they don't want to be recruited into these vile, vile circumstances. so these are earnest, hardworking children who want to have safety, who want to have a future, and we want to be able to see do they by interviewing them qualify for refugee status, and if they don't, they will have to go back home, but if they do, they get to stay here. so they deserve the protection under the law. so we need to pass this legislation. this bill is a funding bill. it doesn't include immigration legislation. we say those kinds of things can either be brought up in another way, another method here, but this is a clean funding bill. when i say clean, it means it has no legislative language on it related to immigration.

so, madam president, i hope that we can pass this legislation. now, i've listened to my own constituents and many of them are saying to me, "hey, barb, we're not against these kids." and, in fact, recent polling says 69% of the american people say if they're refugees, we should take care of them and they have a right to determine their legal status. but they -- my constituents, many of them, say, "hey, barb, what about us? what does this mean? you're going to spend more money? what about my schools? when do we get help? my kids need help. they need schools, they need health care." you talk to families now, they're getting ready to go back to school. they can't wait -- many parents can't wait for sales tax-free day in maryland where you can get your backpack and your school supplies and your little clothes and shoes -- my god, the cost of kids' shoes now are a

small fortune. and they'll outgrow them by the time they get to thanksgiving. parents are looking for bargains, for deals to be able to them. they are not hostile but they wonder about them. and i want to say to them, i hear you. i was touched by a very poignant story over the weekend about how we have a food bank at steelworker's hall in baltimore. bethlehem steel closed. it will never, ever, ever come back. the steal workers of -- the steelworkers of america who contributed to united way were always the first in line if a blood bank was necessary. now, many of those who lost their job are using the very food bank that they once donated to. that story was so moving because we have lost our manufacturing. we've just lost the bill earlier today on bringing jobs back ho home, something i know the

gentlelady, the presiding officer's, for. i sure am for it and so on. so i know that american families are hurting. and, yes, they are. but i want to bring out that this cost of this bill, the cost of this bill is the same amount of money as we're going to spend on training the afghan security forces. did you know that? so we're going to spend $4 million -- $4 billion. that's billion like in "barb" -- not million like in "mikulski" -- that's $4 billion to train the afghan security forces. and we don't -- i'm not going to debate the merits of that. but we can spend money all over like that and we can't spend money at our border and also threats to our border because of narco-terrorism that breeds other vile, repugnant, heinous behavior? i think we've got to get real

here. and the reason i want a supplemental that's urgent and meets that criteria is that we don't have to take the money from other important programs that do help america's family in education, in health, in job retraining in order to bring our jobs back home. so, madam president, i really do hope we pass this bill. not spending money won't save money. it means that we'll just take out existing programs and the american people will pay for it doubly. they'll pay for it through -- through inaction, which will ultimately cost more. they'll pay for it because they'll lose the programs that they thought they were going to have access to or there will be limited availability. we have the chance here now to help our neighbors in our western states. i know wisconsin has been hit by

it terribly and we're so sorry for the loss of property and the danger to that community. it will help a treasured ally, israel, which we must, and also we will help our own country. and the way to protect our border is two ways -- fight it in central america and also show what we stand for. the children are applying for refugee status. they should have their day in court and under the law proceed. so, madam president, we're now on this motion to proceed. let's get on with it. let's yield back our time, let's get to the bill, let's get the job done, and i hope that at the end of the day the vote will be "yes." madam president, i yield the floor. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from missouri. mr. blunt: madam president, i want to talk principally for the next few minutes about a bill that senator boxer and i have filed this week on israel and talk about what's going on in israel.

but on the work that's the bill before us right now, i'm always hesitant to disagree with the chairman of the appropriations committee, my chairman, my good friend, senator mikulski. i just think we're headed in the wrong direction here. providing money and not trying to solve this problem, not sending the right message i think is a mistake. people are leaving these dangerous countries. if they're dangerous to be in, they're also dangerous to travel through. they're dangerous to leave. one of the concerns i've had during this whole debate is how many kids leave their home country and never get to the american border and what happens to those kids. and we've heard stories in briefings that weren't classified about kids that never get here because they get sold into some sort of terrible situation. even kids who their organs are harvested and sold that way. this cannot be something we need

to continue to encourage. in fact, if you do qualify for asylum in the united states, there's a way to do that. that's why we have embassies. that's why we have consulates. surely it's safer for someone in guatemala city to go to the american embassy in guatemala city than it is to leave guatemala city and try to come through their country, through other countries, through mexico to get here. under the control of people who have tried to make the most of the president's announcement that if you get here, you can stay here. that's not the red cross bringing kids here. this is not something altruistic group bringing kids here. these are people who are taking advantage of misinformation in their country about what happens if you get here. and some of these kids don't get here. doing this in this way, money without policy, acting like somehow it doesn't cost anything if it's an emergency and so we can continue to do everything

that the chairman mentioned that needs to be done in the united states but we can also do this because it's a supplemental, it's an emergency, it's more money we borrow from somebody else. life's full of choices and for our government we have choices. there are things that need to be done right now to send a messa message, do not leave your home country. the door is not wide open, no matter what the president's announcement in 2011 led people to believe. the law needs to be changed so that immigrants from all countries coming to our borders are treated just like immigrants from mexico and canada coming to our borders. they have an immediate hearing within seven days or so. almost all of them are told, you have to go back. and once that happens, almost all of them stop coming. this would be a mistake to do this in this way and i believe

this bill never winds up on the president's desk. the house of representatives doesn't share this view, even if a majority of the senate does. we need to send a message to gatguatemala, to el salvador, to every other country that the door is not open. just getting here is not enough. this is not a safe disneyland type ride to the united states of america. this is a very, very dangerous thing for you to try to do and you should not try to do it. and when you get here, it's not going to be successful. again, let me say, if you have a case that you should have asylum in this country, there is a way you do that that's much safer than showing up at the border and we shouldn't encourage just -- we shouldn't encourage the danger that these kids go through. i think the case is very dramatic on the side that cares for the lives of these kids. we should send the message strongly and now -- do not come

