that sale to american victims of iranian-backed terror. after years of legal appeals, the victims look to be getting close to receiving this compensating. -- this compensation. of course, iran is the only criminal enterprise hiding behind american shell companies. other recently uncovered examples of enterprises hiding behind american shell companies include a mexican drug cartel using an oklahoma corporation to launder money through a horse farm; a crime syndicate setting up a web of corporations in eight states as part of a $100 million medicare fraud scheme; and a human trafficking ring based in moldova hiding their crimes behind anonymous corporations in kansas, missouri, and ohio.

according to the rhode island state police, corporate secrecy in my own state has complicated their investigations into real estate fraud, illegal prescription drug distribution and sales tax evasion. in january, just months before the panama papers hit the headlines, "60 minutes" aired a segment showing just how easy it can be for criminals to hide money in the united states. the program featured an investigator with the anticorruption organization global witness. that investigator pretended to represent a corrupt african leader, and "60 minutes" brought a hidden camera along into his meetings with lawyers in new york. the investigator presenting himself as representing the corrupt african leader made

clear that his client wanted help using suspicious funds to buy a mansion, a jet, and a yacht in the united states, and to hide his ownership of these assets. of the 16 lawyers who met with the undercover investigator, only one turned him away. it seems the others were comfortable helping a corrupt foreign official hide money in opaque american shell corporations. while the underlying criminal schemes may be colorful and complex, the answer to this shell corporation problem is simple and straightforward. the incorporation transparency and law enforcement assistance act would direct states to require applicants forming

corporations and limited liability companies to include basic information about the actual human beings who own the companies. the states would maintain and periodically update this information, and it would be available to law enforcement officers who present valid court-ordered subpoenas or search warrants. it's really simple. have each state keep track of who actually owns the companies they charter and ensure that that information is available for federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies through proper process. transparency in business ownership is not a novel idea. every member of the european union will be transparent by 2017. the united kingdom and the netherlands have even announced

plans to make their corporate owners registries available to the public. with the light of corporate transparency about to shine on criminal assets hidden in europe, their shell corporations won't be effective for these purposes. so that money will be looking for new dark homes. america should take swift action to make sure that these assets don't find new hidden homes in opaque american shell corporations. we are supposed to be an example to the world, not the place where the world's corrupt and the world's criminals hide their cash and their assets. the incorporation transparency and law enforcement assistance act enjoys broad support from the national law enforcement community, including the federal law enforcement officers

association, the fraternal order of police, the society of former special agents of the f.b.i., and the united states marshal service association as well as the rhode island state police. i ask unanimous consent to read my two remaining paragraphs. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. whitehouse: chuck canterbury, president of the national fraternal order of police explains it this way. "when we are able to expose the link between shell companies and drug trafficking, corruption, organized crime, and terrorist finance, the law enforcement community is better able to keep america safe from these illegal activities and to keep the proceeds of these crimes out of the u.s. financial system. of all places, mr. president, the united states shouldn't be a safe haven for criminals foreign or domestic, to hide their illegal assets.

we could take a simple, major step in fighting money laundering, financial fraud, and terrorist financing by passing this bill. i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to cosponsor it and to help us get it passed. i thank the chair, appreciate the extra time, and yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from arizona. mr. flake: it's been nearly nine -l months since the u.s. had an ambassador to mexico. the president's' nominee to that post, roberta jacobson, is eminently qualified as all of us know, to serve in that position. however, she's been waiting for the senate to confirm her since the foreign relations committee reported it, her confirmation to the senate in november of last year with a vote of 12-7. yesterday i took to the floor to talk about our important trade

relationship with mexico. that's not the only reason why finalizing this nomination is so critical. the united states and mexico's bilateral work on migration, security and border issues requires top-level leadership at our embassy in mexico city. it's critical for the u.s. to have an ambassador to ensure cooperation on border security issues and to identify threats to our national security. we continue to engage mexico in disrupting organized criminal networks that facilitate human trafficking. according to mexico's national migration institute, mexico apprehended more than 190,000 migrants in 2015, including nearly 19,000 unaccompanied minors, children, better known as u.a.c.'s. this is a significant increase from 2014 when 127,000 migrants, including just over 11,000

