quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

s mr. chambliss: mr. president, i ask that the quorum call be dispensed with and i be allowed to speak in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. president, i rise today along with my colleague from new hampshire s been very focused, as havere i, on this issue of the release of detainees from guantanamo and the fact that we know that not

only are there dangerous individuals there that should not be released, but we also know that these individuals are returning to the fight and they're scheming, planning and intending to do harm to america and americans. so i want to visit this issue again and i want to start off just by saying that it's well founded in our nation's history that the united states has the authority to hold enemy combatants until the end of hostilities in order to prevent their return to the battlefield. for the past several years, each national defense authorization act that has been signed into the law by the president has recognized this principle and made clear that any al qaeda affiliated terrorists, whether foreign or american, who takes up arms against the united states can be held under the law of war. because congress authorized the use of military force against

these terrorists shortly after they attacked us on september the 11th, 2001, detention within a military framework is often the best means of collecting valuable intelligence to prevent further terrorist attacks while ensuring that they remain on the sidelines for the duration of the conflict. now, there are fundamental failures of the administration in the war against terrorism. first, when the president announced the closing of the detention facility at guantanamo in january of 2009, he left our nation without a clear policy for detaining and interrogating suspected terrorists. without such a policy, including one that identifies a facility for holding terrorists that are captured outside of afghanistan, the intelligence community's ability to conduct ongoing intelligence operations have been severely limited. second and even more alarming is

the ill-advised release of these gitmo detainees back to the battlefields from which they came. i would suggest to the senator from new hampshire that we are doing material harm to our national security efforts by purging the guantanamo facility, particularly without a long-term plan or guaranteed monitoring -- of monitoring, and i know she is going to address this issue. in fact, those who remain at guantanamo bay today are not low-level fighters who were in the wrong place at the wrong time. they are some of the most hardened, determined extremists who we have encountered and remain singularly focused on bringing violence to the united states and our allies. shockingly, many of the detainees that are being transferred were determined to be too dangerous to transfer by the administration's own guantanamo review task force yet many of them are still being

transferred. i've been to guantanamo on several different occasions, the most recent time being about three months ago and i can attest once again that these truly are the most hardened and the most dangerous terrorists that exist today. particularly that are obviously in captivity. and these individuals, as you see them on the screen in their cells, you can see in their eyes the criminal activity -- is that criminal activity is occupying 100% of their thought and that they truly are determined that they're going to one of these days get out of that facility and return to the battlefield. there was one particular anecdote where the leadership at -- at the facility and i were

engaging in a conversation and it was close to the cell of one of the individuals and all of a sudden we realized that that individual was telling other cellmates that he was trying to hear what was going on in our conversation. it has gotten that sophisticated on their part when it comes to trying to figure out ways to communicate with the outside of ideas that they have about killing and harming americans and planning and scheming for one day, as i said earlier, to leave that place and to reengage in the fight. instead of working with congress to develop commonsense policies to enable our national security personnel to detain and interrogate terrorists, this administration is releasing them back with little thought to their future actions.

in this haphazard fashion, there is no uniform procedure for the continued monitoring of these individuals, individuals, i might add, who have already demonstrated a propensity for violence. each country accepts them on their own terms with varying commitments and cooperation, making further monitoring by the intelligence community and our partners nearly impossible. this is neither a safe nor a sustainable way of ensuring the national security of the united states, yet it has become an all-too-common practice in this administration. we know for a fact that a number of these former detainees are returning to the battlefield with renewed zeal to wage war against our american way of life. according to the director of national intelligence, an additional four former guantanamo detainees were confirmed to rejoin the fight between july, 2013, and january,

2014. raising the combined suspected and confirmed recidivism rate to 29%. in addition, although the next report has not been released, we know this number will increase. we constantly face new plots and operatives looking for ways to murder americans, such as the may, 2012 plot that put another i.e.d. on a united states-bound aircraft. thankfully, this plot and others didn't materialize, but we are not going to always be that fortunate, especially in the absence of meaningful interrogation of terrorists and their imminent return to the battlefield. we know that al qaeda and the arabian peninsula or aqap, today represents one of the biggest threats to the nation's homeland as well as personnel serving

overseas. they are continually plotting against our interests and seeking new recruits, especially among our own citizens as well as former guantanamo detainees. explosive experts such as ibrahim al-asiri continue to roam free, posing a tremendous threat to the safety and security of u.s. citizens. it's mr. al-asiri that is the bomb-making expert that has attempted to device bombs that cannot be detected by the equipment in airports so that they can hopefully place a bomb either inside an individual or on an individual who can secure a seat on an airplane without being -- without that bomb being detected as they go through the various checkpoints at airports around the world. additionally, as the senator from new hampshire again will allude to, this proposed closure

of guantanamo bay presents significant risks for the united states as well as yemeni efforts to counter aqap inside of yemen. a substantial portion of the detainees remaining at guantanamo bay are, in fact, yemeni citizens. transferring these individuals to a country plagued by prison breaks, assassinations and open warfare at this point could prove catastrophic. these detainees would likely rejoin several other former gitmo detainees who have returned to the fight in yemen, further destabilizing the country and worsening an already tenuous security situation. the most recent example of a totally failed and dangerous policy on the part of this administration is the exchange of the taliban five back in may. that decision to release five individuals who now wake up every morning thinking of ways to kill and harm americans was

wrong. this administration clearly and cappously failed in its obligations of notifying congress. it appears they did not comply with this requirement because they knew there would be objections to the release of those five individuals from both sides of the aisle, here in the senate as well as across the capitol on the house side. this administration clearly decided that they wanted to intentionally release these individuals in spite of the fact that we had included language in the previous defense authorization bills requiring specific notification to congress in advance of them doing so. the administration violated the antideficiency act by obligating funds that were not legally available.

