vermont i am very proud to say we bring before you a way to put a final stamp on beginning to end. this is not the beginning of the end. this is the beginning of the beginning of our effort to help those men and women who have defended our nation with honor and dignity, and we owe them that. so i urge my colleagues to vote in favor of a waiver of the budget act and to vote in favor of this legislation. i thank my colleagues. the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. sanders: mr. president, yesterday the house voted 420-5 for this conference report. they understood that taking care of veterans, as senator mccain just indicated, the men and women who put their lives on the line to defend us, who have survived so much -- sacrificed so much that this is a cost of war and, in fact,

what we are talking about is an emergency. that's what the house said overwhelmingly yesterday. on june 11, six or so weeks ago, by a vote of 93-3, the senate supported the sanders-mccain bill, and it was funded through emergency funded as a cost of war. this bill as senator coburn indicated, is about one-third of the cost of what we voted on in the original sanders-mccain bill. mr. president, let us defeat this point of order, let us stand with the veterans of this country. let us reform the v.a. and let us go forward. thank you. the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. coburn: i'll be very quick. what our colleagues should know is over the -- since 2009, the v.a. budget has increased 57. -- 58.7%, a 7% increase in the number of providers and 17% in the number of veterans using

those providers. the problem is not money at the v.a. the problem is management, accountability, and culture. so we're going to borrow $12 billion from our children and reward the poor behavior and charge it to our children. i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: the senator from arizona. mr. mccain: i would say in response to my dear friend from oklahoma, i agree with every single thing that he has said. but we must embark on fixing this problem, and choice and the ability to give the secretary of veterans' affairs the authority to hire and fire people are so important to me that i believe that it deserves our support. and i would also ask my friend from oklahoma, can we leave here and go -- leave here for five weeks and not address this

issue? and not -- we've got 50 veterans in my state that have probably died at least allegations of that. can we leave here and not act? if i'd have written this bill with only you and i say to my friend from oklahoma it would probably be $10 billion less and all of it paid for. but we had to negotiate, not only with the other side of the aisle but with the other side of the capitol. so this is not a perfect legislation, but for us not to pass it at this time would send a message to the men and women who have served this country that we have abandoned them. we can't do that. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. corker: mr. president, i first want to thank everybody who's worked on this. i know that -- that there are a lot of political conundrums people find themselves in, we've got an august recess, this issue has come up but i

wonder if i could ask the senator from oklahoma a question, who knows so much about these issues. our staff has looked at the c.b.o. report, and people keep talking about $10 billion on the floor, but the choice program is only funded for three years. and it looks to me like this bill is really creating an unfunded liability, it's a $250 billion cost over the next decade. and i can't verify that based on the c.b.o. numbers that have come out, but as we look at them, it looks like as a choice -- the choice program continues and grows, the number we're talking about is massive. so i do wish we had more detailed info from c.b.o., the kind of info we got on the first bill after the fact, for some reason reason we're not getting it on this, but it appears to me if this choice concept continues and we don't company do those things to wind down

v.a. for not providing services to these people because they're seeking it elsewhere, the cost of this could well be $250 billion over the next ten years, unpaid for. i'd like somebody to answer that. i don't know if senator coburn or someone else could. but we're not talking about $10 billion is all i'm saying. the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. coburn: an errant c.b.o. score that doesn't fit with reality or the information given to them by the v.a. the presiding officer: the senator from arizona. mr. mccain: what we're talking about people will go rather than drive for 40 hours and have that reimbursed and paid for, for a person to go to the local care provider. commonsense shows that costs one heck of a lot less, i would say to my colleague. the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. sanders: senator coburn talked to mention one thing about the increase, he forgot to mention we were if in two

wars, forgot to mention that 500,000 men and women came back from iraq and afghanistan with posttraumatic dress stress disorder and not to mention the loss of legs, arms, and eyesight and hearing. forgot to mention many of the veterans from world war ii, korea and vietnam are getting older and need more detailed care. so i think it is important that we put $5 billion into the v.a. to provide the doctors, the nurses, the personnel that they need so that the veterans can get into the v.a., have quality, timely care and that is what that will is about. -- this legislation is about. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion to waive. the yeas and nays have are previously been ordered. the clerk will call the roll. vote: vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: on the motion to waive, the ayes are 86, the nays are 8. the motion to waive is passed, is agreed to. the presiding officer: the question occurs on the adoption of the conference report. the senator from vermont. mr. sanders: mr. president, before we vote, i just very briefly -- the presiding officer: the senator from vermont is recognized. mr. sanders: i want to take this

