quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: madam 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 the chair lay before the senate the house message accompanying s. 524.

the presiding officer: the cleachair lays before the senata message from the house of representatives, which the clerk will report. the clerk: resolve, that the house insist upon its amendments to the bill s. 524 entitled "an act to authorize the attorney general to award grants to address the national epidemics of prescription opioid abuse and heroin use" and ask a conference with the senate on the disagreeing votes of the two houses thereon. mr. mcconnell: i move that the senate disagree to the amendments of the house, agree to the request by the house for a conference and the presiding officer appoint the following conferees: senators grassley, alexander, hatch, sessions, leahy, murray, and wyden. the presiding officer: the motion is now pending. mr. mcconnell: i understand is a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture.

the clerk: cloture motion: we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on on the motion to disagree to the house amendments, agree to the request from the house for a conference, and the presiding officer a point the following conferees: you senators grassley -- mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the reading phs names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. pursuant to rule 28, there will now be up to two hours of debate equally divided in the usual form. mr. portman: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. portman: madam president, i want to start by commending the majority leader, who just came to the floor and offered a motion to go to conference on cara. that's the comprehensive addiction and recovery act. this is an incredibly important piece of legislation because it will allow the united states congress to be a better partner in fighting against this heroin and prescription drug epidemic

that is seizing our communities. the and this is a big step today because it sthais we're going to send a few senators over to work with the house to come up with a consensus bill between cara, which passed in this body on march 10 -- by the way, by a 94-1 vote; that never happens around here, and it happened because after two and a half weeks of debate on the floor, everybody realized this was an issue that had to be addressed and that the legislation we came up with was a sensible and responsible way to do it. it was legislation we developed over a three-year period. senator whitehouse and i were the lead on it. we had experts come in from around the country, we took the best ideas regardless of where they came from and came up with a way to deal with the prevention and education aspect of this, to keep people from getting into the fun of addiction in the first place, but then to treat addiction like the disease it is and get people into the recovery and treatment services they need, and to help

our law enforcement with regard to narcan, a naloxone, which helps to stop the overdose deaths and also we helped to get the prescription drugs off of people's shelves and avoid people from getting into opioid addiction sometimes inadvertently through a prescription drug overprescribing. so this is a bill that actually addresses the problem in a responsible way. it is comprehensive. the house then passed its own legislation. it passed 18 separate bills, smaller bills, not as comprehensive, but which included some good ideas that were not in the senate bill. one, for instance, raising the cap on doctors who are treating people with suboxone. some of those ideas should be incorporated as well. but the point is we've got to move and move quickly. you think about this: iring's since the senate passed its legislation on march 10, we have seen roughly 129 people a day lose their lives to overdoses. so many thousands of americans have lost their lives, even

since march 10. this legislation takes the right step to address that problem and not to address just those who have overdosed and died but those who are casualties of this epidemic, who have therefore lost their job, lost their family, lost their ability to be aiblg function -- able to function. the drugs become everything, and this does cause families to be torn apart. it does cause crime. when i talk to prosecutors in my state, they tell me that most of the crime -- in one county recently a county prosecutor told me 80% of the crime is due to this heroin and prescription drug epidemic. so this is one that we must address for so many reasons. we must address it right away. so i'm pleased that we are finally appointing conferees. i hope that the other side wouldn't consider blocking this because we need to move on with this, to get this legislation to the president's desk. we have been talking with the house about their legislation,

which was passed subsequent to our legislation, and talking about how to make some of these compromises to be able to come up with a consensus bill. i think we're very, very close, and again i think there are soe ideas in the house that we should incorporate and i think there are some ideas in the senate bill. and one is with regard to the recovery services. the best recover services are turn people's lives around. for those in the people, they will tell you it is not just about the medicated-assisted treatment. it is about the longer-term recovery. then on the prevention side, we have more focus on prevention. a national awareness campaign to get people again focused on this issue of the link between prescription drugs and the dangers there, the narcotic prescription drugs and the opioid addiction issue. i can't tell you how sad it is to talk to parents back home who have lost a child because that

