the border from where these iraqis were going to come across. we started digging as fast as we could. about this far underneath the ground was shale. so the sinking feeling came across, we are digging positions six inches in the ground to withstand the iraqi onslaught. >> at 6:thirty on road to the white house rewind, the race for the 2004 democratic presidential nomination between john kerry and north carolina senator john edwards. for the complete american history tv weekend schedule go to c-span.org. >> the u.s. senate gaveling back-and-forth continued debate on apps and drug abuse bill that would authorize funding for grants for education, prevention

and treatment and prescription drugs. live coverage of the u.s. senate on c-span2. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the

senator from north carolina. mr. tillis: thank you. you know there has been a dramatic increase in the incidents of opioid addiction which is now at the point of being a full-blown crisis. in my home state of north carolina, we've seen this devastation firsthand, with 1,358 overdose deaths in 2014 alone, fueled by the combination of abuse of opioid-based prescription painkillers and heroin. to put that figure into context, that's more than the number of north carolinians who lost their lives in automobile accidents in 2014. for far too long the conventional thinking was that drug addiction deserved the stigma it receives. a choice made by criminals who were intent on destroying the lives of themselves and others. it was a dark and painful embarrassment for their families, and it's long overdue for us to come to grips with reality, because we know the

truth. drug addiction doesn't discriminate based on one's gender, race, or socioeconomic status. successful c.e.o.'s of mayor companies have -- of major companies have succombed to addiction. straight a students and valedictorians have succombed to addiction. p.t.a. moms and dads who were pillars of their communities have succombed to addiction. we know it because we've seen it in our inner cities, our suburbs and tight-knit rural areas. two weeks ago i picked up a hometown newspaper, the charlotte observer. on the front page was a report that highlighted the rising prescription overdose epidemic. it started off with a terrifying story from a north carolina mother that encapsulates the kind of crisis we're dealing in. the story began the charlotte woman didn't know her daughter was a drug addict until she heard a thud upstairs. her daughter a bright high

school graduate, returned from college for the weekend with a sack of dirty laundry. her mother was folding clothes in the den when she heard the fall of her daughter's uncon science body. she's unon chens on -- unconscis on the floor, not breathe, blue, no heartbeat. fortunately in this case the young woman survived the painkiller overdose. with the support of a loving family, she has an opportunity to get her life back and on track and seize the chance to reach her full potential. but let's not kid ourselves. this near tragedy could have happened nearly anywhere in america and any parent could have experienced it. it's important to reflect on how we got to this point, though. in 2012, the c.d.c. completed a report that said in north carolina, there were 97 painkiller prescriptions written

per 100 people. so what does that mean? it doesn't mean that 97% of the people in north carolina are getting painkillers. it means that there's a group of people who are getting dozens and dozens, sometimes hundreds of prescriptions of opioids. in part, it's the result of a greater awareness of importance of pain management. and many people do need pain medication. but the wider availability of these life-improving and lifesaving surgeries and treatments have actually contributed to the epidemic. the medical community rightly recognized that managing patient pain was the compassionate thing to do and started holding providers accountable for doing so. however, the risk of the wider availability of these powerful medicines must be urgently and rigorously addressed. that is because for americans from all walks of life, the nightmare of addiction begins with something as unassuming as a routine prescription for a painkiller. like oxycontin or perkoset.

due to the highly addictive nature of these drugs a patient's body can become dependent and they experience debilitating withdrawal. once the prescription runs out, the physical addiction, unfortunately, influenced people to make really bad decisions that can be life-changing. seeking more pills on the black market when their doctor says no more or turning to cheaper or even more deadly opioid drugs like heroin. opioid addiction is a slippery slope and it's a deadly slope. the c.d.c. has concluded that people are 40 times more likely to be addicted to heroin if they are addicted to prescription painkillers. our country desperately needs coordination from federal, state, local law enforcement officials to develop comprehensive strategy to combat heroin trafficking and to prevent prescription drug diversion. federal dollars and resources come with so much red tape,

though, and mandates that state and local experts cannot use funding for different initiatives, and that's what the cara bill seeks to address. for example, there aren't enough treatment slots for mothers with children. and there isn't enough assistance provided to pharmacists and doctors to teach them how to best manage their prescriptions and help the people with the highest risk of addiction. it has been heartening to see members of congress set aside their partisan differences in order to take immediate action to address the current shortcomings. i'm proud to be a cosponsor of the comprehensive addiction and recovery act, which is the bipartisan legislation that brings together the experiences and recommendations of drug addiction experts, law enforcement, health care providers, first responders, and the patient community most affected by the opioid epidemic. the legislation expands abuse prevention and education initiatives. it provides grants to substance

abuse agencies, local governments and nonprofit organizations in north carolina and the rest of the nation that are being hit hardest by the heroin and painkiller epidemic. local first responders receive help through expanded availability of in a -- nal lock sown. it has had amazing impacts on saving the lives of people like the lady i talked about earlier. the legislation also addresses the strain, the addiction crisis places on our criminal justice system by providing more resources to identify and treat incarcerated americans. helping put them in the path to recovery which in turn could lower the nation's recidivism and crime rates. we can never forget the solution to so many of america's problems can be found in our local communities, our schools, our churches, town halls and v.f.w. halls. the federal government c can help support these efforts

through smart, commonsense approaches like the comprehensive addiction and recovery act or cara. we must be honest in recognizing success will be neither quick nor easy. we're confronted with the reality that addiction is a vicious and devastating cycle of abuse and despair. with consequences that can result in the destruction of loving families and the end of once promising lives. it affects us all, mr. president. the fight against addiction is one we must wage together and we cannot afford to lose. and, mr. president, i want to thank you personally for your leadership on this issue. i look forward to seeing the cara bill come to the senate and go to the president's desk. thank you, mr. president. a senator: mr. president? mr. thune: i'd like to also

take a few minutes today to discuss the devastation that drugs are bringing to too many families and communities across our nation and also to congratulate the presiding officer for his great work on this issue, the bill that's before us today is a collaborative effort of his and senators ayotte, toomey and others who have worked very hard to address what has become really an epidemic across our country and is particularly hitting states hard. it's hitting communities hard. it's hitting families hard. it needs to be dealt with. and so the destructive effects of drug use has been well documented and anything we say about the problem likely stoive said many times before, but it is still worth saying. and that is we can't afford to forget what's at stake in this effort. my home state of south dakota, methamphetamine use hit our indian reservations very hard over the past few years. numerous individuals have become trapped in a cycle of meth abuse, their plans and dreams for their futures erased as

their world shrinks to nothing more than their next dose. of course drug abuse doesn't just affect the individual abusing drugs. it ripples out into families and communities. since meth abuse spiked on our reservations there there has bea significant increase in the number of babies born addicted to meth. that's about as heartbreaking as it gets, mr. president. a newborn baby screej in agony as -- screaming in agony as her body suffers withdrawal. the meth epidemic on reservations caused a significant increase in meth-related crimes including sexual assaults, car accidents and gang violence. the meth epidemic has worsened the housing shortage facing south dakota tribes because meth contaminated a number of homes across our reservations. cleaning up a house that tested positive for meth costs thousands of dollars. several south dakota tribes have seen so much devastation from meth abuse that they've declared a state of public emergency to

gain access to additional government resources to fight the problem. mr. president, today we're considering legislation to address another drug epidemic that's caused similar devastation. that's the abuse of prescription painkillers and heroin. since 1999 drug overdose deaths from prescription opioids like oxycodone and hydrocodone quadrupled. 47 americans die every day after overdosing on opioid painkillers. the numbers of heroin abuse are disturbing. heroin use in the united states nearly doubled between 2002 and 2013 while overdose deaths related to heroin nearly quadrupled. between 2013 and 2014 heroin use in the united states increased nearly 35%. behind those numbers are thousands of broken families, suffering children and devastated communities. mr. president, any response to a problem as deep and complex as drug abuse has to approach the problem from a number of

different angles. it has to address education and prevention. it has to target the drug supply by going after those who trade in and produce drugs. and it has to ensure that individuals trying to escape the cycle of addiction have access to the resources they need to overcome their dependence. the bill before the senate today, the comprehensive addiction and recovery act, targets all these priorities. a substantial part of the bill is focused on funding programs that provide treatment, support for individuals trying to escape painkiller or heroin dependence. the bill also provides grants for education and prevention for local communities antidrug efforts. and an important section of the bill focuses on developing best practices for prescribing pain medication. right now prescription painkillers are heavily prescribed in the united states. in fact, the united states consumes more opioids than any

other country in the world. our country accounts for almost 100% of hydro codone used globally in one -- i should say 81% of objection codoan use. in 2012 doctors prescribed enough opioids in the united states a month supply. in 2012 doctors prescribed enough prescription opioids to give every adult in the united states a month's supply. it goes without saying that prescription painkillers can be a key part of medical treatmentt is essential we make sure these drugs are being carefully prescribed and that they're only being prescribed when really needed. reviewing and updating prescribing practices will help us prevent attempts to use these drugs inappropriately. mr. president, one of the most important parts of preventing

drug abuse is going after the people who prey upon the vulnerabilities of their fellow man by engaging in the drug trade. one significant reason for the recent spike in heroin abuse is the sharp increase in supply of affordable heroin here in the united states over the past several years. this increase has been driven by a major surge in heroin production in mexico. between 2013 and 2014, heroin production in mexico increased a staggering 62%. 62% in one year. a large part of that production increases ended up here in the united states. any successful strategy to combat the heroin epidemic in the united states has to include efforts to check the flow of heroin coming across our borders. the comprehensive addiction and recovery act addresses in priority by authorizing brands for state and law enforcement agencies to address the legal trafficking of distribution of heroin and prescription pain

killers. and republicans will continue to look for ways to support federal, state and local law enforcement as they seek to stem the flow of drugs into our communities. mr. president, the comprehensive addiction and recovery act is an important bill. it's supported by senators of both parties and by a number of law enforcement and drug treatment associations, and it takes the kind of comprehensive approach we need to address the abuse of heroin and prescription pain killers. but our efforts are not limited to this bill. last year, we passed a protecting our elephants act to help prevent and treat prescription pain killer abuse for pregnant women and provide care for newborns who suffer as a result of their mother's abuse of overdoses. we -- of opioids. we also provide grants to states to help them prevent and treat drug abuse. the chairman of the senate commerce committee and i worked with my colleagues last year to provide new resources to the coast guard, the leading federal

agency for combating drug trade on the high seas. the senate finance committee recently held a hearing on the stopping medication abuse and protecting seniors act which establishes a medicare program to prevent pain killer abuse. mr. president, too many lives across our country have been wrecked by drug abuse. too many children have lost a mother or a father to addiction. and too many communities are bleeding from the violence and brokenness that accompanies the drug epidemic in this country. republicans remain committed to doing everything that we can to support those fighting drug abuse, whether they serve in law enforcement agencies, emergency rooms or classrooms. we are committed to reaching a day when fewer lives are destroyed by the scourge of drugs. the legislation before us today, senators portman, ayotte, toomey and others have been involved with, is an important step forward, mr. president, in helping to address something that has become a crisis in this

country and which is impacting in a harmful and negative way way too many families, way too many individuals and ruining the hopes and aspirations of too many young people and children across this country. let's pass this legislation. let's get the house to pass a similar piece of legislation, and let's get something on the president's desk that can be signed into law that will bring the relief that is needed. mr. president, i yield the floor. i have six unanimous consent requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. i would ask unanimous consent that these requests be agreed to and that these requests be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: mr. president, i yield the floor and i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. whitehouse: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. whitehouse: mr. president, may i ask unanimous consent that the pending quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. whitehouse: thank you, mr. president. i will take the opportunity, since no one appears to be seeking the floor right now, to speak about our dr ara legislation -- about our cara legislation. and since the senator from ohio, who has been my partner in this, is now presiding, it's an opportune time to give some remarks. i think like many states, just from the remarks we've heard on the floor already, it's not unusual to have a terrible toll at home. from overdoses. in 2013, 239 rhode islanders

lost their lives to overdoses. that is more than were killed in automobile accidents, more than were killed in homicides, more than were killed by suicide. indeed, more than all of those categories -- automobile accident, homicide, and suicide -- combined. in one small community, byrlville, rhode island, the beginning of last year was marked by six opioid overdose deaths. byrlville's a very small town up in northern rhode island, probably has 5,000 people who live there. in one quarter, the opening quarter of last year, to lose six people, to have six police calls to the scene, to have six

wakes, six funerals in a community that small. and that is, sadly, emblematic of what's going on all around the country. rhode island is not alone. the addiction overdoses are claiming lives, creating tragedy and destroying families across the united states. our emergency rooms in america treat almost 7,000 people every single day for the misuse or abuse of drugs. 7,000 people come through the e.r. doors needing treatment, which, by the way, runs up some costs to our health care system. and more than 120 people die every day as the result of an

overdose. the latest year for which we have figures is the year that senator thune just mentioned, 2014. 47,000 dead in one year. if you leave this building and if you walk down to the mall, you can find the vietnam war memorial. the vietnam war memorial has about 58,000 names on it. from the entire vietnam confli conflict, 58,000 names on the vietnam war memorial. from one year of opioid overdose, 47,000 deaths. and i'm afraid it probably went up in 2015. we just don't have the figures in yet. and behind this tragedy of death

and sorrow lies a terrible feeling which is that according to the most recent estimates nearly nine out of ten people who need drug treatment don't get it. they just don't get it. when you think of that death toll and you think of the cost and you think of the sorrow, the idea that we are still letting nine out of ten people who need treatment not even get it, not have access to it, it's a terrible failing. the economic cost of all of this is something we always think about in congress, whether it's from health care costs or criminal justice related costs to lost productivity at work,

that's been estimated at as much as $70 billion -- with a "b" -- $70 billion per year. and one thing we've seen is that ongoing substance abuse epidemic does not discriminate by race, by ethnicity, by gender, by age. overdose rates are up in both men and women, in non-hispanic whites and blacks, and in adults of almost all ages. the dynamic nature of this epidemic demands that we respond in a comprehensive way. a way that brings together the public health, the public safe safety, the behavioral health care, the addiction recovery and other communities. it was out of this recognition, this realization, the

realization that this pandemic, as some have aptly called it, requires an all-hands-on-deck approach, that the comprehensive addiction and recovery act was born. starting in the spring of 2014, the presiding officer, senator portman of ohio, senator klobuchar of minnesota, senator ayotte of new hampshire and i hosted a series of bipartisan, bicameral congressional forums addressing various aspects of addiction. from the role of addiction in our criminal justice system to the special challenges faced by women, by veterans, by young addicts, and the collateral consequences that we impose on people when they're in recovery. five forums we hosted, as the

presiding officer will well recall, that brought together experts from this various different fields to come here from all around the country. this was a national pilgrimage to washington to highlight best practices and to share success stories from their states. i have more remarks that i will be pleased to make as the day goes on but i'm here managing the floor and so i will yield the floor to my colleague and fill in again when there is a gap in the proceedings. with that, i will yield the floor, pursue this later. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from montana. mr. daines: mr. president, yesterday i joined senators gardner and moran on a fact-finding mission to guantanamo bay. guantanamo bay was a humble reminder of the services our military provides overseas to get these terrorists off the

battlefield and ensure they don't end up in americans backyards. president obama has signed multiple pieces of legislation into law that explicitly prohibit the transfer of enemy combatants from guantanamo bay to our shores. most recently, the 2016 national defense authorization act, signed by the president, specifically prohibited funds to be utilized to transfer detainees from guantanamo bay to the united states. among those being held are detainees like khalid shake mohammed, who is -- khalid sheikh mohammed who is the principal architects of the 2011 attacks in new york city according to the report. khalid sheikh mohammed is just part of the 9/11 five that are currently detained in guantanamo

bay that allegedly masterminded and facilitated the 9/11 terror attacks on our country. in fact, other prisoners include osama bin laden's bodyguard, who fought u.s. forces in afghanistan. we need to do the right thing for our country and keep them locked up in guantanamo and not help president obama fulfill a campaign promise and bring these terrorists to our communities. i'm exceedingly proud of our men and our women serving at guantanamo bay. they're impressive, they are professional and i'm honored to represent their interests in the united states senate. and i will continue working tirelessly to prohibit the transfer of these detainees to america.