while the president has a habit of ignoring laws relating to domestic policies such as health care and immigration, this overreach will likely directly threaten the lives of our citizens and service members in afghanistan. in the wake of the president's bold defiance of congressional oversight, i wrote the white house requesting the declassification of the 2009 guantanamo review task force assessments for the taliban five. i also requested on the floor of the united states senate that the administration release these files so that the american people can know what i know and what the presiding officer knows and decide for themselves if that was the right decision. today i renew that request and call on this administration to call on its failed promises of transparency and show to the american people the very real stakes they are gambling with in

their attempts to empty guantanamo. nevertheless, this dangerous trend continues unabated, even amidst bipartisan calls for greater oversight after the taliban five release. in november alone, seven detainees were transferred, three to the country of georgia, two to slovakia, one to saudi arabia and another to kuwait. some of these countries have previously had detainees sent to them. we have mixed reaction as to the re-engagement or the oversight that's provided in those countries. some of these countries have never had a detainee that they have taken possession of. we have no idea what kind of supervision they are going to exercise over these individuals. so whether it is in iraq, afghanistan or in other parts of the middle east, americans have fought and died in the war against al qaeda. our nation may be weary of war,

but threatening elements still remain, and those five individuals, the taliban five that i just alluded to, are clearly threats to the united states. i urge president obama as well as my congressional colleagues and the american people not to abandon the gains that we have made in this fight against terrorism since 9/11. we must remain steadfast in our resolve to defeat extremists who oppose freedom, democracy and our american way of life. i look forward in my remaining days here in the united states senate to working with colleagues such as my friend from new hampshire and other members of this body as we continue to face this growing threat. with that, mr. president, i would yield. the presiding officer: the senator from new hampshire. ms. ayotte: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i would also ask to speak as if in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection.

ms. ayotte: thank you, mr. president. i just want to thank my colleague from georgia, senator chambliss, for his incredible leadership on the intelligence committee, on the armed services committee and his deep commitment to ensuring that our country remains safe, that our freedoms are protected and i dare say from the time i have been in the senate, senator chambliss is one of the most knowledgeable people in this body about the threats that we face, how we address those threats and how we ensure that america remains safe, so i want to thank senator chambliss for his incredible leadership in this body, not only on the issue of how do we address ensuring that the detainees that are held that are very dangerous at guantanamo bay do not present additional threats to our country and to our allies but on so many issues ensuring that our

intelligence officials have strong information and oversight to ensure that america remains protected. i rise in support of what my colleague from georgia has just talked about. if we look at what's happening around the world, the recent developments with isis combined with the continuing threats that we face here at home from al qaeda and its affiliates, it underscores the continuing need that we have for a military detention facility that is outside the united states of america, that prevents enemy combatants who are at war with us from returning to the battle and allows us a secure location to gather intelligence to ensure that when we capture a member of al qaeda or when we capture one

of its affiliates that is in a position where the organization is threatening the united states of america, that we take the opportunity to ensure that there is a full and complete interrogation of those terrorists to make sure that we know everything that they know to ensure that we prevent future attacks and that the united states of america is protected. so i would argue as we look at what's happening around the world, the need for this detention facility actually has become more apparent, and yet what we have seen with the administration, as senator chambliss has so eloquently outlined, is that there has been a push, there was a political promise made in the president's campaign to close guantanamo, and despite having a policy as to how we're going to handle the capture of these enemy

combatants, one that he works with congress on and how we will ensure the full interrogation of these combatants to ensure information that we need to glean to protect our country, we've seen a rush to release people from guantanamo that has been accelerated recently, as my colleague from georgia talked about, where the department of defense has announced the transfer of seven detainees fairly recently, and some of these detainees were reportedly assessed to be high risks, and there is also questions about what are the conditions that the countries that are taking these detainees are going to ensure that they don't return back into the fight where we have direct evidence of a 29% re-entry rate where those that have been released from guantanamo, not just under this administration but under prior administration who are confirmed or suspected of having reengaged in

terrorism. there is nothing that must appall our troops more than to be on the battlefield where our intelligence officials or our allies to re-encounter a terrorist that we had safely detained at a detention facility at guantanamo bay and to see that person again and to know that they continue to be a threat to the united states of america and to our interests. and so i would urge -- i hope my colleagues now more than ever that it is important that we have that detention facility there that is safe, secure and we can ensure that those that are captured that want to do us harm, members of al qaeda terrorist groups, that we can ensure that they can't get back in this battle against us. i specifically want to talk about the country of yemen because as a member of the armed services committee -- and

senator chambliss supported this effort -- we passed an amendment in the senate armed services committee that would have prohibited the transfer of guantanamo detainees to the country of yemen until december december 31 of 2015. that provision was removed during the conference committee. as i am being told we won't have a chance to debate that issue on the senate floor or to amend the defense authorization as it comes to the floor because this is something that i cannot understand why this provision was removed and why the administration would want the ability to transfer guantanamo detainees to yemen, because let's talk about what's happening in yemen. last may, president obama, in my view unwisely, lifted the moratorium on detainee transfers to yemen. since that decision was made, between the date of the

president's and the administration's order that we could potentially release detainees to yemen, let me just outline what's happened in yemen since then. that country has continued to be a place where there is instability, lack of government control and in fact between november 24 and december 2 of 2014, al qaeda and the arabian peninsula reportedly claimed responsibility for 17 attacks in eight yemeni provinces. now, i have a laundry list of very dangerous attacks that have jurisdiction in yemen, and one of the most troubling things that has occurred, as we think about those who are present in guantanamo that are very, very dangerous individuals, a number of them are yemenis, and if they were to be transferred back to the country of yemen, for example, in february of 2014,

