ask unanimous consent the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. barrasso: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i rise today to oppose the nomination of dr. dr. vivek murthy to be surgeon general of the united states. surgeon general is known as america's doctor. americans have great respect for this important position. they expect their surgeon general to be someone who has substantial experience in helping patients, helping them

improve their health and in helping them reduce their risk of illness and injury. this important position has been vacant since july of 2013, so about a year and a half. it's far too long, and it's been completely avoidable. now, we have seen how the obama administration has struggled in response to important health issues like the ebola crisis. america should have had an experienced doctor in the job as surgeon general to lead our fight against ebola. and to take on other serious health challenges as well. dr. murthy is a smart man, very well educated, has an undergraduate degree from harvard, an m.b.a. from yale, an m.d. from yale school of medicine. these are impressive academic

credentials and i'm sure he will be a fine doctor. they are not sufficient qualifications for this important job. is dr. murthy a renowned expert in treating patients or-reaching diseases? no, not at all. he's not. has he actually built a career teaching medicine or leading public health organizations? no, not yet. in fact, dr. murthy only completed his medical training, his residency, in 2006, just eight years ago. now, i speak as someone who has actually practiced medicine for 25 years, who has been an instructor of surgery at yale medical school that dr. murthy attended. and i saw that being a doctor is about much more than going to school. doctors learn more and more as they progress through their careers, and they spend more time with their patients,if

listening to patients and the patients' families. dr. murthy has just not had the time to develop these kinds of skills. so what qualifies him to be surgeon general of the united states? well, in 2008, just two years out of his residency, he founded a group called doctors for obama. the purpose? to elect a president. the majority of his career has been spent not as a doctor treating patients but as an activist, an activist focused on gun control and political campaigns. even former senator -- i'm sorry, even former surgeon general richard carmona has said that dr. murthy doesn't have the medical experience to serve in such an important position.

let me point out, dr. carmona is a democrat. he wrote an article for "the huffington post" on december 4. it was titled in search of a surgeon general. i want to read a little bit about what he wrote. he says we don't appoint doctors early in their career to be a university dean or chairman. he said graduate business students at the top of their class don't become instant c.e.o.'s. top law yachts graduates of elite law schools don't get nominated to be u.s. attorney general or supreme court justice. he asks, why should the u.s. surgeon general are any different? -- be any different? he concludes by asking the question, is the health, safety and security of the nation any less important? is the health, safety, and

security of the nation any less important? well, no. the health, safety, and security of the nation are not less important and the job of surgeon general is not less important. americans want the same thing from a surgeon general that they all want from their own doctors. people want honest and straightforward advice about medical dangers like cancer, like heart attacks, like stroke. they don't want inexperienced, unqualified political appointee. patients don't want a doctor who might let political ideology get in the way of treatment and their best interest. americans don't want a surgeon general who might use this position of trust to promote his own personal campaign against the second amendment of the constitution. this is just another example of president obama giving someone

an important job based solely on their support of the president's political career. just like his nomination of a soap opera producer to be ambassador to hungary or the president's nomination of a man to be ambassador to norway when the person didn't know the first thing about the country. now, of course, both those nominations to be ambassadors had funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars to the president's campaigns. well, those nominations were embarrassing. and so is the nomination, this nomination, to be surgeon general. this office of surgeon general is not just honor -- an honor area title. it is not just a figurehead position. the surgeon general commands the entire commissioned corps of the uniformed public health officers. there are 6,700 people that the surgeon general commands. it is one of the key positions

leading america's public health efforts. america has a long history of qualified and talented people filling this job. when president bill clinton nominated bill sapper in 1998 he had already searched as president of a medical school, president of a medical school and as director of the centers for disease control and prevention. c. everett koop had spent 35 years as a leading world refound pediatric surgeon. they were substantial candidates who brought serious experience to the job. the responsibilities of being america's surgeon general require a strong professional leader, and the american people deserve a qualified nominee. now, there's a long list of capable doctors who could meet those requirements. the president should pick one of them. we've seen over the years that

when the president nominates qualified people for this position, the senate has approved their nominations on overwhelmingly bipartisan votes. now, when president obama nominated regina benjamin to be surgeon general, she was confirmed unanimously. so was richard carmona when president bush nominated him. now, today even democrats have objected to the nomination of dr. murthy. so why are we wasting the senate's time talking about this now? well, the president obama thinks dr. murthy is qualified, why haven't we voted on him? he was nominated more than a year ago. we've had no surgeon joan, had the ebola crisis. he was nominated more than a year ago. his confirmation in the committee was last february. the majority leader could have

brought this up for a vote at any time in the past nine months but he didn't do it. why? because he knew this nominee, this unqualified nominee, this partisan nominee, didn't have the votes, couldn't get the votes on the democrat side of the aisle, and the nomination would have been an embarrassment before the election. now is not the right time for this nomination, and it is not the right job for dr. murthy. the ebola problem and the other health crises facing our nation are enormous challenges. they require skills, they require talents that this nominee hasfully simply not had time to develop. and which he has so far not demonstrated in his career. now, i want to close by quoting from a letter that former surgeon general carmona sent to all the members of this sentence