the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. whitehouse: i'll continue my remarks. we were discussing the forums that the presiding officer and senator ayotte and senator klobuchar and i organized. and out of that was developed a national working group of stakeholders, from the public health community, from behavioral health folks, prevention, treatment, recovery, law enforcement. the forums informed us and the working group supported us as we worked together to draft legislation that would promote effective evidence-based policies and increased collaboration among what are too often siloed areas of activity and expertise. the bill that we developed would do a great number of things. they fall into four major

categories. one is that it would expand prevention and educational efforts, particularly aimed at teens, parents and other caretakers and elderly folks, aging populations to prevent the abuse of opioids and heroin and to promote treatment and recovery. second, it would expand the availability of naloxone to law enforcement agencies and other first responders to help in the reversal of overdoses and save lives. third, it would expand the resources to identify and treat incarcerated individuals suffering from addiction disorders promptly by collaborating with criminal justice stakeholders and by providing evidence-based treatment. and, fourth, it would strengthen prescription drug monitoring programs to help states monitor and track the diversion of prescribed drugs out of the

proper and legitimate market and to help at-risk individuals get access to the services that they need. it does a number of other things but i won't summarize them all now. the comprehensive addiction and recovery act recognizes that we have learned from science and from experience and it promotes those practices that we know work best to confront the multiple facets of this new epidemic. it sends the message that we in congress understand that addiction is a disease, a public health crisis that requires more than the enactment of stiffer criminal penalties. we tried that road. we know that it was not a success. the bill that we worked on and prepared has been endorsed by over 130 community and national

organizations on the front lines of this epidemic, including the national council on behavioral health, the community antidrug coalitions of america, the haz hazelton betty ford foundation, the national district attorneys' association, the national association of attorneys gener general, the major county sheriffs, the american correctional association, and many, many others. here in the senate at the last count we had 38 other cosponsors than myself and i'm sure that number is climbing. as committed as i am to the principles in this legislation and to the need to encourage and support these policies, i recognize that this bill alone is not enough. without adequate resources to fund the programs in the comprehensive addiction and recovery act, cara, they will

remain out of reach to too many of the individuals, communities and first responders who most need them. without adequate resources for prevention, treatment, and recovery, we will continue to spend billions of dollars elsewhere in economic and societal costs that would be avoidable if we got this right. without adequate resources, too many people who desperately want to turn their lives around will be told to wait another day. anybody who knows about addiction recovery knows what the consequences can be of being told to wait another day. senator shaheen of new hampshire has proposed an amendment which provides emergency appropriations to address this

crisis. i'm a cosponsor of that amendment because i agree with her that the opioid epidemic is an emergency, a public health emergency and should be treated as one. building on the strong commitment congress made to funding addiction and recovery programs if the tp-frpblts xy. 2016 omnibus, senator that even's bill would appropriate an additional $600 million to the department of justice to samsa and to the cdc. much of it going to programs authorized in cara, the comprehensive reduction recovery act or complimentary to cara's goals. this would not be the first time that the congress has authorized emergency spending in response to a public health emergency

when the swine flu epidemic hit taking i think 11,000 lives, congress appropriated $2 billion on an emergency basis with broad support on both sides of the aisle. here in the latest year for which we have the data, the body count is $47,000 -- 47,000 lives, 47,000 deaths. 11,000 to swine flu, 47,000 in one year to the opioid epidemic. so i hope that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will join me and senator shaheen and vote not only to support the comprehensive addiction and recovery act but to also provide

added resources to make those principles a reality in the lives of the people who are counting on us to come to their aid. addiction is a tough illness and recovery from it is a hard but noble path. men and women who walk that path deserve our support, our encouragement, and our admiration. i thank my fellow sponsors, senator portman, senator klobuchar, senator ayotte for their partnership over the past two years as we prepared this legislation. i thank chairman grassley and my ranking member senator leahy for their commitment to tackling this epidemic and for bringing

this bill out of the judiciary committee without opposition and now on to the floor where we hope we can bring it across the finish line. let me say i anticipate that we're going to have a disagreement about the funding of this bill. and i will fight as hard as i can to make sure that this bill is adequately funded, but i do not intend nor do i know anyone who intends to block the passage of cara or to interfere with it going into law over the question of funding. people will have to check in with their own consciences and check in with the desires of the addiction recovery communities

in their home states and check in with their constituents about what the right way to vote is on giving this adequate funding. finally, let me close by thanking the advocates, the providers, the police officers, the rescue personnel, and of course the families of people in recovery who support them and help them through the tough nights and days. they do the hard work of saving lives every single day, and we would do well to honor them by passing this bill and seeing to it that it has adequate funding support. i yield the floor and i will note the absence of a quorum until -- oh, the senator from virginia is here.

i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from virginia. a senator: i believe, mr. president, that a series of speakers are going to come up and -- i don't know if my colleague from the senator of ohio had a long statement. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. a senator: mr. president, i would ask my colleague if he would defer to me for just two minutes on the cara bill that senator whitehouse has been talking about and then we'll yield to you. first i want to thank senator whitehouse for his partnership. for the last few years we've been working on this issue ensuring we have a comprehensive approach to this horrible issue of drug addiction, specifically increasing threat we've seen in all of our communities to addiction to prescription drugs and heroin. it is the number one cause of death in my home state of ohio and the number one cause ever

accidental death in the country now is overdoses but it's far worse than that. it's tearing apart families and communities and we do need to address it. mr. portman: i will say two things. one, this is not just a bill about principles. this is a bill about policy. so what we're supporting, what senator whitehouse is supporting is new policies to approach this more effectivelies o. as to prevention and education, evidence based, as to treatment and recovery, as to dealing with the unfortunate situation of too many overdoses for naloxone and training, prescription drug monitoring programs in place, as to helping these addicted babies and mothers who are pregnant and have an addiction, there's very specific policy changes here that direct the increase in appropriations which was provided this year for the current fiscal year, for the next seven, eight months and so that funding will be there for this. if we were to pass this bill tomorrow and get it enacted into law, that funding would be there, not just on principles but on specific ways to spend that money more effectively. i want to make that point clear. second, i do support additional

resources. i think this is such a crisis that it requires resources over and above what we provided for even in cara as important as it is. but we've got to get cara done. this is our number one priority not just of us but 130 groups around the country, who are the people, the experts in education in treatment and recovery and they have come together and given us their best council and that is that this legislation will -- counsel and that is that this legislation will begin to reverse this terrible trend of addiction. i'm hopeful we can have a full debate on this. senator shaheen is going to offer an amendment. i've seen the revised version of her amendment. i believe i will be able to support that amendment. i just started to look at it but i like it because it does provide additional funding but it's in addition to the funding we know is already going to be there for cara. it would be emergency funding. i think when you're in such a crisis in this country right now and including in my state, that i will be able to support that.

however, as senator whitehouse said, we have to pass the underlying bill. and i appreciate his commitment to that as is the commitment of so many other great groups around the country who have supported us and said let's not get off track. let's get this legislation passed. we have companion legislation in the house. it's bipartisan. it's identical to the legislation that senator whitehouse and i introduced. identical. we worked together with the house on this. it's bipartisan. they have over 88 cosponsors, republican and democrat. and we have some very good signals from the white house, of course, that they're interested in working with us. therefore, this could actually get done. it's not just about this year and funding for this year. obviously this would be a change in the way we spend money. it's an authorization changing it for next year and the year after and the year after. in my experience, that's what needs to be done. i was the author of the drug free communities act in the house. there's now been $1.3 billion spent under the auspices of the drug free communities act that directs and targets that funding to what we know is effective prevention.

our legislation takes that the next step further, by the way, with regard to heroin and prescription drugs to help those communities that are particularly impacted. i thank my colleague from rhode island and my colleague from virginia, thank you for your indull generally. sorry to interrupt you in the beginning of your colloquy with colleagues and, mr. president, i yield my time. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from virginia. a senator: i want to thank my colleagues for their very important work on the issue before the senate today. mr. warner: i have a state where both opioid abuse and heroin abuse has taken too many lives and destroying too many families. i look forward to successfully moving forward on this legislation. but, mr. president, i rise today to join several of my colleagues in a conversation on digital security. since last year i've been working with the chairman of the house homeland security committee, texas republican

michael mccall to set up a commission of experts to study digital security and issues around encryption. these issues have been somewhat in the news, and we see court cases both in california and in new york. i say to my colleagues, well, this is one component of this commission and study -- commission that we are trying to address. we are at the beginning of a debate that is even much broader than the current cases being litigated in california and new york that really are going to encompass the whole world of digital security. you think issues we face are challenging, as -- basically your refrigerator responds to your voice, this issue around digital security is only going to grow. mr. president, what brings me to this, my background in technology community and working

with chairman mccall, his background in the law enforcement community, is that unfortunately over the last few months, we've seen folks from the tech community, from the hraufrplt community, the privacy community, too often talk past each other. we've seen this issue addressed without a common set of facts. and we've seen now the situation that's arisen that has basically pitted law enforcement against technology. now, we think the approach that we're taking, my colleagues and i will talk about, a bipartisan bicameral legislation that was introduced on monday is the appropriate way to go. i know we're joined now by my partner in the senate senator gardner and senator schatz, senator bennet, senator capito and my good friend senator king. mr. president, one thing regardless where people fall on this debate is that digital

security tools are terribly important. encryption is essential to protecting our personal information, our financial information, our intellectual capital, our national security, and this is one issue in which the heads of law enforcement and the heads of the intelligence community as recently as two weeks ago, senator king and senator collins are on the intel committee, testified in public that encryption is here to stay and is extraordinarily porch. but we've seen -- important. but we've seen challenges around this technological innovation come very quickly. think about this. nearly 2,000 new applications are submitted to the app store every day. this is how quickly this world is changing. the majority of these applications that are added to that app store are actually produced overseas. two-thirds of these new apps use some level of encryption.

i followed this both if the policy standpoint but also my personal background was in the telecommunications industry for over 20 years. i can say that the networks that we deal with today in terms of the internet, the cloud are infinitely more complicated than the top down -- distributed top-down network that existed in the 19 90's when the congress most recently addressed some of these issues. the internet today is no longer top down. the fundamental architecture of the internet is decentralized and resilient. we've seen on countless occasions in the past when traffic, telecomtraffic shifts quickly from one area to another and attempts by any government to channel that traffic in a certain way, in fact often results in shifts that make it harder for governments, law

enforcement, and intelligence to stay abreast of the activity. obviously, mr. president, many of these issues have been bubbling since edward snowden's disclosure three years ago, a disclosure i think that did great harm to our country. we've seen more recently in the press this debate crystallized after terrorist incidents and even more recently, court activities in both california and new york. what we are doing, these members in the senate and members in the house in a bipartisan, bicameral way is saying let's sit down together and work through a set of facts, a common slab stiff approach. -- collaborative approach. so before more time lapses, we bring the right people together now. we all need to be working, as i said before, from the same set of facts. we need a framework for collaborative conversation.

too often i've heard from law enforcement and tech over the last recent months. we need to get into a room to try to sort these things through. and, unfortunately, a static american-only solution won't get us to solving the problem. i believe it will simply drive the bad guys -- criminals and terrorists, at least the smart ones, anyway -- off of american technology, away american platforms and move more and more foreign criminals off foreign-based technology and make safety even farther out of our reach. i know some of my colleagues question, is a commission the right way? too often congress has used commissions in the past to punt a serious issue. the model that we've taken, working with great assistance from cor senato senator collinse

9/11 commission, where a congressionally mandated commission came together, came together on a series of policy recommendations, the overwhelming majority of which were implemented by the congress. that's why this 16-member commission that we've proposed has been endorsed, modeled after the 9/11 commission, has been endorsed by a wide range of stakeholders, from the tech sector to respected academic and legal experts and distinguished national security figures. as a matter of fact -- and this doesn't happen that often -- our commission's proposals have even been endorsed by the editorial boards of both "the wall street journal" and "the washington post." nothing else, everybody else will get a second look. a bicameral digital security commission is a productive path forward. while these issues are not easy, what is great about america is that we are a country of innovators and problem solvers. i know that if we stop talking

past each other and put the right people in a room, we can find the right solutions that protect us all and then congress can afnlg act. mr. president, i know we're going to hear from a number of my colleagues. i'd like to now yield to my friend and colleague on this issue, the senator from colorado, senator gardner. mr. gardner: thank you, mr. president. the presiding officer: the sphror colorado. mr. gardner: thank you. i thank my colleague from virginia for his work on this and his history in the telecom business and his understanding of the issues set before us. there is a he no simple answers, no black-and-white procedure because of the set issues before us. i'm reminded when i was in the state legislature, the legislation that we worked on several years ago that was trying to figure out what to do when it came to criminal acts over the internet. at the time this bill passed, most people were using blackberrieberryies.

they had described in the statute that the legislature was working on that -- dealing with the issue of internet luring of a child. and when they wrote the language, they used technical language that a judge then, when presented with a case under the statute, trying to charge somebody with internet luring of a child, actually said that, wellerwell, since the perpetrats using a blackberry, we don't define the blackberry as a computer. therefore, this charge won't apply in this case. well, that's because at the time the legislature tried to describe in very definite times a black-and-white answer to technology that had evolved, or that everybody thought would be understood that this is a computer or this is the internet and the judge said, no, that's not the case. so we had to address that issue in later years to try to overcome and understand the technology in ways that allows techmology to evolve, that allows new technologies to emerge, but also making sure

that we're passing laws to provide protection to victims of crimes. in this case, an innocent child. and so when we're dealing with this issue of privacy and security and encryption, congress ought to be the first body to admit that there is no single person in here who can say, i have every answer, i have every solution, choose me, choose my bill, this is the way forward. and so i applaud my colleague, senator warner from virginia, for the work that he is doing along with senator collins, myself, and chairman mccall in the house of representatives to try to find that solution to a very nuanced issue. this challenge with enription en -- with encryption that we face tad is significant. encryption is a technology designed to prevent unauthorized access to data and information, a code, a series of codes to put a block on valuable things, both trivial things alike. no matter how you describe what it is or what it is protecting,

floss doubt that it has been -- there is no doubt that it has been an enabler of global commerce. it is that blanket that keeps our credit card numbers savings our bank account numbers safe. it's the underpinning of financial success for businesses like e-imai an ebay and amazon . it can also be used to cover bad actors to cover their actions, creating a safe harbor sometimes for people who don't deserve to have a safe harbor. it can create an impenetrable cage around crimes, a tool used to thwart law enforcement and lawful investigations, a blockade that is too difficult to penetrate for law enforcement. and so this bill that you have put forward, this digital commission that will be comprised of experts around the country on issues of privacy, security, encryption to try to find the right balance between what is it that we need in this country to protect our national

security, define bad telecommunication -- to find bad actors that are trying to do bad things, to craft policy in an open manner that we can look at to make sure we are protecting policies, protecting encryption. we are not off-shoring the problem allowing others to hide behind technology made offshore. but that we have a solution here in congress that takes into account evolving technologies, encryption techniques and technologies respecting people's privacy rights as well. because while there is a darker side to some users of innovations that we'veunleashed, we have great benefit from the innovations that we have cited, that have -- that we have created, that have enhanced our way of life and our quality of life. and so to senator warner, my colleague in the senate, through the chair, i would just congratulate the senator on his good work and the work that so many of us have tried to find this balance of security, privacy, and to make sure that

we're getting -- giving no corner to people who wish to do us harm. the presiding officer: the sno rt frofrom -- the senator from virginia. mr. warner: this is not an either/or circumstance. we've got to protect americans sings privac -- we've got to prt americans' privacy. we also need to ensure that we it into promote american ink knowvation and i believe there is a way through this and appreciate his good work on this as we move forward on this important piece of legislation. let me now ask someone who's seen this process work before, longtime member of the senate intelligence committee and homeland security committee who has helped shape this legislation, my friend, my colleague, the senator from maine. ms. collins: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from maine. ms. collins: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i rise today as a

cosponsor of the digital security commission act, a bill that will establish a national bipartisan commission to examine digital security and privacy and the going dark problem that poses a real challenge for those responsible for our national security and for protecting the american public. let me commend the primary author of this bill, the senator from virginia, senator warner, for his expertise in putting together national only a well-balanced commission but also a broad array of cosponsors in support of this important legislation. mr. president, senior administration officials -- the f.b.i. director first among them

-- have been vocal in articulating the problem of terrorists and criminals going dark with the result that our intelligence agencies and our law enforcement are going blind. director comey has testified repeatedly to the fact that there are terrorists who are using encrypted communications to plot attacks against our people and we know that international criminal cartels are doing so as well. there are many competing and difficult concerns that need to be worked out as we address this complex issue. under our bill, a national and diverse commission will perform its review and then will make recommendations that will

protect the privacy rights of law-abiding individuals in an era in which terrorists and criminals increasingly use encrypted devices. the digital security commission will have the opportunity to make a valuable contribution to this debate, and that is the opportunity that our legislation creates. mr. president, the laws of the united states, unfortunately, have not kept pace with technology, which has obviously rapidly evolved during the past three decades. as a result, the issues of going dark and preserving personal privacy are ones that we simply must grapple with today and for the future. to resolve what often are

competing concerns will undoubtedly require a new law. now, let me be clear that i personally don't believe that the absence of a new law in any way exempts a company or an individual from complying with a court order irked by a federal -- i shoul-- issued by a federa. in the san bernardino case, apple has been ordered by a federal judge to provide technical assistance to help the f.b.i. access data on a cell phone that was used by one of the terrorists involved in killing 14 people and injuring 22 others. now, here's an important fact that's been overlooked in many of the reports on this crime: given that this phone was owned by the county, which has given its permission for the data to

be retrieved -- and i think that is a critical point here -- and that the court order is narrowly tailored, i believe that apple should reconsider its position as it relates to this particular case. in the long run, however, it is clear that we need a new law and a dialogue among the administration, congress, federal and state law enforcement, and the tech community in order to deal with this issue. mr. president, it's appalling to me that there's been no legislative proposals submitted by the white house or any other federal agency to guide us on this issue. at a time when the administration has been notably

absent in offering a legislative proposal to address these important and complex issues, the practical solutions that i believe would come from the digital security commission would be most welcome by congress and would help us and guide us as we draft a new law. to be sure, these are difficult issues to resolve, and i believe that if you surveyed the cosponsors of this bill, you would find all sorts of different views on the cases that are before us. indeed, the courts have reached different opinions. well, i do not expect that the commissioners will see eye to eye on every recommendation. we can have confidence that the final report will reflect the consensus judgment of a

supermajority of the commissioners who are selected in equal numbers by republicans and democrats. the final report must be supported by at least three quarters of the commission to ensure that no recommendation represents the view of just a few stakeholders. when we had the 9/11 commission's recommendations, one reason they were so powerful in enabling us to revamp the intelligence community was their unanimity. again, let me thank senator warner for his leadership. i look forward to working with him and with my other colleagues, including the senator from maine, angus king, to make sure that we get this issue right for the challenges we face now and in the decades to come.