militants attacked yemen's main prison, killing seven and enabling 29 inmates to escape, including 19 members who were convicted members of al qaeda. so i am -- i really don't know why the administration would seek to transfer guantanamo detainees to this country where there have been prison breaks, where there have been multiple, multiple instances of violent attacks by al qaeda, and yet this provision got dropped from the defense authorization, even though it had the support of the senate committee. and i'm very troubled by that. i'm troubled we don't have the opportunity to debate that on the floor and i would hope that the administration would look very closely at the record of what has occurred in yemen since the president made the decision to end the moratorium on transfers to yemen because it is

an incredible list of dangerous activities, prison breaks by members of al qaeda so there's no way if we transfer someone from gitmo to yemen that we can guarantee that those individuals won't get back in the fight, that they won't escape from any prison we put them in because that country cannot assure their security. one thing that i wanted to talk about that i think is a very important issue as we look at this issue of the administration's rush to close guantanamo, that is the issue of isis. there has been have been reports that a certain number of former guantanamo detainees may be fighting with isis. wees all saw -- we all saw with horror the acts of isis and how brutal they are and the brutality that they have taken out on americans, including one of my constituents, and we all

know that isis is a group that the president himself has said we need to defeat. i have written the president and asked him about these reports, and, in fact, i wrote a letter to president obama and requested that all international transfers be suspended until we can know more about potential guantanamo detainees that we've release hoed may be getting in the fight in support of isis. it was recently reported that one former guantanamo detainee has pledged his allegiance to isis leader, the leader of isis and is recruiting fighters for ice nuss northern pakistan. if that is confirmed to be true, i think we need to revisit not only ensuring that we aren't transferring dangerous detainees from guantanamo to countries like yemen, and allowing them to be in a position to get back in the fight, but that we also are

ensuring that we have a moratorium on transfers until we understand how many of these detainees may actually be joining isis and present a threat to us. this issue as we look at the national security challenges we face right now, you have to reevaluate, i hope the president would reevaluate the campaign promise he made in light of the national security threats that we face. and now is not the time to be closing the facility at guantanamo when we are presented with so many threats around the world not only from al qaeda but from isis and we need a secure facility to ensure those who are there now who are tremendously dangerous individuals don't get back in the fight to continue to harm us and our allies. and also to ensure that if future enemy combatants are

captured, members of al qaeda or its affiliates, that they have a secure place they can be held and fully interrogated. i thank you, mr. president, and i again want to thank my colleague from georgia for his leadership on this issue and so many national security issues. and with that i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. blumenthal: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i'm honored to be joined here today with my distinguished friend and extraordinary colleague, senator harkin of iowa, to support continued funding of the prevention and public health fund and he has been a leader in this area so i'm particularly privileged to stand with him

today on behalf of a fund that is absolutely necessary to address prevention of serious and chronic diseases and it is fiscally and morally absolutely essential that we approach health care in this way. i'm going to ask for permission to continue to speak, i'm not sure what the allotted time is if there is no objection i would ask for time at least through 5:00 for myself, senator harkin and others who may join us in this colloquy. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. blumenthal: our nation currently spends 75 cents of every dollar on health care for the treatment of preventible conditions. these diseases can be stopped and prevented in people through simple, commonsense measures,

and yet a meager three cents of every dollar goes toward those treatments, therapies and practices that can help prevent the diseases that are so wasteful to our economy and to individuals and their livelihoods. our young people are on track to be the first generation of americans to live a shorter, unhealthier life, than their parents. the responsibility to change the course of this history is in our hands. one step that this body, led by senator harkin, has taken was to establish the prevention and public health fund. it's the only dedicated federal fund for the prevention and improvement of our nation's public health. prevention is the most effective way to improve the health of americans, while reducing health care costs in the united states.

this funding supports efforts to reduce the rate of infant death death, cancer, diabetes, heart disease, and tobacco use. they are the killers, and they kill unnecessarily and avoidably. sadly, many connecticut residents suffer from those very chronic diseases. 30% of connecticut residents have high blood pressure, 9% have diabetes, 21,000 residents of connecticut are diagnosed with cancer annually, and 16% still use tobacco. the prevention and public health fund invests in a broad range of evidence-based activities. not speculative, not abstract, on sentual, theoretical, evidence-based activities including community and health prevention initiatives that can help stop all americans from developing debilitating and

chronic disease in the future. so far, grants from this fund were awarded to support four connecticut projects, including on mental health and addiction, diabetes management in older and disabled difficult -- adults, and the establishment of an electronic birth registration system improve the ability to track health and well-being of infants. this sounds pretty rudimentary and it is, using technology to track health and well-being in infants. the centers for disease control has a hard hitting antitobacco media campaign funded from this fund, focused on the destructive health effects of smoking and it is not only effective but it is supported by the efforts that we've advocated on preventive health management.

over the next three years, this campaign is expected to save the country $170 million in nonincurred health costs and lowered productivity that us from smoking. the c.d.c. has estimated that this campaign will assist 50,000 tobacco users to quit smoking. i know from my own work in suing the tobacco companies, establishing a fund to support exactly these kinds of efforts, that millions of americans across the united states want to quit. they try repeatedly. 99% i think of all smokers want to quit, and almost all try to quit, but quitting is hard because nicotine is one of the most powerfully addictive drugs known to man, and cigarettes are a powerfully effective nicotine delivery tool.

