, democrats and republicans, and crafted something that i'm very proud of. it didn't end up coming to the floor because a different course of action was taken, but the fact is the administration sought our input on something that, as the senator from south carolina just mentioned, may

pale compared to the impact of this iranian negotiation relative to nuclear arms. so this is something that's, i think, very, very important. i agree with the senator from south carolina. i agree that if something is presented, we would act very much in the same manner. it would be a sober discussion. people would understand the importance of it, and i think from the administration's starntioadministration'sstandpog grace over it and approving it, says the american people are behind him. if they don't, we should have the right to weigh in and keep the sanctions that have been put in place by us. ive say, well, the administration still has to come back and talk with y'all about sanctions. that's not true. there's a waiver provision in there that can't be undone permanently, but i think it gives us the appropriate say-so.

i thank you so much for your leadership and for everybody's time on the floor and in work on this. thand hopefully, as you mention, this will become something that's very bipartisan. i yield the floor. mrs. shaheen: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from new hampshire. mrs. shaheen: thank you, mr. president. i come to the floor today with a number of my colleagues to ask unanimous consent that at a time to be determined by the majority leader, after consultation with the republican leader, the senate resume consideration of s. 2262, which is the shaheen-portman energy efficiency bill, that the motion to commit be withdrawn, that amendment numbers 3023 and 3025 be withdrawn, that the pending substitute amendment be agreed to, that there be no other amendments, points of order, or motions in order to the bill other than budget points of order, and that the applicable

motions to waive, that there be up to four hours of debate on the bill equally divided between the two leaders or their designees and that upon the use or yielding back of time, the senate proceed to vote on passage of the bill, as amended; that the bill be subject to a 60-affirmative vote threshold, understand that if the bill is pass -- understand that if the bill is passed, the senate then proceed to the consideration of calendar number 371, senate bill 2282, which is the passage of the keystone pipeline, at a time to be determined by the majority leader after consultation with the republican leader but no later than thursday, july 31, 2014; that there be no amendments, points of order, or motions in order to the bill other than budget points of order, and the applicable motions to waifnlt that there be up to four hours of debate on the bill equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, that upon the use or yielding back of time, the senate proceed to vote on passage of the bill, finally,

that the bill be subject to a 60-affirmative vote threshold. so, mr. president, what i'm basically asking is that we get a vote on shaheen-portman and if that moves, that we then get a vote on the keystone pipeline, something that our colleagues on both sides of the aisle have been talking about for months. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. cornyn: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: mr. president, i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. cornyn: mr. president, i would propose to the senator from new hampshire an alternative and just before i do that i would just say that the biggest problem we have is the inability for the senate to process amendments in the normal order. and i believe the senator from new hampshire is sympathetic to that. if we would just have an opportunity to offer and vote on amendments, i have every confidence that this piece of legislation would have been long passed.

but somehow we're stuck and i.t. no-- and it's not just the minority party that's limited to offer ideas. it's even our friends who are in the majority. i can only imagine what it is like to feel like i'm in the majority and i can't even get votes on my amendments or my legislation passed. so i would ask unanimou i ask us consent that the only amendments the senate will come to order in order to s. 2262 be five amendments, five amendments, from the republican side related to the energy policy, each with a 60-vote threshold on the adoption of each amendment. i further ask that following the disposition of these five amendments, the bill be read a third time and the senate proceed to a vote on passage of the bill, as amended, if amended. the presiding officer: is there objection? a senator: i object. the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. the objection is heard.

man comainl to thman comainl toe floor to speak on these two pieces of legislation. they have worked so hard in a bipartisan way, which you don't always see anymore on the floor here or over in our -- on the other house side. and it is a shame. people tell me about how things used to be. and i have been here not quite four years, and i haven't seen it yet. i'm still waiting for it to happen. but we have before us a bill, the shaheen-portman bill. it is bisquely a bill that create -- it is basically a bill that creates jobs. it savings money. makes significant strides towards a more energy-efficient nation, which we should about h. be. i am from an energy-producing state. my friend senator heitkamp from the state of north dakota, a tremendous energy-producing

staivment we believe in all energy policies. we believe we should be using everything that we have to make sure that we have the economic engine we can to compete globally and in a very competitive way. with that being said, this is the low-hanging fruit. this is truly low-hanging fruit. we all agree, why shouldn't we pass a piece of legislation that basically we all benefit, all 50 states will benefit by? the bill will put us on a path towards a more sustainable future. it has broad support, as you can seevment ousee. our colleague, senator corker, would tell us that if got voted -- senator cornyn, sphaid it passed, it would get broad support. it is a shame that politics have trumped policy, good policy in this body in this city. and we've got to get back to

some order of common sense. and so i am a tremendous supporter of this piece of legislation. i want to thank senator shaheen for all the work she is done. she has not given up. she will not give up. that's what it takes heerk the tenacity thaten -- that's what s here, the ten n.a.s. that i she has -- the ten n.a.s. that i she has. then you look at the keystone pipeline. i've never seen a piece of legislation that made more sense than this piece of legislation, the keystone pipeline. when i first heard about it, they said, senator manchin, what do you think about it? what i can tell you in west virginia, we'd rather buy from our friends thank enemies. so the oil is going to be sold somewhere in the world. why shouldn't we have access to that? why shouldn't we have control of that? why shouldn't we benefit from the jobs? i mean, we're talking 20,000 direct jobs doing construction, we'ring to 118,000 indirect and spinoff jobs, after

construction. contributes $20 billion of economic stimulus to the united states. every state, including my state of west virginia, new hampshire, north dakota, rhode island -- we're all going to tbrift this. and it is just something that we find almost -- for us not to be able to vote on legislation. i understand all of that. when you have such clearly defined pieces of legislation, it creates good policy for all of america. that's something that sometimes maybe we push the politics aside, we vote on the policies, and the contents of these pieces of legislation, which i know west virginia would be happy for me to vote on. and i would be in very much in support of these two pieces. so with that, i i want to thank senator shaheen for her hard work, for her not-give-up attitude, she is going to work an fight and we're going to be right behind here working with our bipartisan friends on the