thank you, mr. president. mr. warner: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from virginia. mr. warner: i thank my colleague, the senator from maine for her good work and the fact that she has fought through these issues in a different framework when our country was attacked different framework when if some in congress had come through with this a few years back, we would not have these cases where it appears at first blush the court is coming at it in two different directions. in america, the only solution here could simply drive criminals and terrorists to foreign-based technology, hardware and software are, and in many ways to get this right you are going to need a balkanization of

the interest when you also think through this on an international basis. let me now ask my friend, the former governor, like myself, and a great member of the senate intelligence committee, and want to thank him for joining us in this effort as the senator from maine has said, we have a broad breadth of ideological viewpoints that are on these eight bipartisan original sponsors here in the senate. i think more will be joining us. i'd simply add that on a day where a lot of the nation's focus is on super tuesday, some of the activities are taking place in the presidential debates, it's great to see such responsible members from both parties stepping forward in a bipartisan way to address a very, very serious issue both today and the future for our country. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. king: mr. president?

the presiding officer: the senator from maine. mr. king: when i first entered this body in 2000, i was appointed to the intelligence committee and we would talk about very difficult, very complex and sometimes very scary issues. after sitting on these meet gdz for months, it came to me what the purpose of the committee is. it comes down to balancing the principles of the constitution. the preamble uses two important phrases in conjunction with each other. the first is to ensure domestic tranquillity. and the second is to provide for the common defense. now, there are other elements listed, but that is part of the essence of any government, to ensure domestic tranquillity and provide for the common defense. in other words, keep us

safe. that's what government is all about. but be the on the other hand, the bill of rights, and particularly the fourth amendment, makes it clear that there are limitations on government's power in whatever area. the fourth amendment says the right of the people to be secure in their papers, in their houses, in their effects shall not be violated. that no unreasonable searches and seizures. those two provisions are intention, and they have been since the founding of the republic. and the role of the intelligence committee and this body, it seems to me, is to constantly recalibrate the balance between those two provisions based upon the threats our country faces and the developments of technology. and that's really what this discussion is about and has been brought into sharp focus in the

last two weeks by the case involving apple and san bernardino and also other cases around the country. the apple case points up the complexity and the difficulty of these issues. it is not simple. the more you -- it's easy to say it was a terrorist phone, open it up and get the information. but then when you learn that the, number one, apple is not being asked to simply throw a switch or plug in a wire. it's asked -- it's being asked to write new software which would compromise its own software protections built into its iphones all over the world. it's being asked to create something, not simply open the doors. number two, although there's been some discussion about it's just this phone, it's not just this phone. apple's being asked to create a new piece of software that compromises its

operating system in such a way that the phone can be hacked. once that piece of software is created, there is no telling where it will go. it's referred to in the tech literature as the golden key, or the god key. and sure, apple could keep it, but it might -- who knows a disgruntled blee could let it -- employee could let it out, apple could be hacked. it could fall into the hands of the intelligence community, it could then be made public. once it's out there, you can't undo it. what i mean by raising these issues is not that i know what the answers are, but that it's very complicated. and what if we create this key -- apple creates the key for the san bernardino phone but it ends up in the hands of china or russia or iran or a criminal enterprise. then we've compromised the security of our, all of our citizens, millions of our citizens, and perhaps of

our country itself. the real point here is this is an issue of immense significance and public policy importance that should not be decided by a single court in california or iowa or new jersey or anywhere else based upon a 220-year-old law. this is an issue of policy that should be decided here. and indeed, in the district court opinion that was written yesterday in new york, was released yesterday -- i stayed up late last night reading it -- the heart of that opinion was this is a job for congress. this is a policy question. the judge said the people who wrote the all ritz act in 1789, the judiciary act in 1789, many of them are the vaim -- same people who wrote the constitution and bill of rights.

he said he did not believe they meant to import to the judiciary the power to make this kind of policy. that was the fundamental premise of the opinion. i commend that opinion to my colleagues. i've been reading judicial opinions for about 50 years. it's one of the best i've ever read in terms of the research and footnoting. it's a very, very strong argument, and it makes the case, i think, very straightforwardly that this decision should not stay in the hands of the court. the real issue here is who shall decide this complex and portentous issue. now generally i don't like commission bills. typically, they are often a politician's way of putting the problem off to someone else in the future and we'll deal with it and appoint a blue-ribbon commission. but i've seen them work. the senator from maine mentioned the 9/11 commission that i think

did a lot of good work and provided the basis for a great deal of policy. in maine we had a case on workers comp, a very difficult issue in our state but the commission helped us get a political solution that ultimately helped to solve that problem. i have seen commissions work, and i think this is exactly the right answer in this particular situation, because the issue is so complicated and because it involves technology, it involves law, it involves the first amendment, the fourth amendment, the fifth amendment, and it involves national security. these are important considerations, and we have to understand the ramifications of these issues before taking action. now we may want to, and need to address the specific issues raised in the current apple case on an interim basis. we may not -- we may decide not to do that, but that is an option we don't necessarily have to wait until the

commission acts because the commission is talking about larger issues. yes, it's talking about the encryption issue or would talk about the encryption issue, but it's also dealing with broader issues of digital security. so we may want to make an interim decision while we wait for the work of the commission. but i think the important point is that that -- the question before the house is where should this decision be made? and i would join my colleague by saying this problem, the so-called going dark, the encryption problem and its constraints upon law enforcement is not new this week. we've been hearing about it in the intelligence committee and in the armed services committee and generally in the press for a year or two years, and i believe that the law enforcement community or the administration should have come forward with a legislative proposal for us to act upon. of course i'm not absolving myself.

we could have brought forth our own proposal, but it was their continuing to raise this issue, and i think it was incumbent upon them to say here's how we think it should be solved. now i know if mr. comey were here, he would say we hoped we wouldn't have to bother you about this because we were trying to work this out with the technology companies. i understand that. but i wish, frankly, that we had put forth this bill a year ago or two years ago and then we'd be in the position of answering this question today instead of starting down the path of handing this question to a commission that we hope will provide some answers and guidance to us that will help us to make policy. but i'm delighted to be a cosponsor of this bill. i commend the senator from virginia for spear heading this effort. i think it's one that deserves quick attention here and something that we can move so we can get to work on trying to

understand all the ramifications of this decision. we don't want to compromise national security, but we also don't want to compromise personal security. and we don't want to create something which could redowned against national security if it fell into the hands of some of our adversaries. so i'm delighted to be able to help with this effort. i look forward to working with the sponsor and the other cosponsors and hopefully this is something we can move with alacrity so we can bring this issue back to this congress sooner rather than later, and we will never answer the questions finally because by the time we get some answers there will be new developments in technology and new questions. but we at least need to bring this debate into the 21st century and try to find a solution that will make sense both in terms of national security and personal security for the citizens of this country. thank you, mr. president, and thank you senator from virginia,

and i yield the floor. mrs. boxer: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from california. mrs. boxer: could i just ask the staff if there is a lower -- mr. president, excuse me, i'm just trying to get a different -- thank you very much. mr. president, this is a great country, regardless of what some people say, this is a great country. and the reason it's great is that people work. they get up and they produce for this country. they give their talents. they get paid. they help their families. their kids get educated.

and we have that ethic of doing our job. and that's why it's so shocking to me that the republicans who are in charge of this united states senate refuse to do their job. they said that no matter who the president nominates, they're not even going to hold a hearing on that person. they say they want a presidential election. well, they had two, and their guy lost. their guys lost. and i know it's not a happy experience. believe me, i've lived through it. i've served with republican presidents and democratic presidents. but the world doesn't stop because you're not happy with who's president. the constitution tells us what we have fo do. here's what article 2, section 2, clause 2,

says. and i know everyone here swears to uphold this constitution. i would argue that when my republican friends say they're not going to do their job, they're not going to hold even a hearing on whoever the president nominates for the supreme court, which now is short one member, they are defying the constitution. maybe they will be sued by someone, an aggrieved party. i will tell you who is aggrieved. the people of this country are aggrieved by this attitude. but let's read article 2, section 2, clause 2, for anyone who cares about the constitution, and everybody says they do. it says -- "the president shall nominate and by and with the advice and consent of the senate shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls and judges of the supreme court."

"the president shall nominate and by and with the advice and consent of the senate shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls and judges of the supreme court." so it doesn't say the president does it alone. it doesn't say the senate does it alone. it says they do it together. that's article 2, section 2, clause 2. i advise my colleagues to read it. it's pretty simple. anyone can understand it. and if you don't follow it, you're not doing your job. so we want them to do their job. now, who else says it's important? i'll tell you. some very incredibly respected people. this is ronald reagan, one of the heroes of the republican party. i served when he was president. and this is what he said --

"every day that passes with a supreme court below full strength impairs the people's business in that crucially important body." that's ronald reagan. let's look at sandra day o'connor. sandra day o'connor, the first woman appointed to the supreme court, a republican. very beloved. what a wonderful woman. she was -- made history because ronald reagan appointed her, and we confirmed her. "i think we need somebody there now" -- meaning in the court --" to do the job, and let's get on with it." this is sandra day o'connor. so my republican friends, you have two extraordinary republicans who you love telling

you to do your job. it doesn't say in article 2, section 2, clause 2, but you don't have to do your job if you don't like the president. it doesn't say that. it just lays it out pretty straightforwardly. this is article 2, section 2, clause 2. it doesn't say don't do this if you don't like the president. it doesn't say don't do this in an election year. as a matter of fact, we voted in an election year. anthony kennedy was nominated by ronald reagan with a democratic congress in an election year. do you think we wouldn't have been happier to wait to see if we were able to get that presidency back as democrats? no. we did what ronald reagan asked us to do. we acted responsibly and we

found anthony kennedy to be very qualified. and he sits in the court to this day having been voted on in an election year. it's happened 14 times, mr. president, in our history. the only time we had a problem there was back during the civil war when our country was obviously under tremendous stress, and today we are one nation under god and we should pull together on this. now, there are some other things i wanted to read to you. there is a michael gerhard, professor of law at the university of north carolina. listen to what he said about this republican plan not to move on this vacancy. quote -- "refusing to hold a hearing on a supreme court nomination or refusing to take any action on a nomination before it's been made is simply unprecedented in our history."

the refusal is not grounded in the constitution. it's a willful abdication of authority. the constitution does not cease to have effect at certain times of the year or the session. you never know when somebody horrible is going to happen. when this happened to judge scalia, this was a shock to his family, to the country. regardless of whether you agreed with him or not, it was a shock. nothing in the constitution says if you're shocked about something that happened, you don't have to work with the president. it doesn't say that. don't make it up, especially this is the party that keeps saying they want a strict constructionist. you want to construe the constitution in a strict way, you need to act.

and then there is jemal green, professor of law, columbia. he says the senate has constitutional duty to give due consideration to anyone nominated by the president to fill a supreme court vacancy. and he goes on -- "in the modern history of the nation, there is no precedent for the senate's deliberately refusing to vote on a nominee to a vacant supreme court seat, whether during an election year or at any other time." now, we have our differences here. we really do. and you know what? people say senator, is that why you're not running again, because it's so hard to do things? no. i love it here. this is just my time to move on and do other things and have somebody else come in. i love it here. i love my colleagues. i have friends on both sides of the aisle, and i get things done

and so do they. you would think that we would agree on the meaning of the constitution. simple. that we wouldn't be arguing about it. and i am a little stunned at this failure to step up and do their job, because i'll tell you this -- if you're an average american and you have a job and you call your boss and you say hi, boss, it's monday morning and i just don't feel like coming to work. well, are you sick? no. do you have a problem in the family? no. well, what's your reason? well, i'm not in the mood. i want to wait. you would be fired. you would be fired. i'm going to be here for the remainder of this year.

i want to do my job. i want to do my due diligence. i want to have the chance to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle here on this issue. today at the white house, senator mcconnell and senator grassley reportedly told president obama they don't want to do their job. they're not going to do it. they don't care who he sends up. it's unreal. it's unbelievable. they want an election. we had an election and president obama didn't get elected for three years. he got elected for four years. and the next president, whatever party, is going to be there for four years until the next election. that person has to do his or her job for four years, and we have to do our job. they don't want to hold a vote,

they don't want to hold a hearing, and many of them say they won't even meet with the nominee. it is our job to be involved in this election, this election of the next justice, which is such an important job. now, the supreme court has a job to do so this incredible attitude by my republican colleagues here means that the supreme court cannot really function the way it is meant to function. it's going to be divided 4-4. and that is unfair to the people of this country. whatever side they're on, decisions need to be made. and as ronald reagan said, and i repeat, every day that passes with the supreme court below full strength impairs the people's business in that crucially important body.

so here is one of the heroes of the republicans saying that every day that passes with the supreme court below full strength, the people's business is, in fact, impaired. and here's what's at stake. this isn't an argument that's kind of happening in a vacuum in some fancy board room of some law firm, conservative or liberal. it's a serious argument that impacts the people. here's the thing. every year the court considers cases with profound consequences for our constituents. again, it doesn't matter what your position is. we need a fully functioning court. now, i want to give an example -- and i see my friend is here from washington. the supreme court is going to

hear oral arguments in whole women's health versus hellerstedt, the most important women's health case in a generation. the case is about is the unprecedented attacks we are seeing on women's health in texas, which is what this case is about, but also across the nation. this case is about extreme politicians and extreme groups trying to overturn 43 years of settled law, and that settled law is very simple. women have a right to have reproductive health care. it's as simple as that. and when you shut down a series of clinics throughout a state and they have to travel hours and hours and hours and maybe

even days to get health care, they effectively don't have it, and that's what's been happening in texas, and that's why this case is so important. there is a texas law hb-2 that was designed to close health clinics that provide a full range of reproductive health care services including annual exams, pap smears, s.t.d. tests, birth control, and yes, safe and legal abortions. the full pan play of services for a -- full panoply of services for a woman. the law in texas singles out women's health providers with burdensome requirements that have already forced more than half of the clinics in texas to close. now, i don't know who gets happy about that, but i don't get happy about that, and nobody who cares about a woman should get happy about that.

it's a total outrage. women are taking matters into their own hands because they have no access to doctors. the goal of this law -- and it is working -- is to shut down these clinics and deny these rights to women that they have earned. it would reduce the number of providers in texas from 40 to 10, and if you're just unfortunate enough to live in an area where your clinics are shut down, lord knows what you do. you may be a single mother. you may be part of a couple where you both work. you may have children. you may not be able to take days to find health care. the law is forcing women to travel for hours and some even to other states. women who live in remote or rural areas may have to stay

overnight or for multiple days to avoid making more than one trip. think about the cost to families who may not be able to do it, who are just getting by. many women simply can't afford to take off work, drive for hundreds of miles or get on a plane every time they need health care. they want to do their jobs. they want to be responsible. they step up to the plate every single day. but we can't do it here because politics is playing a part, and people have decided they didn't like the fact that barack obama got elected twice. well, too bad. he did. and it's your job to act. i'm sorry you don't like the president. maybe you don't like the fact that he got us out of the worst recession since the great depression. maybe you don't like the fact that he cut that deficit by

two-thirds. maybe you don't like the fact that he got us out of two wars. that's your choice. fine. but he has a right to nominate, and we have a responsibility to meet that nominee and to vote up or down on him or her. these cases that are pending before the court -- and i'm just highlighting this, and i know senator murray will go into depth on it. these cases are critical. we need the full bench. i don't care how you feel about the issue. maybe you support closing down clinics and going from 40 to 10 and letting women suffer and take matters into their own hands. if that's your position, i'm sorry. it's not fair. but you have a right to your position. but the court has a right to be at full strength.

so i'm going to close with just a couple of quotes from women who have been hurt already by this texas law which is going to be heard -- is it tomorrow? tomorrow in the court. marney. marney had to fly from austin, texas, to seattle when her appointment was canceled because the clinic was immediately forced to discontinue providing these services after the texas law took effect. marney said her first reaction was -- quote -- "to feel like my rights were being taken away from me, to feel very disappointed and that elected officials had the ability to make decisions about my and my fiancee's life." that's marney. the stakes could not be higher. this is just one of the cases. so i will say this finally. the highest court in our land should be fully functioning.