these 50,000 tobacco users who quit smoking are better off, not only their health but their pocketbooks. they save countless dollars that they'd otherwise squander on smoking or tobacco products. and they are healthier, their families are happier, and they save themselves from lifetimes of addiction and disease, and the preventive efforts of the c.d.c. as a result of this fund are preventive in stopping young people from beginning to smoke always well. -- as wells. it is monumental, it is historic, it is a fund that should be fully supported by this congress. the fund afforded the c.d.c. the ability to run another tobacco education campaign called tips from former smokers. according to a recent study, this campaign led 1.64 million americans to attempt to quit smoking. those who have completely quit smoking as a result of this

campaign added half a million quality adjusted life years to the united states population. i know these numbers sound abstract and object institute, they are real lives -- be a strews but they are real lives and this have been served from the evils of smoking which in turn causes cancer, heart disease, all kinds of preventible diseases. this funding is essential to running the local departments of public health in many areas of our nation. workers at those departments of public health are at the forefront of preventing infectious diseases, an issue that most recently has come into focus as part of the domestic ebola response. without adequate funding for these departments, the people most closely tasked and most immediately responsible for providing services and information to people in a time of crisis may be unable to respond when communities are most in need of them.

we must change our health care focus from sickness and disease to wellness and prevention. we grew up, many of us, with our mothers telling us that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. mr. president, that is not only an adage that is commonly repeated, it is commonly proved in everyday life. i strongly encourage my fellow members to support the prevention and public health fund to help ensure the future well-being of our fellow citizens and i yield to my colleague from iowa, senator harkin, one of the leaders in this effort. thank you. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. harkin: i thank the presiding officer and i just want to thank my colleague and my friend from connecticut for his very excellent and profound statement and for taking a

leadership position on this very crucial issue. it's obviously well known i'm retiring in just a couple weeks from from now or three weeks from now, i guess, and the prevention and public health fund about which the senator spoke so eloquently just now is going to continue, and it's going to need people like the senator from connecticut to take that kind of leadership position. i believe people are catching on to it around the country, but there are still those that say, well, you know, people get high blood pressure, they get borderline diabetes, they have high cholesterol, these things just sort of happen, sort of like they're preordained. chronic diseases are not preordained. they are as the senator said, you said 75% of them -- 75% of

the money we spent was accountable by preventible chronic diaz diseases and -- chronic diseases and conditions. as the senator rightly said what we need to focus us on, and i wrote it down, is keeping people healthy, not paying for it later on when they're in the hospital. and that's something that this prevention and public health fund i think is making strides to do. i think one of the things that people have i think perhaps a mistaken idea about is that health care only occurs in the doctor's office. or in the exchange between doctor and patient. or health care provider and patient. but we know that it takes place in all aspects of life. in the workplace, in the

community in which we live, in our schools, in our homes. it has to be something that is sort of pervasive in our society. i say to my friend connecticut, i've often said that in america, it's easy to be unhealthy and hard to be healthy. it seems to me that ought to be turned around. it ought to be easy to be healthy and harder to be unhealthy. that means that simpl the simple things in life -- kids ought to be able to walk to school from home, and back. i often talked about my kids when we moved here many years ago from iowa. we had a high school one mile from our house. kids couldn't walk to high school. why? there was no sidewalk.

there was a busy street but no sidewalk. simple things like that. things like, as you mentioned, making sure people get their checkups every year. the prevention fund does that. it makes sure of that. and the money that we put in the affordable care act that provides for annual checkups and vaccinationvaccinations for peoo co-pays and no deductibles. i'm told that now over 100 million people have taken advantage of that in this country. no co-pays, no deductibles. they can go in and get their blood pressure screening and all of that kind of stuff on an annual basis. we've to be cognizant that our kids need to have better physical activity in school, better food in school. in the healthy and hunger-free kids act of 2010, in which we

spharted tstarted to change they schools provide food to our kids, fresh fruits and vegetables in schools all over america -- these are the things that make it easier to be healthy. easier to be healthy. the quit lines that the senator spoke about, which have been enormously successful, and the tips from former smokers. we have the data on that from the center for disease control and prevention. so we know they're working. and so, again, i just wanted to thank the senator for his focus on this and wish him well in the future in sort of being the champion of this, because, you know, there's a lot of polls around this place. i think everyone around here would say, yes, i'm for health care, i'm for keeping people healthy. but there are so many polls

around here on how to appropriate money and what we do that sometimes it gets lost in the shuffle. so i am encouraged and pleased that the distinguished senator from connecticut will be focused on this prevention and public health fund. it's making changes all over this country in profound ways, in profound ways, and in our communities. communities are now getting torkts i satogether, i say to tg officer. communities in maine are now getting together and thinking, what can they do as a community to provide for more healthy activities and encouragement for people in our community. and they are getting grants from the prevention and public health fund to do just that. leaders all over america are starting to think about this and taking afntl action.

simple things sometimes. we had a very small than in iowa, a very small town. they had a retirement home for the elderly. but they didn't have any place for the elderly to exercise, so they built a walking thing clear around the town, and they put a couple park benches across the way and a couple hill shelters so the elderly can come right out of the doore door and walk. i don't know how far it is, maybe a mile or two. just simple things like that. before they had no place to go at all to get that kind of exercise. so, again, this prevention and public health fund is -- i hope will remain a priority and i hope that th the senator from connecticut will continue his great leadership in this eamplen this area. i thank him for his excellent

statement and if on the outside i can ever be of help in any way, let me know. but i know it's in good hands with the senator from connecticut, i think. i yield the floor. mr. blumenthal: mr. president? i want to -- the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. blumenthal: thank you, mr. president. i want to again thank my great friend, senator harkin, for the legacy of public health advocacy that he will leave for all of us and pledge to him that i will carry on among many others, and i'm sure that legacy and advocacy -- and he mentioned that it is easy to be unhealthy, harder to be healthy. and part of the reason i think is lack of awareness and education and perhaps in some instances even lack of income and wherewithal. just let me pose the question to him whether that impression is true. mr. harkin: if my friend would