the way you're coming now. the kids that get to the border are -- we're concerned about what happens to them as a country because of who we are. we should be equally concerned about the kids that never get to the border because of this false message we've sent. but let me spend a few minutes talking about a bill that senator boxer and i introduced this week, the u.s.-israel strategic partnership act of 2014. this is a -- an updated version of legislation we first introduced in march of 2013. this bill that was filed this week is already backed by more than three-quarters of the senate. i'm hoping we figure out how to get this done and get this done this week. there is never -- has never been a more important time to send a message to the world and to israel about this relationship, about what it means to us, about how committed we are to it. this legislation reaffirms our unwavering commitment to

israel's security and the strong relationship that goes back to the founding of israel. it supports deepened u.s.-israel cooperation on defense, including continued u.s. assistance for the iron dome. by the way, the iron dome assistance in the defense appropriations bill that the appropriations committee approved, that's the way to fund the iron dome. do the work that begins for the fiscal year october 1. we're a month and a couple of days from the time or two months and a couple of days from the time this fiscal year is over. we should be having bills on the floor that talk about the iron dome but it should be the defense bill. it shouldn't be some bill that we're talking about because we're unwilling to go through the regular process. but we -- we do in this bill talk about the iron dome. we reiterate our support to

negotiating a settlement, a political settlement that the government of israel is for, where you'd have two states but both of those states have to recognize each other. you can't have two states where hamas and others that are significant parts apparently now of the coalition on the other side deny that israel has a right to exist. but we do support the israeli concept that we want to have two states peacefully coexisting. that's reiterated here but it's also clearly understood that you can't have one of those states say the other one doesn't have a right to -- to exist. we have a long-standing relationship here. it really dates back to the very moment that israel was founded. and my fellow missourian, president truman, in great leadership decided that we would immediately recognize israel and that -- that moment, that decision, that commitment from the united states continues

today through security, through energy, through trade. we'd like to make that clear and make that clear this week. and what is the u.s.-israel strategic partnership act do? well, first of all, it authorizes an increase of $200 million in the value of u.s. weapons held in israel to a total of $1.8 billion. now, what does that mean? does that mean we're spending $200 billion more -- $200 million more? no, it means we're putting more of our equipment in israel with the clear understanding that it's there for us to use in the time of a crisis. it's also there for israel to have access to when they need it. and when they use it, they pay us back and replenish that stockpile that we have strategically placed in israel for our future use and for an immediate challenge to israel that they may need to look at that stockpile of our weapons there. it requires the administration

to take steps to include israel in the top-tier category of license-free exports, the top-tier category of looking at the technologies we share with any other country we would suggest you should also be able to share with israel. if they're uniquely held in our country, technology as that we don't want to share with anybody, they're not considered in that category. it authorizes the president to carry out cooperation between the united states and israel on a range of policy issues. they include defense, water, things like the water salinization efforts that, israel, is frankly ahead of us in and we need to understand as we look forward to water needs, homeland security, alternative fuel technologies, more cooperation in cybersecurity -- all those things are authorized in this bill. there's new language that encourages the administration to

work with israel to help the country gain entry status in the visa waiver program. that will make it easier for israeli citizens to travel to the united states without first having to get a waiver but it will also make it easier for people in our country to go there. it requires the administration to provide more frequent and more detailed assessments of the status of a qualitative military advantage that we have committ committed, that israel would always have. this bill that senator boxer and i have introduced says we're going to check that even more often and in more detail to be absolutely sure in that troubled part of the world that israel's adversaries look at israel and can clearly understand that israel has an advantage that makes up for the difference in its size. it strengthens the collaboration between the united states and israel on energy development, encourages increased cooperation in academic business and

governmental sectors. this legislation amends previous legislation related to how people can travel between our two countries, and we do have a unique situation, in fact, in the recent fighting in israel, two american citizens, members of the israel defense force with dual citizenship in this country and in israel were killed in that fighting. this is one of the unique relationships we have in the world where people leave our communities, go to another country they also care about, fight in the uniform of that country because this country is our ally and we need to look for ways to continue to emphasize that. it authorizes but doesn't require the secretary of homeland security in consultation with the secretary of state to waive the nonimmigration refusal rate requirement for israel but only

if israel meets all the other program requirements and then it still is authorized but not required. this is a particularly important time to send this message. this is an important time to send this message of continued support between our two countries. israel we see in looking at the gaza situation today, during recent months uncertainty in egypt, support from terrorist groups all over the world, weaponry, missiles taken into gaza, money that could have been spent, the concrete that could have been used to build housing and schools and hospitals and places for jobs was useed to build tunnels so people could come into israel and attack israel. certainly the government of israel and the citizens of israel look at this moment and think no time to quit now with this job partially done.

some of the messages have been frequent our country have not been helpful and encouraging in that regard of what has to happen in the middle of this conflict. but this kind of legislation sends the message, a message we should send, i hope we can get to it this week. i'm pleased that three-quarters of our colleagues, i think that number is right now at 80, have cosponsored this legislation and, again, legislation just introduced this week. so if there is any message to our friends in israel and maybe more importantly, to others around the world, where the united states senate and hopefully by the end of the week the united states congress stands, this action sends that message, and i can't think of a more critical time to send that message, madam president, and i would hope that we see this bill on the floor and send that message this week and would yield the floor. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the

senator from colorado. mr. udall: i rise today to speak in favor of a critical issue for colorado, and that is fighting, mitigating and recovering from wildfire. recent history has shown in my state there is no greater threat to our communities, water supplies and our special way of life than wildfires. successive megafires over the past few years have broken records faster than they could be written down, and even today, flash flooding in recent burden areas is a reminder that after the embers of wildfires have cooled, their destruction lingers for months and years. madam president, i used to joke that coloradans were strong and prepared for anything, come hell or high water. but i had no idea that the past several years would bring both with modern megafires and floods devastating thousands of households and businesses.