earlier this month, sent it to each and every one of us. and, madam president, i ask unanimous consent that this be made part of the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. barrasso: this is what he wrote about dr. murthy. this is a former surgeon general, democrat, about this current surgeon general nominee who we're going to vote on later today. dr. car mona writes his partisanship and lack of qualifications for the job of surgeon general gives this nomination the scent of political patronage. political patronage. that's for -- from someone who has actually served as surgeon general, a democrat, who knows what it takes to do the job well. dr. carmona added in his letter to all the members of the united states senate, he said his confirmation would undermine the

credibility and the authenticity of the office of surgeon general. undermine the credibility and the authenticity of the office of surgeon general. while demeaning, demeaning the selfless service of qualified career union formed officers -- uniformed who merit consideration. that's who the president of the united states has chosen to nominate. someone who would undermine the credibility and the authenticity of the office of surgeon general while demeaning the selfless service of qualified career uniformed officers who merit consideration. madam president, americans deserve a surgeon general who has substantial experience in managing complex crises and delivering patient care. the american people deserve a surgeon general who has proven throughout his or her career

that their main focus is a commitment to patients, not a commitment to politics. dr. murthy has time to learn, time to gain experience, and that may make him a fine surgeon general someday, but that day is not today. madam president, i call on the senate to defeat the nomination of dr. murthy for mr. durbin: i ask the quorum call be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: i see my friend and colleague from wyoming who just spoke on the floor is still in chamber, and i want to acknowledge publicly, i hope he will, too, we're friends, we disagree on the nomination of dr. vivek murthy to be our next surgeon general. i'd like to speak for a few moments about why i'm supporting him and why i hope a majority will join me in support of his nomination. this is an indication of what can go wrong in the senate.

we received this nomination from the president of the united states to fill this post of surgeon general, reported from committee in february this year. obviously, we're in december. it's been sitting here since never. in fact the most of surgeon general has been vacant since july. the surgeon general was supposed to be the leader, one of the leaders in america speaking to issues of public health. can anyone think of a public health issue that we've had to face since february when dr. murthy was reported to the floor of the united states senate? perhaps one of the deadliest diseases that has ever been recorded is being fought in west africa, and we are being asked on a regular basis how we will respond in the united states. the center for disease control plays a major role in it, but historically surgeons general have played a major role when we face similar public health challenges. i can remember coming to the

united states house of representatives years ago when president reagan had been elected and he had chosen c. everett koop to be his surgeon general. c. everett koop was a controversial choice by president reagan because he had been outspoken on some major political issues. he personally had strong feelings against abortion and had said as much before his nomination and some other issues, and it led many people to believe that he was too political for the job and that president reagan had made the wrong choice. but koop was chosen, despite the fact that he had been at least engaged as a medical doctor in discussing political issues. he was chosen. i wasn't in the senate at the time. i didn't have a vote when it came to his choice, but i will tell you this -- when dr. koop took over as surgeon general, he

made it clear that he understood that his obligation was to be the nation's doctor, not the nation's leading medical politician. he did some extraordinary things. i don't know what america would have been like if it were not for dr. koop's presence pushing back on a lot of political spin when it came to public health issues, issues involving aids, for example. it's no secret, it's well known, that many politicians in both parties, for that matter, were reluctant to go into the whole issue of the aids crisis in america for a variety of reasons, but if you will remember, history shows that under dr. koop, we ended up mailing every household in america to let them know about the danger of the aids epidemic. that was an extraordinary act of public leadership when it came to public health, and dr. koop was surgeon general when that

occurred. so those who worried that c. c. everett koop was just too little for the job were disabused of that notion as we watched his service to our country. i make that point because i don't want the same mistake to be made in criticizeing dr. dr. vivek murthy, who we're going to vote on later today to be our next surgeon general. it is true that he has engaged in political activity, as any american citizen is entitled to. i hope that would not disqualify him. when i read in a few moments the groups that are supporting him, you will understand that he isn't in this position of being nominated simply because of his political activity. he has an extraordinary backing of individuals in the medical profession. now we need him more than ever. we need to fill the post of surgeon general of the united states of america.

we hope that we can see an end to the ebola epidemic. we're not quite there. but we ought to have a surgeon general in the united states of america. to think that we have waited since february while this doctor's name has been on our calendar, and we had to use some extraordinary parliament moves to even bring his name up for a vote here. i think it's time for us to vote and it's time for us to confirm the nomination of vivek murthy as our next surgeon general. this past year, americans have battled public health crises on all fronts. here at home, parents watched while a severe train of entero virus spread from state to state threatening young children. illinois, my home state, was one of the hardest hit. i heard from doctors across the state that the minute they discharged one child with respiratory symptoms from the emergency room, another came in.