yield, i think that's absolutely true. first of all, it is true that a lot of times low-income people don't have access to a more healthy environment. the food deserts we call about in our inner cities where they don't get the fresh fruits and vegetables and things for the family. that has to be addressed. again, making it easier for them to be healthy. and it's, again, an awareness. i would just say to my friend, one other thing i hope my friend will take a look at that's now undergoing a trial period, we put something in the last farm bill, and it is a trial period for food stamp recipients, people who are on what they call food stamps -- which are not food stamps any longer, as the senator knows -- to provide incentives for low-income people, people who use food stamps, to purchase more fruits

and vegetables rather than just stampsstarstarches, fats fats. i think the senator might want to take a look at that with the secretary of agriculture and see how that program is ongoing. again, it was just a trial, or an experiment to see what we can do, to incentivize people who are on food stamps to use it more for more healthy foods. but it's that lack of awareness. the senator is absolutely rievmenright.mr. blumenthal: any impression also is, and perhaps the senator has some views on this, that in a way we have a responsibility in this body to create that awareness, to spend the money on what should be regarded as an investment.

it is spending. it involves funding. but really the way to look at it is an investment in education, in the clinics and the doctors and the services that can make americans healthier and save us dollars over the long term not only in the money spent on treating preventable -- truly preventable diseases but also avoiding the suffering and the pain that is involved in many of those diseases, whether it's cancer, heart disease, diabetes connected to so many preventable conditions. mr. harkin: i thank my friend. i remember dr. andrew weil, who is pretty well known in this country and a good friend of mine, once made the statement some time ago in a hearing that the default status state of the human body is to be healthy. the body wants to be healthy.

that's, after all these millennia of changes, the body wants to be healthy. the problem is we put all these obstacles in the way. so, again -- and i think it is true of people -- people would not to be healthy. they might not know that some of their lifestyles and what they do is provoke their illnesses. so i think it is our job to make people more away of that and to help, to provide some assistance, to provide some incentives for them to have a more healthy lifestyle. i say to my friend from connecticut, people will be here, i hope, for the next highway bill. we haven't been able to get one for a long time. i was here for the last one. i had an amendment that i thought was going to pass. it was simply this:

that anytime federal funds are involved in communities for streets, roads, highways, bridges, or whatever, that there must be incorporated in the plan provisions for walkways or bike paths along the side. i didn't say you had to build them. i just said, put it in the plans. they're doing that in europe, by the way. every road, every street built has a walkway or a bike path. you can use both for walking or biking. and i had someone here object to it, and we didn't get it. but i still think that would be something, again, to make people more aware. and if they're incorporated in the plans, they might see that it doesn't cost that much more to just add it on to a road or a bridge or whatever streets we're building in this country.

again, making it easier for people to be healthy, just a little thing like that. but i hope the senator would take a look at that the next time the highway bill comes up here. mr. blumenthal: mr. president, i certainly will pledge to do so and will think of th the senator from iowa when we do hopefully consider the next highway bill. but let me just say, in conclusion, for myself, i was not going to mention the "r" word, the retirement word, because it seems almost impossible to imagine this body without the senator from iowa, not only because of his advocacy of the prevention and public health fund but also his constant reminding us and his unceasing advocacy for better

public health, for championing the interests of ordinary working men and women, and i thank him for that legacy to me and so many others. mr. harkin: i thank the senator for his kind words. mr. blumenthal: thank you. mr. harkin: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. harkin: mr. president, i see my friend from tennessee is sheer on the floor. i just wanted to take just a few minutes on another subject. mr. president, today, december 3, is international disability rights day -- international disability rights day. it is observed around the globe as a day to think about, consider, and support more full inclusion of people of disabilities in all aspects of our societies, to provide the support and accommodations for people with disabilities to get a good education and to get

employment and to be able to enjoy all the aspects of life with their families and their friends in all societies around the world. this day commemorates this fight for equality and opportunity and access for people with disabilities all around the globe. in 150 countries and the european union, they have ratified the united nations convention on the rights of people with disabilities. a day to celebrate a future of increased opportunities and inclusion for individuals with disabilities. now, i am proud -- i am proud of the fact that we in america have been the leader in the world on disability rights and inclusion beginning with "idea" the individuals with disabilities education act, followed up by with a we call 503, the rehab

act, the rehabilitation act. then the americans with disability act, and the amendments of 2008. we helped set the framework for equal opportunity and full participation for individuals with disabilities. most of the world now shares those principles and they have shown their support by signing onto this treaty, this convention. but there's a difference between signing onto principles and implementing them. by ratifying the crpd, as it's known, the convention on the rights of people with disablght disabilities, we can play an important role in helping other countries actually implement that treaty, that convention, that's principles. -- these those principles. now the president of the united states has already signed for the united states on this

treaty, but under our system of government, under our constitution, that must be ratified by a vote in the senate. a vote requiring two-thirds of those present and voting. not two-thirdsú -- not two thirf the senate. two-thirds of those present and voting. that's what it says in the constitution. as we all know, two years ago this month we brought this treaty up for a vote in the senate, and it failed by six votes. i think at that time there was a lot of misinformation about it. but under our system, it had to go back to the white house, that congress having died, came back to this congress under the great leadership of senator menendez. we had hearings, further hearings on it. the bill was reported out this summer of the foreign relations

committee, and yet we cannot bring it to the floor because of some objections by a few on the republican side. not every republican. just a few. i always want to point out that we have had courageous republicans supporting this, frerch john mccain -- everyone from john mccain, senator mccain who has been stalwart ever since the adoption of the americans with disabilities act, who has been a stalwart supporter for the rights of people with disabilities. senator barrasso from wyoming. senator kirk from illinois. senator ayotte from new hampshire. senator murkowski of alaska. and senator collins of maine have all been supporters of this. and that's as it should be. disability policy has never been