child started on prescription drugs -- in two case cases, i cn tell you about parents who have come to talk to me -- one testified at a hearing we had back in cleveland, ohio. two cases where the teenager went in to get a wisdom tooth extracted and was given painkillers, prescription drugs, and from that became addicted and from that went to heroin, and from that, sadly, had an overdose and died. so this awareness, i think, is incredibly important because most people don't realize that four out of five heroin addicts in ohio started on prescription drugs. that awareness campaign alone will save so many lives and create the opportunity for us to keep people out of that funnel of addiction in the first place. the grip of addiction is so strong that once you're in it, it's a huge challenge, but it's one that can be overcome with the right kind of treatment and recovery. so again, i'm pleased that the majority leader came to the floor today to actually begin this process of the formal conference to get this bill to

the president's desk and more importantly to get this bill out to our communities so it can begin to help and begin to turn the tide. i.t. not getting better. i wish i could say it was. but when i talk to people who are staffing the hotlines back home, they tell me, unfortunately, there's more calls coming in. when i talk to people in our hospitals back home, they tell me, unfortunately, there are more babies born with addiction who are showing up in the neonatal units. a 750% increase in my state of ohio in babies born addiction. just in the last dozen years. unfortunately, when i talk to people about the emergency room -- i talked to an emergency room nurse last weekend. i was at a festival. a nurse came up to me and i heard the same thing i've heard many times. you've got to do something about this. more and more people are coming to our emergency rooms seeking help. it is creating an issue in terms of jobs and employment of course because people who are addicted often are not able to work,

cannot hold down a job and cannot pass a drug test. so it's affecting our economy in so many ways. and of course affecting our families and ultimately it's about individuals not being able to pursue their god-given purpose in life because these drugs get them offtrack. cara passed here in the senate by a 94-1 vote. there is common ground here among republicans and democrats alike. this is not a partisan issue. it never has been. from the start, over the last few years we have worked together. we worked with the house, not just bipartisan but bicameral, to put together legislation that both chambers could support. there are about 129 house members who are cosponsors of the legislation that passed the senate. we took ideas from the house and the senate initially and this is why i am a little frustrated, frankly, we haven't made more progress already. now is the time to move. let's get this done before july 4. let's get it done next week. let's get it to the president, to our communities. there's no reason for us to

wait. with this step today of the formal naming of the conferees, there is no reason for us not to move forward with this. and move forward with it in a way that shows we can 0 work together as the house and senate to solve these profnlts some have said, well, there might be some other ideas that will come up. that's fine. i hope there will be lots of new ideas that will come up because there's no sill remember bullet -- silver bullet. but we know this legislation will help. we know it's comprehensive, well-thought-out, based on best practices. let's move forward on this because it is urgent. one american every 12 minutes loses his or her life to overdoses. since cara passed, this means more than 11,000 americans have died of overdoses. so since march 10 when this legislation passed on the senate floor, 11,000 americans lost their lives. and again, it doesn't include the hundreds of thousands more who have affected in such fundamental ways. people back home get this.

when i was on a tele-town hall meeting recently one of my constituents called in, started talking about the legislation, the cara legislation, the importance of more funding for evidence-based treatment that works. and there was something about the way he was describing t i could tell this was person african-american so i said, sir, are you tell us why you know so much about this and why you're 10 interested in and there was a pause. and i knew it was coming because i heard it too many times before. he explained that he had lost his daughter. she had been in and out of treatment programs, had relapsed, had been in prison and out. she finally decided that she was ready, that she wanted to accept a treatment program to be able to turn her life around. she was in a position to do so. they took her to a treatment center to get treatment and there was a waiting list. and during the time that she was on that waiting list -- i believe it was 14 days -- was when they found her.

she had overdosed. and his point was very simple. you can imagine the emotion on the call. but his point was very simple. when someone is ready to seek treatment, we need to have treatment available for them. we're told that eight out of ten heroin addicts, nine out of ten people overall are not seeking treatment who need it. some of that's because of the stigma associated with addiction. we need to wipe that stigma away to get people into treatment. some of it is because there is not the availability of treatment. in some parts of ohio and some of our rural areas there is no effective treatment available. in some of our urban areas where there is good treatment available and some amazing places that are doing incredible work, they do have a waiting list at some of them. we also have a waiting list with regard to some of the longer-term recovery centers, residential centers in ohio. that again is helped by this legislation. we also have difficulty with some of our detox areas in some of our areas in ohio where there