other side, and senator portman is committed the same way. so we hope we can get something reasonably done. with that. i would yield the floor. ms. heitcamp: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from north dakota. ms. heitcamp: i am standing with my good friend from the great state of west virginia and certainly a tremendous legislator and former governor, someone who knows thousand get things done, senator sha shahee. i know what is happening. i think i've learned at least that much, since i've been here, about the rules and how things work. but i also see this body through the eyes of an american citizen, and i see two pieces of legislation, one the keystone pipeline, the vast majority of people in this country support moving forward with the keystone pipeline. it is a critical piece of north american infrastructure. it is critical -- in the last discussion we had about the

disruption and about the horrible kngs in the mideast, if we haven't learned the lessons that we need to build out our resources right here among our frnd lei lice in the form of -- friendly allies in the form of cacanada and using our own resources here and then have the ability to use that new energy development for soft power, to actually begin to have a meaningful geopolitical discussion that doesn't involve an addiction to foreign oil. so you think about keystone pipeline and you think about the relationship that we have with canada, and you think about the jobs that could be created. but mainly you think about developing the infrastructure that is absolutely essential to the development of our country and the development of our energy resources. because we can talk about fuel sources -- and that's what my great friend from west virginia just talked about, having a policy that truly includes all of the above, all of the above;

not picking and choosing; let the market decide, let's take sure it is diverse, that we have every opportunity to develop everything that we're going to develop. but we've got to move that energy. and the keystone pipeline is example one. a lot of the disagreement about the keystone pipeline has nothing to do with the pipeline itself. it has to do with the oil sand development up in canada. and when we pick and choose winners and decide we're not going to vote on something that the american public just shakes their head and said, this makes so much sense to them, so why isn't the congress voting? and then let's take the second part of a solid energy policy. all of the above but also conservation, also energy efficiency, also making the best use in a great american tradition, a conservative american tradition of making sure that we have the best energy efficiency in the world. and having a piece of legislation that guarantees that

and creates jobs as a result and saves money for schools and saves money for businesses. all of this makes so much sense, and the american public knows that it makes sense. but yet this body cannot find a way forward to taking a vote. how frustrating is that? it's frustrating for us here in this body, but it is more frustrating forbe the american g for the american public that watches this display of inability to move fired on critical pieces of public policy that make a difference for not only our future but the future of the young people here that i see every day, the future of the young people in my state, knowing that we need to absolutely have an energy policy that works for the future, that's diverse, that recognizes the importance of energy efficiency, and that moves energy. we know that we have a huge number of people in this body who support the keystone

pipeline. do we have 60 votes? we'd find out. let's take a vote. we know that there's tremendous bipartisan support, not only for keystone but for energy efficiency for the shaheen-portman bill. let's take a vote. let's actually demonstrate to the american public that we can move forward on things that are literally no-brainers, things that absolutely make sense. and, you know what? those of us who support the keystone pipeline, we'll find out. we'll find out if we can pass it. think about this: we have a bill here that mangeds -- that mandates that we approve that little bit of crossing into the united states of america, which is the only way the federal government really gets involved in it is because it's coming from a foreign country, approves that. maybe we win, maybe we lose. but we know where we're at because the administration has taken six years in a time period

that it took us longer to evaluate the keystone pipeline than it took us to fight world war ii. there is something dramatically wrong with that. and so that frustration builds up. we know we need to move the keystone pipeline. we need to have a strong vote here. let's take that vote. let's take the vote on shaheen-portman. it is a critical piece of legislation, well thought out, comes right out of committee where lots of amendments were offered, where there was the ability to have a dialogue. it comes about the right way with the folks who are the bill's sponsors standing on the floor answering questions, debating what that bill does. but yet, because of this impasse, because of whatever happens behind a closed door that the american public doesn't see, they only look at what they see happening in the debate here and wonder why.

i can only tell you that i support senator shaheen in her efforts to support this bill. this won't be the first time we come to and ask this. we will continue to do everything we can to move a vote forward on shaheen-portman, to move a vote forward on keystone pipeline and start getting the work done for the american people. mr. president, i yield the floor. mrs. shaheen: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from new hampshire. mrs. shaheen: before my colleague from north dakota leaves, i want to thank senator heitkamp not only for shaheen-portman but for a resolution for getting a vote on our energy efficiency legislation that i worked on for years with our colleague senator portman from ohio but also the impasse that would break around a vote for the keystone pipeline as well. i think this is, pairing the two would allow us to see where we stand on both of these issues.

and i appreciate my colleague from west virginia coming down, senator manchin. because he and senator heitkamp have talked about the fact that we've got to look at a variety of areas of energy if we're going to address our future energy needs in this country. and there's new urgency to energy efficiency right now. a recent study just came out that showed the united states ranks 13th out of the world's largest 16 economies in energy efficiency. so that study analyzed the world's largest economies that cover more than 81% of the world's gross domestic product and close to 71% of global electricity and what it found is that we are severely lagging behind other countries in our use of energy efficiency.