u.a.c.'s were apprehended. it's clear that these complex issues require top-level diplomacy, and we benefit from an experienced leader who can navigate the nuances of these regional relations. in addition to these migration issues, the u.s. and mexico need to address security challenges from transnational drug trafficking. as we hear all too often, we're witnessing an increase in heroin use leading to rising levels of violence and heroin-related deaths. now while the u.s. and mexico are cooperating on a strategy to fight heroin, this represents a priority that requires the leadership of an ambassador. now we need someone in place as our top diplomat in mexico with experience, with mexican security and with law and to engage the most senior mexican government officials on the narcotics issues.

in addition, there are specific ongoing cases that necessitate having an ambassador in place to ensure that our nation's interests are being represented. as i said yesterday, mexico represents one of our most important bilateral relationships. it's clear that the longer the u.s. goes without having an ambassador to mexico, the greater our partnership will suffer. there's simply no reason to go any longer without an ambassador to mexico when we have someone as qualified as roberta jacobson. now i come here with good news today. that is my understanding that a deal, an agreement is in the works that will ultimately lead to the successful confirmation later this week. now as such, i won't be making a unanimous consent request today, but i intend to come here as long as it takes to keep up the pressure and to monitor this process to ensure that it has a

successful resolution. i yield back. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. mr. coons: mr. president, i'd like to ask that proceedings

under the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. coons: mr. president, earlier this month, the governor of iran's central bank, dr. malila saif, spoke at the council on foreign relations here in washington, and he made three primary claims. first, he said that sanctions did not in fact lead iran to agree to the terms of the nuclear agreement between iran and the united states, united kingdom, france, germany, the e.u., russia and china. sanctions, he said, did not force iran to agree. second, he said iran's nuclear program has always been entirely peaceful. and third, he said that the united states and our european allies have not honored our commitments under the terms of the nuclear deal, also known as the jcpoa. i'd like to push back against all three of these claims. first on sanctions. governor saif said, and i quote -- "contrary to baseless allegations that some people made, sanctions did not and

could not force iran to engage into a negotiation with our p-5 plus 1 colleagues, the nations i referenced. u.s. sanctions have been a major feature of u.s. policy towards iran since iran's 1979 revolution. the imposition of international sanctions and worldwide bilateral sanctions on iran began in 2006 and increased dramatically in 2010. in june of 2010, congress passed the comprehensive iran sanctions accountability and divestment act also known as csada, which weakened iran's international sanctions and bolstered iran's human rights abuses. that same month with the support of not just our european allies but also russia and china, the obama administration and then-secretary of state hillary clinton led the passage of u.n. security council resolution 1929, which created the most

comprehensive and stinging international sanctions the iranian regime has ever faced. two years later, in 2012, the national defense authorization act designated the central bank of iran for additional sanctions, which the obama administration successfully used to undermine iran's ability to sell oil on world markets. the obama administration also convinced key allies such as japan, australia, south korea and canada to agree to additional bilateral measures that increased pressure on iran's financial, banking, insurance, transportation and energy sectors. the effects of these coordinated sanctions were clear, swift and direct. the value of the iranian currency decreased dramatically. obstacles to iranian trade forced businesses to close and increased inflation within iran. iran's oil exports and government revenues declined sharply. in 2011, for example, iran exported about