opportunity to thank senator mccain for his intervention, for his making sure that we had serious negotiations. i want to thank the staff of the veterans' committee, steve robinson, dali manetris, becky dean, carlos ventre, janet gehring, elizabeth mckenzie, katherine manay, sha shannon lawyery, and janan jackson. these guys worked very hard for months and i very much appreciate what they did. the presiding officer: the question is on the adoption of the report. the yeas and nays are ordered. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: does any senator desire to vote or change their vote? on this vote the yeas are 91, the nays are 3. under the previous order requiring 60 votes for the adoption of this conference report, the conference report is agreed to. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to consideration of h. con. res. 111, which the clerk will report. the clerk: h. con. res. 111, concurrent resolution directing the clerk of the house of representatives to make certain corrections in the enrollment of the bill h.r. 3230. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the concurrent resolution is agreed to and the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table. the majority leader. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding

rule 22, following disposition of the house imagine related to h.r. 5021 -- that's the highway bill -- the senate vote on cloture on executive calendar 848. further if cloture is invoked, all postcloture time be expired. and at 5:30 p.m. on monday, september 8, the senate resume executive session and the senate proceed to vote on confirmation of the nomination. further if confirmed the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid on the table with no intervening action or debate and that no further motions be in order to the nomination and any statements related to the nomination be printed in the record, that president obama be immediately notified of the senate's action and the senate then resume legislative session. the presiding officer: is there objection? knocks. -- no objection. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader and the chamber will come to order. mr. reid: we will have two more votes. we'll be in session tomorrow. there will be no votes tomorrow. there will be some activity here that we have to complete. so the next vote will be monday,

september 8. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the chair lays before the senate a message from the house with respect to h.r. 5021. the clerk: resolved, that the house disagree to the amendment of the senate to the bill h.r. 5021 entitled an act to provide extension of federal highway aid -- highway safety motor carrier safety, transit and other programs funded out of the highway trust fund, and for other purposes. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i move to recede from the senate amendment to h.r. 5021 and ask for the yeas and nays on my motion. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? mr. reid: mr. president? mr. president? the presiding officer: there appears to be. the majority leader. the yeas and nays are ordered. the majority leader. mr. reid: mr. president, yes. we request two minutes debate on this side, one minute to the chairman of the finance

committee, another minute for the chairman of the environment and public works committee. is there any time requested over here? the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. reid: following that i ask 18 minutes be dispensed with. the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. wyden: senator reid, thank you. colleagues, it's no secret that this transportation bill is not the senate's first choice. however, the alternative to acting tonight on transportation is to put at risk america's economy, our communities, and our quality of life. as senator hatch noted earlier tonight, the senate had a real transportation debate this week with amendments, alternatives, and bipartisan initiatives. this will serve us well as we begin to work as soon as the senate returns to develop a long-term bipartisan transportation plan that ensures that our big-league economy is not plagued by little-league infrastructure. i urge the senate to support the

legislation. the presiding officer: the senator from will come to order. the senator from california. a senator: mr. president,, the senate is not in order. the presiding officer: the chamber will come to order. take your conversations out of the chamber. the senator from california is recognized. mrs. boxer: senators, i'll be brief. it's so unfortunate the house walked away from the work we did. the bipartisan work we did together. 79 votes. my goodness, country get that these days for mother's day. so it was fantastic what we did. the work of senator wyden and senator hatch, the work of senator carper and senator corker. the work of senator vitter in our committee that i chair. and it's really sad because what we wanted to do was to take care of this problem this year, in this congress, on our watch, not kick the can down the road. that's what they chose to do. it's most unfortunate and their pay-fors just were a lot of smoke and mirrors.

having said all that, we all know and you've asked me how am i going to vote, that we really can't walk away from the highway trust fund, we can't let it stagger and fall. millions of jobs and thousands of businesses depend on it. so i will be voting aye and we'll be working with senator wyden and the rest of my friends and colleagues here to make sure we get a multiyear bill as soon as possible. thank you. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion to recede. the yeas and nays have been previously ordered. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

the presiding officer: the senate will be in order.