so this legislation, the energy efficiency and industrial competitiveness act known as shaheen-portman is a way for us to address that deficit that we currently have in this country. we've heard from the american council for an energy efficient economy that by 2030 this legislation would create 192,000 domestic jobs. that's nothing to sneeze at at a time when our economy is still recovering from the recession. that it would save consumers and businesses $16 billion a year; again, real savings in a way that's important to consumers and businesses, and that it would reduce carbon pollution at a time when we know that pollution is affecting our environment and we're seeing a record number of disasters. it would be the equivalent of taking 22 million cars off the road. and our legislation does this without any mandates, without raising the deficit. in fact, we see a very small

savings of about $12 million in the legislation. it addresses the building sector where we use about 40% of our energy. it addresses the industrial manufacturing sector which consumes more energy than any other sector of our domestic economy. and it addresses the federal government where we use more energy than any other, any other entity in our economy in the federal government. 93% of that energy is used by our military. so clearly, energy efficiency is something that would benefit all of us. there are ten bipartisan amendments that have been incorporated into this legislation. it's the product of three and a half years of work. it's been endorsed by hundreds, literally hundreds and hundreds of business groups, of businesses, of organizations, everything from the natural resources defense council to the u.s. chamber of commerce and

national association of manufacturers, the international union of painters. so this is legislation that makes sense. we just heard senator cornyn on the floor say that he thought there was support to get this legislation done. so i think we need to figure out how we can come together. we don't have much time left before we go out on, in august to go back to our home states. this would be a great bipartisan effort to go out on at the end of july, to be able to go home and say to people across this country that we worked out a deal that passed this energy efficiency legislation, that we got a vote on the keystone pipeline, and let the chips fall where they may. that we addressed one of the biggest challenges facing this country, which is energy and what we're going to do about our energy future. so, i certainly hope that in the

remaining time between now and the beginning of august that we can come together, find some sort of resolution to address this issue and get this legislation done. we know that the house has said they're willing to take it up. they're interested in seeing some action on energy efficiency. and now is an opportune time to do that. so, i'm disappointed by today's objections, but as senator heitkamp said so well, we're not going to give up. we're going to continue to try and move this issue and do what's in the best interest of the people of this country. so thank you very much, mr. president. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania. mr. casey: mr. president, i rise -- i ask consent, first of all, to speak in morning

business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: thank you, mr. president. i rise tonight to highlight an important piece of legislation that was just voted out of the committee on health, education, labor and pensions, around here known by the acronym h-e-l-p or help. we voted out senate 2539, the traumatic reauthorization act of 2014. senator hatch and i introduced senate bill 2539 to reauthorize existing programs to support states' efforts to help individuals live with traumatic brain injury, and of course to help their families. t.b.i.'s range from mild concussions to devastating life-altering injuries that collectively represent a significant public health challenge. it's the signature injury, unfortunately, of the conflicts of the last decade, whether it's

iraq or afghanistan. it's also an injury that occurs approximately 2.5 million times in the united states each year. over 50,000 people die of traumatic brain injuries every year and traumatic brain injury is complicated in nearly -- is implicated in nearly one-third, one-third of all injury-related deaths. children -- just imagine this number. children ages zero to four and teens ages 15 to 19 are at the greatest risk for traumatic brain injury. among all children, in an average year 62,000 will sustain brain injuries that require hospitalization, and 564,000 will be seen in hospital emergency rooms.

clearly we must continue to improve our response to traumatic brain injury, which includes prevention, timely and accurate diagnosis, and of course treatment. the bill that we passed today out of the help committee would make modest but important improvements to the t.b.i. act that was in place already. we asked that the department of health and human services develop a traumatic brain injury coordination plan to ensure that federal activities at h.h.s. and other federal agencies are being coordinated for maximum efficiency and effectiveness. we also asked for review of the scientific evidence on brain injury, in particular, brain injury management in children, with a special emphasis on evaluating the scientific evidence behind the -- quote --

"return to school" and -- quote -- "return to play" policies. this, of course, is very, very important. as public awareness grows as to the seriousness of traumatic brain injury, parents, schools, and coaches are struggling to develop appropriate responses. a lot of attention thus far has been placed on the -- quote -- "return to play" policies trying to ensure that children don't return to sports until they've healed from a previous concussion. but there is much less attention on the so-called return to school policies and how we can take steps to ensure that children with a concussion or a more serious brain injury can return to the classroom and continue learning safely and effectively. so it's my hope that this bill,

senate bill 2539, will help focus future research efforts and guide federal and state agencies looking to develop policies in this area. so like a lot of members of the help committee, i am pleased that the committee voted today to move forward senate bill 2539, and i hope that the rest of the senate will join senator hatch and me in passing this legislation as quickly as possible. i say in conclusion to this part of my remarks that it's been a great honor to work with senator hatch on this legislation, as it is when we worked together on a whole series of important matters here in the senate. mr. president, i'd ask that the balance of my remarks be set forth in a separate place in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: mr. president, i just have brief comments on a, an important set of data that has just been released, and i'll

highlight very briefly the 2014 kids count data book, something a lot of child advocates and families are aware of. this is an annual report and i wanted to highlight the fact that the 2014 report is now on the record. this kids count data book was just published by the annie e. casey foundation for this year. the kids count data book looks at every state to measure child well-being in states and across the country, considering factors such as economic well-being, health, education, family, and community. within each of these categories, the report highlights four important metrics and notes whether or not we have improved from the year 2008 to 2012. nationally 10 of the 16 metrics showed improvement.

that's good news. five metrics worsened. of course we don't like hearing that, but it's important to measure when things are going in the wrong direction. and one of the metrics remained unchanged. so we're happy that the improvement number is 16 metrics and the worsening number, the worsening metric number is 5. but we still have a long way to go to improve each of these areas. the report also ranks states based upon their overall results. pennsylvania is ranked 16th in the nation. i wish it were in the top ten. i wish twarp in the top five and -- it were in the top five and even number one. so we have some work to do in pennsylvania, of course. in some areas pennsylvania is doing well compared to the national average. for example, we have a lower rate of children without health insurance. that's certainly good news, but still more to do on that. teen berth rates in pennsylvania continue to be below the national average. pennsylvania has a slightly

higher percentage of children attending preschool. that's good news. we have a lot more to do on that both in pennsylvania and across the nation. finally, pennsylvania's students continue to have higher proficiency rates in reading and math skills when compared to the national rate, but still more work to do there as well. the report also hiements areas where -- highlights areas where we need to improve in pennsylvania and nationally. far too many children in the united states of america are living in poverty, with parents who often lack secure employment. too many teens are not in school and also not working, which dramatically worsens their ability to grow into economically self-sufficient adults. so i'd encourage my colleagues to review the 2014 kids count data book which is available on the web site of the annie e. casey foundation web site.