a partisan issue in this body in the 30 years i've served here. it's never been a partisan issue. and i'm sorry that the convention on the rights of people with disabilities seems to have been caught up in some kind of partisanship. that shouldn't be. i was hoping that we might bring it up for another vote before we left. asked consent to do so and it was objected by the senator, the junior senator from utah at that time. and so this congress will adjourn once again without ratifying this convention. last evening i was privileged to share an honor by the u.s. international council on disabilities with professor patrick quinn, a citizen of ireland who is very instrumental in drafting the convention on the rights of people with disabilities at the united

nations. he pointed out that much of what they did was based on the americans with disabilities act, and that it sent a bad signal around the world if we are going to join with the community of nations in helping them implement the principles. as i said, you can sign on to the principles but implementing them is quite another story. that's where we can be very helpful. some people say we can do that on our own. we don't need to be a part of this treaty. we just don't have the wherewithal to go to every country and do that. we don't have that many personnel. we have budget constraints too. but if we join with other nations -- and believe me, there are other nations that are very good at implementing disability policy both in the european union, and i might mention that great nation of ireland. they have been very good at implementing disability policies. so we could work with other

countries. and when we go to other countries to help them implement these principles so that people with disabilities can have a fair place in their societies, an equal place in their societies, it's better if we speak a common language. a common language. not the u.s. going to them saying here's what you should do. but going to a country with other nations and saying here's what we do. here's what we do together. here's what we can do to help you implement the principles on which you sign the treaty. it's a shame that we can't ratify. again i point out, as i have many times that, it has broad support in our society. think about this. we have a measure coming before the senate -- it doesn't go before the house. just the senate.

we have a measure that is supported by the following: the united states chamber of commerce. tom donohue has been a stalwart supporter of this from the very beginning. we have the u.s. chamber of commerce, the business round table led by a former republican, governor of michigan john engler, came out in strong support of this. the veterans groups. the veterans groups all support this. we have all of the faith-based groups. in fact, on november 10 of this year we had a letter from the national association of evangelicals now supporting this treaty. the high-tech industry council. all of the disability groups without exception support this. so, one would think -- and i must also mention here that one of the strong supporters who has worked his heart out to try to get this adopted is our former

majority leader of the senate, bob dole. i would also point out every former republican leader of the senate supports this treaty. every former republican leader of the senate. bob dole, trent lott and bill frist. every former president of the united states from jimmy carter to george h.w. bush, president clinton, president george w. bush and president obama all support this. so you'd think this would be a slam dunk, but there are a few that have blocked this from coming up. over 800 disability, civil rights, faith groups, 20 top veterans organizations -- i mentioned the chamber of commerce, the business round

table all support this. well, it's a sad thing that on this international disability rights day that i'm sad to say that it looks like the clock is running out and that we will not even vote again on it this year, let alone adopt it. next year my friends, i will not be here. i'm retiring. next year my friends on the republican side will take over the senate. well, i hope that they will pick up on this and take this treaty, move it through their committee again and bring it out on the floor. it should not be a partisan issue. and if there are some things that need to be done with the reservations, understanding some declarations, fine. there were some changes made this last time to accommodate the concerns for people who are concerned about home schooling. there's a whole new thing put in

there on home schooling. so i'm hopeful that we will continue our efforts on this to pass this and to become a part of this international effort. people wonder, the united states, i mean you're so good, you're so good on disability policy, you can help. you can help people with disabilities all around the globe. i can't tell you how many times i've had people who have talked to me in the past, young people who are students in universities who got some kind of a grant to go overseas to study but can't do it because of accessibility issues in other countries. they just can't get around. they can't find adequate housing. so it really does -- it's still part of discrimination globally, and again, we should be a part of it. i wanted to take the floor on this, the international

disability rights date, again to ask that this senate in the future take up the convention on the rights of people with disabilities, ratify it and let's become a part of an international effort to make every country in the world -- not to make them. to work with every other country in the world to implement the kind of policies that we have in this country that provide equal opportunity, full participation, independent living and economic self-sufficiency to people with disabilities, the four great goals of the americans with disabilities act. we can do this. we should do it. and we should do it with our friends around the globe. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: mr. president, before i begin my remarks, i'd

like to acknowledge once again my gratitude for senator harkin for his leadership these past two years that i've had the privilege of working with him as the ranking member of the health, education, labor and pensions committee, and to acknowledge once again that there has been no one in this body on either side of the aisle who has been a greater champion for americans with disabilities. mr. harkin: mr. president, if the senator from tennessee would yield, i thank him very much for those kind remarks but let me say again what a pleasure it has been to work with the senator from tennessee over the last few years, the last couple of years in getting a lot of meaningful legislation through our committee, signed by the president. in fact, it was my friend from tennessee who pointed out we had 21 bills through our committee signed by the president, the most productive committee, i think, in the entire congress. i know in the senate. as i retire, the senator from

tennessee, i hope, will be taking over the help committee, and it will be in good hands. the senator is a person of goodwill and good heart and good mind. after all, he has all the background needed: former president of a university, tennessee; former secretary of education; former governor and of course united states senator. of course. so, mr. president, the help committee will be in good hands with the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: mr. president, i thank the senator from -- mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: i thank the senator from iowa. mr. president, the house of representatives is expected to pass tonight legislation that should be very good news to americans who care about their jobs and for americans who care about the condition of our

inland waterway systems. inland waterway systems aren't on the front page of the united states newspapers until a dock, a lock closes or something happens, and the cargo can't get down the river. then it's big trouble, which is the case in tennessee with a an old lot the army corps of engineers says it could close it is in such bad shape. if it would it would throw 175 trucks on the interstate highway. that same picture applies to other parts of the country. in our region it is the mississippi, the missouri and the tennessee and the ohio. but the rivers that carry so much of the heavy cargo that provides the income and the jobs for so many american families.