vote:

the presiding officer: does any senator wish to vote or change their vote? if not, the ayes are 81, the nays are 13. the motion to recede in the senate amendment to h.r. 5021 is agreed to. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session and the clerk will report the motion

to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion. we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, hereby move to a bring the close the debated on the nomination of jill a. pryor of georgia to be united states circuit judge for the 11th circuit. signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is: is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of jill pryor of georgia to be united states circuit judge for the 11th circuit, shall be brought to a close? the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: does any senator in the chamber wish to vote or change their vote? if not, the yeas are 58, the nays are 33. the motion is agreed to. mr. reid: madam president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i renew my request that i made earlier this evening. i can consent the senate proceed to calendar number 220, the reid-mcconnell-mikulski substitute amendment at the desk providing emergency appropriation for the iron dome defense system measure be agreed to, that the joint resolution as amended be read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid on the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? a senator: objection. the presiding officer: objection

is heard. mr. menendez: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from new jersey. mr. menendez: madam president, i rise in support of all of the career foreign service officers whose nominations have been held up in the chamber until there is a crisis somewhere in the world, until there is a presidential or a vice-presidential trip to some part of the world that suddenly demands our attention, and then miraculously holds are lifted and nominees are approved. on a thursday, malaysian airlines flight 17 crashed in eastern ukraine. on the following monday, the senate confirmed michael lawson as the u.s. ambassador to the international civil aviation organization. he had been pending before the senate. his first day on the job, his

first time meeting his colleagues, he was forced to grapple with this crisis. in the last week or ten days, two more plane crashes have occurred in taiwan and in mali and -- an algerian plane. random events around the world cannot determine when the senate acts on nominees. we cannot continue to follow a policy of confirmation by crisis. it took the president to travel to saudi arabia, an important ally, and the vice president to travel to chile for the senate to confirm the nominees to those countries. in the case of chile, ambassador hammer was taken to his new office in santiago for his first day on the job on air force two because the senate approved his nomination just before the vice president was to visit chile. madam president, it shouldn't require flying on air force two to get to your posting for your first day of work as a united states ambassador. take the case of our ambassador to qatar. she waited for months and then

bergdahl was exchanged for five guantanamo detainees released to qatar and suddenly she was approved. they almost require the president to be wheels up on air force one on his way before we confirmed an ambassador to saudi arabia. i repeat -- the criteria for confirming nominees should not be determined by a sudden, just-breaking crisis with the urgent need to fill a vacant post. confirmation by crisis is not a strategy, and it is not in the national security interests of the united states. now, the foreign relations committee has moved judiciously in some cases with record-setting speed to confirm nominees. in the case of obstructionism on the floor of the senate, the committee has proven that bipartisanship is not only possible but it can thrive when american national security interests are put first, and it's my view that we must lift up our ambassadors and their

families, not put them down. these individuals are serving our nation, and their families are sacrificing for our nation. they deserve better. our career foreign service officers serve democratic and republican presidents, and they should not, must not be treated as political pawns. we cannot continue to allow the pulpits where we preach american values to remain vacant. no nation can listen to us if we're not present to speak for ourselves. american leadership can only occur if american leaders are present on the international stage. in the senate standoff that has left so many career foreign service nominees in political and personal limbo is damaging our credibility, undermining our national security, and it has to end now. so i rise today for the career ambassadors who have not gotten the decency of a vote in the senate, career ambassadors who are waiting along with their families for months, some more

than a year, to take their post. they are trapped on the executive calendar, unable to assume their appointed post because the leadership on the republican side has chosen to hold them hostage as a political tool. they have consciously chosen a strategy to do nothing, pass nothing, approve nothing and leave key diplomatic posts unfilled for months. threatening national security and our ability to conduct foreign policy. so madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the following nominees -- i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to executive session to consider the following noomtions -- calendar number 524, adam scheinman to be a special representative of the president for nuclear nonproliferation for the rank of ambassador. calendar number 533, karen