and while doing that, we should all consider what we can do here in the senate and in the other body, consider what we can do together to improve our children's lives and of course their future. with that, mr. president, i would conclude and also note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: quorum call:

mr. casey: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania. mr. casey: mr. president, i'd ask that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: thank you, mr. president. first, i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: i ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule 22, following the vote on the motion to invoke cloture on executive calendar number 929, harris, on thursday, july 24, 2014, the senate remain in executive session and consider

calendar number 777, disbrow, that there be two minutes for debate equally divide between the two leaders or their designees prior to the vote, that upon the use or yielding back of time, the senate proceed to vote without intervening action or debate on the nomination; that if the nomination is confirmed, the notion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate, that no further motions be in order to the nomination, that any statements related to the nomination be printed in the record, that the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: for the information of all senators, we expect this nomination to be confirmed by voice vote. i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to executive session to consider the

following nominations: calendar number 934-8- 951 and all nominations placed on the secretary's desk in the air force, army and navy, that the nominations be confirmed en bl bloc, that the motions to reconsider be -- the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate, that no further motions be in order to any of the nominations, that the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, and the senate then resume legislative session. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: i ask unanimous consent that the rules committee be discharged from further consideration of s.j. res. 40 and the senate proceed to its consideration. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. j. res. 40,

providing for the appointment of michael lynnton as a citizen regent of the board of regents of the smithsonian institution. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding? without objection. the committee is discharged and the senate will proceed to the motion. mr. casey: i ask unanimous consent the joint resolution be read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 470, s. res. 500. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 470, s. res. 500, expressing the sense of the senate with respect to enhanced relations with the republic of mal moldova and supt

for the republic of moldova's territorial integrity. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, so ordered. mr. casey: i know of no further debate on the resolution. the presiding officer: if there is no further debate, all in favor please say aye. all those against please say nay. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the resolution is agreed to. mr. casey: i further ask that the preamble be agreed to and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: i ask unanimous consent that the judiciary committee be discharged from further consideration and the senate now proceed to s. res.

489. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 489, supporting the goals and ideals of growth awareness week. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, so ordered. mr. casey: i ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the kirk amendment to the preamble be agreed, the preamble as amended be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: i ask unanimous consent that the judiciary committee be discharged from further consideration and the senate now proceed to s. res. 501. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 501, commemorating the 20th anniversary of the wright museum of world war ii history in wolfboro, new hampshire. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, so ordered. the committee is discharged.

and the senate will proceed. mr. casey: i ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration en bloc of the following resolutions which were submitted earlier today: s. res. 514, s. res. 515, and s. res. 516. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed en bloc to the measure. mr. casey: i ask unanimous consent the resolutions be agreed to, the preambles be agreed to and the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table en bloc with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: i understand that s.

2648, introduced earlier today by senator mikulski, is at the desk and i ask for its first reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the title for the first time. the clerk: s. 2648, a bill making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2014, and for other purposes. mr. casey: i now ask for its second reading and object to my own request. the presiding officer: the objection having been heard, the senate will proceed on the next -- the bill will receive a second reading on the next legislative day. mr. casey: i yield the floor and 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 connecticut. mr. blumenthal: thank you, mr. president. i ask that the quorum call be lifted. officer sphe without objection. mr. blumenthal: thank you, mr. president. while presiding for a couple of hours just now, i listened to some really very powerful and eloquent debate organized by the presiding officer, and i thaipg him for doing so, regarding the migrant unaccompanied children who are coming across our bord border. those remarks moved and inspired me, and they were followed afterward by an effort by senators shaheen and others to bring to the floor a measure on energy efficiency. the connection between the two may not seem immediately apparent, but in fact i was struck by the irony of an effort by some of our colleagues to

eliminate and repeal, in effect, a measure called the trafficking victims protection reauthorization act of 2008. it is actually named the wilberforce trafficking victims protection reauthorization act of 2008, very symbolically and significantly after a leader who sought to abolish the slave trade. and our colleagues who seek to repeal, in effect, that measure are calling its provisions a loophole because it provides for screening of migrant children such as those reaching our border who are not from the immediate bordering countries; they are from other central american countries. and they are seeking to apla alo

them the same -- apply to them, the same procedures, lack of procedures, lack of individual consideration that apply to migrant children from canada and mexico on the theory that those provisions are a -- quote, unquote -- loophole in our law. in fact, those screening procedures are the very intended substance of our law. they are meant to provide individual careful, fair consideration of each child. and on a day when consideration of the energy efficiency bill named for senator shaheen and portman was blocked from consideration, colleagues are considering a measure and advocating a measure that is completely unnecessary. the shaheen-portman energy efficiency bill is vitally necessary.

the repeal of the traffic victims protection reauthorization act of 2008 is entirely unnecessary. in fact, unhelpful and downright harmful. the question of what to do about the flow of migrant children to our border is one of the most profoundly important for our chamber and our country to face in coming days and weeks. and i recently visited the border in a trip organized thankfully by senator hirono and joined by senator murkowski. we met senator cornyn while we were there, and we went to various of the facilities to see for ourselves and speak with the

children who are coming to our borders, the professionals who are seeking to care for them, the border patrol agentsen deavoring to enforce the law -- endeavoring to enforce the law, all who are in this situation on the ground. and that experience has formed -- i hesitate to say "transformed" -- but it has certainly changed my view of this problem. because we speak in this body about these unaccompanied minors, as they are called, as though they are an interchangeable mass. they are a massive number. but each is an individual. each has a story to tell. each is different. they have in common, most of them, stories of horror and

terror, vicious persecution, cruelty and brutality, rape and murder, and forced prostitution in the countries they are seeking to escape. this brutality is spawned by gang warfare, the result of conflict among gangs trading in drugs, cartels and organized crime who have put children in the middle of their murderous activity. as others during that eloquent colloquy organized by the presiding officer observed, much of that drug trade has moved from colombia to central america. it is fueled by demand, the same demand that fuel the colombian gang warfare, from the united states. the demand comes from this