the american people deserve nothing less. and i'm going to put up the sandra day o'connor quote for the last time in this talk. a republican woman, first woman to serve, appointed by ronald reagan. she's looking at this court. she knows what it's like to serve on the court. she knows how hard the issues are. she understands how important it is. she's more important to this debate than anyone in the senate, including yours truly. she knows. she didn't say wait till the next election to see if my party wins. no, she didn't say that. she said, "i think we need somebody there now to do the job and let's get on with it." thank you, mr. president. and i want to thank the senator from washington for her leadership on this.

mrs. murray: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: mr. president, thank you. and thank you to the senator from california for her long advocacy on behalf of women across this country to be able to access health care that they choose. mr. president, tomorrow the supreme court will hear oral arguments in the case of whole women's health v. hellerstad. and at its core, this is a case about whether extreme right-wing politicians will be allowed to block women from exercising their constitutionally protected health care rights, rights that have been affirmed by the supreme court for more than four decades now. so, mr. president, for women across the country and for our daughters and our granddaughters, there's truly a lot at stake. and i've been so inspired to see women of all ages from across the country standing up now to share their stories and make sure the supreme court knows why

politicians should not be able to make women's health care decisions. in fact, mr. president, 113 lawyers submitted an amicus brief to the supreme court explaining the difference that constitutionally protected reproductive rights have made in their own lives. the stories they tell are incredibly powerful. one partner at a major law firm wrote that after three miscarriages -- quote -- "my husband and i were delighted when i again became pregnant in december 1999 and safely made it past the danger zone of the first trimester, passing an amnio with flying colors. but," she wrote, "five weeks later when i was heading into the sixth month of my pregnancy, i returned to the doctor for a routine ultrasound and the doctor immediately detected a problem. mr. president, her baby had a rare heart defect, so severe

that he was already in congestive heart failure and would be born only to suffer if he survived at all. after talking with her doctors and her husband, they made the decision to terminate her pregnancy and she wrote -- quotr and a lawyer, i know i did the right thing. i've shared my story with my children and hope that should my daughter ever find herself in a position similar to mine, she will enjoy the same rights that were available to me." mr. president, it should go without saying butl but politics have absolutely no place in such a deeply personal, extraordinarily difficult decision. unfortunately, the texas clinic shutdown law being challenged in whole women's health v. hellerstad is a law that's being driven by extreme right-wing politicians who want to undermine women's access to

health care, would be the exact opposite. that law and laws like the one that's allowed to stand in louisiana just last week places burdens that health experts, like the american college of obstetricians and gynecologists, say are medically unnecessary on clinics in order to shut them down and make it harder for women to exercise their constitutionally protected reproductive rights. if the supreme court fails to block this law, three-quarters of the clinics that provide abortion services, as well as other health care in texas, would be forced to close, leaving 5.4 million women in texas with just 10 clinics statewide. hundreds of thousands of texas women would have to drive 300 miles round trip just to get the care they need. mr. president, if that's not an undue burden, i don't know what is.

and a ruling upholding the texas clinic shutdown law wouldn't just impact women in texas. it would make it easier nationwide for politicians to interfere with women's health care and block them from exercising their constitutional right. that would be the wrong direction for women. it would be the wrong direction for families and for our country as a whole. and that's why tomorrow women and men from all over the country will be outside the supreme court standing up for women's health and rights and opportunity. and i will be very proud to be right there with them, because we are going to be sending a very clear message. a right means nothing without the ability to exercise that right. mr. president, i hope the justices listen, realizing how much this ruling means to women's lives. and ultimately i hope that they will rule in favor of ensuring women's health and rights

continue to progress rather than going backward. i know that our country will be stronger for it. thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i would now like to talk about a different topic and i would like to ask unanimous consent that it appear in the record in the appropriate place. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. murray: mr. president, first of all i want to start by expressing my appreciation to senator whitehouse and all of our colleagues who've worked very hard to bring this legislation -- this bill before us on the floor. it is the comprehensive addiction and recovery act and it lays out key steps towards addressing the crisis of prescription drug abuse and heroin addiction, which is ruining and costing lives nationwide, including in my home state of washington. now, i hear about this epidemic from washington state families and communities far too often. parents ask me what we are doing here in congress to help families like theirs who are trying desperately to help their children who are struggling to

escape addiction. i'm told about mothers and fathers who developed opioid addictions after be prescribed pain medication with devastating consequences for their families. and when i go to speak with local sheriffs and police chiefs, they say that they are most often the ones responding to these crisis and that our country needs to do better than allowing those struggling with addiction to cycle in and out of the criminal justice system. and they tell me that heroin use is only becoming more widespread in our communities, especially amongst our young people. now, penny ligate is a former news anchor from seattle and she knows this all too well. her daughter, mara williams, had a happy childhood. ballet lessons, softball, close-knit family. but in middle school, as she began to struggle with adhd, depression and anxiety, she also started experimenting with

drinking and drugs. for years her parents tried everything they could do, and as penny will tell you, mara did too. she fought hard to break her addiction and to keep her life moving forward. but tragically, when mara began using oxycontin and then heroin, the grip of addiction was just too much. mara died of a heroin overdose when she was just 19 years old in the basement of her family home. mr. president, this is a parent's worst nightmare. it's happening to parents across my state and across the country and it has to stop. so i'm glad that there is bipartisan momentum towards giving our communities the tools and resources they need to the tackle this disease. the comprehensive addiction and recovery act, cara, includes efforts to strengthen education, prevention, and treatment efforts around prescription drug abuse and heroin use.

it will cut down on inappropriate use of pain medication that gets so many people addicted to opioids in the first place and would make it easier for people to safely dispose of pain medication so it doesn't get in the wrong hands. this legislation will also help police departments get access to naloxone. it's a drug that counteracts the effects of an overdose, which is something police chiefs i've spoken to make clear that they need and more. so, mr. president, the bill that we are debating right now would be a good step in the right direction but it can be even better. as many of my democratic colleagues have made clear, a problem as serious and urgent as this epidemic deserves a serio serious, urgent response. so we should enact the policies in this bill and at the same time we should also make sure that families and communities will see additional tools and resources as quickly as possib possible.

that's why i strongly support the emergency investments proposed by the senior senators from new hampshire and west virginia and the junior senator from massachusetts and others. their proposal will actually help our states and local governments as well as families who are on the front lines of this battle by providing the resources to prevent opioid abuse and expand access to the treatment that so many families today are seeking. i'm hopeful that republicans will work with us to move this alongside this important bill so families don't have to wait for federal resources that this crisis desperately needs. mr. president, as i've laid out, the legislation that we are debating today would go a long ways towards tackling the epidemic of prescription drug abuse and heroin addiction, especially if it includes emergency funding that can offer relief and support quickly. but given the strong belief on both sides of the aisle that far too many people are falling

through the cracks in our mental health and substance abuse systems, i believe we can and should do more to build on this cara legislation in the coming months. mr. president, we should pass this bill but then i hope all of our colleagues won't just get up and walk away. we should build on this rare moment of bipartisan agreement and stay at the table and keep working beyond this bill to strengthen mental health care and substance abuse treatment in our country. so, mr. president, even while we are debating this very first step, i want to lay out just a few of the goals that should guide us as we look past this, goals i believe can be met if we work together and take this crisis seriously. first of all, mental health is every bit as important as physical health and we should make sure to -- make sure we work together to make sure that they are both treated equally in our health care system.

secondly, we should do more to break down the barriers that make it difficult to address patients' mental and physical health care needs at the same time. third, at a time when half of all u.s. counties lack access to a social worker, a psychologist or a psychiatrist, we need to strengthen our mental health care work force so patients and families can get care when and where they need it, whether that's at a hospital or in their own community. fourth, we need to recognize that mental health care is important at every stage of life and ensure our system can address every patient's need, whether that patient is a child or an adult. and, finally, to continue taking steps to address the opioid abuse epidemic, i believe we can do more to expand access to medication assisted treatment and offer our states more resources to respond to crisis situations, including by strengthening prescription drug

monitoring programs. my colleagues on the judiciary committee have worked very hard to improve prevention and treatment of opioid addiction, especially among individuals who pass through the criminal justice system. i believe we night to ensure these tools are available to all americans struggling with addiction and ensure that our health care system is equipped to address addiction as a disease. mr. president, i've been proud to work with the junior senator from connecticut and other members of the help committee on both sides of the aisle led by chairman alexander, the senior senator from tennessee on a path toward meeting those goals and i'm very hopeful we'll be able to reach agreement on some additional steps that would make a difference for the many families and communities who are struggling to support loved ones in need. mr. president, it goes without saying that in this divided government we don't agree on much, but there is some important bipartisan agreement on the need to close the gaps in

our mental health care system and tackle the crisis of opioid addiction. so i hope we can pass the legislation that we are debating today along with improvements that helps patients and families as quickly as possible but we shouldn't stop there. we should seize this opportunity, work together and continue making progress for the families and communities we serve. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota. a senator: mr. president, i come to the floor today to speak in favor of the comprehensive addiction and recovery act. senator whitehouse and i have been working on this together for years along with senator portman and senator ayotte. so this bill has been bipartisan from the beginning. i thank my colleagues. i also thank senator grassley and senator leahy for their leadership in bringing this to the floor and all members of our committee, including yourself, mr. president, who have contributed to this bill.

ms. klobuchar our nation, mr. president, is facing a serious problem with drug adirks. and i'm glad to join my colleagues today to talk about how we can tackle this problem and work towards solutions by passing this bipartisan bill. ms. klobuchar: just last week i was in minnesota and we gathered together some people from the town. it's a town of a couple thousand people, and our goal was to just talk about this problem. i was shocked that early in the morning on a saturday, that we had 50 people there. we had every doctor in the town there to my knowledge. we had the sheriff there, the police chief there. at one point a regular citizen who was there who had suffered from some disease and had been in the hospital, actually emptied her purse out and tons of medications and opioids came rolling out on to the table that she hadn't used. and it was an imaging that i will not forget and kind of an

imaging that i bring to the senate floor today to remind us that there are too many of these drugs out in our communities. i heard stories of young children who dealers, people who are trying to get the opioids would actually say to the kids, hey, i'll give you a beer if you'll go to your parents' medical cabinets and look for these drugs. and they would write them down for them. and then they go and they get the drugs and they bring them back. or the story of one doctor who was treating someone, thought he was pretty normal, back pain, had given him some painkillers for years, and then all of a sudden one day the secret service shows up because this man had actually made a threat on the life of the president. he had an entire night life that was different than his day life and it was completely dictated by the fact that he was addicted to prescription drugs. four out of five heroin users got their start these days from prescription drugs. i don't think anyone would ever

have imagined that when i was growing up or when we saw heroin addicts on the corner, when i was a prosecutor for years, we never had those kinds ever statistics. people got hooked on heroin because they got hooked on heroin. they started with heroin and they sadly would end with heroin. in this case you have 80% of the people who go because they have an ailment, because they have a surgery, because they have back pain and then they get too much of the drug or no one figures out that getting hooked on the drug is worse than the pain they had in the first place and they get hooked on the drug. you also have stories of overdoses, of people who aren't taking the drug for periods of time. so we have a crisis in this country. when i met with those people it hit home to me that it happens at any town. we didn't pick this town because they were having a big crisis, because they had had a number of deaths. we just happened to be in that area of the state and decided we wanted to focus on the issue. mr. president, plaintiff i was

aoe -- before i was elected to the senate i spent eight years serving as chief prosecutor in a county that includes minneapolis and drug cases made up about one-third of our caseload which meant we handled everything from trafficking and selling to production and manufacturing. and from this position i had an opportunity to see firsthand the devastating impact of drug addiction. mr. president, i see my colleague from indiana has arrived and i'm managing the bill for this hour. if he wants to speak, i can go back and finish my remarks later. and i will just finish up while he's getting back to his desk, but i was talking about my time as county attorney. many of those people that were affected by addiction that we saw were hooked on opiates including both heroin and we saw the start of this prescription pain epidemic. and we would be sadly mistaken if we think drug abuse only

happens in our cities or states in the metropolitan areas. as i saw this weekend when i met with some of our people, three emergency calls for heroin overdoses in one day. one of those individuals passing away. this is happening every day. i'm going to turn it over now to senator coats of indiana. i see he's here to support this bipartisan bill. i thank you very much, mr. president. i yield the floor. mr. coats: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from indiana. mr. coats: mr. president, i want to thank my colleague from minnesota. i'm here to talk about the same thing although i'm trying to combine to speeches now. since we're talking about the opioid issue and drug atkreubgs, i'm more than -- addiction, i'm more than happy to listen to the senator from minnesota finish. but i thank you for the time. i want to make sure that i also am not unduly holding you back

as i flip through my weekly waste of the week. and i can delay that if necessary. so, mr. president, i am joining my colleagues here, all of us who i believe are deeply concerned about the drug addiction problem that's sweeping through our nation. it's an epidemic. it's an epidemic for people of all ages. it's most tragically an epidemic for our young people who feel a sense of immortality when you're young. often fall prey to the just try it, it's harmless, you'll really like it and don't worry about the addiction. that obviously is not the case. we're talking about highly addictive drugs and heroin that is coming into our country. we are talking about serious consequences of this. in our state like every other state, it is a major crisis.

and we are trying to do everything we can to address that. in one county alone, we've had an unprecedented rural hiv outbreak as a result of sharing needles with individuals from individual to individual, needles that are providing the kind of drug atkreubgs that is -- addiction that we read about every day. it's clear that the legislation before us is a comprehensive approach, and that is needed. i think we have to -- i have said it's an all hands on deck effort here. whether it's prevention, whether it's enforcement, law enforcement to keep the drugs from coming in, or whether it's the treatment, it really is all three. not only those three components but communities and community organizations, whether they're federal, state, or whether they're local and volunteer, such as the various charities that are operating and the volunteers that are stepping up.

all of us need to get involved in all aspects of dealing with this. i'm pleased to be a cosponsor of senators portman and whitehouse and the work they've done on the cara act. it's been talked about here on the senate floor and i'm proud to be a cosponsor of this bipartisan legislation. the legislation includes a provision that senator blumenthal and i on a bipartisan basis have authored. it authorizes individuals authorized by the state to write prescriptions for controlled substances, such as physician assistance and nurse practitioners. it authorizing them to access state prescription drug monitoring programs, so-called pdmps to reduce drug abuse. i won't go into the details of that program but it's been very successful in terms of providing the transparency and the information necessary so that we can control the prescriptions

and control the output of drugs that are perhaps prescribed for legitimate purposes but are used for illegitimate reasons. and so for all of that i look forward to our being able to work through this legislation and to successfully pass this legislation and move it on through the congress and to the president. now, mr. president, if i could also with the indulgence of my colleague from minnesota just talk for a brief time about my waste of the week. i think this is the 35th or 36th -- i'm almost lost track the number of times i've been down here. every week the cycle the senate has been in session, i've been down with one or two exceptions talking about the waste of the week. waste of the week is simply those documented through a nonpartisan process those documented issues of waste, fraud and abuse that occur through the spending,

irresponsible spending and oversight of our bureaucracies here in washington. today i'm highlighting two policies that have occurred within the state department and the federal aviation administration. i frankly could be talking about every agency in the federal government who has fallen prey to a lack of oversight, a lack of responsibility to being victims of waste, fraud and abuse costing the taxpayer an exed extraordinary amount of money. we have come to the point where we've identified over these waste of the week speeches well over 150 -- $150 billion of documented waste, fraud and abuse. these are issues that have been raised through inspections and analysis by the federal accounting office, by the various agencies, the inspector

generals of these agencies whose job is to delve in and find out how the taxpayer money is being spent. is it being spent for the la jilt mat purpose of -- legitimate purpose of providing the service that is needed or is there a problem either in mismanagement or through waste or are criminals and others taking advantage of the program? and i have documented as i said 34, 35 of those totaling well over $150 billion. today we want to look at two agencies as examples of this. i could go through every agency but we'll take two today. one is the state department. changing the policies here it's estimated could save the taxpayer $295.6 million. it's not small change. just addressing these two agencies, problems that have been identified, $295-plus

million in savings. let me go into a little bit of detail. state department employees located overseas, those serving in embassies or consulates have access to what is called a purchase card. and the idea here, the concept is okay. the idea here is that rather than go through all the paperwork and processing and sending back to the united states and, look, we need -- we need some office supplies. we didn't order enough initially. we need to pick up a hundred scotch tape containers or pens or who knows what it is. a purchase card is given to those employees who are responsible for providing those supplies to make what is called simple transactions. now, to prevent the wasteful use or fraudulent use of these purchase cards, federal law and state department guidelines

require that all transactions meet certain eligibility criteria and be continually monitored. we know from experience that mistakes are made. we know from experience that fraud is committed. one of those key eligibility criteria is that all of the purchase receipts have to be retained for a minimum three years. that's so inspector generals can go back and look at the purchases, look at the receipts, make sure everything is up to speed, and done within the law. however, a recent report by the state department inspector general has revealed that overseas employees have been told that they don't have to send any purchase documentation to their supervisors in washington for further review. all they need to do is keep the receipts of the purchases, the documentation of the purchases

for a three-year period of time so that whether those assessments are being evaluated, when someone comes back and says we heard there's a problem here, they will have the receipts to verify whether the purchases were legitimate or not. that's the trust but verify that i think is important for dealing with these kind of situations. but when the state department -- inspector general tried to access the documentation for purchase card transactions as required by the law and by state department regulation, he found that many of the overseas offices didn't keep their transaction records. as an example in fiscal year 2014, the inspector general found that more than half of over-- more than half of overseas offices either didn't perform reviews as they were required to do of purchase card transactions or didn't even respond to the inspector

general's request to produce the documentation. the report determined that during the 2013 and 2014, there were $53.6 million in unaccounted purchases. unacceptable. you take a job, you're told that here's your card. if you need to buy something locally and don't want to go through all the rigmarole of purchasing and sending overseas and so forth, you can use this purchase card. but you've got to keep the documents, if you do this because you're going to be reviewed. someone is going to come over here and say, prove it. yet the state department has basically said, don't worry about t you don' it. you don't have to keep those. probably thinking, well, they'll never come over and follow-up on this. so, that $53.6 million unaccounted for purchases at this rate over a ten-year period

of time is going to amount to about $263 million in unknown and unverified purchases, just within the state department's overseas offices. who knows what's going on here? secondly, i want to talk about the federal aviation administration, because they have a similar situation that was inspected by their inspect tear general -- inspector general. he found that many employees did not comply with the guidelines and the employees are not consistently held responsible for safeguarding their assigned equipment and supplies, like digital cameras, laptops, any number of other items. and, as a result, th the federal aviation administrator, i.g., inspector general, found that there are nearly -- get this -- 15,000 pieces of equipment and material that employees have not been able to locate. the combined value of that missing property is over $32.5

million. and to make matters worse, the i.g. report states that the f.a.a. division that essentially lost $32.5 million worth of equipment doesn't even have the authority to hold employees accountable. not a bad job, right? i mean, don't worry. if you mess up, if you don't something illegal, fraudulent, or you're just sloppy and not responsible, you don't know where the equipment is you don't keep track of of it, you won't have to be accountable for that lost equipment. now, no american business could function this way and stay solvent. walk back to an employee back there and say, well, what happened to the new laptop that we gave you six months -- i don't know. i don't know where it is. i need another one. oh, that's fine. don't worry. this happens all the time.