stanton to be an ambassador. calendar number 536, eric schultz to be ambassador to the republic of zambia. calendar number 540, donald lu to be ambassador to the republic of albania. calendar number 542, amy hyatt to be ambassador to the public of palau. calendar number 544, john hoover to be the ambassador to the republic of sierra leone. calendar number 546, matthew harrington, to be the ambassador to the kingdom of lasoto. calendar number 548, thomas daughton to be the ambassador to namibia. calendar number 696, louis moreno to be ambassador to jamaica. calendar number 699, maureen cormack to be the ambassador to bosnia herzegovina. calendar number 707, linda

thomas-greenfield, an assistant secretary secretary of state of african affairs to be a member of the board of directors of the african development foundation. calendar number 898, ted osius to be ambassador to the republic of vietnam. calendar 902, gentry smith to be a rank of ambassador to the office of foreign missions. calendar number 927, leslie basset to be the ambassador to paragraph way. calendar number 953, george albert proy to be ambassador to the republic of kazakhstan. calendar number 954, bernikaf to be ambassador to the people's republic of bangladesh. calendar number 95, james d. pettit to be ambassador to the republic of moldova. john r. bass to be ambassador to the republic of turkey.

calendar number 957, alan muster to be ambassador to turkmenistan. calendar number 958, todd robinson to be ambassador to the republic of guatemala. calendar number 961, erica j. barks-rubbles to be ambassador to the republic of rwanda. calendar number 962, brent robert heartley to be the ambassador to the republic of slovenia. calendar number 966, michelle jean seasong to be deputy representative of the united states of america to the united nations with the rank and status of ambassador and a deputy representative of the united states of america in the security council of the united nations. and then finally calendar number 967, michelle seasong to be representative of the united states of america to the sessions of the general assembly of the united nations during her tenure of service as a deputy representative of the united states of america to the united nations. the presiding officer: is there

objection? the senator from wyoming. mr. enzi: i don't think he's finished with his unanimous consent. mr. menendez: and -- i appreciate that. their nominations be confirmed en bloc, the motions to reconsider with no intervening action or debate, and no further motions be in order to any of the nomination, that any related statements be printed in the record, that the president be immediately notified of the senate's action and the senate then resume legislative session. the presiding officer: is there objection? the senator from wyoming. mr. enzi: reserving the right to object, we used to pass ambassadors and all kinds of people en bloc like that, but we have this nuclear option now that the majority chose so it takes a little longer to do that whole process, and on that basis, i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. menendez: madam president, you know, i don't know about nuclear options. i do know about national security. when we have objections to some

of career ambassadors -- career ambassadors. i'm not even talking about other nominees who are equally as important to places in the world where we face a challenge, but when i extract those out of the list that are also pending before the senate, in critical places in the world and just say my god, if a career ambassador, someone who serves under democratic and republican administrations, has committed their life to the service of our country and the foreign service cannot get to their places, you know, i don't understand -- i don't understand how we can actually object to places like guatemala, where we're having the crisis that we just debated right now. wouldn't it be great to have a u.s. ambassador to guatemala to direct the guatemalan government about our concerns, about how children are coming here? wouldn't it be great to have the ambassador to turkey at a time

that we have all of these challenges in the region where turkey has a huge number of syrian refugees? and we say we object to those? vietnam, where we are looking at a 1-2-3 nuclear agreement and would where we are concerned about what china is doing in the south china sea as it ultimately challenges vietnam in international waters for drilling purposes, and the list goes on and on. so let me at least try some, if i can't do them as a bloc, let's see if we can get somebody confirmed here at the end of the day to critical positions. so let me ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to executive session to consider this following nomination -- calendar number 968, john teff

to be ambassador to russia. a career ambassador. if we cannot send a united states ambassador to russia in the midst of the enormous challenges, so i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to executive session to consider nomination -- calendar number 968, john teff, ambassador to russia, that the nomination be confirmed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, that no intervening action or debate, that no further motions be in order to any -- to that nomination, that any related statement be printed in the record, the president be immediately notified of the senate's action and the senate resume legislative session. the presiding officer: is there objection? the senator from wyoming. mr. enzi: this is the procedure the majority set up and the majority are going to be stuck with their decision to delay people, thinking that they could speed them up and take away some of the minority rights. so i object. the presiding officer: objection

is heard. mr. menendez: madam president, this is not a procedure the majority set up. the procedure that is being set up is where career nominees and critical nominees are being held on the floor as a procedure that the republicans had decided to do. let me try once again, let's see whether there's a more important place than russia. i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nomination -- mark lippert, the ambassador to south korea, calendar number 893, that that nomination be confirmed, that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate, that no further motion be in order to that nomination, that any related statement be printed in the record and the president immediately notified of the senate's action and the senate then resume legislative session. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. enzi: this is a political appointment, an career appointment.