2.4 million barrels of oil per day. by march of 2014, iran exports were down to just one million barrels a day, in a nation for which petroleum makes up 80% of all commodity exports. in july of 2012, former iranian president mahmud ahmadinejed called the sanctions regime the most syria restrictions ever imposed on a country. the coordinated sanctions regime was so effective that iran's current president even described iran's economic situation as if the country had -- quote -- returned to the 19th century under the sanctions regime. so, mr. president, i think it's clear on this first point that sanctions imposed an unsustainable cost on iran and forced it to the stable to engage in associations with the west regarding its nuclear program. that brings me to his second erroneous argument, that iran has pursued nuclear technology with only peaceful purposes in

mind. iran's actions directly contradict this claim. in 2002, members of the international community revealed that iran had in fact been attempting to build a secret uranium enrichment facility at natan in central iran and a heavy water plutonium reactor at its iraq facility in the northwestern part of the country. only because iran failed to keep these facilities secret did the iaea or the international atomic energy agency finally begin having the opportunity to monitor these sites in 2002. in 2009, the united states, france and britain revealed the existence of another uranium enrichment plant buried deep under a mountain near the city of coman. the evidence continues, in 2011, the iaea released a report on the possible military dimensions of iran's nuclear efforts. the report detailed areas in which the agency had evidence of iran's past and potentially

ongoing work on nuclear weaponnization and the development of nuclear warheads for missile delivery systems. the iaea's final report on the possible military dimensions of iran's nuclear program issued in december of 2015 found that, and i wrote, a range of activities relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device were conducted in iran prior to the end of 2003 as a coordinated effort -- end quote. the report also found that iran conducted certain activities relevant to nuclear weaponization for at least several years after 2003 and that some of these activities didn't end until 2009. it's not just on the ground reports and secret nuclear facilities that suggest that iran's nuclear efforts have not always been entirely peaceful. let me remind my colleagues that just last month, iran tested a ballistic missile that supposedly had a message on its side proclaiming in hebrew -- quote -- israel must be wiped

off the earth, an iranian regime that continues to advocate for the destruction of israel, america's vital ally israel, does not sound like a nation that has been and hopes to continue to develop nuclear technology for anything remotely peaceful. an iranian regime that ships illicit weapons to support the murderous regime of bashar assad in syria or the houthi rebels in yemen or the hezbollah in lebanon is not seeking to develop weapons for peaceful purposes, and an iranian regime that illegally tests dangerous ballistic missile technology, some of which is capable of carrying a nuclear weapon, all of which violates u.n. security council resolutions, does not have peaceful intention. mr. president, because of this behavior, we have every reason to distrust iran's claims that its nuclear efforts were always peaceful. iran continually misled the international community about the nature of its nuclear

program, and it continually disguised its efforts to conduct research and other activities to help it better understand how to develop a nuclear weapon. it continues to threaten israel, to test ballistic missiles and to support terrorism throughout the middle east. that's why i simply can't accept saif's argument that iran's nuclear program has always been entirely peaceful. the third claim made by saif last week as that the united states and our european allies have not honored our obligations under the nuclear deal known as the jcpoa. iran's evidence for this claim is that the sanctions relief granted to iran for complying with the terms of the agreement hasn't suddenly unleashed a flurry of iranian economic activity, but as adam zubin, our own department of treasury's acting under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence recently put it, throughout the negotiations between the united states and our allies and partners and iran, the u.s. and our allies -- quote -- did not guarantee

economic outcomes or a flood of immediate business into iran -- end quote. enacting under secretary zubin is right. iran is responsible for making iran an attractive, safe place to do business, and for many individuals and businesses, iran appears neither attractive nor safe. for example, in october, iran arrested ciamak namazi, a businessman who is a dual iranian citizen. he previously ran a consulting business in iran. he still has not been charged. in fact, the only recent development in mr. namazi's case, is that his father, aquir, an 80-year-old man who suffers from heart problems was arrested in february and sent to a notorious prison fnlt why would iranian leaders expect foreign investment to flow into their country when it arbitrarily arrests and detains those

seeking business opportunities for their own country? and it's not just iranian's flawed legal system or its ongoing human rights violations. more than half of iran's economy consists of shadowy organizations controlled in part by the iranian revolutionary guard corps, the irgc, the hard-line military force committed to the preservation of the iranian regime. the pseudoprivate entities that are tied to the irgc includes banks, businesses, religious foundations, pension funds and welfare projects that also service front companies for the irgc. during his question and answer session at the council on foreign relations, mr. saif was asked whether foreign businesses considering investing in iran or doing business with iran could be confident that money invested in iran would not fund the irgc. he was unable to declare definitively that it would not. mr. president, the onus, the burden is on iran, not the international community or the