abroad, we still face the worst ebola epidemic in history. with over 6,300 deaths and many more diagnosed with this devastating disease, now more than ever america needs to fill the spot of top doctor. it has been vacant since july, since july. dr. vivek murthy is that doctor, and i'm proud to vote for him as the next u.s. surgeon general. i'm hoping my colleagues will join me. let me tell you a little about his background. dr. murthy is an attending physician at brigham and women's hospital, an instructor at the harvard medical school. part of what is extraordinary about him is that as well as treating his patients individually, he also thinks about the systemic issues affecting the health of patients and tackles those as well. he is a leading voice in public health, publishing his research on the participation of women and minorities in cancer

clinical trials in top journals, including "science," "journal of the american medical association "and" journal of the american cancer institute." critics of dr. murthy who say he is not up to the job should just look at the literature. he has published in medical research areas of great importance. he also cofounded and chairs the trial network, a software company that helps clinical researchers collaborate more effectively and efficiently with drug developers to speed up drug discovery. in 2011, dr. murthy was appointed to the advisory group on prevention health promotion and integrative and public health. over 100 national state and local public health organizations have endorsed his nomination. they describe him as -- quote -- a well-qualified, forward-thinking, innovative leader with a strong commitment to public health." end of quote. does that sound like a political hack, when 100 organizations say that about this doctor?

the organizations that support dr. murthy include the american college of physicians, the american academy of family physicians, the american academy of pediatrics, the american public health association, the american hospital association, the american cancer society, the american heart association, the american diabetes association, and the list goes on from there. in his confirmation hearing before the senate help committee last february, dr. murthy stated if confirmed he would prioritize his efforts on obesity and tobacco-related disease and -- quote -- make prevention and health promotion the backbone of our communities. this is something that i share with dr. murthy. for the past 30 years, serving in the house and senate, i have worked on the issue of tobacco and public policy. i have worked to reduce youth smoking, implement programs to help people to quit and rein in

the most insidious practices of the tobacco industry. moreover, i have chaired the -- as a cochair of the senate hunger caucus, i have become familiar with the complex and arguably unjust way food is distributed and consumed in america, leaving communities, including many in illinois, simultaneously facing high levels of food insecurity and high rates of obesity. obesity and tobacco-related diseases are part of a growing trend of chronic disease that claims seven out of ten deaths in america and makes up 86% of america's health care costs. dr. murthy says these are his priorities. they should be. these statistics are unacceptable. i believe dr. murthy understands the importance of the national crises before him. i feel confident that his experience, his training and his tenacity have proved him -- that he has qualifications that are needed to tackle these issues.

not only is dr. murthy an outstanding doctor and public health expert, but he also remains closely connected to his community and family. dr. murthy was born to parents who originally were from the southern part of india. he came to the united states at the age of 3 and grew up in miami, florida. he did very well in school. he was valedictorian of his high school, graduated magna cum laude from harvard in just three years, and then got a combined medical and business degree from yale. so senators who come to the floor and question this man's resume, his ability, for goodness sakes, he has an extraordinary background, and that's why the president nominated him. from a very early age, dr. murthy did not set out to make money. he set out to make a difference. in 1995, he cofounded visions worldwide, a nonprofit organization that conducts and supports hiv-aids education and

empowerment programs in india. until 2003, he served as the president of that organization and then board chair. he's a dedicated uncle and friend, consistently described by those who know him as humble, soft-spoken and tireless. i know the indian-american community across this nation is so proud of dr. murthy's accomplishments, as all of us should be. madam president, many years ago, i worked for a state senator in illinois named cecil partee. cecil partee used to say for every political controversy, when you listen to the arguments, understand there is a good reason and a real reason. what is the real reason for the opposition to dr. murthy? it may have come down to just one thing that he said. it was alluded to by the senator from wyoming earlier. during the course of his hearing, he said that he believed that gun violence was a public health issue.

gun violence, a public health issue. for making that statement, he has been pilloried and excorps excorps -- excoriated by the gun lobby, and that may be a major reason why his nomination is controversial. i'm proud to represent the city of chicago and the state of illinois. gun violence is a public health problem. go to the emergency rooms, and i'll give you the list of the names of hospitals in chicago to start with. go to the emergency room on a friday our -- or saturday night, and you tell me that gun violence isn't a public health issue. in those emergency rooms, you will see the victims of gun violence. many of them fighting for their lives. if you go to mount sinai hospital in the englewood section of chicago, you can look across the street to a rehab institute. those who have survived gun violence at mount sinai go

across the street to the schwab rehab institute and learn how to live a life as a paraplegic or a quadriplegic. does that have anything to do with public health? it certainly does. gun violence is a public health issue. no apology necessary. but i think dr. murthy, like dr. koop, has made it clear they are not aspiring to be the leading doctor in america to engage in a political debate, but rather to engage in public health debates about obesity and tobacco and things that make a dramatic difference to the lives of so many people who live in this country. i'm supporting dr. murthy. i think he will be an extraordinary surgeon general. i'm sorry that he and america have had to wait so long for this vote. i hope the majority of my colleagues will step up and support his nomination as well. at this time of challenge, when it comes to public health

issues, we need his leadership. we need his expertise. we need a person of this