if i objected to the career appointments, i'd certainly object to the political appointments. i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. menendez: it's true it's a political appointment but to the republic of south korea at a time that we are facing challenges in the south china sea where there is a dispute between china and korea, where we have critical interests, where we are dealing with north korea, we can't have an ambassador to south korea. let me just say, madam president, that i could go through a list of critical countries, critical countries and it's pretty amazing to me. i have some of my colleagues tom to the floor and talk about national security. well, national security isn't onlying about about having a trigger and a gun. national security is also about interrogatory an ambassador in -- having an ambassador in the country to ultimately press

press our case and our concerns as it relates to our bilateral relationship with that country. places like russia which was objected to, places like south korea, places like guatemala where we're having the crisis, a whole bunch of african countries that were in the career list, we're going to have the african leaders come here next monday and tuesday, but we're not going to have ambassadors to a whole bunch of their countries. career ambassadors to a whole bunch of their countries. that is not in the national interest and security of the the united states and i hope after having waited quite some time to finally get to this point where i felt the necessity to come to the floor and ask for unanimous consent instead of the trickle that we occasionally get because there's a crisis and therefore there's a response to the crisis that we can avoid respond buying crisis and having people in places that maybe would help us to ensure that the crisis doesn't take place. and with that, madam president, i yield the floor.

mr. carper: would the senator yield for a question? would the chairman name the ambassador, the ambassador to guatemala. mr. menendez: the gentleman who is nominated, a career nominee to be the ambassador to guatemala is todd d. robinson. mr. carper: i would just say to my colleagues, as chairman of the homeland security committee, i've been down in a number of central american countries, guatemala, el salvador, if there is anybody that needs a u.s. ambassador down there, it's guatemala. we see all these young people, not so young people coming to this country, trying to get in this country. the reason they're coming up here is there is no hope, no economic hope, crime, lack of opportunity and we have no ambassador there. we haven't had an ambassador there for months. and i would just make a plea for

the chairman to make a unanimous consent request, if only for the ambassador to guatemala. i would just plead with my colleague, my friend from wyoming not to object. mr. menendez: i would say to my distinguished colleague from delaware that i already included the ambassador to guatemala in my list, and there was objection. and if the senator from wyoming, who i believe is not doing this in his own course but on behalf of his leadership, has an indication that he would accept that, i would be happy to do it but otherwise i think we'd be further not being able to achieve it. mr. carper: i would have question. would you one more time make the unanimous consent request for todd robinson. mr. menendez: sure. i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nomination --

calendar number 958, todd d. robinson, to be the ambassador to guatemala, that the nomination be confirmed, that the motion to reconsider be made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate or further motions to that in order be in order to that nomination, any related statements be print printed in the record, that the president be immediately notified of the senate's action and the senate resume legislative session. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. enzi: reserving the right to object. the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. enzi: we have been through this nomination and the others before, and there is a procedure that we've set up that's recognized now by both sides, but that our side feels forced into because of the nuclear option that the other side broke the rules in order to change the rules, and the way that works, the majority leader is is still the one that has ever power in this body except congressional review acts, and he hasn't chosen to bring these up in the normal order.

instead, asking to bring them up en bloc. my college roommate was a career ambassador and i helped him get assignments and brought a lot of people through en bloc at the same time. but that was before we did the nuclear option. so on that basis, i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. menendez: i would close on this, look, the reality is that if each of these ambassadors was going to be brought up and have to go through cloture and go through the whole process of time or the debate time that would be attributed to each one of them, we would spend the rest of this congressional session doing exactly that. that would not help our national security interests in terms of getting these people in place. i want to get these people in place. and i've limited the request to countries that have career individuals. and to countries that also are critical for our national security. and i just hope that in the

national interest of the united states we can come to a better position at some other time. with that, madam president, i yield the floor. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: cloture having been invoked on the prior nomination, the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, jill a. pryor of georgia to be united states circuit judge for the 11th circuit. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. enzi: madam president, i'd ask unanimous consent to be able to go into morning business with 10-minute limitations and the right to speak. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the