we'll give you a new one. and on and on and on it goes. now, that division of the f.a.a. essentially has lost $32.5 million worth of equipment, and it again doesn't even hold its employees accountable. look, we have racked up nearly $19 trillion of debt in this country, $19 trillion. no one can explain how large an amount of money that is. what we do know is that we are continuing to plunge into debt and that we're going to keep doing that. and one of the ways that we can be more accountable here is what i've just described. so with that, mr. president, i know my time is running out -- with that, i'm going to add this week to our accumulating waste through fraud $295.6 million for these unknown, unverified

purchases, bringing our total now to $157.5 billion. it's time to put a stop to this. it's time to enforce these rules and regulations. it's time to be sensitive to the fact that we are wasting taxpayer -- hard-earned dollars. and with that, mr. president, i notice a scurry around here in times of keeping on schedule. i thank my colleague for the time which he has yielded, and i yield the floor, and in doing so, i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

ms. klobuchar: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota. ms. klobuchar: madam president, i ask that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. klobuchar: madam president, i come to the floor today to speak in favor of our bill, the comprehensive addiction and recovery act. i'd like to thank senator whitehouse, senator portman, and yourself for the leadership. we worked together on a bipartisan basis on this bill from the beginning. our nation, as you know, is facing a serious problem with drug addiction, and i'm glad to joining my colleagues to talk about how we can handle this

problem, how we can do something about it. earlier in my speech, i -- today, i referred to the group that i met with in montevidio, minnesota, with only a few days inotice. all the doctors in the town showing up, the sheriff, the police chief. and a regular physician pouring out a bunch of medication on the table to see how much we're seeing in terms of overprescription and how this can how easily get in the wrong hands or turn people into addicts. i really come to this issue first as a prvmen prosecute. i spent eight years serving as a prosecute in he hen hennipen co. we handled everything from trafficking and selling to production. i had the opportunity to see firsthand the devastating impact of drug addiction. many of of those affected were

hooked on opiates including both heroin and prescription pain medication. when i left this office in 1998, i didn't see anything near what we're seeing today. we were starting to see some of the beginning of the addiction on prescription drugs, but nothing like what we're seeing today. in fact, today four out of five heroin users are getting their start misusing prescription drugs. and we'd be sadly mistaken if we thought this was only an urban problem. we know it is a huge problem in our rural areas. just this past weekend, three emergency calls in one county for overdose oz. one of those -- for overdoses. one of those people passed away. that is a rural county in our state, one weekend. many affected by this epidemic are young people. three young people died of overdoses and another three were hospitalized foroverdosing on heroin in one town in minnesota.

these statistics show why we must focus on both treatment and prevention. minnesota is home to hazelton betty ford addiction treatment center. we are proud of the work and the leadership our state shows when it comes to treatment. it is one of the reasons i got involved in this issue. hazeltohazelton betty ford has d impressive success with its opiate comprehensive response program. their program offers lifesaving medicine to help treat the causes of addiction as well as counseling to help people get on the right path. however, too many people have been unable to get the treatment they need. almost 10% of americans are estimated to need treatment for issues related to drug and alcohol, but only about 1% receives treatment at a specialty facility. that's why my colleagues and i have come together to introduce this bill. our bill covers strategies for prevention, evidence-based programs such as strengthening

prescription drug monitoring programs, something i worked on with the presiding officer. these types of programs help states track data on uncontrolled substances like oiptz sopioids, so they can be dispensed and be a strong, effective tool and be used for a right -- for the right reasons. where i was this weekend near the south dakota border, these doctors knew patients going into south dakota to get prescriptions. it was very difficult for them to trace what was going on, which pharmacies they would go in rural areas. they could drive an hour go to a different pharmacy. drive another hour, go to a different pharmacy, maybe see a different doctor in south dakota, maybe check into an international room somewhere else. that is going on today in our -- maybe check into an emergency room somewhere else. that is going on in our country today. another provision in our bill will provide consumers are safe and responsible ways to dispose of unused prescription drugs.

according to the d.e.a., more than 2,700 tons of expired, unwanted prescription medications have been collected through these programs since the drug take-back law that we passed in 2010 was put into place. that was a bill i worked on with senator cornyn, also on the judiciary committee with me. it is called the secure and responsible drug disposal act. it took a long time for the d.e.a. to get their act together to get the rules out. the rules came out and, guess what? literally a few months later, now walgreens has said that they will actually offer kiosks in places for people to return drugs on a nationwide basis. right now we have law enforcement doing it. minnesota is kind in front of the curve. we've got our libraries taking these drugs in in secure facilities. the best thing would be where people who got the drugs would also be taking back drugs. we believe that this bill before us today will help even pore --

will help even more. we also have in this bill increasing the availability of naloxone, used to save lives in emergency overdose situations and just a number of things that are going to be helpful going forward. this bill is a framework, but it is an important step forward that the federal government is finally saying and the u.s. congress and the u.s. senate that we need to take steps here. our bill has the support of a broad range of stakeholders, including the national district attorneys association, the fraternal order of police, the national association of state alcohol and drug abuse directors, the faces and voices of recovery, and the major county sheriffs association. finally, madam president, we must also recognize that combating this kind of drug abuse will require a serious investment of resources and it is for that reason that i have cosponsored senator shaheen's amendment to appropriate emergency funding to address heroin and opioid drug abuse

epidemic. i'm hopeful that the senate will come together to curb the problem of prescription drug abuse and save lives across the nation. i'm hopeful we'll pass the amendment as well as our bill and i think there will be a number of other good amendments that are considered, including medical education and other things that need to be done here. but i see this bill as a beginning, not an end. i think that more work is going to have to be done with funding. i think that more work is going to have to be done, and this is the tough stuff, with the prescription drug monitoring. we have a start here, but when people and addicts are crossing state lines, when we've got a very difficult situation with trying to regulate where the drugs are and how many are going out there, i figure if target in my state can find a pair of shoes in i had with a sku number, we should be able to figure out if people are getting too many prescriptio prescripti. we should be able to educate our doctors so they are not giferg them out in too big quantities.

so these are things i am going to continue working ofnlt thank you, madam chairwoman. i yield the floor. i notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: quorum call:

mr. hatch: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. hatch: thank you, madam president. madam president, each of us has taken an oath to support and defend the constitution of the united states. president george washington called the constitution the guide that he would never abandon. the constitution declares itself to be the supreme law of the land and more than 90% of americans say that it is very important to them. unfortunately, basic knowledge about the constitution is dangerously inadequate. i say this is dangerous because, as james ha madison put it, onla well-instructed people can be permanently a free people. the current debate over when to fill the supreme court vacancy left by justice antonin as scals death only magnifies my concern. ignorance of not only how the

constitution applies to this question but even what the constitution says apparently extends far and wide. here is the text of the constitution regarding the appointment of judges and other public officials. "the president shall have power to nominate, by and with the advice and consent of the senate, shall appoint judges of the supreme court and all other officers of the united states whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for and which shall be established

by law." i couldn't hardly read that from this side here. i should have just done it by memory. the president shall have power to nominate and by and with the advice and consent of the senate shall appoint judges of the supreme court and all other officers of the united states whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for and which shall be established by law." this is what the constitution actually says right here for everyone to read. the constitution gives power to nominate to the president and gives the power of advice and consent to the senate. it says nothing about how the president and the senate should exercise their separate powers. in fact, the judicial confirmation process has been conducted in different ways, at different times and under different circumstances. our job is to determine how, under current circumstances,

best to exercise our power of advice and consent. several factors convince me that the best way to do so is to defer the confirmation process for filling this vacancy until the next president takes office. first, this is only the third supreme court vacancy in nearly a century to occur after the american people had already started voting for the next president. in the previous two instances, 1956 and 1968, the senate did not confirm a nominee until the year after the presidential election. second, the only time the senate has ever confirmed a nominee to fill a supreme court vacancy created after presidential election voting had begun was 1916. that vacancy arose only because justice charles evans hughes resigned to run against president wilson, woodrow

wilson, a completely different situation than we have before us today. third, the judicial confirmation process has become increasingly combative, especially for the supreme court. attempting to conduct this process in the middle of an already divisive presidential election campaign would be especially difficult. fourth, president obama's judicial appointees and justice scalia represent two radically different kinds of judge. this offers the american people a unique opportunity to express through the election their view of the direction that the judiciary should take by electing the president who will make judicial appointments in the next four years. in june 1992, then-judiciary committee chairman joseph biden, a friend of mine, made the very recommendation that we are following today based on some of the very same factors that i

just mentioned. in particular, he noted that the appointment process would take place in divided government during a presidential election process that was already underway. he could have been describing 2016 instead of 1992. madam president, the constitution does not mandate a particular process to address this supreme court vacancy. we have to look all the way back to the 19th century to find a year in which the senate confirmed a supreme court nominee of the other party in a presidential election year. that of course was long before the courts became as powerful and the -- in the confirmation process as confrontational as they are today. democrats can read the constitution and understand the historical and political facts as well as anyone else. why then are they making such bizarre claims? last week, for example, the

minority whip said that the constitution requires -- quote -- a fair hearing and a timely vote, unquote. they say this conclusion comes from the plain text of the constitution. well, i had the plain text up here and it clearly says nothing whatsoever about hearings or votes. as i said, the constitution gives the power to nominate to the president and the power of advice and consent to the senate, and leaves to each the judgment about how to exercise their respective powers. last week, the senator from california, senator boxer, said that deferring the confirmation process would be an abomination. she said that the constitution standard for the senate's advice and consent role does not change with the party of the president making nominations, and yet she voted 25 times to filibuster republican judicial nominees, including to the supreme court. she voted not simply to defer

the confirmation process as we are doing today but to prevent a confirmation vote from ever taking place. if the confirmation process should not change with the president's party, then she should have no problem with the decision that we have made since it is less drastic than the blockade she promoted just a few years ago. also last week, an email solicitation signed by one of my democratic colleagues asking for petition sixth claimed that the senate -- signatures claimed that the senate has a -- quote -- fundamental duty to confirm nominees to the supreme court, unquote. i would like to think that this is simply an egregious typographical error because it goes beyond even the false claim that the constitution requires hearings and a vote. if the senate has no choice but to confirm a president's nominees, what is the point of giving the senate a role in the process at all? i will say it again in the hope

of clearing up what should not have been confused in the first place. the constitution gives to the president the power to nominate and to the senate the power of advice and consent. these are separate and independent powers, and the constitution does not mandate any particular way for the president and the senate to fulfill their responsibilities. because this fact is evident on the face of the constitution, i cannot understand my colleagues who say that the president has a four-year term. that observation has nothing at all to do with anything before the senate. the senate is not doing a single thing and cannot do a single thing to interfere with the president's power to nominate. he can exercise that power in any way he chooses, including sending nominees to the senate up to his very last day in office. he could do that. nobody disputes that, that i

know of. they might dispute how wise it would be to do it right up to the very last day in office, but nobody really disputes that he can exercise that power in any way he chooses, including sending nominees to the senate up to his very last day in office. what the president cannot do is dictate to the senate how we exercise our separate power of advice and consent regarding those nominees. liberal allies of senate democrats are similarly confused. i received a letter signed by liberal groups, for example, claiming that the constitution requires -- quote -- "timely hearings and votes, unquote. it almost sounds like democratic senators and left-wing groups are sharing talking points. almost. let's look once more at the language of article 2. i will just refer to the chart.

tell me, where is the language about hearings and votes? i understand that senate democrats and their leftist allies want a timely hearing and confirmation vote this year to replace justice scalia, but wanting a particular confirmation process and saying the constitution requires that process are two very different things. some of the groups signing that letter, in particular i noticed the leadership conference, the alliance for justice and people for the american way actively urged senators to filibuster the supreme court nomination of samuel alito. they opposed in 2006 the very confirmation vote that today just ten years later they say the constitution requires. democrats and their liberal allies must be reading the same madeup, shape-shifting constitution that their favorite activist judges use, because the real constitution says no such

thing. democrats' arguments contradict not only the plain words of the constitution but also their own words and actions in considering nominees of a republican president. as to hearings, then-chairman pat leahy denied a hearing to nearly 60 judicial nominees in less than four years while george w. bush was president. as to confirmation votes, the minority leader said in may, 2005, that claiming the constitution requires a confirmation vote would be, in his words, rewriting the constitution and reinventing reality. now, that was the -- that was the minority leader, the current minority leader at this time. here's what he said then. let me just refer to the chart. "the duties of the united states senate are set forth in the constitution of the united states. nowhere in that document does it say that the senate has a duty to give presidential nominees a vote.

it says that appointments shall be made with the advice and consent of the senate. that's very different than saying that every nominee receives a vote." that was the minority leader, who was then the majority leader. well, think about that. the duties of -- quote -- "the duties of the united states senate are set forth in the constitution of the united states." nowhere in that document does it say that the senate has a duty to give prince william nominees a vote. it says that appointments shall be made with the advice and consent of the senate." now, that's very different than saying that every nominee receives a vote. unquote. i mentioned one democratic senator who voted 25 times to prevent confirmation votes on judicial nominees. so did the minority leader, the

majority whip and senators leahy and senator schumer as well. in fact, vice president biden himself when he served in this body voted 29 times to filibuster republican judicial nominees. while president obama today says that the constitution requires us to vote on a supreme court nominee, as a senator, he, too, voted to prevent any confirmation vote for supreme court nominee samuel alito. in other words, these senate democrats voted over and over to deny the very confirmation vote that today they say the constitution itself requires. they cannot have it both ways. do we have multiple constitutions, one to use for a president of your own party and another for a president of the other party? democrats today have no credibility whatsoever to dictate how the confirmation process should work with filling this supreme court vacancy.