country, the demand for those illicit drugs. and those children, caught in the horrific violence plaguing their home, have fled to this country seeking safety and security. many of them also are seekin seg their parents because the majority have one or more parents in this country already. and the vast majority have a close relative, if not a parent, an aunt or uncle. so their journeys seek to reunify with their families as well as to escape the grizzly grinding horror of their existences in those homelands that they have left. and those journeys are plagued by the harshest, most inhumane

of conditions: deserts, swamps, and, most dangerously, the traffickers, the smugglers who exploit them, put them in stash houses, take them hostage, hold them for ransom, threaten their lives and often rape and murder them, preventing them from reaching this country. they arrive here -- and these faces are the children i saw -- with fear in their eyes, fear of all adults, because most of the adults in their lives have been a threat, not a protector. fear in their eyes about the border patrol agents, who are there when they arrive at the loading dock at mcallen border

facility. it is a loading dock where produce or goods might be dumped or left to be shipped elsewhere. they arrive at the loading dock and sit on a befnlg bench, firen their eyes, apprehension in their voices, and they are then interviewed by the border patrol agents wearing green uniforms, looking like the authoritarian figures that they are. in the lives of these children, the police are not a source of comfort. they are a source of danger, because in their country, the police are corrupt and a threat, not a protector. they are not apprehended by the border patrol agents. they surrender to them. border security is not the issue, as again some of my colleagues remarked earlier.

these children are coming here to give themselves in and give themselves up in the hope of being taken into custody, being fed, housed, and given some basic security and safety. their numbers are down, anywhere from 30% to 50% down in july as compared to june, so we were told by the border patrol agents. whether that is a temporary phenomenon or a trend remains to be seen. but the numbers are down. and after this holding detention center where they are kept in cement-floored cell blocks, segregated by age and gender, so densely packed that they can barely sit, let alone lie down, and provided with tin-foil

blankets, they are sent to more permanent facilities like the lackland air base in san antonio where we also visited. that facility has a dormitory, a health clinic, a school. classes are conducted in tents. and the treatment is far more humane. they are given classes in english. they are eager, intensely eager to learn english, and they are taught in classrooms in these tents where there's a blackboard and an american flag outside an artificial turf soccer field where they are intensely eager to play soccer. and they stay there about seven days to three weeks until they are moved to a home, because

many of them have relatives. most of them have some family members in this country. or another facility. from one temporary facility to a better one, and then to a home. in the second facility, they're in the custody of the h.h.s. or the office of refugees resettlement. not the border patrol. and it is a better facility; no question. but still rudimentary. one of the most powerful moments of this trip was to watch these students, i would say about 20 of them in a class, show how they were learning english, show the words they learned. and to tell us where they were from. guatamala, honduras, he will --

el salvador. and then to show us united states senators how they could recite the pledge of allegiance. we joined with them in reciting that pledge. i wish my colleagues, i wish every american could have been there at that moment. there was something basic, fundamental about us as americans in that moment, about what we offer in hope and opportunity, in freedom and protection, to people who come here with that aspiration that those children epitomized at that moment.

whether you agree or disagree on what should be done with the law, whether you feel that we ought to do something differently with these children, that moment evoked a fundamental value in our society. and another did as well, when a bus load arrived after we were about to leave, and the staff of that facility lined up on both sides of the children coming off the bus into the facility clapping for them. the staff clapping and cheering for these children arriving at the facility after leaving the border crossing where they were under the custody of the border patrol agents. clapping and cheering for children recently arrived in this country, and the children

beaming. the staff and the professionals who care for these children are truly to be thanked. they are dedicated and professionals. the border patrol agents who do their very best to make these kids feel at home under the most adverse conditions, the h.h.s. counselors and teachers who seek to interview them, give them some basic hope and comfort, all of the professionals in the office of refugee and resettlement who seek against the odds to provide them with a future. and mayor of mcallen, who runs a town, small town on the

border, which is where that border crossing is, where the mcallen facility is housed. i think many of us expected him to complain to us about the burden of this flood of children coming into his town, the expenditure of resources necessary to support the infrastructure, the burden on him and his fellow townspeople and to the contrary. the mayor of mcallen, jim darling, said to us they welcome these children. they regard the border as part of their home. they have an interchange in culture and families. and he said to us, i don't remember whether they were his exact words, but in effect he said to us about welcoming these children, this is what we do. we're americans.

this is what we do. we're americans. not asking for reimbursement for the expenses for his town, although it is a significant part of his budget. comparable to the federal government, it would be in the billions. his government is much smaller, so the proportion obviously is much less. but it is a major fiscal burden on mcallen. but mayor jim darling impressed us and inspired us with his willingness to welcome these children, at least to care for them while the law is enforced. and that is the point i want to emphasize to my colleagues tonight. what's needed is not a repeal of the trafficking victims protection reauthorization act

of 2008. what's needed is not to send these children back without screening or consideration. what's needed is not a wholesale closing of due process. it is enforcement of that law, resources to enforce that law, resources to provide the immigration judges and the advocates so desperately needed for these children. after all, they look at any authoritarian figure with fear, even the teachers, many of them, as well as the border agents who seek to elicit from them those stories about why they fled their stories, they fear retaliation from anyone who might learn that they are talking about the reasons that they left. they need spokespeople and advocates for this process, and they need the individual

consideration child by child by child. that is what the law requires. that law should be enforced, not repealed. and enforcement also means border security. it means better facilities while they are under care of the department of h.h.s. as well as the border patrol. it means that we support state officials if they provide state facilities. those decisions about where and when and how many should be made by state officials, but the federal government can support them. and that is why i thank senator mikulski for her leadership on the supplemental as well as the presiding officer for his leadership in organizing the colloquy earlier today, because raising awareness as well as

resources is what is necessary to make sure that we reunite these children with their families when in fact their request for asylum is justified child by child, justified by the facts and the evidence, upheld by due process, by justice and fairness. not demonizing or demagoguing as may be done by calling out the national guard or denouncing children who are doing nothing more; six- eight- ten-nine-year olds than seeking safety and security. their resillans was inspiring as well. having crossed so many miles against so many obstacles in the

face of so many threats, their smiles as they recited the pledge of allegiance to the united states of america is the picture i will have of them in advocating a bipartisan solution, long-term immigration reform and a fair and just resolution to their plight as they seek freedom and security in our great nation, the greatest country in the history of the world. i thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i now ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today it adjourn until 9:30 a.m. on thursday, july 24, 2014; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day.