united states. to reform iran's domestic economy and to make sure its businesses are not linked to the irgc, to make it a country transparent and open and to engage in actions that suggest to the world it is a trustworthy partner. the burden is on iran to comply with the jcpoa. the burden is on iran to stop testing ballistic missiles, abusing human rights and supporting terrorism. if iran is unhappy with the level of economic relief it has received since this agreement came into effect, it only has its own actions to blame. as acting under secretary zubin put it -- quote -- the jcpoa, the nuclear deal, is an international arrangement, not a cashier's check. mr. president, i commend dr. zaif for his willingness to travel to the united states and to make his case in front of our council on foreign relations. i think this is a constructive step. but as i've shown, i think the case he made is a weak one.

the evidence is clear a coordinated sanctions regime did in fact force iran to negotiate, and iran's nuclear program was not entirely peaceful in its intent or execution. and the u.s. and e.u. aren't holding the iranian economy back. the iranian government is. the iranian government's actions are. in my travels throughout the middle east and in conversations with regional leaders and ambassadors here, it's apparent these nations all share one overriding concern -- iranian aggression. this challenge unites countries as diverse as israel, turkey, saudi arabia, and the united arab emirates. as my colleagues may have seen in an op-ed in in "the washingn post" just last week, iranian foreign minister muhammad zarif sought to justify recent steps iran has taken to dramatically build up its defenses. mr. president, countries do indeed have a right to self-defense, but there is a difference between self-defense efforts undertaken by responsible members of the

international community and some of iran's recent aggressive and destabilizing actions. responsible nations don't support terrorist groups throughout the middle east and stoke sectarianism to undermine the security of their neighbors. responsible nations don't directly threaten the destruction of israel. responsible nations seek common ground and the pursuit of mutual interest with their neighbors. res -- responsible neighbors abide by u.n. security council resolutions. iran's actions make it clear it is not yet a responsible member of the international community. if iran then has complaints about the relief it's received under this agreement, it should move its behavior and begin to uphold its commitment under the deal while changing the dangerous aspect of its ongoing behavior. yet instead iran continues to try and dominate its region, a valuable reminder that we must continue to enforce the terms of the jcpoa strictly and push back on iran's bad behavior that's

outside the parameters of the agreement. while i commend the obama administration for its recent actions interdicting illicit arms shipment from iran to the houthis continuing to designate irgc length entities and taking other critical steps to push back on iran's bad behavior and destabilizing activities in the region, i also remain concerned about the administration's willingness to entertain iranian complaints about sanctions relief. i urge the united states and our allies to remain cautious in our dealings with iran. we must remember the most important contract with iran is the one we've already agreed to. that is this nuclear deal. and we must continue to remind iran that its own behavior is the real cost of its continuing international isolation. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask that the quorum call being dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent that the appointment at the desk appear separately in the record as if made by the chair. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 39, s. res. 368.

the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 368 supporting efforts by the government of colombia to pursue peace and so forth. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. mr. mcconnell: i further ask the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid on the table, with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: now, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 400, s. res. 383. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 400, s. res. 383, recognizing the importance of the united states-israel economic relationship and encouraging new areas of cooperation. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding? without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the purdue amendment to the resolution be agreed to, the resolution, as amended, be agreed to, the perdue amendment to the preamble

be agreed to, the premium preamble, as amended, be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid on the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate now proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following senate resolutions, which were submitted earlier today: s. res. 444, s. res. 445, s. res. 446. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 444, honoring the life and achievements of prince. senate resolution 445, recognizing the 100th anniversary of coast guard aviation and so forth. s. res. 446, designating april 2016 as national 911 education month. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measures en bloc? without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the resolutions be agreed to, the preambles be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid on the table en bloc.