madam president, the constitution leaves to the president how to exercise his power to nominate and to the senate how to exercise its power of advice and consent. recent claims to the contrary are inconsistent with the plain text of the constitution and with past words and actions of the very senators and grassroots activists making those claims today. the question is when, not whether, to fill the vacancy left by the untimely death of justice scalia. the best answer is to defer the confirmation process until after the next president takes office. far from ignoring or shirking our responsibility, that conclusion tackles our responsibility head on for the good of the judiciary, the senate and the country. madam president, i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from colorado. mr. gardner: madam president, it is with heavy heart that i rise -- i ask that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. gardner: it is with a heavy heart that i rise today to honor the life and work mesa county sheriff's deputy derrick gear. on monday, february 8, deputy gear was dispatched to a call about an armed individual in a local neighborhood. as members of our law enforcement do every day, deep adeputygear with courage and cae responded to that call. and through a senseless act of another, this son, husband, father and friend lost his life. deputy gear served at the mesa county sheriff's department for nearly 15 years. as a veteran of the navy, his

service to others began before his role as a law enforcement officer. service and duty, to his country and to his community exemplified deputy gear's selfless concern for others. as a member of the sheriff's department, deputy gear served as a victim's advocate, providing support to those during some of life's worst difficulties. in every role he held, he always found ways to give even more. this loss has been felt deeply across colorado's western slope. the communities in the western slope and our state, as we remember a man who exemplified the best in the western spirit -- courage and selfless leadership. the grand junction community has come together to support the gear family and our men and women who nobly protect us each and every day. members of law enforcement from around the state and around our nation came to honor the life of deputy gear, filling the streets to pay their last respects. integrity, service and

community. the values of the mesa county sheriff's department. values carried out since the inception of the organization in 1883 and embodied in the work of deputy gear. the thin blue line represents the men and women in law enforcement protecting the public from those who seek to harm and cause destruction. our officers do not waiver at the dangerous calls and unknown situations. they face them in this line of duty and they do so out of a love and loyalty for their neighbors and community. i'm grateful for the work of those at st. mary's hospital who cared for deputy gear, as his last act was perhaps the most selfless of all -- to give his organs to others in need. as mesa county deputies shrouded their badges, we too share in mourning the loss of deputy gear and we will continue to honor his life and legacy.

my deepest sympathies, prayers go to derrick gear's family, his two children, his wife kate. madam president, i yield the floor. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from florida. a senator: madam president, i too, would like to extend my condolences to the family in colorado and the senators from colorado for the loss. mr. nelson: madam president, i wanted to call to the attention of the senate that tonight around midnight, we are expecting the return from space of commander scott kelly who has been in space for almost a year.

he has been on the international space station for 340 days. it is an experiment not only all of the things that he's done in doing experiments, all kinds of physical things, but we are specifically doing a test to compare the effects of zero gravity on the human body for an extended period of time and of all things comparing him to his twin brother, an astronaut commander who was in command of the next to the last space shuttle mission in 2011.

in that case it's commander now navy retired captain mark kelly. and so we will have an identical twin that nasa that can then see the effects of the physical, emotional, psychological effects because as we prepare to go all the way to mars in the decade of the 2030's, there's going to be a lot that we're going to have to learn and long duration space flight, long duration and zero gravity is going to be one of the things that we've got to be able to adapt to. this senator was only in space for six days. the human body readapts when you get back to earth fairly

quickly. for the long duration and in this case a year, there is going to be a significant readaptation as we have seen by some of our americans who have been up for months and months, but nobody as long as a year. in the old soviet program, they had put up cosmonauts for a year and there are changes that occur, but in those intervening years, we've become so much more aggressive in how we keep in a physical exercise activity on board the space station, which is what it would be on a mars mission as well trying to replicate through stress machines the fact that we don't

have gravity but replicating that and trying to keep up the bone density, trying to keep up the muscle tone. you have to work at it. and the astronauts on board the space station do that. well, mark kelly has been up there a year. scott kelly has been up there a year, and we will compare that with his identical twin brother, mark kelly, who has flown several times in the space shuttle. mr. president, i will report to the senate tomorrow since he is supposed to return in early morning in kazakhstan. that's somewhere just before midnight here on eastern time. and i wanted to alert the senate to this because we are right on the cusp of doing a whole number of things as we prepare to go to

mars. this is certainly one of the significant events, and we'll see how scott kelly is doing. so in the meantime, we say godspeed on his fiery reentry into the earth's atmosphere, and we our hopes and our prayers go with him as he and his crew mates return and i will give a report to the senate tomorrow. mr. president, i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. a senator: i'm here to deliver my climate remarks, but i want to thank the senator from florida for his description of what is happening up in space and what our fellow americans have achieved and to say that one of the unforgettable moments of my time in the senate has been to hear senator nelson's

description of the events that led up to his space flight, the experience of his space flight, and, frankly, the spirit call nature -- spiritual nature of the events in his life. it's been impressive. senator nelson, i'm honored to serve with you. mr. whitehouse: mr. president, as you know, this is my 129th time wake up speech to my colleagues about the serious threat of carbon pollution. and our responsibility as senators to heed that threat and to take steps to soften the blow of climate change. with each passing week, the evidence of climate change continues to mount, and public understanding of the stakes of the climate crisis continues to grow. worldwide 2015 was the hottest year since we began keeping

records back in 1880. according to both noaa and nass sa*. the last five years have been the warmest five-year period on record, says the world meteorological association. we know that the amount of carbon in the earth's atmosphere has risen to its highest level in at least 800,000 years. probably several millions of years, but at least 800,000 years. global sea levels are rising along our shores at their fastest rate in nearly 3,000 years. the current rate of change in ocean acidity is already faster than any time in the past 50 million years. our oceans are acidifying more rapidly than they have at any time in 50 million years. we measure that from the geologic record. and the american people get it. they understand the climb platt -- climate change is real. more than three out of four

americans believe that climate change is occurring and that doing nothing to reduce future warming will cause a very or serious -- very or somewhat serious problem for the united states. three out of four. even the majority of republicans now acknowledge global warming with 59% saying the climate is changing. when asked do you think that the world's climb platt is undergoing a change that is causing more extreme weather patterns and the rise of sea levels? 70% said yes. the american people have afternoon extraordinarily diverse and qualified array of expertise supporting those convictions. virtually every major scientific society and agency. our american military and national security and intelligence officials, leading american companies, doctors and faith leaders. so the truth is winning out, right?

the polluters can't paint a deception and misinformation has been thwarted, right? well, wrong. they're still at it. a network of fossil fuel backed front organizations with innocent sounding names still promulgates counterfeit science in an attempt to cast doubt on the actual american scientific consensus. this network of polluter paid deceit and denial has been well documented by dr. robert brule at drexler university, dr. justin fowler at yale university, dr. riley dunlap at oklahoma state university, and others. dr. brule's follow the money analysis, for instance, diagrams the complex flow of cash to these front groups, a flow that the polluters persist extently try to obscure.

dr. fail's quantitative analysis of words written by organizations revealed a complex climate denial apparatus that is -- quote -- "overly producing and promoting skepticism and doubt about scientific consensus on climate change." doubt is their product to use the famous phrase. dr. constantine bosalis at trainty college and dr. travis cohen at the university of exeter released a new study in december examining more than 16,000 documents from 19 conservative think tanks over the period 1998 to 2013 and found -- quote -- "little support for the claim that the era of science denial is over." instead discussion of climate science had generally increased over the sample period, end quote. their study demonstrates that in spite of the broken global heat records over the last decade,

rising sea levels and accelerating melting of polar ice sheets, these conservative think tanks have in recent years actually increased their polluter paid attacks on science. the study explains these think tanks -- quote -- "provide a multitude of services to the cause of climate change skepticism. " these include offering material support and lending credibility to contrarian scientists, sponsoring pseudo scientific climate change conferences, directly communicating contrarian viewpoints to politicians which is how we get infected here, and disseminating skeptic viewpoints out through the media. it follows a playbook of fraudulent deception that we've seen before from industrial powers fighting to obscure the harms their products cause. tobacco being a fine example.

in 2002, the conservative strategist frank lundst summed up itself scheme in a memo to the republican party since leaked titled "straight talk. " here's what he said. should the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global warming will change accordingly. therefore, you need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate. the scientific debate is closing against us, he said back in 2002, but not yet closed. there is still a window of opportunity to challenge the science. this is the climate denial version of the infamous 1969 tobacco industry memo that declared doubt is our product.

in her recent book "dark money" jane mayer describes in depth the means by which fossil fuel interests put their wealth to use exerting outside influence on our american political process. first she describes they invest in intellectuals who come up with ideas friendly to the industry. then they invest in think tanks that transform these ideas into -- quote -- "marketable policies, stuff they think they can sell. as one environmental lawyer explains, you take corporate money and give it to a neutral sounding think tank, which hires people with pedigrees and academic degrees who put out credible seeming studies, but they all coincide perfectly with the economic interests of their funders." miss mayer describes this as the

think tank as disguised political weapon. not surprisingly think tanks in the climate denial scheme tend to be funded by fossil fuel interests like exxon-mobil and the koch brothers or their fronts. the kochs and their ilk use dark money channels to funnel money through a labyrinth of nonprofit groups that make the full extent of their meddling difficult if not impossible to fully determine. the bosalis and cohen study identifies the heartland institute as a particularly important cog in the polluter funderred climate denial apparatus. according to their study, and i'll quote it, "heartlands shift towards science-related themes, dovetails with lundst's famous straight talk memo, the one i just referred to.

it is, therefore, not a surprise that for a decade it, heartland, has organized the annual international conference on climate change, also known as denial of palooza, which serves as a forum climate science den nicer or that it, heartland again, made headlines in 2012 after launching a controversial ad campaign which equated climate scientists with ted kaczynski, the unabomber. climate scientists like the ones who work at nasa and noaa with ted kaczynski the unilatera uno. very responsible behavior by heartland. but heartland gets big bucks from the fossil fuel industry

and its front groups for this service. unfortunately, that's not all. behind this well-paid conspiracy to fool the american public, which is failing, is a related political effort which is not. the polluters are losing with the american public, but they still control congress. huge sums of dark money are spent on politics, particularly right here in the united states senate and house of representatives. as nyu law professor bert newborn has written, "rivers of money flowing from secret sources have turned our elections into silent auctions. how huge are these rivers of

money? each election sets new records. in the 2012 presidential cycle, the nonpartisan center for responsive politics reported, dark money groups spent over $300 million, with over 80% of it coming from republican-leaning outfits. the torrent of dark money flooded the 2014 mid-term elections making them the most expensive mid-term elections in american history. according to "the washington post," at least 31% of all independent spending in that election came from groups not required to disclose their donors. dark money. and that doesn't even count spending on so-called issue ads, which is all not reported. and in this 2016 election cycle, dark money spending has broken new records again.

these dark money groups, according to the center for responsive politics -- quote -- "are more integrated into campaigns than we've seen in the past." end quote. the koch brothers' political network alone has vowed to spend $750 million this election cyc cycle. they're through $400 million already and climbing, and the $750 million they have vowed to spend is more than the bush and kerry campaigns combined spent in 2004. in our political debate, dark money dollars drown out the voices of average citizens. with what has been aptly called a tsunami of slime. and all that money is not spent for nothing. as one secret corporate donor

exalted -- quote -- "we can fly under the radar screen. there are no limits, no restrictions, and no disclosure." end quote. the result stinks, mr. president, and it's polluting our public discourse. and the sad part is that it's working. not one republican senator will stand up and address climate change in a meaningful way. i have a bill modeled on what conservative economists and the out-of-office republican officials who are willing to address climate change all recommend as their solution. i did it their way. not a single cosponsor. in the presidential primary, it's even worse.

one leading candidate has actually declared, the concept of global warming was created by and for the chinese, by and for the chinese, in order to make u.s. manufacturing noncompetitive. tell that to noaa, nasa, the united states navy, and every single american national laboratory. it's a preposterous statement offered by a person who presents himself as qualified to be president of the united states. another candidate, this one i'm sad to say, a senate colleague, simply shrugs and says, climate is always changing. no, not like this, and if you don't believe me, ask noaa and nasa and the navy and every single american national lab.

yet another candidate, who is also a senator, dismissed the solid american scientific consensus on climate change as -- and i quote -- "partisan dogma and ideology." tell that to the scientists at noaa and nasa and the navy and every single one of our national laboratories, that what they're doing is not legitimate science but is partisan dogma and ideology. again, a pre preposterous remar. but they have to say these things, because the big fossil fuel money is so powerful in that primary race that they don't dare cross them. the powerful fossil fuel interests have created a beautiful situation. they no longer care which

candidate wins that primary because they've schooled them all to climate denial. that's the achievement of dark money, and it is an achievement that is disgracing our democracy and will darken our reputation for decades. and its effect is that we do nothing, exactly what the big polluters want, exactly what the big polluters paid for. it is just sickening what these secretive special interests and their dirty, dark money are doing to our american democracy. it is time to wake up, mr. president. i thank you. i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. wyden: mr. president, i

ask unanimous consent to vacate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. wyden: mr. president, tomorrow the supreme court will hear oral arguments in the case of whole women's health v. hellerstad. and the central issue of this case is an attack by the state of texas on women's health and the clinics that provide abortion services. so i'd like on begi -- i'd liken by stating clearly that in our country, women have a constitutionally protected right to make their own choices about their bodies. that is the law of the land, is guaranteed to women in oregon and nationwide by the supreme court in roe v. wade. the 2013 texas law at the heart of this case hb-2 is a thinly veiled attempt to block women's

choice by setting unjustifiable and burdensome requirements on the doctors and clinics that offer abortion care. despite what hb-2 supporters say, it doesn't have anything to do with protecting women's health. and the reality is complications from abortion procedures are exceedingly rare. in fact, the numbers show that abortion care is far safer than colonoscopies. yet texas law doesn't go out of its way to impose comparable requirements on facilities providing colon of cours colono. texas hb-2 specifically targets women's health clinics. i'd like to briefly quote from

an amicus brief from experts trusted in this matter from the american medical association and the american conference of obstetricians and gynecologists, among others. their brief said that the requirements imposed by the state of texas -- and i quote -- "are contrary to accepted medical practice and are not based on scientific evidence. the brief continues again -- and i quote -- "they fail to enhance the quality or safety of abortion-related medical care and, in fact, impede women's access to such care by imposing unjustified and medical -- and medically unnecessary burdens on abortion providers. hb-2 tells clinics -- and i quote -- "comply with these new requirements or close." so in the months since the law passed, the number of clinics that provide such services has,

in fact, plummeted across the state. according to reports, if hb-2 is upheld, the total will drop by more than three-quarters. now, texas is obviously a big state and under hb-2, many women are going to have to travel for hours on end to exercise a right guaranteed to them by the united states constitution. the fact is, a lot of working women don't have the luxury of taking a day off or can't afford a long and expensive trip to a faraway clinic. in effect, women are going to be denied care. now, you're going to hear people on both sides of the aisle say again and again how vital it is that americans have access to medical treatment and advice from doctors they know and

trust. but hb-2 flatly denies many women that protection. and i personally find it very troubling that hb-2 has become a blueprint for similar restrictive laws around the nation, bills that masquerade as women's health safety measures. for example, the state of louisiana now has a nearly identical law on its books. in january, 162 of my congressional colleagues and i wrote the following in an amicus brief filed with the supreme court. and i quote here -- "a woman's right to decide whether to carry a pregnancy to term or to seek critical medical services, including abortion, should be insulated from the shifting political rhetoric and interest groups whose sole purpose it is to erode the right to choose to bring a pregnancy to term

afforded to women under the roe case." so here is my bottom line, mr. president. a limit on the exercise of a woman's right is a limit on the right itself. it is wrong and it is un-american to restrict a person's right because it conflicts with your own views. texas hb-2 should be struck down. the rights guaranteed to women following roe v. wade ought to be protected just like all the others that are guaranteed by the constitution. and my hope, mr. president, is this ongoing crusade against women's health care, which i've spoken about repeatedly on the floor of this senate, it ought to end here and it ought to end now. and with that, mr. president, i yield the floor and i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection kphoeuld i ask unanimous consent that the senate be in a earthed 'of morning business with senators permitted to speak up to ten minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that following leader remarks on wednesday, march 2, the motion to proceed to calendar number 369, s. 524 be agreed to, the committee reported substitute amendment be

withdrawn, and senator grassley or his designee be recognized to offer a substitute amendment number 33778 and that the first three first-degree amendments in order be the following: 3362 which is a feinstein-grassley amendment, 3345, shaheen, 3367 toomey. and that senator grassley or his designee be permitted to offer side by side amendments to the shaheen amendment and the senator leahy or his designee be permitted to offer side by side amendment to the toomey amendment. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. mcconnell: so now i ask unanimous consent that the judiciary committee be discharged and the senate proceed to immediate consideration of s. res. 380. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 38 on 0, resolution designating february 29, 2016, as rare disease day.

the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the committee is discharged. mr. mcconnell: with no further debate on the resolution? the presiding officer: is there further debate? if not, all those in favor say aye. those opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the resolution is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: finally i ask that the preamble be agreed to and the motions considered be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i now ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to consideration of s. res. 382, submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 382, congratulating the community colleges of iowa for 50 years of outstanding service to the state of iowa, united states, and the world. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening

action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the appointment at the desk appear separately in the record as if made by the chair. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: and i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today. it adjourn till 9:30 a.m. wednesday, march 2. following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day. further that following leader remarks the senate begin consideration of s. 524, as under the previous order. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: so if there's no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: it stands adjourned till 9:30 a.m. the

bill also establishes a governmt and private task force to develop guidelines for pain management, and medication prescribing. here is some of today's floor debate on the bill, clip you hadding some of the bill's cosponsors. s >> mr. president, yesterday senate comprehensive addiction and recovery act, commonly known as cara. this legislation gets into big problem. abuse of heroin and prescription pain killers is devastating families and communities across the country including texas.bl the truth is the problem is n getting worse and not better.oi deaths due to heroin overdoses and prescription drug overdoses even surpassed car accidents as number one cause of injury for related deaths nationwide. so it is time for congress to do something significant to begin

to address this disturbing trend. this bill is a good example of how republicans and democrats working in a bipartisan basis can zero in on a problem that is harming our nation and work together to address it. and i'm proud to cosponsor this legislation.ward so i look forward to continuing to work on this bill and to vote on amendments that will actually improve it. speaking of amendments, while this bill touches on how tog battle drug addiction in this country we need to do more to cut the source of drugs off and keep them from getting into our country in the first place. the senate armed services committee recently heard about the supply side of this the equation. this is primarily goes to the heroin coming from mexico. they heard testimony from the director of national intelligence, director james how clapper.