that following any leader remarks the senate resume consideration of the motion to proceed to calendar number 453, s. 2569 postcloture and that at 1:45 p.m. all postcloture debate time be considered expired and the senate proceed to vote on adoption of the motion to proceed. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. blumenthal: mr. president, at 1:45 p.m. there will be a voice vote on the motion to proceed to bring jobs home act. there will be an immediate roll call vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the nomination of pamela harris to be a circuit judge for the fourth circuit. if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it adjourn under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until

the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. sanders: i would ask that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sanders: mr. president, as chairman of the senate committee on veterans' affairs, i wanted to just take a few minutes to to just take a few minutes to spin mr. president as chairman of the senate committee on veterans affairs i want to just take a few minutes to update

members of the senate as to where we are in some very very important issues that impact veterans all over this country. first that i want to make is they think some good news. the committee had a hearing yesterday. i think i can speak for the whole committee and saying that we were very impressed by what we heard from mr. mike donald both in terms of his passion with the need for veterans and also his administrative knowledge, his management skills as the former head of one of the largest corporations in america. he left us with a strong impression. the result was a few hours ago by unanimous vote the senate committee voted to confirm ross mcdonald as our new secretary of the va and i hope very much that his nomination will get to the floor as soon as possible.

i think that's good news because the va needs stable leadership. sloan gibson in my view who is an acting secretary is doing an excellent job. he has a ready, is to love but it's important we have a new permanent secretary on board and i hope that the members see fit to confirm him as soon as we possibly can. mr. president on an additional issue i think is all members of the senate know about a month or so ago we voted by a vote of 93-3 almost unanimously to make sure that the veterans of our country get quality health care in a timely manner, that we bring a new level of accountability to the va. i'm very very proud of the support that legislation which was introduced by me and senator john mccain received them i want to thank again senator

mccain for his very strong efforts to make that happen and for his continued support of the veterans community. senator mccain made a statement just the other day. i think it was yesterday published in cq which i personally could not agree with mark. this is what he said. he said in terms of the conference committee that we are in right now trying to merge the senate bill on the house bill and come up with something that can pass in both bodies he said and i quote we have got to sit down and get this done because we cannot go out for recess in august without having acted on this bill end of quote and i think he's exactly right. let me just picking up on that theme just relates to my colleagues what the vfw has in their annual convention in st. louis and this is what they sa said.

and i call quote, the veterans of foreign wars of the united states has demanded that congress immediately pass a compromise bill to help fix the department of veterans affairs before they adjourned for five weeks at the end of the month. quote half of them don't come back from recess end of quote said vfw national commander of georgetown. quote american veterans are tired of waiting on secret waiting list with the va and on their elected officials to do their jobs end of quote and i could not agree with the vfw more on that issue. there was a bill a month ago and the cbo said that bill would cost $35 billion. we voted for that for emergency funding because the members here understood that taking care of veterans is the cost of war as

much as spending money on tanks and guards and missiles. $35 billion emergency funding. the house passed its bill which was laid up and assessed by the cbo and $44 billion so here's the good news and without the whole thing the negotiations that we are having with chairman miller in the house and chairman miller is a serious man, i think he wants to get a bill passed and i don't want to go into all the details here but i think it is fair to say that the cost of that bill would be significantly less than what the cbo originally estimated. now, just a few minutes ago mr. president i received and others received a letter from the major veterans organization on an issue of importance and again without going into great

detail about the nature of the negotiations of the house and senate what happened on the veterans bill i think it's fair to say i agree and the house agrees that it's imperative that we pass funding to make sure that veterans who are in the long waiting lines right now get the quality care that they need now and that means that if the va cannot accommodate them in a timely manner that they will go out to private doctors, community health centers or or whatever in the va will pay that bill. that is what we have got to do because it's unacceptable that veterans remain in long wait lines, waiting. there is general agreement on that. debate about how much that's going to cost over two-year period but i think we can reach some resolution on that.

if we have a difference of opinion and without divulging anything this has been in the newspapers. sloan gibson, the acting secretary, came forth before the senate veterans committee last week and he made it very clear that while we have got to deal with the emergency of long waiting periods and get people to get the care they need simultaneously, we must make sure that the va has the doctors, the nurses, the medical personnel, the i.t. and the space they need in order to deal with this crisis so that two years from now we are not back in the same position that we are. and he came forward with a proposal. in fact it cost $17.6 billion. i think we can roll that amount of money because some of that request is not going to be spent

this year or even next year. but the issue here is that we have got to strengthen the va, their capacity so that veterans do not remain on longwave -- waiting. then we can get them quality and timely care they need. now what i wanted to mention mr. president is just an hour or so ago, i received and chairman miller who is chairman of the house committee on veterans affairs, he got the letter and the ranking member on the senate committee and the ranking member of a house, we received a letter from a variety of veterans organizations, virtually every major veterans organization. this is who they are. they are the disabled american veterans. they are the veterans of foreign wars of the vfw, they are the powerlines veterans of america