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

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. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today it adjourn until 10:00 a.m. thursday, april 28. following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour 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 be in a period of morning business for one hour with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. further, that following morning business the senate then resume consideration of h.r. 2028.

finally, that the cloture motion with respect to the motion to proceed to h.r. 2577 be withdrawn. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: if there is no further business to come before the senate i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until c. mr. alexander: i ask that the quorum call be vitiated. the >>

>> we will vote on the energy and water appropriations bill. most of what we have to say at this plate is very good news this is the first appropriations bill in the year the earliest appropriation's bill acted upon since 1974. go into regular order it will be the first energy appropriations bill since to 2009 and many senators have contributed policy suggestions and amendments umbel sides in addition to that on the floor we have 18 amendments that we will now move to the process ofth resolution of the bill. the final solution of the bill. expecta i believe the bill was put on the floor because senator feinstein has a history of working together with the

expectation to find a way to do that. let me say the problem and i will leave time for senator feinstein or others who may want to say something. at issue is an amendment and offered by senator cotton. he did that after the administration made anra announcement over the weekend they would be purchasing heavy water from iran.ru heavy water by itself is just water it doesn't hurt anybody and isn't dangerous it is distilled. it is used primarily for scientific instruments and other scientific reasons and it could be used also asis part of the agreement between united states and iran led to characterize

that amendment will do two things one is no appropriated funds to buy more heavy water the second was to do something about putting a rand -- are everyone into selling water with those applications for our own national security. this is the decision by u.s. department of energy that was announced over the weekend without notification to the chairman of the foreign relations committee or the intelligence community so we have unitedr states senate who says this is an issue of a bite to do something about and then to raise objections on the design especially senator feinstein that i have the- greatest respect so talking

to the democratic leaders, may i see if theyuse in t will find that acceptable? so in the appropriations process to not blow that up to put on the clean water amendment and then let to veto the comeback. so this year we talked to the democratic leaders and we all agreed let's have the appropriations process and they said no controversial writers sit in committee so be persuaded many senators to be the controversial amendment of the bill in committee to say you can bring them up on the floor if you can get 60 votes it goes in in the bill.

is the president doesn't like that he can veto. here we are in the early process of april now i understand the democratic minority will block us from going forward i will say this mr. president. i think senator cotton has acted responsibly as soon as he knew it has listened to the objections from the other side and has amended his own bill to be adopted by voice vote and has modified. export he has taken apart completely to limit american businesses to get the export licenses for every - - - heavy water from iran and

the part that says you cannot use 2017 many but the t department can use the prior year and revolving fund money so i think that is a reasonable step and i would ask the democratic leaderp and those for whom have great respect but let's keep talking about this because this is the constitutionalat framework of power of the united states senate to do the job and senators should be allowed to offer the major amendments with anre objection on the other side to say 60 though it's sort of voice vote or i modify my

amendment and that is the way the process works if we don't do this we will add up with the omnibus bill of toon much spending and then the president will have to veto have and that is in the process that turns respect for the american people. >> mr. president. >> majority leader. >> i have deep disrespect for the senator from tennessee. he is my friend and senator feinstein who figuring now the democratic politics but i have some reservation from

the senior senator from tennessee talking about the appropriation bill and i love my service in thede appropriations committee. over the last eight years republicans have done everything they could to mess up the appropriation process. clotu everyone should know thery senate we didn't ask that cloture motion with a candidate on everything we have done. so i would suggest to my friend that if there is some proposal republicans want to come back with the world

history on this bill.ere has b i get it. just everything is germane. it is a big and important sidetk bill and with the senator from arkansas has to have an effort to sidetrack. hoping that it doesn't last s that long but is where we are. but we have tried hour best. so i suggest to my friend from tennessee to see what happens if we have had many