in his testimony director clapper talked about how mexicoo has ramped up the production of heroin in response to growing demand in the united states. coming from a boarder state like the presiding officer, frequently in my conversationsns with our mexican counterparts w me supply they usually turn it on me, well, what about the demand in the united states? the truth is we have to get at both components, both the supply and the demand. in 2014 alone drug cartels smuggled more than a quarter of a million pound of heroin across our borders. this was done by the same transnational criminal organizations that traffic in human beings for sex or forced labor. and who, who man theat immigration, illegal immigration pipelines into our country. this is no longer a mom-and-pop operation. these are major criminal networks and organizations that

will do anything for money. and of course they're happy to make money off the heroin that comes across our borders. so if we're going to make significant strides in this fight against addiction and drug abuse, we need to take critical look where drugs are coming from, consider strategies we can employ to keep them from even coming on to our soil. these unfortunately even while the production and demand of these illegal drugs has been growing, we've simply not done enough to combat it. i mentioned earlier that the u.s. southern command, that's the area of combatant command for the united states military that is south of mexico into central america and comma south america, that southern command has been given zero navy ships to conduct countertrafficking missions. that is because our navy fleet

is simply too small and these resources have been diverted elsewhere to counter growing threats around the world but ita is irresponsible to ignore the transnational criminal threats in our own backyard. we need a strategy to interdict drug shipments to cut them off before they reach our shores. so i've introduced several amendments that would help focus our resources to interdict thess shipments and to help stem the growing tide of illicit drugs entering the u.s. market. one would simply require the defense department when it allocates funding to the states for national guard counterdrug program to prioritize drug interdiction.na more effectively using the national guard's military capabilities to help interdict, drug flow would provide needed especially on our southern border.

too often law enforcement agencies have been left with scant resources to handle this growing problem. so this amendment would allow the national guard to play a bigger role in drug interdiction. another amendment i've offered would require the president to create a plan, a strategy really to increase interdiction of illegal drugs that enter acrossw the southwest border. it would require the interdiction goal of 90% of those drugs which would be a great leap forward from the current levels.n last year general kelly, thennly the commander of southern command, estimated that only 15 to 20% of drugs bound for the united states but, due the lack of resources, in the southern command, basically, relegated to observers as illegal drugs would

transsit across their weaknesses across their area of operation. given the short fall, plan on agencies doesn't really exist. this amendment would make sure one is created to make sure to boost the amount of drugs we successfully interdict.t it would also require the president to submit this plan to congress so we can have a am conversation between the executive branch of the legislative branch and american people could review it, hold us accountable and make sure we are making progress on this front. t finally introduce an amendment to increase the high-intensity drug trafficking area program. this would help federal, state and local law enforcement officials use task force funding to implement a multidisciplinary heroin response strategy.as this has been tested in several high-intensity drug trafficking areas with great success.

this amendment would help implement this strategy nationwide. giving law enforcement additional tools to combat the growing threat of heroin from both the supply and the demand side. so, mr. president, i'm glad weg are making some progress on this legislation.pt i'm optimistic that we will be able to complete it this week in a bipartisan fashion which sendly way you get things done around here. we desperately need to target the opioid epidemic happening across the nation and we also need to cut off as much of the supply of the cheap heroin which when people can't get access too prescription drugs, too often they turn to the cheap heroin and that's why the supply issue is so important. but we need both pieces in order to make real progress and to restore our communities currently plagued by addiction

and drug abuse. mr. president, i yield the floor. >> mr. president. >> senator from new hampshire. >> mr. president, i rise today to urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the comprehensivee addiction and recovery act. this is a bill that we have been working on for three years. both senator portman, senator whitehouse, senator klobuchar, i want to thank them for their partnership and leadership on this bill.ou this is something that the four of us got together on because we saw in our own states the public health epidemic that was happening with our constituents, individuals struggling with addiction, people who wereescriu addicted to prescription drugs

and overusing and misusing prescription drugs and the prica of heroin on our streets and so low an people going to heroin and also combination of heroin and a deadly drug called fientr noll. i want too thank them for the work we've been doing together over last several years and see this bill come to the senate floor.ce this is a very important piece of legislation that will help us address the public health epidemic facing my home state of new hampshire and this country. this is something i've come to the floor on on several occasions before and traveling around my state i can't tell you the number of stories that i've heard from people in f new hampshire and what we're facing and the number of lives that are lost. the number of lives that are devastated by heroin andthis fentanol and misuse of prescription drugs. this is a life or death issue in my state. the number of drug overdose

deaths has been staggering and before i came to the senate i served as attorney general of our state and so i worked with law enforcement on these issues, whether methaphetamine, cocaine, other illegal drugs but i've never seen anything like this. as of last week the chief medical examiner's office, had recorded that there were over, there were 420, 420 drug deaths in 2015. and that was a dramatic increase in new hampshire from the year before. the year before we had about, my, 320 drug deaths, so, this is over a person dying a day in mya state, many more than die in traffic accidents, are dying from the drug overdose and it is a combination, again of the t driver of this, heroin, and fentanol.

fentanol is 40, 50% more powerful than heroin. when the drug dealers mixer it up with the heroin, it is a spo killer. as eric spafford told me who he himself an incredible guy in recovery, with open treatment facilities in our state. he got it right when he said it's a serial killer. that is what it is. in the month of february, thereh were 14, 14 suspected opioid overdose deaths just in the city of manchester. 14, just in one city in my state. that is a record high in manchester, new hampshire. these are not just numbers we're talking about here. behind every statistic is a life, a life taken from us far too soon, tragically lost. a mother, daughter, a son, brother, neighbor, a friend.

coworker. this hits all of us. horrible this is people being lost from this horrible, horrible epidemic behind the statistics and behin, the headlines we see every day in the news there are family members, friends, and communities who have been deeply impacted by this public health crisis. like the mother from greenvillem new hampshire, who wrote to me. she spends her days actually doing incredibly important worki helping people who are struggling with addiction. she helps them and yet she came home and has been coming home to see her own son struggling with heroin. she told me, as i tried to comfort those who have been will affected by this tragedy, i think that my son will be next. in laconia, a man helped struggling to get treatment but he feels helpless when they are faced with a five-month waiting

period for a rehabilitation facility. he wrote, in five months these individuals may be dead. a parent from salem,d new hampshire, contacted me and told me her son is struggling with heroin addiction and she needed help finding a treatmentr program for him since she couldn't afford to pay forf. treatment herself. m and parents don't know where to go.. i have met many parents who want to get help for their kids and they're having hard time finding a place and knowing where to go. another mother of three children had to revive her son from an overdose before the paramedics could arrive. or like the griffin family from newton who i got to know well who lost their beautiful 20-year-old daughter, courtney, to an overdose. now courtney's father, doug and courtney's mother pam, they made it their mission to bring awareness to this issue and to make sure that others don't

suffer from the same tragedy that they have suffered. and the life loss in a beautiful young woman named courtney, who had so, so much of life before her and so much potential. doug and so, doug and pam and so many other dedicated people in new hampshire are working tirelessly to turn the tide against this epidemic. over the past two years i've made it a priority to travel the state and hear from our public safety community, treatment providers, addiction expert, family, individuals in recovery about finding effective strategies to the address this problem. on ride alongs with the police and fire i've been to overdosesl i've seen them bring people back to life administering narcan, only to say that they face this every single day. if we don't focus on prevention, and we don't focus on treatment, then the important work that our first-responders are doing, then

we're not going to get at this o problem and make sure people get out of this cycle of addiction that are struggling. treatment facilities in new hampshire are certainly working tirelessly and individuals stepping up to expand our capacity in new hampshire to support individuals who need help and they need more support. and i want to take a moment to recognize some of their hard tht work. among so many others that i'm greatful, and there are some working hard together in new hampshire, hope for new hampshire recovery, families in transition, willows program, the farnham center, bite house sober community in nashua, hope on haven hill in rochester, bonfire recovery in dover, the granite house in in derry. gotten to mead so many incredible lives. new bury house. hering from dedicated

professionals that work there and average people coming together to organize a 5-k race to gain resources and support for people on the front lines. this is what they're saying those on the front lines. tackling this epidemic and reversing the tied of addiction will take a comprehensive, thoughtful approach and includes strategy for treatment, prevention, education, support for individuals in recovery and interdiction. that's why we have to pass cara. cara is important because it c embody as comprehensive approach some in my state told me they need. here is what it looks like. it gives more support to first-responders and law enforcement, expanding the availability of life-saving drugs like narcan that are first-responders are using every day. and because kara will help make this happen, endorsed by national fraternal order of police, national districter attorneys association, the national association of

attorneys general including our own torn general joe foster. iss it strengthen prescription drug monitoring programs to help prevent doctor shopping. this is something i've been advocating for since i was attorney general of our state so that our public health officialw could have the tools because we know from smsa research, four out of five people started with misusing or overusing transferred to heroin.n. so this is critical. it increases access to treatment including evidence-based medication assistance treatment. helps people have more access. we need to turn the tide. over 130 stakeholder groups have gotten behind this legislation.i groups that are on the front line of this issue. just to name some of them have been endorsed by the national council for behavioral health, the american psychological association, the american society for of addiction, medicine community. anti-drug coalitions of americaf harm reduction coalition, faces and voices of recovery, mental

health america, young people in recovery, the national a association of state and alcohol and substance abuse directors, among many others and i thank these groups for fair feedback. it would support additional resources to identify and treat incarcerated individuals suffering from substance abuse discords. it would expand prevention so important that we address prevention. and it would also establish a campaign to bring greater the awareness to the association between overuse and misuse of prescription drugs and what happens as people misuseer prescription drugs and then go to heroin and deadly drugs like fentanyl. this bill has overwhelming by partisan support. it has 39 cosponsors. h i see my colleague from new hampshire on the floor. i want to thank her for her sponsorship of this legislatione this crisis does not discriminate. it doesn't care. heroin, fentanyl, this devastating impact of this drug

does not care whether you're republican, democrat,, independent, whatever your background. this is something that affects all of us. and like the high school student from manchester who wrote to me sharing how concerned he is about the negative impact this epidemic is having on his city, when he walks home from school he sometimes sees discarded needles on the sidewalk, tragically he lost his best friend to a fentanyl overdose. or abby who lives in the seacoast region who struggled to opioid use disorder through her pregnancy until she was finally able to receive health and treatment and enter recovery. i met abby. i'm so inspired by her. she shows us we can make a difference and turn this around. a woman in londonderry spoke with me at community forum, terrified her brother would suffer reoccurrence as soon as he was released from prison because he wasn't getting treatment and she woos worried

about his path to successful sun life with his he is still suffer ing from substance abuse disorder. angela from nashua, turned into al raying cry for others. she lost her mother to heroin over dose 1 years ago. adopted children of several aunts and cousins who lost battles with addiction. after all this, angela son and girlfriend became addicted to ag opioids and she overdosed in angela's home. her son is still battling withth heroin addiction. so many groups are working to support these individuals. we need to give them our support but they can not and should not have to do this alone. i really appreciate, i see my colleague, senator shaheen here from new hampshire, her leadership on this, i'm a cosponsor of senator shaheen's stand alone legislation which would provide emergency appropriations in order to combat the heroin and prescription opioid crisis facing our state in new hampshire.

in fact, she and i have both written to health and humane services and asked them toen designate this as a public health emergency because we've seen the impact in our state. we've seen the lives that are being lost and impacted by this. so i'm cosponsoring, i will be cosponsoring senator shaheen's amendment to cara and supporting this on the floor and i very much support her getting a vote on this. i hope that that happens. in addition i do appreciate the president has put in additional resources in his budget to address this issue. t and this is an issue that as i look at, we all have to work together on. at the end of the year there wad important funding that was passed that cara would provide a very important framework for. last year during the appropriations process congress worked to increase by 284% funding for programs at cdc and

smsa related to combating opioid abuse. while this is positive step forward, these dollars actually haven't been distributed yet. and so it's important that we pass cara to make sure that as we go forward with the dollars that have already been appropriated, as we go forward in the appropriations process this year, that we have the from time to time work to properly redirect this funding to prevene shun -- prevention, treatment,fe first-responders, to make sure we have feedback of 130 stakeholder groups, law enforcement throughout the country to insure the dollars are appropriately spent to address the epidemic we're facing. i was honored, and i have been honored to work over this last several years again with senators portman, whitehouse and klobuchar introducing this bill.

i also want to thank the head of drug policy in the administration, director botticelli. he really summed it up well when we asked him what he thought about cara. he said in a hearing before the judiciary committee in january there's clear evidence that a comprehensive response looking at multidimensional aspects of this that are embedded in the cara act are tremendously important.e, we know we need to do more and i think all of those components put forward in this bill are critically important to makingem headway in terms of this epdemmic. heal recovery act would be significant step forward in federal response to the public health epidemic facing new hampshire and so many states in the country. i huge r urge my colleagues to support this critical legislation, listen to the people of new hampshire and to the people of this country who are asking us to act. this is what they're saying in new hampshire.

senator bless pass legislation to save my son's life. in manchester, i wake up every morning with a fear i will find my son dead, crying out for help. in spafford, i want my voice tot be heard so that no one else falls through the crack. in london derry, at diction can happen to anyone. in tilton, we need action and we need it right now. we have an opportunity on this floor right now in this debate, very thoughtful legislation, very bipartisan legislation, comprehensive addiction and recovery act to take action now. we owe it to all those that lost their lives, family who is have been impacted and those who are struggling with addiction, the first-responders in our community, the people who are working hard to turn this around in new hampshire and across this country. to all i thank them for the incredible work they're doing.s we need to pass this legislation.

i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting passage of the comprehensive addiction and recovery act. this bill will make a differencp and i believe it will help save lives in new hampshire and across the country. and no doubt that passing this bill will make a difference. we will all need to continue to do more. we will all need to continue to through fight for more and more support through the appropriationsay process and in any way that we can. and i intend to keep up this fight because i know that lives are on the line. i know this issue is impacting my state. i know that this issue as i talk to the mothers, the daughters,t the fathers, the sons, the friends that are telling me the stories of people they have lost. that we can turn this around but it is so important that we pass this legislation.. and, mr. president, i want to again thank my colleague from the state of new hampshire for her work on this and with that i yield the floor. >> mr. president?