we've endured these tests and we have communities all over the state like the black forest that are rebuilding. but, madam president, these recent disasters and the fires burning today in colorado, california, washington and across the west show that the status quo is unacceptable. and the cost of inaction for homeowners and first responders alike is too high to not act. and that's why i've come to the floor today to speak in favor of a few smart, bipartisan, and fiscally responsible bills that are in front of our congress right now. these bills, taken together, address wildfire in a comprehensive way by attacking the problem before, during, and after a fire. so if i might, madam president, i want to share some of the elements in these important pieces of legislation. first i want to focus on what we can do before a wildfire at the individual and community level

to reduce risk. there are numerous studdities that single out the most important factor in protecting homes, and that is if you do mitigation work. you involve yourselves with ignition resistant construction techniques and you reduce hazardous fuels around your home. and that's one of the reasons that i introduced commonsense legislation that's entitled the wildfire prevention act of 2013. it will help homeowners and communities reduce the risk of wildfire damages up front. i'm pleased it is moving forward in a bipartisan fashion. i'm working with senator inhofe as my republican partner in the house two members of our delegation from colorado, congressman pole it's and tipton have joined with their california colleagues to lead this bill in that body. that's what coloradans expect from their elected representatives, collaboration for the good of our state and the good of our country, i should add. this bill is a game changer,

madam president. not just in my state but across fire-prone communities in the west and increasingly in other parts of our country, the upper northwest, the midwest, florida, wildfire is continuing to be a threat across our country. what this act would do, the wildfire prevention act, it would athe fema fema, we know it as fema, to provide hazard mitigation grants. and these mitigation projects do, they put us on the offensive. we put our communities and our public land managers in front of the threat of megafires. we can head them off before they even start and it's an idea that came from colorado, it's more than just a commonsense idea, it's a fiscally responsible approach to dealing with the threat of wildfire. why do i say that? studies show for every dollar you put on hazard mitt days up front it -- mitigation up front it saves an average of four

dollars down the line if you have to fight a fire. for that reason and the others i mentioned i'm going to keep doing everything i can to move this bipartisan bill to the president's desk this year. the second point i want to make and discuss with colleagues is that we must fundamentally change and modernize how the federal government funds wildfire suppression operations. that's another way of saying fighting fires, wildfire suppression operations. the rising severity of modern firefighters has caused agencies to take precious resources away from the critical fire prevention efforts i just described to fight fires that are already burning. and this is a vicious self-perpetuateing cycle called fire borrowing brig which increases the risk of catastrophic fires later. it's a backwards way of budget being, a classic let's rob peter to pay paul and leaves us all to bear much larger costs,

most notably our communities in colorado. i've joined senators wyden and crapo on their bipartisan biparl that would treat wildfires like other natural disasters and making sure we're not fighting fires that could have been prevented. this is a sensible approach for many reasons. it's cosponsored by 120 members of the congress in the house and the senate, and it's endorsed by over 1 who ooh groups ranging from the timber industry to the environmental community. that speaks to the broad support obviously. my hometown, the coast put it this -- "the denver post" pus it this way, using disaster fund money for wildfires could solve a lot of problems long term and we hope congress sees it that way. i hope that my colleagues see it that way. if we're serious here about helping prevent future wildfires and reducing the threats to lives and property, we'd all join together and pass this

legislation. proper wildfire budgeting and the use of disaster relief funds would help break this vicious cycle of fire borrowing and allow our natural resource agencies to manage healthy forests instead of fighting megafires. i have the great privilege of chairing on the energy committee in which the presiding officer serves, the national parks subcommittee and i know all too well the problems that this bill could solve. if we adopted this measure, this new way of wildfire budgeting, we could ensure that the resources that are available to our national forest supervisors to reduce hazardous fuels, provide quality recreation experiences and provide a tim were supply would have certainly, would be there for the uses that we need them to be there for. and we can do this also while upgrading our safe modern air tanker fleet in such a way we

keep our communities and firefighters safe. so this legislation i just described is in the emergency supplemental appropriations measure before the senate here today. and we really need to pass it. it's crucial, it's an opportunity we have to grab. and in the supplemental appropriations act before this body, there is $615 million to prevent fire borrowing this year, get resources on the ground fighting these blazes, and help our resource agencies plan into the future. now, i know house appropriations chairman rogers and the presiding officer and i both know chairman rogers, he's a thoughtful member of the house, did he say that he did not include wildfire funding in their supplemental because in his words there is no urgency for such money. i have to respectfully disagree with my friend, chairman

rogers. and i know coloradans as well as the people of washington state, california, and many states across the west would not only disagree, they would strenuously disagree and i'd invite chairman ronaldors come out to the west and see firsthand how urgent the situation really is for our communities. now, let me finish with a couple of remarks about other elements in this supplemental. i want to join along with my colleague, senator blunt, who just spoke from missouri and mention the iron dome system. the supplemental includes emergency funding for israel's iron dome system. it has intercepted hundreds of hamas rockets targeting civilian areas over the last several weeks and it's literally been a lifesaver for our allies many times over. i chair the strategic forces subcommittee which has responsibility for iron dome and working with the israeli defense forces and i heard today from an

israeli, madam president, who said the system is miraculous. as hamas cons to rain rockets down, we need to ensure this system continues to protect our friends and allies in israel. finally, this frequently supplemental includes critical resources to help address the root causes that have led to the humanitarian crisis at our southern border. so in summary i'm glad that we've moved forward to debate debating this crucial supplemental appropriation bill. let's move to an up-or-down vote as soon as we possibly can. this is a timely debate and passage of this bill is too important to allow partisan gridlock to interfere. let's come together, let's show the american people we can meet our obligations and rise above partisanship. i urge my colleagues to support this legislation. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the