senator from oregon. mr. merkley: reserving the right to object, would you consider modifying that request to include me to follow on, following your remarks? mr. enzi: i would, certainly. mr. coburn: reserving the right to object. the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. coburn: senator rubio has been waiting all day. i would ask the two minutes that senator rubio would like to have would be available between senator enzi and you, senator merkley. mr. merkley: i have absolutely no objection to that. mr. enzi: i revise my i ask unanimous consent for my speech, then senator rubio for two minutes and then senator merkley. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. menendez: reserving the right to object. i'm sorry. the presiding officer: the senator from new jersey. mr. menendez: i want to join senator rubio in his. if it can have two minutes as well before going to senator merkley.

the presiding officer: without objection the modified request is agreed to. the senator from wyoming. mr. enzi: thank you, madam president. the speech that i need to give now is not one of my favorite speeches. it's a very important speech. there's an old saying we've all heard before, good help's hard to find. here's my experience. good help is not only hard to find, it's almost impossible to replace. those words have come to my mind quite often in the days since my state director, robin bailey, told us that she had decided to retire. as we began our search for a new state director, it soon became apparent that you can't replace robin bailey. there's only one robin bailey. i was fortunate to have the original on my team since that first day that i came to washington to represent the people of the state of wyoming. robin's story and her service in the center begins in 1977 in cheyenne. she heard there was an opening on senator malcolm wallop's staff.

it sounded like an interesting job, it would give her a chance to work on behalf of the people of wyoming. she submitted an application for the position of office manager. fortunately, malcolm made the perfect choice and added her to his staff. he was fortunate that robin was there to make sure that everything was done and done well. serving on malcolm wallop's staff for a few years, robin's husband ron accepted a job in rock springs. they packed their bags and moved there. that was not to be the end of robin's senate career. in 1984, senator al simpson chose her to take the challenges of the office in rock springs. later the baileys moved to gillette, my hometown, and senator simpson just changed where she worked. here's where i come in. i'll never forget in 1966 and the decision that my wife, diane that, and i made to run for the united states senate. things came together for us and soon after the victory parties were over, it became apparent that i had a bigger issue to contend with -- putting my staff together. now that the campaign had ended, i had to make sure we continued

to provide the people of wyoming with the support and assistance to which they'd come to rely on over the years. i started going through the stacks of resumes and then visited with my predecessor, al simpson. over the years, he'd put together a remarkable staff. some of them were willing to stay on. i was delighted that robin bailey was willing to continue to serve the people of wyoming out of the gillette office. over the years, my staff and i have noticed that robin has two responses to most questions. either she knows the answer or she knows how to find the answ answer. i don't think anyone has a better or more extensive system of resources and contacts than she does. having her on my staff came in handy when in 2000 i had to find a new state director. do rotaker who was senator simpson's state director then my state director, decided to retire and enjoy all that she'd earned from the service to the people of the state. fortunately she and i and all my staff knew we had someone already prepared that would be a perfect fit.

that's robin bailey. we extended her duties and we putter in charge of all the state offices. she not only exceeded our expectations, she took everything to the next level. she was a constant source of support, guidance and direction for the people in my state offices and she was always there with a word of good advice or a suggestion about how to take on a problem. she was a great mentor to my staff. the new ones and the more seasoned veterans, because of her great love of and knowledge about wyoming, were able to do great things. she's the kind of resource every office needs to have if we're to do the best possible job of taking care of the people in our home states. my chief of staff has often said that robin is the best and most natural supervisor he has ever met, and every day she's been on my staff she's proven the truth of those words and her value as one of my team leaders. robin is one of the people who stands out from all the rest. she's known and respected by all. she has a talent for not only knowing what's going on in wyoming but also understanding

what it means in the short- and long-term. robin has never worked for me. she has always worked with me. that's part of what made her a great asset for senator malcolm wallop, senator al simpson and then me. that makes three generations of wyoming congressional delegation and family. robin could write a book about being an effective state director. it would be the "how-to" manual of all time. it would help a person learn how to be an effective leader, to help others, to be the eyes and ears of what's happening, and to enjoy the job. all at the same time. a big part of the job has been traveling around the state to see what's going on and how people feel about it. in my office, i relied on robin to travel around wyoming and represent me at a long list of meetings and hearings and presentations. we wanted her there because she's a good listener. she not only hears what the people have to say, she has an uncanny sense of understanding what they're really driving at and how best to address that. she would then let me know what she saw and heard and it was the