the house of representatives tonight is expected to enact a third part of a three-part plan that was envisioned in the american water works act of 2012 which would provide a permanent long-term solution to having the kind of inland waterway system that a great country such as the united states deserves. i want to talk for a moment about the effect that has not just on our country, but on my home state of tennessee. for our country, it would be hard to imagine how we could carry cars and coal and agriculture equipment from the great midwest from the south into the rivers to be shipped overseas without the, without the barges that carry that equipment. millions of tons of cargo every year, and it's usually cheaper and faster than many other forms of transportation, and that means more jobs and more money in the pockets of americans who

are able to work for industries that are competitive. the legislation that the house is expected to pass will provide $260 million for inland waterway projects across the country over the next ten years. it's important to note that this fee is paid entirely by the big barges, by the owners of the big commercial barges that use the locks when they go down the rivers and that none of it would be paid by the fishing boats and recreational boats which also use the locks. in other words, the big barges are going to pay more to get through the locks faster, to save money and to save time. and that's good for the fishermen as well without any more costs. this is the third step, as i said, in the american water works act that was proposed in 2012. this step would increase by nine cents the way the fee is calculated that the big barge

companies pay to go through, to go through the locks. the barge companies have volunteered to do this. they have been pleading with the united states congress to say, please raise the fee we pay to go through the locks so you can use the corps of engineers to replace the locks so we can go through faster and cheaper. and so the house is taking steps to do that tonight. the fee will increase from 20 cents to 29 cents per gallon of fuel used, about 260 million of that over the next ten years will go to help repair these locks. the first two steps in the plan of the american water works act were enacted earlier this year as party water resources reform and development act. step one was to take the olmstead lock in ohio and treat it separately because it was soaking up all the money that might be available for all the other locks in the country.

step two was to create a prioritization of the lock so we didn't come here every year and say my lock is more important than your lock. in fact of that the chickamaga lock in tennessee became number four. the third is the user fee that i talked about earlier. what difference does this legislation mean for the state of tennessee and the chickamaga lock? for years the chickamaga lock has been subject to year-by-year efforts by those of us in congress to find a little money to repair it, to keep it from closing, all knowing full well that if we didn't replace it it would one day soon close. those days are over. this is a long-term solution that says, number one, the homestead lock, which has been soaking up the lock, has been reduced, cricka maloga lock has

been being paid for by big barge owners and now in appropriations should be able to replace the lock beginning in the year 2016. that would mean that it would still take several years to replace the lock. it would the still cost about a half a billion dollars but it would mean that instead of year-by-year appropriations and guessing games that the army corps of engineers can have a long-term plan and begin to do the job and that those who are making plans to invest in our part of the region -- not just in chattanooga but east tennessee -- can know that if they do that, that the lock will be there to help provide low-cost transportation for what they manufacture and what they grow. i want to thank a variety of people who've taken great leadership in this. the senator from pennsylvania, senator casey, and i have been the joint sponsors of this legislation in the senate. we're very hopeful that the house will do its work tonight and that the senate will do its

work next week and that the bill will go to the president before the end of the year and this will be law by the end. end of the year. so i thank him for his leadership. i also want t to congratulation the congressman from chas fog fa who rounded up colleagues to support this, speaker boehner has been very helpful, congressman kemp has been very helpful. here in the senate, i would like to thank senator vitter, who's the ranking member of the environment and public works committee for his leadership on this effort. and i'd like to thank senator reid, the majority leader, senator mcconnell, the republican leader for their cooperation on this. nothing is ever done in the united states congress until it's finally done so this is passing the house tonight and it's expected to pass the senate next week. but it's very good news for americans who depends on the inland waterways for their jobs. and in tennessee, for a change, instead of year-by-year appropriation, it's an effort --

it's the first chance we've had to have a long-term solution to the replacement over the next several years of the lock beginning as early as the year 201. i than201 -- of 2016. i thank the president and i yield the floor. mr. casey: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania. mr. casey: thank you, mr. president. i rise and ask consent to speak as if in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: thank you, mr. president. i rise this evening to talk about two of our judicial nominations that are before the senate today. we've gotten through one -- one vote and we'll be having several

more on a number of judges. the two that i'll speak about are mark kearney and jerry pappert. and i know that my colleague, senator toomey, is with us and i'll make some remarks and -- and obviously be here for his remarks as well. first and foremost, i'm grateful to be working with senator toomey on these nominations, as we have on others. it's a long and difficult process for everyone, ever more so if you're a candidate or a -- someone who puts yourself forward to be a united states district court judge. and we're grateful that individuals are willing to do that. but it does not work unless we work together here in the senate and senator toomey and i have been working together over several years now and these are two more and we've got one more after this we hope by the end of the year. but just by way of a little bit of a biographical background on both of these nominees. mark kearney is currently

managing shareholder at elliott greenleaf and sigiekowski, where he has worked since 1990. so almost a quarter of a century in a firm that does a wide variety of legal matters. i know this firm well and i know the work that they do on litigation and all kinds of complex litigation. and mark has had broad and diverse experience in that -- in that firm. previously he worked at the elliott, meni on and flarrety firm, going back to his days before the other firm. after law school, he clerked in the delaware court of chancery, following his legal training. and, of course, that's a court that has a high degree of specialization. a lot of business matters, obviously corporate matters come before that -- that very well-known court in delaware.