senator from south dakota. mr. thune: mr. president, i rise today to talk about the disturbing leadership failure that we're seeing out of the white house. over the past year the president and his administration have seemed increasingly out of touch with the many challenges facing our country at home and abroad. two weeks ago the president's spokesman told reporters -- and i quote -- "i think there have been a number of situations in which you've seen this administration intervene in a meaningful way that has substantially furthered american interests and substantially improved the tranquillity of the global community" -- end quote. let me repeat that, madam president. substantially improve the tranquillity of the global community. madam president, fighting is going on right now in israel and the gaza strip. russia is actively involved in a war in ukraine and played a role in bringing down an airline with 298 people on board. iraq is under the control of a

terrorist organization considered by al qaeda to be two extreme. those are just some of the most serious trouble spots' we nays right now. yet the president's spokesman claims there have been a number of situations in which you've seen this administration intervene in a meaningful way that has substantially improved the tranquillity of the global community. madam president, not only can i not think of a number of situations in which. the president pro tempore:'s actions have substantially improved tranquillity, i'm finding it hard to think of one. we're actually looking at more points of serious instability than receive seen in decades. writing in "the washington post" over the weekend, the paper's editorial page noted during the president's administration -- quote -- we have witnessed as close to an elaborate experience on the effects disengagement on the real world is likely ever to provide." miss engagement is a good description of the president's

attitude because right now the president doesn't even seem to be paying attention. obviously, america can't fix all the world's problems, but strong american leadership can help, as we've seen many times over the past century. strong american leadership, however, requires the president be fully engaged, and this president is anything but. tens of thousands of children arriving at our southern border. the president's playing pool. plane shot down in ukraine. the president keeps right on with his campaign schedule. earlier this month, as thousands of unaccompanied children were making their dangerous trip across the southern border, because of the president's statements that sent the message if they got here, they could stay, the president traveled to texas. but he didn't go to assess the situation for himself. he was, as the associated press reported, primarily in texas to raise money for democrats. weeks later, despite taking multiple additional trips to fundraise for democrats, the president still hasn't visited the border despite calls to

visit for members of his own party. indeed, the president has largely stopped even discussing the crisis. and this is the same president whose spokesman described him as having substantially improved the tranquility of the global community. madam president, our world is facing a number of very serious crises right now, and the president seems completely unaware of it. when it comes, unfortunately, to domestic issues, the president seems equally out of touch. the president has recently taken to telling his audience that by almost every economic measure, we're doing a whole lot better than we were when i came into office. well, try telling that to the american families who are doing worse. average household income has dropped by nearly $3,000 on the president's watch. meanwhile, prices have risen. food prices are higher. the price of gasoline has almost doubled. college costs continue to soar. and health care premiums, which the president promised would

fall by $2,500 have increased by almost $3,000, and they are still climbing. combine high prices with declining income and you get a whole lot of families who were once comfortable in the middle class now struggling to make ends meet. and the obamacare economy provides few opportunities for these families to improve their situation. in 2009, the president's advisors predict that the employment rate would fall below 6% in 2012. two years later, unemployment still hasn't fallen below 6%. and the only reason, the only reason the unemployment rate is as low as it is is because so many americans have given up looking for work and dropped out of the labor force altogether. if the labor force participation rate were as high today as it was when the president took office, our unemployment rate would be about 10%. even when jobs do become available, too often they are low-paying jobs, not the kind of jobs that help middle-class families achieve financial security or move low-income

families into the middle class. take the most recent jobs report. under the president's policies, the economy lost 523,000 full-time jobs and gained 799,000 part-time jobs last month, which is the largest one-month jump, the largest one-month jump in part-time employment in 20 years. madam president, i'll give the president this -- he does talk, he talks about helping middle-class families, but he has steadily opposed measures to help them. republicans have proposed numerous measures to create good-paying jobs and increase opportunity. we've urged the president to approve the keystone pipeline and the tens of thousands of jobs it would support. in fact, democrats have urged the president to approve it, too. the president has said no. republicans have proposed fixing the 30-hour workweek provision in obamacare which is cutting workers' hours and wages. the president has said no.

republicans have proposed repealing the medical device tax which has already eliminated thousands of jobs in the medical device industry and will eliminate many more if it isn't repealed. a lot of democrats agree with that position. the president has said no. and the president hasn't just said no to measures that would help the middle class. he has implemented policies that have hit the middle class with tremendous financial burdens. chief among the president's burdensome policies, of course, is obamacare. the president told an audience in wilmington, delaware, the other day that thanks who his administration -- and i quote -- "millions more now have the peace of mind of having quality, affordable health care if they need it." end quote. well, try telling that to the americans who lost their health care plans as a result of the president's law and were forced to replace them with plans that cost more and offer less. or try telling that to the americans who obtained health plans under the affordable care act only to discover that their

plan didn't cover the doctor that they wanted it to cover. or tell it to the families paying thousands of dollars more each year in premiums, deductibles and co-pays, thanks to the president's health care law. that's not to even mention the drag the health care law is having on the economy. part of the reason there are so few opportunities for american families to get ahead is because the president's health care law is making it more difficult for businesses to afford to hire new workers. and now the president is following up his budget-busting health care law with the national energy tax that will drive up energy bills for american families and put hundreds of thousands of americans out of work. madam president, nero may have fiddled while rome burned. the president fundraises. "the washington post" reports, and i quote, in his two presidential terms combined, president bush hosted 218 fundraisers. president obama has already smashed that number with 393