of the vietnam veterans of america the iraq and afghanistan veterans of america the military association of america the u.s. coast guard and their chief petty officers association and many other organizations, many many other organizations. i want to take a moment to read what they said because this is terribly terribly important. what they are saying in essence is yes we need emergency funding to make sure that veterans tomorrow get the health care they need from the private sector or anyplace else but we also need to strengthen the va so that over the years, they can provide the quality and timely care that veterans are entitled to. and i'm going to read this letter because it's important that members of the senate and the house understand where the

major veterans organizations are coming from and i quote quote, last week acting secretary sloan gibson appear before the veterans affairs committee to discuss the progress made in the department of veterans affairs over the past two months to address the health care access crisis with thousands of veterans. secretary gibson testified that after re-examining the a's resource needs in light of the revelations of our secret waiting lists and hidden demand b.a. required supplemental resources totaling $17.6 billion for the remainder of this fiscal year to the end of fiscal year 2017. as the leaders of organizations representing millions of veterans we agree with secretary gibson that there is a need to provide va with additional resources now to ensure that veterans can access the health care they have earned either that va provided or nonva

purchased care. we urge congress to expeditiously approve supplemental funding that fully addresses the critical needs outlined by secretary gibson either prior to or at the same time of any compromise legislation that maybe were ported out of the house conference committee. whether cost $17 billion or 50 billion over the next 50 years. congress has a sacred obligation to provide va with the funds it requires to meet both immediate needs are nonva care and future care by expanding va's internal capacity and i continue and again this is a letter from almost every major veterans organization and i continue. last month we wrote to you the chairman of the house and senate veterans committee, we were owed to you they outlined the principles and priorities that are essential to addressing the

crisis, a copy of which is attached. the first priority and i quote must be to ensure that all veterans currently waiting for treatment must be provided access as quickly as medically indicated. end of quote. second when va is unable to provide the care directly quote va must be involved in the timely coordination and fully responsible for prompt payment for all authorized nonva care. third, congress ought to provide supplemental funding for this year and additional funding for next year to pay for the temporary expansion of nonva purchased care. finally whatever actions the day or congress to address the current crisis must also protect preserve and strengthen the va health care system so that remains capable of providing a full continual high-quality timely health care to all involved veterans.

and mr. president without objection i would like to submit this letter for the record. >> without objection. >> the letter goes on to talk about that many of these organizations have been looking at this issue for years and in their independent budget have known that the va needs more space because you have many hospitals where there are not enough examination rooms and that slows down the ability of doctors and nurses to treat patients. we need more doctors and nurses so for many of these organizations, this is not new news. they have known it for years. so mr. president the good news is i think we can bring forth a bill which deals with emergency contracted out care for veterans today am long waiting periods.

i think this can deal with the issue that senator mccain feels very strongly about and that is making sure that veterans who live 40 miles or more away from a va facility will be able to go to a private physician of their choice and i think we can also strengthen the va in terms of doctors and nurses and information technology and space so that we don't keep running into this problem year after year. it's going to take the va time in order to bring in the doctors and nurses. mr. president i would hope and i don't want to get into the details of the discussions we are having with the house but i did want to make veterans and infect members of congress aware of where i believe we are at this moment and with that mr. president i would yield the floor.

>> i rise today as the chair of the appropriations committee that will be proposing the emergency supplemental bill rate this bill will be introduced tonight and i want to personally describe it. first of all what is the emergency supplemental bill duke? it deals with free crises. wonderful fight wildfires with additional resources about which are going on in our own country. second, it would help israel be able to continue to man its iron dome anti-ballistic missile system as it has been under siege by hamas rockets and third it will help with a down payment on resolving the crisis of the children arriving at the border. to be specific it will fight wildfires to the tune of $615 million. right now the 127 wildfires

burning in our western states covering over four or more states. second it will strengthen israel's iron dome and add $225 million to replenish the antimissile defense rockets by shooting down hamas rockets helping our central ally israel and third it will deal with the crisis of our children arriving at the border and that would be $2.7 billion, $1 billion that the president asked for. it will care for the children and provide food shelter and other needs. it will resolve children's asylum status and give enforcement money to break up organized crime, cartels

traffickers and smugglers. the total for all three of those will be $3.57 billion. now i agree with president obama. this is an emergency supplemental. these funds are designated as emergency spending because they meet the criteria for the budget control act of 2011. denise must be urgent, temporary, unforeseen and prevent loss of life. that's exactly what we are facing. what what does that mean designate of emergency spending? it means no offsets so we don't take existing funds where we are either defending the nation for helping america's families to pay for the spending in this bill. the needs are urgent. firefighting needs are needed now. the fire service will run out of

money in august. fires are burning in washington and other states. we need to be able to provide the support to fight those fires and help our neighbors -- neighbors and our western states. iron dome, the funding is needed now to replenish a key part of the missile defense system. and replace iron dome artillery, that israel has hardly used a great deal of its assets to more than 2000 hamas rockets aimed at itself. israel is acting in self-defense and we will helping them with what they need to intercept 95% of the rockets. .. homeland,

immigration and customs enforcement will run out of funds in august and the department of homeland security border patrol will run out in early september. it doesn't mean our border patrol agents or i.c.e. agents will stop working but it will mean the department of homeland security will have to take money from other homeland security needs to keep these agencies doing their job. also, health and human services will run out of money to house children in august, and it means the children will stay longer at the border. they will be in inappropriate holding cells and also means that border patrol agents will be taking care of them rather than child welfare social workers. i think not to fund this, if you want to use border patrol agents to take care of children, that's one thing. i think they should be defending our border and we should have

social workers taking care of the children. our approach is sensible, it meets human needs and while we acknowledge a tight budget situation, we fund only that which is needed >> we fund only that which is needed in calendar year 2014. this is very important. it funds only what is needed in calendar year 2014. it defers $1 billion of the president's request until 2015 subject to congressional action that the need be validated. we hope by 2015 the surge has dimini diminished. the funds we say we need we really need. i am deeply concerned if the senate number, the house will

make cuts that impact the care of the children and also being penny wise and pound forward they are going to stop our about to go after the smugglers and coyotes. we want to go after the people exploiting the children and trying to recruit them into dispicable activities. we don't want radical writers that will weaken the human trafficking laws or eccelerate children without due process under law. we don't want a backdoor violation of immigration reform. this bill is only a money bill. it doesn't include immigration legislation. how that will be addressed on the senate floor will be decided by the leadership on both sides.