is not enough room so the police don't know where to take people to get them started in this pro. we hear stories constantly back home in ohio about this issue because sadly we're one of the states that's hardest hit. we're top five in the country in kwro*edz. -- overdoses. in fentanyl overdoses we may be number one. people say is it about prescription drugs or heroin? it's about the drugs. if it's not heroin, it may be fentanyl. if it's not fentanyl, next year it may be something else. it may go back to methamphetamines. it may be cocaine. it's about the drugs. we can't take our eye off this issue. fentanyl, by the way, is produced synthetically. it is usually in the mail, mailed mostly from ohio. our experience, it's coming from china to the united states, made by chemists who don't care about our kids, our citizens because

they're making this deadly poison. sometimes it's mixed with heroin. sometimes it's put into a pill form to try to indicate that it might be a prescription drug pill which people might think is more safe, which is obviously not. this fentanyl is causing more deaths in my hometown of cincinnati and in cleveland, ohio, than heroin these days. you hear stories like nicholas tekilo of cleveland, ohio. nicholas was a bright young man, a gifted musician. he had a full scholarship to northeastern university. northwestern university. his father died of a heroin overdose when he was a child. two decades later nick became a heroin addict himself after experimenting with it with a friend. it was an an experiment and he got addicted. and i hope people who are listening today understand this is something you cannot play with. you're playing with fire. he soon realized he made a tragic mistake. he said -- and i quote -- "heroin took me to the depths of

hell." then his mother celeste died of a heroin overdose in january. that experience motivated nick to get clean. he made a promise to himself he would not suffer the tpaeult of both of his parents. after his mother died he was homeless. he tried quitting cold turkey. that didn't work. he wasn't able to do it. most heroin prescription drug addicts are not. he sought help. he sought treatment. he was clean for two months. i'm just starting to like myself again, he said. i have a whole lot more life to live. i have a whole lot more i want to do. i don't want to become another statistic. but then sadly he relapsed. he overdosed. he was found dead with a needle in his arm on may 4 in west cleveland, ohio. memorial services are being held for him in cleveland this week. that's what's happening in northeast ohio. in southwest ohio, a woman arrested by the cincinnati police pled guilty last week to

repeatedly trafficking her own 11-year-old daughter to her 42-year-old drug dealer in exchange for heroin. sadly she even gave this girl, her 11-year-old daughter, heroin. so you get the picture. this is not in one zip code. this is not in one community. it knows no zip code. it knows our rural areas, in our inner cities. it's affecting every person regardless of their station in life, regardless of their background. no one is i immune from it. ohioans know this is happening and they're taking action, and that's positive. terry thompson founded a group called ohio moms against heroin and i commend her for it. she's got seven kids and five of them have been addicted to heroin at one point or another over the past 20 years. they're from a middle-class ohio home. one son went to prison. over the next year 12 of his peers died of heroin overdoses.

terry's youngest daughter, a soccer player and talented piano player made the mistake of trying heroin with her boyfriend. she became addicted. the one of her brothers encouraged her to get treatment too. she did and now she's living a sober life, clean life and productive life. some 700 ohio moms joined terry's group. we already know they have been saving people. they tell me a story about one woman who contacted the group when she needed treatment. terry picked her up, drove her to detox. the woman has been clean for nearly three months and back on track. on june 18 terry will be rallying and marching in findlay, ohio, to indicate people that addiction is a disease that needs to be treated. i commend her and want to thank her. she is a brave woman channeling her grief toward something constructive and that is helping others avoid this disease. in my hometown of cincinnati the

center for addiction and treatment known as the cat house announced a $5.7 million capital campaign to construct a new 17,000 square foot building to address the opioid epidemic. this will triple their capacity to be able to treat more patients. they'll be able to treat about 6,000 patients. they do great work. they have had great successes. construction has already begun. it's expected to be completed within a year. i want to thank everyone who made that possible including the folks at the cat house, but also the state of ohio, the city of cincinnati, deaconess health association and bethesda, inc. a former law school dean who is a friend of mine has been speaking out about this epidemic, writing in the cincinnati enquirer -- and i quote -- "there is no more urgent need in our community than to address this drug scourge. i want to thank him for doing his part in helping lend his voice to those who don't have a voice. madam president, i know the scope much this epidemic can sometimes feel overwhelming, and i know the way i've talked about