events to date, end quote. and, madam president, he still has two and a half years to go in his administration. instead of urging the president to focus on crises at home and abroad, senate democrats have taken a lead from the president's book and spent the past several months focused on the elections. rather than taking up legislation to provide real help for struggling middle-class families, senate democrats have spent months, months on political showboats and designed to fail legislation that they hope will win them a few votes in november. madam president, our country's facing challenges at home and abroad. campaigning has its place, but here in washington, members of congress and the president should be focused on solving the problems facing our country, supporting middle-class families and restoring america's economic vitality. it's time for democrats and the president to stop focusing on politics and to start focusing on the policies that we need to create jobs, to grow the economy, and to support freedom and opportunity here at home and

around the world. madam president, i yield the floor. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. cardin: thank you, madam president. next week, between august 4-6, the united states will welcome leaders from across the african continent to washington, d.c. i first want to acknowledge the work of our colleague, senator coons, the chairman of the subcommittee on africa and the foreign relations committee for the work he has done on behalf of the senate to make this opportunity a real chance to strengthen the economic ties, to strengthen the strategic ties between the countries of africa and the united states. we expect that there will be robust discussions that will be encouraging economic growth, unlocking opportunities and fostering greater ties between

our country and africa. one of the areas that i hope will get some debate, discussion during next week's meetings will be a key government trade initiative that makes these ties possible, and that is the africa growth in opportunity act, agoa. agoa provides qualifying sub-sahara countries duty-free access to the u.s. market for a wide variety of products. it was first signed into law in 2000 by president clinton and has been strengthened and extended by congress and both president bush and president obama. agoa enjoins bipartisan support throughout the years because it -- its advocates recognize the critical role that africa plays in the global economy. the african continent is one of the world's fastest growing

regions. for instance, by 2035, it's estimated that africa will have a larger working age population than china. i mention that because it's certainly in our interests to have stable partners who develop their economy that can work with strategic partnership with the united states, but it also means that we're going to have stronger markets for u.s.-produced goods and products, and as we have a growing middle class in africa, it represents a market for u.s. manufacturers, consumers -- manufacturers, producers and farmers, which creates more jobs here in the united states. agoa allows the u.s. and africa to both take advantage of this this -- since the act was fully implemented in 2001, u.s. imports under agoa has tripled. nonoil agoa trade has increased fourfold. some of the sectors that agoa

has helped open are apparel, textiles, jewelry, handicrafts, electronics. agow has created hundreds of thousands of jobs in those sectors, most of those in the apparel sector where women comprise 75% to 90% of the industry. in sub-sahara africa, women are at the highest risk of being poor. agoa has tackled barriers to poverty reduction by eliminating tariffs on goods that come from many sectors in which women are employed. modern trade agreements and initiatives are much more -- much more than just lowering tariffs. it also involves dealing with good governance practices. in an increasing global economy, we can no longer consider issues like labor rights, human rights and good governance as issues that are separate from trade. trade with our country is a benefit with deserving nations that share our value. strong commitment to the rule of

law and human rights are an essential part of those values and level the playing field between u.s. and our partners in the global marketplace. agoa is no exception. the act has been encouraging these commitments since it was first enacted. this is not just an opportunity by lowering barriers to our markets. it's also about expectations and enforcement that the african countries will improve their good governance, their labor rights so we have a more level playing field. to qualify for agoa benefits, countries must establish or make continual progress on measures that promote good governance and a fair economic system. these include fundamental rights, the rule of law, a system that combats corruption and policies that increase access to health care and education, expand physical infrastructure. in other words, the african

countries involved that take advantage of agoa must have continuing progress on the good governance key issues. for example, as part of the annual agoa review process, the united states department of labor examines agoa countries' efforts to implement and enforce workers' rights, including the right of association, the right to organize and bargain collectively, prohibiting forced or compulsory labor, a minimum age for the employment of children and acceptable conditions of work. these are the international labor standards. the standards are very much a part of the progress we made under agoa in the african countries. improvements in these areas have been shown to foster the kind of inclusive economic growth and opportunities that raise families and nations out of poverty. we understand that by developing stronger economies in african countries, we are building more

stable african countries, countries that are more reliable being partners with the united states than dealing with global issues. we understand that by doing that, we're going to have a stronger partner sharing u.s. values. this is just one of the tools we use. we also use our transparency initiatives. we included in the dodd-frank legislation transparency on extracted industries that operate globally but also in africa so we can find -- make sure that the wealth of a country is actually going to its people. that requires good governance. agoa is one of our tools to accomplish that good governance. so these countries that have mineral wealth, the wealth is not a curse but really benefit the people of that country. agoa helps transparency -- agoa helps, transparency issues that we have passed help, but here is the issue. the current authorization of

agoa expires on september 30, 2015. once again, madam president, as you know, as you have worked so hard, we need predictability in our laws. short-term extensions don't do much good. what we need is a long-term commitment because we need a long-term economic commitment with the continent of africa. already, a bipartisan effort in congress to extend and improve this important legislation is under way. the united states trade representative, too, has been reviewing agoa's successes as well as the areas that can be improved. and later today in the senate finance committee, we'll be holding a hearing on agoa and ambassador froman will be one of the witnesses at that hearing, so we will have a chance to work together, bipartisan members of congress, with the administration. one of the areas that we're looking at and strengthening agoa's criteria to further incentivize improvements in human rights, and i will be talking about that in the finance committee. another is providing coordinated

technical assistance and capacity building. this is very important. too often, trade and development policies operate on separate tracks. granting trade preference means little without providing countries with the ability to take advantage of those benefits. we have development assistance that we provide to countries. we have trade that we do. let's combine them. let's recognize that these trade opportunities can only be taken advantage of if the country has the capacity to deal with the issues that we're talking about. capacity building is already under way in africa. for instance, the department of labor provides capacity-building assistance to agoa countries to improve workers' rights through partnerships with a broad range of organizations from n.g.o.'s to health organizations to social and economic researchers. by providing this aid in a more efficient and clearly measurable fashion and seeking more input from local cooperatives and groups, we could help foster more sustainable growth in

sub-sahara africa. the time to develop consensus on agoa improvements is now. i hope my colleagues will join me in supporting and strengthening the agoa act so that we can maintain this important tool to increase the trade relations between the united states and africa in fighting global poverty. i hope and look forward to seeing the results of next week's meetings with the african leaders. it's my sincere expectation that these meetings will produce concrete ways that we can improve the ties between africa and the united states, and i certainly expect it will help us lead to the improvement and reauthorization of agoa. with that, madam president, i would suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. franken: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota. mr. franken: i would ask that the quorum call be rescinded.