mark kearney is also obviously very active in his community and i've known him for a couple of decades now. he serves on various charitable and civic organizations, including director for legal aid of southeastern pennsylvania, the pennsylvania bar institute as well and -- and the montgomery bar -- montgomery county bar foundation. and, finally, in that vain in service to his community, he's worked as a volunteer child advocate with the montgomery child advocacy project since 2007 and served as director of that organization from 2009-2012. that's montgomery county, one of our largest counties by way of population, just bordering philadelphia. and that's a big county that has challenges, like any county of its size. and to have a judge -- or to have a nominee who we hope will become a judge after our voting

to have spent that time with children in an advocacy position is -- is great testament to mark's commitment. so whether you focus on his academic credentials, as someone who had a wide variety of matters come before him as a lawyer in a big firm, whether it's his volunteer work and, therefore, his commitment to service, mark is well prepared and i believe one of the best nominees that we could put forward for the united states district court for the eastern district of pennsylvania. i've known him a long time, and when i make a decision about whether to support a particular candidate for judge of any court, but especially a district court judge, i look at their academic training and their experience, whether it's -- it's experience as a lawyer and advocate or in some cases a lawyer as well as a judge.

you have to make an assessment of someone's character, their integrity, their judicial temperament. all of those qualities and attributes that you would want to find in a judge. on all those, mark kearney is someone i know personally that possesses those -- those attributes and qualifications but i also know him as someone who just by virtue of his record that we can recite here, he's well prepared to serve as a district court judge. so i would ask my colleagues to give him in this vote all the consideration that is warranted. jerry pappert, more formally gerald pappert, i think i'm allowed to call him jerry until he becomes a judge. jerry is someone i met in state government. i was in an elected position which is now 18 years ago i was elected. and early in my term, i was having a meeting with the

attorney general, attorney general mike fischer, who's now in the third circuit court of appeals. and attorney general fischer brought his chief of staff, his first deputy, as they called it in that department, to a meeting with my chief of staff and we sat down at a -- at a restaurant just to have pizza one night to talk about how our offices could work together, even though they don't have an overlapping jurisdiction. but it was one of those meetings that you never forget and that's the first time i met jerry pappert. i knew then of his commitment to service because he was serving in the top position in the state attorney general's office. much later, years later, he became the attorney general when there was a vacancy. he served as the attorney general of pennsylvania. he currently serves as the chairman of the pennsylvania banking and securities commission in harrisburg. previously he was a legislative appointee to the commonwealth

financing authority in the department of community and economic development, a very important authority which makes determinations about where to invest tax dollars, economic development dollars across pennsylvania and how to make those difficult decisions about where dollars should go and how to grow the economy. from december of 2003 to january of 2005, as i mentioned, he was attorney general of the state serving -- and then prior to that, serving as first deputy. obviously as attorney general he was active in the national association of attorneys general dealing with issues that relate to pennsylvania and law enforcement and the prosecutions but also, of course, on national issues that are common to all the states. so i know jerry well and i know him to be someone of the highest caliber of integrity and commitment to service and i believe a commitment to justice. but his long and significant

history of service to our commonwealth i think prepares him well to serve his commonwealth but in a federal -- a federal district court position as a united states district court judge. so i -- and i can say the same of jerry that i said about -- about mark kearney in terms of his qualifications, his experience but also his character and his integrity. so i'm grateful to have the opportunity to speak about both of these candidates and certainly grateful to have the chance to work with senator toomey on moving these nominations forward. and we hope tonight bringing them to a conclusion upon confirmation. i would yield the floor. mr. toomey: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania. mr. toomey: thank you, mr. president. i rise to offer my support as well for the two nominees to serve as u.s. district court judges for the eastern district of pennsylvania, jerry pappert and mark kearney, whom we are scheduled to confirm in a short time.

let me just start by thanking chairman leahy and ranking member grassley for facilitating this confirmation process, for handling this at the committee level. and i want to thank leader reid and leader mcconnell for promptly bringing these nominees to the senate floor. i also want to take a moment to thank my -- my colleague from the great commonwealth of pennsylvania, senator casey, for all the work that he and i have been able to do together, the collaboration that we've had has been very constructive and it's been a pleasure to work with senator casey. in the four years since i've been in the senate, we have confirmed 11 district court judges. we've been able to place a judge in the redding courthouse in burkes county which had been vacant for three years. we were able to place a judge in the easton courthouse in northampton county which had been vacant for 10 years. with the confirmation, which i'm certainly hopeful of, of mr. pappert and mr. kearney tonight, then that number will rise to 13 members of the

federal bench from pennsylvania in just these last four years. we have one additional district court nominee, joseph leason, awaiting a vote from the full senate and i'm looking forward to a speedy confirmation of his candidacy as well. before i speak on the two nominees before us this evening, i do want to briefly note how pleased i was on november 20 the senate confirmed wendy beetlestone to serve on the federal district court on the eastern district of pennsylvania. she was confirmed unanimously by voice vote and i think that was a strong testament to his strong qualifications and i'm delighted that senator casey and i were able to see that to completion. let me say just a couple of words about jerry pappert. senator casey spoke about mr. pappert and jerry pappert is just eminently qualified for this post. he's a graduate of notre dame law school. he's had a diverse and extensive legal experience. he's currently a partner at

cozen o'connor, with a practice that emphasizes commercial litigation. prior to that he was the general counsel at sethhelon where he oversaw all the company litigation and property issues. it's a very wide range of issues that he has handled in the private sector. but mr. pappert has also demonstrated his dedication to public service. he served six years, as senator casey pointed out, six years as the attorney general of pennsylvania and in that role he was a very successful attorney general. successfully arguing cases before the u.s. and the pennsylvania supreme court. he won a landmark case before the u.s. supreme court, the booth versus turner case which set forth the administrative exhaustion requirement for a prisoner seeking to sue in federal court. mr. pappert also has enjoyed bipartisan support in the senate. the senate judiciary committee voted him out of committee