it today it's got to be frustrating for everybody hearing it. what are the solutions? how can we get at this? but we know that there is hope. we know that prevention can work. if it's the right kind of prevention, if it's focused and targeted. we know that treatment and recovery can work. i've just given you examples of that. it's got to be evidence-based, it's got to be stuff that we are funding here because it works, not just because we want to throw more money at a problem. reggie gant was a married father of three, he had a good job. he tore his rotator cuff. he was in pain. his doctor prescribed percocet for the pain. he became addicted. when his doctor stopped filling his prescription, he started buying them off other people in the doctor's waiting room. when the pills weren't available or were too expensive, which is often the problem, for these prescription drug addicts who turn to heroin, he switched to heroin. it was less expensive and more

available. he was trapped in the funnel of addiction and the drugs became everything. he lost his relationship with his wife and kids. he started stealing from his workplace. i did things i never thought i would do in a million years, he said. as i said earlier, the drugs are everything. but he got treatment, spending 40 days at an in-paeurbtd -- patient facility he's been clean for six months. he's getting help from the lie in a drug abuse -- lima drug abuse outreach program. he was able to step forward and get treatment. it was there for him. people can beat this and they do every day. madam president, experts tell us nine out of ten who need treatment aren't getting it. some of that is because of the stigma, some because of lack of access to facilities in their communities. this house effort that was undertaken with 18 separate bills combined with the senate bill, cara, will make a difference. it will provide more help for the type of treatment programs

and recovery efforts that can work. if we can get this comprehensive bill to the president we can help give people more hope. it is time to being the a and act quickly to find common ground before we lose more of our fellow americans. let's get this comprehensive bill into law and begin to help those millions of our fellow citizens who are struggling with this epidemic. thank you, madam president. i yield back my time.

the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cruz: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cruz: madam president, our nation is at war. five das ago, we saw a

horrific -- five days ago, we saw a horrific terror attack in orlando, florida. from september 11 to the boston marathon, from fort hood to chattanooga, from san bernadino to this attack in orlando, radical islamic terrorism has declared jihad on america. as the facts have unfolded, it now indicates that the orlando terrorist has pledged his allegiance to isis in the process of murdering 49 and wounding more than 50 at a nightclub. all of us, our hearts go out to those who were murdered, to the families of those who were victims and who are grieving, we stand in solidarity, we lift them up in prayer at this horrific act of terrorism. but it is also a time for action. we need a commander in chief who

will speak the truth, who will address the enemy we face, who will unleash the full force and fury of the american military on defeating isis and defeating radical islamic terrorists. in the wake of the attack, many of us predicted what would unfold, and it was sadly the same political tale we have seen over and over again. many of us predicted that democrats would as a matter of rigid partisan ideology, refusing even to say the words radical islamist terrorist. that they would suggest this attack is yet another isolated incident, one lone criminal not connected to any global ideology, not connected to any global jihad, and that even worse they would try to use it as an excuse to go after the second amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.

madam president, i wish when we predicted that that we had been proven incorrect, but this week played out all too predictably. yesterday, we saw a political show on the senate floor. democrat after democrat standing for hours incensed, not at isis, incensed, not at radical islamic terrorism. incensed that americans have a right to keep and bear arms. this is political distraction. this is political gamesmanship. and i think the american people find it ridiculous that in response to an isis terror attack, the democrats go on high dungeon that we've got to prestrict the second amendment rights of law-abiding citizens. this is not a gun control issue. this is a terrorism issue. and it is nothing less than political gamesmanship for them to try to shift for their

favorite hobby horse of taking away the bill of rights from law-abiding citizens. i have spent years defending the second amendment, the right to keep and bear arms, the constitution and the bill of rights, and i along with you, madam president, along with a great many members of this chamber, are committed to defending the constitutional rights of every american. you don't defeat terrorism by taking away our guns. you defeat terrorism by using our guns. and this body should not be engaged in a political circus trying to restrict the second amendment. instead, we should be focusing on the problem at hand. why did we see yesterday's series of speeches? because senate democrats have an election coming up in november. and they don't want to talk about the real issue. let's talk about isis. let's talk about radical islamic terrorism. let's talk about the failures of the last seven years of this administration to keep this