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. franken: thank you, madam president. i rise today to talk about the transparency provisions in the u.s.a. freedom act. i'm a proud cosponsor of chairman leahy's bill, and i'm particularly proud to have written its key transparency provisions with my friend, senator dean heller of nevada. as i have said, both -- i spoke yesterday on this. both of us are indebted to senator leahy for his leadership on this issue. for over a year now, there's been a steady stream of news, news stories about the national security agency's surveillance programs. and yet right now by law, americans still can't get some very basic information about these programs. americans understand that we need to give due weight to

privacy, on the one hand, and national security on the other. but when they lack an even rough sense of the scope of the government surveillance programs, they have no way to know if the government is getting that balance right. there needs to be more transparency. the controversy unleashed by edward snowden's disclosures has been going on now for over a year and americans still don't know the actual number of people whose information has been collected under these programs. they don't even know how many of these people are americans, and they have no way of knowing how many of these americans have had their information actually looked at by government officials as opposed to just being held in a data base. this lack of transparency is pretty breathtaking. the provisions that senator heller and i wrote, i think,

will go a long way towards addressing this, towards fixing this. they'll give americans the information that they need to judge the americans -- the government's surveillance programs for themselves. three programs are at the center of this debate: the telephone call records program, the collection through 2011 of americans internet communication records, and the so-called prison program that targets the communications of foreigners abroad. our provisions would require detailed annual reports for each program. the government will have to tell the public how many people have had their information collected and how many of those people are likely american. for the call records program and

the prison program, the government will also have to say how many times it's run a specific search for an american's data. by creating these reporting requirements, the government will have an incentive to also disclose the number of americans that have actually had their information reviewed by government officials. and we give the government the authority to do that too. but we don't just require the government to issue more detailed transparency reports. we're also helping american internet and phone companies tell their customers about the government requests for customer information that they're receiving. for years those companies have been under gag orders. as a result, people around the world think that the american internet companies are giving up

far more information to the government than they likely are. those companies are losing billions of dollars because people think they're handing over all of their customers' data to the n.s.a. our provisions expand the options that companies have to issue their own transparency reports, and they let companies issue those reports more quickly. so our provisions give the public two ways to check on the government. government transparency reports and company reports as well. like all major bills, this bill is a compromise and we didn't get theaferg we wanted -- get everything that we wanted but our provisions will go a long way towards giving the american people the information that they need to evaluate the government's surveillance program.

madam president, after 9/11, our nation faced a security crisis. most americans had never lived through anything like that. we're now experiencing a crisis of trust, where a big part of the american public now thinks that our intelligence agencies are out to spy on them, not on foreign countries. the administration has committed to end the bulk collection of americans' data, and congress has written a bill to ban the bulk collection of americans' data. but unless we pass these transparency provisions, americans really have no way to know if the government is making good on those promises. our transparency provisions will focus -- will force the government to prove annually and publicly that bulk collection is

over. this is an unprecedented level of transparency and accountability, and that will allow the american people to decide for themselves whether the government is striking the right balance between privacy and security. madam president, we should take this bill up as soon as possible so that americans aren't in the dark a single day longer. we should take it up so that american companies stop losing business because of misperceptions about their role in domestic surveillance. we should take this bill up so that americans can get the information that they need to hold their government to account. madam president, before i yield the floor, i'd like to take a moment to recognize and thank alvero bedoyo, my chief counsel who is to my left.

this is alvaro's last week on my staff. alvaro has been a member of my team since the very first day in office, and i've relied on and trusted his counsel on so many things in the five years since. he has been instrumental in helping me launch and set the agenda for the subcommittee on privacy technology and the law that i chair. and we would not have reached this point in working to make the n.s.a. more transparent and accountable for the american people if it were not for alvaro. alvar's counsel has also been crucial as we sought to improve our nation's broken immigration system, as we fought for marriage equality and will lgbt

rights and as we work to ban apps that allow domestic abusers to stalk their victims. alvaro has been at my side dmierg very first week in -- during my very first week in office when the judiciary committee held confirmation hearings for sonia sotomayor to serve on the supreme court. that was my fifth day in the senate. i remember pulling some late nights preparing for that. alvaro's departure is bitter sweet for me. i'm of course sad to see alvaro leave but i'm very excited for him as well. he will soon become the founding executive director of georgetown law school's new center for privacy and technology. ihave no doubt that the folks at georgetown will learn what i already know, that alvaro is one

of the most talented, intelligent, hardest working, decent, good guy lawyers that i know. so thanks, alvaro, and thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota. mr. franken: i would note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. ms. warren: madam president, i ask that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. warren: madam president, our tax code is tilted toward the rich and the powerful. huge corporations hire armies of lobbyists and lawyers to create, expand and protect every last corporate loophole. that's how we end up, with a tax code that makes small businesses and restaurants and construction companies pay, that makes teachers and truck drivers and nurses pay, but that allows huge american corporations to make