the challenges to the request are many. we have included more mony for judges and additional legal representation so we can determine their legal status and determine whether they have the right to seek asylum status. we have robust enforcement against gangs and organized crime. seven organized crime are operating in the countries. we are talking about more guns at the border we need law enforcement going after the real scum which is these drug dealers that recruit the children, murder children before other children's eyes. and you know what? we also know that when we work in a crisis and we do urgent supplemental effort we sometimes waste money.

we can only look at the other agencies where we have done this. this bill includes strong oversight from the inspector general to make sure the taxpayer's money is well spent to protect our order and our children and go after smugglers, coyotes, and human traffickers. the best way to freeze the surge of children isn't by rewriting r refugee and human trafficking laws. it is by making it harded for the criminals. we have 60,000 children at the border. this crisis isn't at the border, however. the crisis is in their home countries. these children are fleeing violence. i have been down to the border, mr. president. i have talked to these children.

listen to children who face sexual assault, recruitment into human traffics, gang intimidation, persecution, threats of grisly physical action directed against them. what is happening in these countries, mr. president? when you listen to the cries of the children i can tell you in those countries there is a war on children. we cannot turn our back on these children who are seeking refugee. we need to pass this supplemental and we need to deal with the violence that is coming out of central america that if we don't deal with it there -- it isn't that the children will come to our borders. it is that the violence and gang will come to the borders. mr. president, i hope when the leader introduces the bill later on this evening we can proceed and debate this with due diligence and i look forward to

chairing the committee as we go through the process. i now yield the floor. >> on the next washington journal, republican congressman mike conoway, a member of the intelligence and armed service committee on the malaysian airliner shot down in ukraine and the israeli-palestinian conflict. and we will talk with the democratic congressman about unaccompanied children crossing the u.s.-mexico border. and christopher gill on efforts to combat poverty. >> this weekend on booktv's afterwards. >> i thought it would be compelling telling the story of a black family and a white family with the same name who come from the same place and follow them from slavery through

the civil war reconstruction, jim crowe, the civil rights movement up until today and compare and contrast. >> chris tomlinson on his family's slave owning history and how the legacy of slavery still affects american society. he talked with the brother of an nfl former running back out their lineage. surveillance transparency act night on cspan 2 after wards. >> providing live coverage of the united states senate and every weekend booktv. the only television network devoted to non-fiction books and authors. brought to you as a public service by your local cable or satellite provider. watch us in hd, like us on facebook, and follow us on

twitter. >> seung min kim, speaker john boehner's border group has announced their recommendations to deal with unaccompanied children at the border. >> they are wanting to revise the 2008 trafficking law that is coming under scrutiny. it would treat children who are coming from the central american countries, guatemala, honduras and el salvador would treat them like mexican children and makes it easier to send them home. it has a lot of enforcement measures to deal with the crisis >> what are the house democratic

leaders saying about the plan? particularly the changes to the 2008 trafficking law. >> they are still reviewing the recommendations. they came out this morning. but house minority whip had a discussion with the reporters and doubted there would be a lot of democratic support for the proposal. nancy pulouis and members of mexican caucus are very oppose today changing that 2008 law because they are concerned it stops due process for the unaccompanied children. >> you tweeted on a letter boehner wrote to the president saying it will be difficulty to move on supplemental without strong support from the whitehouse. tell us more about the letter. >> the whitehouse has had mixed

messages when it comes to changing the law. when it asked for money it called for changes in policy that would tweak the law but there has been opposition from immigration advocates and a lot of powerful democrats in the congressional hispanic caucus. so they have backed off on the changes even though they said they would like revisions. speaker boehner is pressing president obama on that point. he is saying if you support changing this come out and say it so we know where you stand. >> both the house and senate is working on their respected version. what does the house committee chair howl rogers plan to include in his bill and how does that compare with what the whitehouse requested? >> the whitehouse asked for $3.7

and if you add for the wild fires it is $4.3 billion. howl rogers is working with $1.5 billion for the emergency funding. so that is clearly significantly less than what the president has asked for. we have not heard a specific administration position on that proposal yet since it was just made public today. on the senate democrats, they are pushing a smaller package as well. they have $2.7 billion deal with the border crisis, too. so it is a question on whether they can be reconciled between the chambers. >> what are the odds of that? might we see a compromise reached prior to the august break? >> it is difficult to see that

now. we have a couple days this week and next week and they are out for the month of august and not back until september 8th, i believe. on the policy measures, republicans from speaker john boehner and down are insisting on changes to the 2008 law. they think it sends a message of deterance to the children making dangerous journey. democrats are raising humanitarian concerns and it is difficult to see the sides agreeing. >> seung min kim, thanks very much for joining us. >> thanks for having me. 40 years ago, the watergate scandal led the only president to resign. this weekend the house committee as it considers impeachment of

the president and the charges of power. >> you have questions about what the framers had in mind. questions about whether the activities that have been found out by the committee and senate and watergate committee were indeed impeachable and can we prove that richard nixon knew about them and authorized them even? >> watergate 40 years later. sunday night. >> a look at the dodd-frank wall street reform and consumer protection act four years after it passes. and then a hearing on cruise ship passenger safety. >> on booktv after wards. >> i thought it would be compelling to tell the story of

a black and white family, with the same name, coming from the same place, and follow them from slavery, reconstruction, jim crowe, the civil rights movement up until today and compare and cop contrast. >> how the legacy of slavery still affects american societyment chris tomlinson is here to talk about former lineage as slaves from the hill. now, the house financial services committee looks at the affect of the dodd-frank wall street reform and consumer protection act four years after its passage. witness include the chair barny