next best thing to being there myself. you've heard the expression, "you can't be everywhere at once." robin's been my solution to the problem. her travels have allowed her to get to know people in every corner of the state. she not only enjoys meeting people but she welcomes the chance to get to know them and to help with their problems. that's why she's been able to make a difference over the years in more lives than we'll ever know. her life has not been without its challenges, however. and one such challenge came about when her husband, ron, began to have some serious issues with his heart and then alzheimer's. it was a difficult time for her but she never complained about what she to do. she just did it. she honored her commitment to her husband and she continued to provide him with the support, care and attention that has always been a hallmark of their relationship. when he passed away and she lost this great love of her life, she thought it might be time to consider making changes in the rest of her life as well. when robin told diana and me that she felt the time had come to retire and follow a different

path in life, we did what most every one of us would do -- we told her t take a few years makg up her mind. unfortunately that didn't work and now she's begun to make plans for the next chapter of her life. she'll be spending more time with her family, h especially hr grandchildren. she's already shown she's a very special and spectacular grandmother. i know her family will enjoy having her take a more active role in their lives. i know she'll continue to make a difference helping others. she'll continue being a great gift to all who know her and for those she is soon to meet. i don't think diana and i have ever met someone who's more focused or more determined to help others. for robin, every day that's spent making life easier for someone else is a good day. we're all sorry to see robin close this chapter of her life but we know she's doing it for all the right reasons. she said she had reached a point in her life when it just seemed to be time to try something new. we'll miss robin's wealth of resources, knowledge, skills and abilities that just can't be replaced. over the years, she set a very

high mark of excellence. her achievements, the milestones she's established in my office for outstanding effort and accomplishment and her determination to make wyoming a better place to live from one corner to the other will be a legacy of her service to the senate. , to the people and to the state of wyoming. even to our nation. in the years to come, each member of my staff will take with them a different favorite memory of working with robin. for my chief of staff, it will be the way in which she would always bring a solution with her to any discussion of a problem. for others, it would be the way she would always find a way to handle any issue, no more how difficult or perplexing, or somehow she seemed to be so familiar with everyone's issues. she also seemed to know almost everyone that was involved. for my part, i'll always remember how much it meant to me to know that i could ask her to take on an assignment and leave it with her knowing it would be done well. she always found a way to do what was needed and expected and then some more. perhaps her greatest gift is her ability to effectively manage her time and resources.

for robin, it's not a problem if there's only 24 hours a day because she makes the best use of every minute of every hour. good luck, robin, and may god continue to bless you and all those who come into your life in the years to come. you'll be missed but we know where to find you. it's good to know that you'll never be more than a phone call away. we hope you fully enjoy your retirement. you've earned it and then some. i yield the floor. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. rubio: thank you, madam president. i ask unanimous consent that i be recognized to speak for up to

10 minutes as in morning business. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. rubio: thank you. and i know senator menendez is going to speak on this topic as well so we intended tonight to come here to the senate floor and offer a unanimous consent agreement to pass sanctions in venezuela. first of all, let me thank the white house for what they announced yesterday and that is sanctions against human rights violators and corrupt government officials in venezuela who have been involved since -- well, for a very long time but especially since the 4th of february in grotesque human rights violations against young people and all people in venezuela. it's a topic that's not often talked about, unfortunately, these days, given all the things that are going on around the world. but what's happening in venezuela, in our own hemisphere, is startling. first, you have the complete erosion of democracy in that country that's been going on since the rein of nicholas chavez and now the predecessor it's gotten progressively work.