billions of dollars in profits and not pay a single dime in taxes. the tax code is rigged. apparently even this rigged game doesn't go far enough for some corporations. those companies taking advantage of a new move, a loophole that allows them to maintain all of their operations in america but claim foreign citizenship so they can cut their u.s. taxes even further. now that's how the loophole works. an american company merges with a much smaller company located in a foreign country, usually a tax haven like ireland or bermuda. as long as the shareholders of the foreign company own 20% of the newly merged company, our tax laws allow that new company to claim foreign citizenship. that means that american companies can hire a bunch of wall street bankers and a bunch of lawyers, fill out some

paperwork, keep everything the same in their operations and dodge their u.s. taxes. tax lawyers call this process a corporate inversion. but don't let the bland name fool you. these companies are renouncing their american citizenship, turning their backs on this country simply to boost their profits. they're taking advantage of all the good things that our government helps provide: educated workers, roads and bridges, a dependable court system, patent and copy right protection and then running out on the bill. if a person did that, we'd call them a freeloader. we'd insist they pay their fair share. and that's exactly what our tax laws do for people who renounce their american citizenship. even if they don't sell their property in the u.s., when they renounce their citizenship, we treat them as if they had sold

it. if they try to send money back to a u.s. citizen, we tax that amount too. and if someone attempts to evade their tax obligations by renouncing their american citizenship, we bar them from coming back to this country. for a person who doesn't want to pay a fair share, our message is clear. you can renounce your citizenship, but don't come back and expect the rest of us to pick up the tab. but we don't do that for corporations. corporations can renounce their american citizenship and make absolutely clear in legal documents that they're doing it to avoid their u.s. tax obligations and not suffer any consequences. in this corner of the tax code, we've gone way past treating corporations like people. in this corner of the tax code, we're treating corporations better than people. that's not right.

that's why i've teamed up with senator levin and more than a dozen of our democratic colleagues to introduce the stop corporate inversions act. the bill is simple. it allows american corporations to renounce their citizenship only if they truly give up control of their company to a foreign corporation and truly move their operations overseas. the bill would help protect $17 billion in tax revenue, money that we could spend on head start programs, on fixing our roads and bridges, on investing in medical research. president obama and secretary lew have spoken out in favor of the proposal. i commend their leadership and i join them in urging the senate to pass this bill right away. now some say wait. they say we should address the loophole in this context, in the context only of broader tax

reform. now, i'm all for a major overhaul of our tangled tax system, but make no mistake, more and more companies are rushing to renounce their citizenship, to take advantage of this inversion loophole before we can get to full tax reform. we cannot allow the larger fights over tax reform to stop us from holding these freeloaders accountable. i believe the senate should act on this, but i'm also realistic. even if the senate passes this bill today, we know that, like so many good senate bills before it, it will face a tough road in the house. if we've learned anything from the past few years, i.t it's tht house republicans will claw, scratch, whimper, beg, or do whatever else it takes to defend every last corporate tax

loophole. but the administration doesn't need to wait for congress. it can use its existing authority to slow down and reduce the attractiveness of these sham inversions right now. according to a paper published this week by steve shea, a harvard law school professor and former senior tax policy official at the treasury department, the administration could take action today to reduce the tax benefits of corporate inversions. it could use its authority under section 385 of the tax code to prevent companies that renounce their citizenship from using any other loopholes to shield themselves from additional taxes that they would otherwise be required to pay. now, this won't totally solve the problem, but it would significantly reduce the benefits of corporate inversions, and it would be an important first step toward

treating companies that renounce america the same way we treat people who renounce america: as freeloaders who get cut off from other benefits. america is a great place to do business because of the investments we've made together. in massachusetts and across this country, we invest in public education, in our colleges and universities, producing millions of skilled workers. we invest in infrastructure, in our roads and bridges and ports, making it easier for our companies to move their products across the country and beyond. we invest in scientific and medical research, giving our companies access to the most innovative and cutting-edge technologies. we invest together to make america a place where any kid will have a chance to come up with an idea and turn it into

the next great american corporation. the companies that are pursuing these corporate inversions know all of this. that's why they are not actually leaving america behind. they just don't want to pay for it. achievements aren't magic. they didn't simply happen on their own or through dumb luck. america works. our government works. our democracy works. because we all pitch in and do our part to build the things that none of us can build alone, the things that give everyone a chance to succeed. if these companies want to leave all that behind, well, that's their right. but if they exercise that right, if they leave america behind, then they shouldn't get to turn around and claim all the privileges of being an american company. we've had enough of rich corporations taking whatever

they want and expecting everyone else to pick up the pieces. the time for freeloadinloading s over. thank you, madam president. i yield. mr. inhofe: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. inhofe: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that i be recognized up to 20 minutes as if in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. inhofe: thank you, madam president. it's been 22 days now since hamas has began its most recent campaign of terrorism attacks against the innocent citizens of israel. since the operation began, 32 tunnels have been uncovered that would have been used to attack israel. on saturday and sunday, this past saturday and sunday alone, almost 100 rockets were fired at israel. in the gaza strip since the beginning of operation protective eagle -- that would have been july 8 -- there have

been over 2,000 hamas rockets fired into israel with tel aviv and jerusalem both in the target. israel has responded as any nation protecting its people with airstrikes and ground strikes to silence these hamas terrorists. you know, the israelis are tough. i just have to remind people all the time that since their independence back in the 1940's, they've been attacked -- israel has been attacked six different times, and we remember how they were outnumbered in the six-day war in 1967, and they won, they prevailed. then again the same thing, i don't mean kip yo--then again tm kippur. that was the same thing. i've often kidded with them, and i've told prime minister netanyahu this. they're a great bunch of people