>> the senator from new hampshire. >> mr. president, i ask nan news consent to speak up to 30 minutes and i wonder if the chair could advise me about three minutes from my time being >> the chair will so notify you. >> thank you. i'm pleased to join my colleague from new hampshire on the floor and the others who have spokenot this morning so eloquently about the heroin and opioid epidemic that is ravaging families and o communities in every one of our states. and as senator ayotte said so well, we have seen in for new hampshire that we are at ground zero for this epidemic. e it is in terms of the percentage of people affected in new hampshire we're losing ate n higher percentage than almost every state in the nation and this is something that we he need to work together to address

more robustly i think than we have done at the federal level.m because this epidemic has become a pandemic. it is affecting young and old, urban and rural, rich and poor, white and minorities. as others have spoken, the senate is now considering the comprehensive addiction and recovery act or cara. i want to congratulate the sponsors of the legislation because this is a good bipartisan bill. it's important as we look at what we need to do to address the epidemic that we face but in addition to the authorizations c and the good work that is in the cara legislation we also need to provide resources that law t enforcement and health professionals who are on the front lines of dealing with this crisis are going to need. because despite heroic efforts,f law enforcement and treatment

professionals are increasingly overwhelm by the sheer scope and scale of the opioid and heroin crisis. everywhere i go in new hampshire the lack of resources is abundantly clear. our communities need additionalw funding and needed urgently. that's why i have introduced an amendment cosponsored by the author of cara, senator whitehouse. and i'm pleased my colleague from new hampshire is joined iny cosponsoring this amendment. what it would do is provide $600 million in emergency funding for critical programs that we know will help address this crisis. i'm on the floor today to urge the majority leader andnd leadership of the senate to allow a vote on this legislatios because, this is nationwide emergency of the first order. t and it is time for us and congress to treat it like a nationwide emergency.

in 2014, more than 47,000 americans died from lethal drug overdoses. more fatalities than from car eh accidents. so each day, 120 americans die of drug overdoses, two deaths every hour. in our state of new hampshire, where we have 1.3 million a people, we're losing more than a person a day to drug overdoses. and here we have a map of america that shows the increases in deaths from drug overdoses. we can see in 2003 the majority of the map is lighter colored. so it means it doesn't have the same number of deaths. in 2008, we see the dark red color which shows the drug overdoses, the deaths from drug overdoses increasing. here in 2014, we see the impact

of those 47,000 people lost. and the presiding officer, like in new hampshire, is at ground zero in the state of arizona.tu west virginia, in tennessee and kentucky. they are seeing the same dramatic increase in the number of deaths from drug overdoses. this chart represents overdose deaths per 100,000 people and again it demonstrates how truly national in scope the crisis hae become. no state is immune from the scourge. t across the country our communities are asking why this is happening. they're asking why so many of our family members and neighbors are overdosing on these drugs? and sadly as people have spoken on the floor, one of the primary reasons is because so many people are becoming addicted to prescription opioid drugs, so

prescriptions were written for these drugs. almost one for every american. that's more than enough to give every american adult their own bottle it of pills. during a three-month stretch in 2015, in new hampshire, 13 million doses of schedule 2 n painkillers were dispensed at new hampshire pharmacies in just one three-month period. 13 million pills in three month for a state with a population of 1.3 million. and nearly 80% of these prescriptions were for heavy painkillers like oxycodone, morphine and fentanyl. . . prescribing and the number of deaths that result. the number of drug overdose deaths has risen as opioid

prescriptions have increased. so let's go back to this chart for a minute. for a minute. prison as opioid and script -- opioid use has increased. the number of deaths is the orange line. the green line is the number of prescriptions being written. we are missing the year 2012ou , but there is no doubt, the pain killers that are being written. people addicted to opioid painkillers are 4040 times more likely to be addicted to heroin.ple turn when someone gets addicted to pain pills they turn to drugs like heroin and from now.ers are taking

people turn to harrowing because it is cheaper and easier to get their prescription drugs. bee traffickers are taking advantage.erdose d of course the end result is a staggering increase.ase 25,000 people died from opioid abuse. fr we can see these are opioid deaths, deaths from cocaine and deaths from heroin. hopkins the red and green line have gone up dramatically. a professor describes the

opioid addiction as a planetn nw relapsing illness just like diabetes.ut tha again, what i have heardno from law enforcement is that our users in jail, but that is not the answer. we need to put the bad guys in jail and provide treatment. that is the only effective answer and a tragic reality t that nearly nine out of ten a people don't receive treatment. state, i spoke eloquently about the people she has heard from.ple, we have heard from people in the same way, estimated

100,000 people almost a 10 percent are currentlydmitted seeking treatment for substance abuse disorders and are able to offer help to a small fraction.th the the number increased 90 percent for heroin and 500 percent for prescription drug use with the largest increases occurring in the past several years. who as we can see, lack of treatment is a national problem. the darker the green the more people are not. receiving entry. arizona, the presiding officers, we can see the pattern coming down the east coast and going up the west

coast. 82,000 needed addiction treatment but failed to getpl it. in nevada 55, north carolina 200,000. there are overdosing in overwhelming numbers in this map shows where overdose death rates are the highest. greater than 19 and we can see many of the same states 1 that have the most difficulty.

11001100 people died from a drug overdose. in tennessee 1200. nevada 500 north carolina 1300. i have had i have had a chance to visit three treatment centers. these are trapped by skilled, dedicated professionals saving livesit every day and tell me that for every life they save many more are lost for lack of treatment capacity, facility command funding. i had a chance to meet with. people in recovery and can remember one young man up in lebanon who had been in and out of prison. one of the things she said was, it costs thousands to

keep someone in prison. don't you know it is cheaper to give treatment, absolutely more cost effective to provide treatment to people in recovery and need help. i heard from a young woman in manchester who had been arrested for drug use and said, i am not a criminal. i need treatment. another young woman saidru they do not provide treatment, so when i get picked up i do not tell them i have a drug problem or mental health issues.

and what i need ist' treatment. that is why this supplemental amendment : 300 million for the block grant program, the premier b federal initiative prevention, treatment command recovery and this represents 75 percentof state agency substance abuse prevention budget. and it is the only funding. if we are going to get a handle we have to provide resources.

this will result in andoin the immediate increase in all save taxpayer dollars in the future, just like i heard from the young man. he is absolutely right. for every dollar spent there is a four to $7 reaction. e i was in stratford county, using the modest funding to

accomplish important things and working to engage the students because if we can prevent addiction that is the most important thingut that we can do. unfortunately many remain cry underfunded. i recently learned about one mother and child. ifif she received inpatient treatment and is doing wellong g but others have not been doing lucky. a month long waiting list for those needing treatment, and with people are turned away the remain on theos street, desperate. vice news profiled the

opioid epidemic. at the treatment center is about have to wait three months. i had to go to the hospitalin until ii was going to kill myself just getting muted. another critical's, prescription drug monitoring stay run programs collect, monitor command analyze electronically transmitted prescribing and dispensing data. supplemen only half a receiving federal support. what this amendment does is included 50 million.

our minimum allocates ten i am education assistant treatment services because numerous studies have shown the effectiveness of including medication.. medications like methadone, before frame and tricks on resos have been shown to treat opioid abuse. received

$1.7 million in byrne funding in 2007.

last year we received less than $1 million, almost a 50% reduction. you know, i had the chance to travel with senator hoeven down to our southern border of texas to our southern border of texas now,now, i had the chance to travel with senator melvin secu last spring gives we botho are on the department of homeland security i subcommittee and talked to texas in border patrol employees who are down on the border interdicting drugs on the southern border interstate one of the things they talked about is the drugs are coming across the southern border and going across the interstate highway system and we have

to survive law enforcement with the funds to interdict traffickers. infuse new funding so that programs are more aggressive phones to combat the opioid crisis for this emergency funding.the in new hampshire we have seen what a difference it can make. from may to december and to seek -- based in bedford new hampshire jew around federal, state, and local resources to make sense.hree

240 arrests, for major trafficking organizations, dismantle three processing mills and seize assets. but we must continue to re-create successes to do that we have to provide the resources. thes barring jagged and the substance abuse prevention and treatment block grant. all senators have seen the good work they do and by

allocating emergency resources this amendment will provide law enforcement and treatment professionals with resources needed to go on the offensive to mobilize a war on opioid trafficking and addiction and most important emergency supplemental funding in a amendment funds the programs included. and i want to thank the center and other that h grasshoppers who have made important changes to improve programs that help treat an action. law but as important as it is, it is an authorization bill. if we support making changes in law we should support the funding needed to make programs work.

this is a quotation from the national governors association.uld provide recently they came together and endorsed emergency appropriation to address theen crisis writing governors applaud the introduction of legislation that would provide emergency assistance the states working on the front lines of the opioid crisis. investment is needed ped to help states mount an effective response. increasing prevention and education regarding the dangers of illicit drugs to strengthening monitoring programs, expanding access and enhancing support.rs b the fraternal order of police has endorsed this amendment written, this

profile help state and local law enforcement by giving necessary funding and tools to about communities heroin and opioid problems, something must be done.po i ask unanimous consent to price the paternal order ofro police support record. su

the increases are modest the best in the majorityars. appropriates programs that have been critically underfunded. the reality is funding has not kept up with healthcare inflation. 26% decrease in the value of funding despite the small increase in the ago, appropriations process.

in order to restore block grants from ten years ago $450 million. funded it is only a down payment 15 years ago again before the explosion of the heroin opioid crisis congress provided more than 1 billionn in through burn my jagged, and block grant funding. right now despite the

explosion one 3rd of the support but the reality being criminal justice prevention and treatment has wait >> we have talked and they are ready to get funding out the door immediately because there is no time to wait. this money is needed now.il congress has risen to the challenge of academics, appropriating nearly 2 billion to fight swine flu vod

which passed 86 to three and congress approved 5.4 building, the ebola outbreak they killed only one american. surely we can come together to fight a raging epidemic. we cannot avert our eyes or accept nine out of ten go without treatment.

help fight the heroin wind opioid epidemic. iepidemic. i urge my colleagues to support this emergency supplemental funding amendmentis is that will ramp up the fight and it is time we mobilize a nationwide response i yield.

>> many states, it is not unusual to have a terrible toll at home from opioid abuse and overdose. in 2014 239 rhode islanders lost their lives to overdoses. and more than automobile accidents, homicide, suicide , all the categories

combined. all of those are from a very small town. losing six people, six police calls to the seemed to have six funerals in a community that small which is sadly emblematic of what is going on all around the country, the addiction, overdoses, planning lives,

creating tragedy, and destroying families across the united states, emergencye treats almost 7,000 people every single day for misuse or abuse of drugs, 7,000 people come through the er doors needing treatment. and more than 120 people died everyday as a result of an overdose. the latest year for which we have figures, 47,000 dead in one year. if you leave this building

and walk down to the mall you can find the vietnam war memorial which has 58,000 names, from the entire vietnam conflict, 58,000 names, someone year of in y and i am afraid this will end up in 2015. and behind the tragedy of death and saw

the fire is a terrible failing. according to the most recent estimates nine out of ten people who need drug treatment do not get it. they just don't get it. ongoing substance abuse epidemic does not discriminate.n race, ethnicity, gender. t

demands that we respond in a comprehensive way. public health, safety it was out of this recognition during the spring of 2014 the presiding officer, sen.

clover charsenator clover char of minnesota, a off of new hampshire and i hosted a series of bipartisan bicameral congressional forums addressing various aspects of addiction. and the role of addiction to the special challenges faced by women by veterans by young addicts, and the collateral consequences when they arell in recovery, five forums we posted that brought together experts from different fields to come here from all around the country to highlight best practices and share success stories from their states. >> discussing the 4 ohms the

presiding officer and senator ayotte and clover char recognized. out of that was developed a working group of stakeholders from the public health community, behavioral health, treatment, recovery, law enforcement, the forms we informed us and the working group supported us to draft legislation that would be effective evidence -basedf a policiesctiv. the bill would do a great number of things.

expand prevention and educational experts particularly aimed at teams and caretakers and elderly folks, aging populations to prevent the abuse of opioid and heroin into treatment and recovery. addiction to sort probably for collaborating withthe collaborating with criminal justice stakeholders. and it would strengthen prescription drug monitoring programs to help states monitor and track the diversiongs t of prescribed drugs out of the proper and legitimate market and to help at-risk individuals get

access to the services that they need.cend they comprehensive addiction recovery act recognizes we have learned from science and experience promoting practices that we know workn best confront multiple facets of new epidemic sending the message that we understand that addiction is a disease, a public health crisis that requires more and than the enactment of stiffer criminal penalties.pr the tribe that road and now it was not a success. thi the bill has been endorsed the by 130 community organizations including the national council on behavioral health,

behavioral and betty ford foundation, national district attorneys association, national association of attorneys general, major county sheriff's, american collection association and many, many others. we had 38 other cosponsors than myself, and that number is climbing. as committed as i am i recognize that this was not enough. they will remain out of reach to many individuals, t communities, and 1st responders.

without adequate resources we will continue to spend billions of dollars elsewhere in economic and societal cost that would be avoidable if we get this right. >> proposed an amendmentdment b which proposes emergency epi amendments.

an additional $600 million to the department of justice, samsung and the cbc , much going to programs authorized in the comprehensive reduction recovery act which would not be the 1st time congress have the authorized emergency spending in this response to public health emergencies. when the swine flu epidemic hit taking 7,000 lives congress appropriatedhe

$2 billion on an emergency basis with broad support on both sides of the aisle. here in the latest year for which we have data account is 47,000. 47,000, 47,000,, 11,000 the swine flu, 47,000 in one year. so ii hope my colleagues will join me and senator shaheen and vote to support the comprehensive prediction comprehensive addiction andss recovery act but to also --

recovery is a hard but noble path.path. men and women who walk that path deserve support,, encouragement, and admiration. i thank my fellow sponsors. >> i think the chairman and ranking member for the commitment teefive tackling this epidemic and bringing this bill out of the judiciary committee without opposition and onto the floor where we hope we can

bring it across the finish line. letline. let me say i anticipate that we will have disagreement about the funding of the bill and will fight as hard as i cani can to make sure the bill is adequately funded.g but ii do not intend nor do i know anyone who intends to block the passage of the bill or interfere with it going into law over thee question of funding. people will have to check in with their own consciences and check in with the desires of the addiction recovery communities and their home states and constituents about what the right way to voters on giving adequate funding.

finally, let me close by thanking advocates. the families of people in recovery who support them and help them through their tough night days. b they do hard work of saving lives, and we would do well to honor them by passing this bill and seeing to it that it has adequate funding support. i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. >> mr. president,.

>> i believe a series of speakers will come up and address the issue. along statement. t

pregnant and have an f addiction.et it the current fiscal year and so that funding will be there for this, not just on principle. our support additional resources., the our gruesome the white

of and this legislation will help to reverse the terrible a trend of addiction. cara. i like it because it does provide additional funding but we are in such a crisis that i will supported.n i appreciate his commitmentwithe

we had companion legislation we worked together. and have give signals from the white house. that is what needs to be done. effective prevention. thank you for your indulgence i yield my time. mr.?

madam president? sorry about that. the presiding officer: the democratic leader. mr. reid: there was a day when that's all we did, but not so anymore. madam president, history won't madam president, history won't >> the democratic leader. >> there was a day that is all we did, but not anymore. madame president. say." history will not forget this misstep by senator grassley, the hawkeye, burlington iowa

that is what they said. oldest newspaper and this is an unprecedented decision by the senior senator from mayor. past the vote lauding service ordering casting votes was doing by refusing

to give president obama's supreme court nominee a meeting, hearing, vote swearing. this abdication epitomizes the work in the us. whatever they may have accomplished while the secondary.low remember, our job is here to vote. the stakes should not be higher. why? senate. because as judicially challenged he presides over one of the most prestigious committee's and the entire senate.

established 200 years ago. one of the original 11 standing, 20 decades past. broad history and president martin van buren, ted kennedy and bill biden from guarded at all costs from being manhandled. independent fact in the face of opposition from the president and civil leader. looked to the judicial committee. during the civil war the chairman of illinois and his 1 committee offered the 13th

amendment, abolish slavery. even the great president lincoln had trouble deciding what should be done. chairman for drafted the trust act that was big-time independent. chairman henry and church a democrat just like president roosevelt, yet they maintained against senate majority leader alvin

barkley long time united kentu states to standing up to the majority leader from kentucky. the accomplishments of the historical models against which the seniors file. if he keeps his current obstruction history will not be kind as tenure. long-held authority, but the sole purpose of weakening the presidency and obstructing the senate's work. turn to beturn to the

impartial regulation into an extension of the trump campaign. just last month he spoke at a rally in iowa, we have had this trend going this way and so we have annd opportunity to make america great. remember, you have had this training away from basic principles.principles. my friend would do well to look at his own committee as it turns away from basic principles that established government. that is what the senator said at the trump rally. even now he and his committee i wasting dollarsnths developing research that has

been going on for many, many months. just basic staff people. for months he blocked the o appointment of career foreign service officers. he held that up and people could not understand. it had nothing to do with secretary clinton. he has done his damage it's th more than eight months away but affecting every action taken, much more at stake.

with committee independence threatened by partisan politics and when the senate is undermined democracy is undermined. future generations will suffer irreparably. continues to do the biddingrk of the republican leader. worked for three decades, served a couple times in the house. my seat was way back they're i gave my 1st speech. i could not get past 1st base presiding on the senate was senator david pryor from arkansas chairman of the subcommittee. senator grassley was also listening to both contacted me and received a note from senator pryor.

when landmark legislation and ways of consent. the judiciary committee considers especially filling a vacancy in the supreme court. the senior senator outlined fo

promising republicans to restore the deliberative body the founders intended. the deliberative body, took the responsibility of vetting the nominees for lifetime appointments for federal judiciary very the the senior sen. from iowa is failing this commitment that he made himself. he made it. he made the commitment.eo c restore the senate. people who wrote the constitution.ld the 1st chair of the important committee to makemi the important step of meat, conduct hearings or hold the vote. call to refuse the

president's nominee.es. all people should no how important a vote is. my friend has a record of not missing roll call votes, but what good is that if you sweep the votes you do not like under the rug? it taints the achievement. don't hide. what good is a chairmanship? e weaken the senate and disrupt our constitutional system which is what it does.

stunning. hestunning. he worked in the senate. captures and i quote, managed to have performed its constitutional obligations for well over m four years. i feel nothing but shame at the fact that my senator will bring that unbroken history to an end. that was last week in the des moines register. i hope chairman does not continue down this path. if give the supreme court nominee a hearing and vote. if it is not, the hawkeye is

right. history will never forget this misstep. i yield the floor. >> book tv with 48 hours eight hours of nonfiction books and authors every weekend. >> for the 1st sentence of the book is the history of american conservatives is a story of this appointment betrayal. >> afterwards discussing the history of republican politics and why the right went wrong. interviewed by juan williams. coming up sunday in depth live with jane mayer. dark money. ..

polls closed an hour ago in vermont and virginia. 595 republican delegates up for grabs. 895 democratic delegates are at stake. early results hillary clinton looks like she will win in georgia and virginia. bernie sanders winning home state of vermont with 90% of the vote countied thus far, winning 90% of the vote. associated press saying donald trump will win in georgia. reminder too, get more election results, watch live presidential candidate speeches all of that happening now and all through the night on our companion network c-span. today in washington supreme