earlier this year, thousands of young people in venezuela took to the streets to protest what was happening. and they were met with some of the most brutal attacks we've seen in this hemisphere in quite awhile. we documented that on the floor consistently. and so beginning from that moment forward, we have worked here in this body to seek sanctions against those individuals, against the people responsible for these human rights violations, who also happen to be, by the way, incredibly corrupt. in fact, i would go so far as to say that virtually every major figure in vens today in the ruling pearpt is -- venezuela today in the ruling party is corrupt. it's absolutely amazing how these individuals in charge of government in that country are systematically stealing the funds of the venezuelan people. and the cases are extraordinary. there are times, for example, when the president of that country, who, by the way, was elected in a illegitimate election, is benefiting from the currency exchange rate and manipulating that. top-level members of his cabinet who are skimming off the top of the country's oil company and

pocketing the money. and what's even more outrageous about it is that them and the people that surround them in the private sector are taking those funds and investing them and enjoying them here in the united states of america. and so i felt for a very long time, as have my colleagues, that this was an important issue that needed to be addressed and it needed to be addressed by sanctioning those individuals. and we've named many of them. so yesterday the white house announced that many of these individuals will now be denied visas to travel to the united states. in fact, just yesterday, a government official from venezuela, who was headed here towards america, was not able to come because of these visa sanctions. and so we are grateful for that and we are grateful for the administration's implementation of this. but while we are grateful for the denial of visas, it does not go far enough. we also need to sanction their assets. and so that's why earlier this year i in conjunction with the chairman of the foreign relations committee and senators nelson, mccain and kirk, proposed the legislation that has -- that -- to authorize both visa restrictions and also

financial sanctions against these individuals. and we have been extraordinarily patient in working through the process to ensure that that happens. the ranking member of the committees, senator of tennessee, senator corker, had initial reservation abouts it and they were legitimate reservations. and as a result, the chairman was kind and wise enough to hold a hearing where we heard testimony about the reality on the ground in venezuela. we then proceeded to vote on this in the committee and the committee voted and approved it by a vote of 13-2, if i recall correctly. and the result is that now -- that happened on may 22. and then we patiently worked with our colleagues to try to bring this to the floor, understanding that with all the issues going on, it would be difficult to schedule a roll call vote on it but we would try to pass it by a process here in the senate we call unanimous consent, where we ask all of our colleagues to approve it. and we've worked patiently to do that. and while he had initial reservations earlier this week, senator corker lifted those reservations and i thank him for that and then the way that he's

taken this so seriously and in his cooperation in that manner. so my intention this evening was to come here on the senate floor and ask for unanimous consent of this body to pass this resolution, but some of my colleagues have expressed concern about some of the costs that potentially are embedded in this. let me explain those costs for point of clarification. there were two in general. the first was a $15 million funding for a democracy program in venezuela which i believe is a worthy endeavor. but for purposes of overcoming those objections and getting this done, i had agreed, and i think the other sponsors as we well, that we would be willing to suspend that in an effort to get this accomplished. the second is a little bit more nebulous. the second involves administrative costs. basically the costs of identifying these assets and implementing these sanctions. and, by the way, those costs are not unique to this. they're not even real costs in the way you and i would think of costs. it's not they have toe go out and write an additional -- they have to go out and write an additional check and borrow money from china to pay for it. it's basically the same thing

they would have to do if the president announced these sanctions, which he has the power to do. and so what we did -- and as a result of that, is we looked at t. the total cost of that is between $6 million and $8 million, even though that number is probably not that high. but it would basically involve identifying the individuals and identifying the assets that they have that we could sanction. there was concern about that and we were willing to find an additional measure to sunset the implementation of these sanctions in 2016 to lower the cost even further and yet we still heard that there might be some objections. over the last few minutes, however, in consultation with the senator from oklahoma, we have tried to craft what i believe we hope we can arrive at over the next few hours a -- a solution to this problem that assuages his concern and allows us to get this done. so in the interest of trying to achieve it in that manner, i'm going to withhold asking unanimous consent today for purposes of hopefully arriving at that agreement over the next few hours and early tomorrow

morning so that we can attempt to get this done in a way tha that -- that achieves what we're trying to do. this is critically important. i want to point out for purposes of by point of comparison, the senate in april approved a bill which i supported -- and i'm glad that we did -- that authorized virtually identical sanctions against human rights violators in ukraine. that bill authorized $50 million for funds for the democracy program. that bill authorized $100 million in security assistance. and visa and financial sanctions on human rights violators. and it implemented the sanctions in the ukrainian human rights bill cost $10 million. none of none of those funds, by the way, were offset in the way that term was used here. there was no objection to that. the total, by the way, of the cost of that bill was $160 million. this issue -- this bill before us is much more modest ints