and we've got to continue to support them. the ha hamas terrorists are not only killing israelis, they're killing their own people, too, because they place their rocket launchers -- and we see this is happening. just yesterday we saw a picture of this. their rocket launchers in the middle of their own population centers. we're talking about in homes, in hospitals, in mosques. and like the cowards they are, they use civilians as human shields. and despite israel's extensive precautionary behavior and measures to avoid collateral damage, casualties, unfortunately, have occurred. and hamas bears complete responsibility for the civilian deaths. as prime minister netanyahu said -- and this is a quote -- "israel is using missile defense to protect our citizens, and hamas is using their civilians to protect their missiles." to date, the israelis' missile

defense system called the iron dome has intercepted over 400 hamas rockets headed toward the populated areas in israel. i was just in israel last month, and i visited the iron dome battery. you see, there has to be a place where they initiate these protective devices. and here they are over there, and i was so impressed with the young israeli troops that operate it in the southern city of schkalan. the same bat rite you see on tv every night comes from the gaza strip 13 kilometers away. i have a picture here i want to look at, madam president. this young -- this beautiful, young first lieutenant in the israeli army i met, and she is the one in charge of the a ashkalon battery down there. she is doing her duty as we speak. her name is lee shmolovich and i

salute her. as ranking member -- leave that up. it gives people the idea of the commitment that is being made by the israeli people and the successes they're having. as ranking member, which i am, of the senate armed services committee, i am proud to say that i have been a constant supporter of the iron diernlinge iron dome, which we've done on a nonpartisan basis. we have put in the authorization for $175 in this last authorization bill, then we added another $176 million that would take care of not just the iron dome but also other systems that we have like david sling and arrow iii. these are jointly done. i hear people say, you're sending all this stuff over from us to israel. if that were true, it would be worth doing it anyway. they're looking out after our

interests. those things they're not able to do in the middle east, we would have to be doing with our equipment, with our young people. but this isn't the case. they have a lot of brave people over there, and in the case of iron dome, of david sling, of arrow iii and a lot of the u.a.v.'s, their technology is things we do. we're doing it mutually for each other. and i think it is important also to note at this point that -- and nobody seems to put this together -- hamas would not have the rockets and the capability of trying to kill all these israelis if it were not for their greatest threat, and that is the country of iran. quite frankly, i think iran is the greatest threat to the united states also. a lot of people don't realize this. back in 2007, at that time it was classified, our intelligence said that by 2015 iran would

have the weapon and a delivery system. well, that's only six months from now. that has been reconfirmed in our unclassified intelligence starting in about 2010. so right now they're the ones over there that are -- it's really iran that is responsible for what hamas has been able to do. and i might ask the question, what is president obama doing? his rush to reach a nuclear agreement with iran has undermined years of bipartisan sanctions that were working. we have sanctions, not just by us but by european kurntion -- y european countries, other countries, that have really brought iran down -- not to their knees because they're still developing. but they were working. the president's agreement is to reduce iran' iran's sanctions in january -- he announced it in january. he has endorsed iran's right to

enrichur uranium. this is a deal he has cut. we'll pull off our sanctions so you'll be able to receive that the benefit of that. at the same time, we're going to let you go ahead and continue to enrich uranium. he's allowed iran to keep 19,000 centrifuges while unlocking $7 billion in assets. that's set as that were held -- that's assets that were held they can now use to their benefit. and he just extended the deal by agreeing to provide iran with additional $2.8 billion in frozen assets. that brings the $7 billion up to almost $10 billion, while iran is building a bomb, obama is releasing sanctions. i believe the iranians are using negotiations to buy time as they're developing their nuclear weapon. again, netanyahu called the president's agreement an historical mistake that is making the world a much more dangerous place. history is going to approve that he's right. obama should demand iran

dismantle its nuclear program but he won't do it. we should reinstate full sanctions, but president obama will not do it. and does anyone really believe that iran is not involved in hamas and its attacks? today obama is rewarding iran by releasing more financial assets to iran, funding that will be used to support more terrorism against israel. there is little to show for the administration's reckless administration's recognize gamble for israel -- reckless gamble for israel. the regime has repeatedly deceived us and iran has hidden that are program for two decades. israel fiscai guess rail lives a dangerous neighborhood. they need all the friends that they can get. you know, i keep hearing people talk about the two-state

solution. the two-state solution between hamas and israel is kind of interesting because hamas does not consider israel to be a state. so how can you have a two-state solution if you only have one state? that's the situation. nays that's why i want to -- that's why i want to salute the country of egypt. there are some other friends that we have over there. i have b been upset with some of the members in this body because they don't have an appreciation with what egypt and the part they play in the middle east and their sphowrt for israel. this started a long time ago. the camp david accords, that was 1979. the camp david accords, where they made a deal with israel. you have to keep in mind this was the military of egypt. it is hard for people in this country to seekers sometimes ther-- it is hard forpeople in o seekers sometimes there is a difference between the people in the country and the military. sometimes the military has said

that we will be protecting israel. we had not too long ago an effort from this body to try to the stop the shipment of some f-16's that egypt had already bought. grangded, that was -- granted, that was back during president morsi and his radical muslim brotherhood. but nones less these were going not to him but to the military. this newly elected president has successfully destroyed. he's working right along with the israelis. he has been involved and his people and his military destroying over 90% of the tunnels that are going from the sinai to gaza. so i only mention this because those individuals who don't understand this might consider punishing egypt. and if you punish egypt, you are punishing to the same degree israel. the turbulent times we face serve is as a reminder why the united states and israel have got to continue to work together and the same enemies that

threaten the existence of israel also want to destroy america. over the years the united states has greatly benefited from the cooperation with israel on missile defense technologies, and we've got to continue that critical partnership. israel is our most faithful ally, our most critical partner in the whole region and acts as a roadblock against terrorism, terrorism that would be hitting the united states of america. the united states stands shoulder to shoulder with israel since his first budget president obama has been degrading our military while also making the world more dangerous through an apologetic and reactive foreign policy of appeasement. i often quote hirea man. no man, those who cried appease, appease, are hanging by those they tried to please. we've got to get out