occasions the last 24 hours as he stood before this amendment was offered. >> mr. president. >> the senator from arkansas >> can speak for up to 10 minutes? >> objections? iran without objection. >> i asked the senator from tennessee the administration after purchasing heavy water from iran but they propose this amendment which is to read to the bill. i've offered to give of voice vote so they don't oursi records show and also a 60 evoked the threshold for those who do not believe united states taxpayer should be subsidized the heavy water industry. this morning the senator

said i offered to revise my amendment but here we are the democrats will vote no on cloture that is not pending it is not included. i will not see appropriations process end and i will pass the bill and move on to the next appropriations bill in committed to working in goodr faith with the senator from tennessee or california to move forward in orderly fashion to pass appropriations bills as welle as ensure the united states taxpayer is non subsidizing a critical component of the nuclear industry that i will add we are not required to do with the nuclear agreement with iran. >> madam president may i

speak prior to the cloture vote? >> objection? without objection. >> we have the democratic leader on the floor and the chairman of the energy water -- energy subcommittee i want them to know so the order deterioration and then to go back to regular order. so i have watched them lose w prestige over the years i have watched something happen that has never happened in the early years as members would vote for a a bill and then cannot to sustain on the floor than

the appropriations committee gained prestige and honor so the ability of senator alexander and myself to try to restore that order by sitting down hook to put together a bill so we can call that successfully perd hour is the big deal the end kid change the nature of this body. so we can get the job done. that is so amicable and positive ago to the lighthouse in and pick up the phone to call the chief of staff.

but if this is the amendment it may affect the heroinl deal of late to do with the administration's position is. wor and the word comes back that the administration will veto this bill if they are ghana. -- donna. with and how this all come about so it understated the administration's problem because it destroys something we are trying to do with the iran agreement famiy to show a legal pathway to proceed to go before the family of nations and a moderate way.ection. i now he believes to takee

iran in another direction to propose an earlier plan to as ambassador to the united nations. >> your time is expired. >> may i ask for additional time? >> objections? >> without objection. >> to make a long story short. this body discusses the joint agreement did we agree that a president should go ahead to implement this agreement and now there are problems because iran is emerging wanting to come h into the family of nations. they had to get the heavy water out sitting in the store room canada has sold

heavy water to eyases it is used for peaceful purposes for fiber-optic says, medical research and many in to improve fiberoptic says in that kind of thing for their car. of those moving proliferations and suddenly on energy alien and water bill. d to believe we have though is to not enter into cloture at this time.

it is very deep regret i don't want it to end this way but to continue to work together so we truly believe it is more in the interest of this country we can do appropriation bills with regular order obols sides of the aisle and then the value of this amendment. so why can that be left for another day? s so why kiwi do -- have the ability in this house thatt doesn't have a poison pill to set the example for future bills? this is the bill that was supposed to do that. been maybe he doesn't understand.ill.

i have waited for plenty of times because somebody said you're overwhelmed with the bills.ppening. why destroy our tubes is? to have chairman alexander to know how very sad i am aware at this point. bil to say cloture is nott granted and to work to try to get a bill but i would so i appreciate it if the new member could recognize to say all of which i admit the

what you are doing will disturb the efforts to have those appropriations bills without the poison-pill writers and i predict there will be more.duce and our effort beginning with the democratic leader to put together a process to produce a bill. please mr. senator. think about that. thank you very much. d >> the senator from tennessee. we're not debating the iran agreement. this is indeed a part of the bill.t i

the senator has filed an amendment that could be part of the bill of the senate decides to adopt them after cloture. and then over the weekend u.s. department of energy from anybody in the senate without the intelligence arm services and those to introduce the amendment my under standing the way it is0 supposed to work in the issue is important sometimes we win and sometimes we lose. votes

it is a difficult issue for us. vote tsa i will take 60 votes for about and under parliamentary rules. and then to say i will modify the amendment and with the export license that is the second sentence of this simple amendment we will reserve up for discussion by other committees so all the amendment says is accused monday from this fiscal year to buy heavy water from iran except department of energy that has billions of dollars from other years to do that.