country safe. now, in response to my criticism and that of many others, president obama gave a press conference where he said, echoing the words of hillary clinton, what difference does it make if we call it radical islamic terrorism? well, mr. president, it makes a world of difference because the failure to address the enemy impacts every action taken to fight that enemy, and i want to talk in particular about three areas where this administration and the senate democrats' refusal to confront radical islamic terrorism has made america less safe and what we need to do about it. let's start with prevention. over and over again, we have seen the obama administration having ample information to stop a terrorist attack, and yet because of the political correctness, because of the ideology of this administration

that won't even say the word jihad, won't even say the words radical islamic terrorism, they look the other way and the attacks go forward. in my home state of texas, fort hood, nadal hasan, the obama administration knew that nadal hasan had been in communication with a radical islamic cleric. the obama administration knew that hasan had appeared al-alaki about the permissibility of waging jihad against his fellow soldiers. all of that was known beforehand, and yet they did nothing. they did nothing, and on that fateful day, nadal hasan murdered 14 immigrant souls, yelling "aluha akbar" as he pulled the trigger. and yet, just to underscore the blindness of this administration, even after the terror attack, the

administration insisted on characterizing that terror attack as -- quote -- workplace violence. that is nothing short of delusion, and it's a delusion that cost 14 lives. if we know of a u.s. service member who is communicating with a radical islamic. the cleric and asking about waging jihad against his fellow soldiers, m.p.'s should show up at that individual's door within minutes. and if we didn't have an administration that plunged its head in the sand like an ostrich and refused to acknowledge radical islamic terrorism, nadal hasan would have been stopped before he carried out that horrific act of terrorism. likewise, the boston bomber. the zrarnaev brothers. the f.b.i. had gone and

interviewed them. and yet once again, they dropped the ball. they stopped monitoring them, so they didn't even note when the elder brother posted on youtube a public call to jihad. now, mind you, this was not requiring complicated surveillance. this was youtube. anyone with a computer who could type in google to see this. and yet because the administration will not acknowledge that we're fighting radical islamic terrorism, they were not watching and monitoring the tzarnaev brothers, so when they called for public jihad, they then carried out that public jihad with pressure cookers at the boston marathon. yet another example where we knew about the individual beforehand, and if we had focused prevention on the problem, we could have stopped it. a third example was san bernadino. san bernadino, that horrific terror attack. once again, we had ample information about the

individuals in question. the female terrorist who came to san bernadino had given the administration a fake address in pakistan, and yet the so-called vetting that this administration tells us they do had failed to discover that it was a fake address. she had made calls for jihad, and yet the administration failed to discover that. in san bernadino, we saw yet another horrific terror attack. and how about orlando? let's talk about what the facts are in orlando. now, we're only five days in. the facts will develop further as they're more fully developed, but here is what's been publicly reported. what's been publicly reported is that omar mateen was interviewed not once, not twice but three times by the f.b.i. in 2013 and 2014. that one of the reasons why he was interviewed by the f.b.i. was because he was talking in

his place of employment, which ironically, which shockingly enough was a contractor to the department of homeland security, and he was talking about being connected to terrorist organizations including the boston bombers. now, to any rational person, that is a big red flag. and yet it's also been reported that his co-workers were afraid to say anything because they didn't want to be labeled as somehow anti-muslim by speaking out about someone claiming to be connected to radical islamic terrorists. we also know that when he was questioned by the f.b.i. in 2014, according to public reports, it was because he was believed to have been connected to a new monar abu sahha who traveled to syria to join the organization al-nusra france, and became the first known suicide bomber in the syrian

conflict. now that, madam president, is another big red flag. if you're palling around with al-nusra suicide bombers, that ought to be a real flag. if the administration is focused on radical islamic terrorism, this is an individual we ought to be watching. we know that mateen, as it's been reported, traveled to mecca in saudi arabia for ten days in march, 2011, and for eight days in march, 2012. and we also have indications that the f.b.i. may have been aware that he was a follower of the islamist educational web site run by a radical imman. and not only that, that his father had posted videos online expressing not only sympathy but arguably support for the taliban. all of that is what the obama administration knew. and yet, by sunday morning, they

were no longer watching omar mateen. they were no longer watching omar mateen. they were not monitoring him, and he was able to go in and commit a horrific act of murder. the question that every member of this body should be asking is why is the ball being dropped over and over and over again? it's not once, it's not twice, it is a pattern. it is a pattern of failing to connect the dots, and i would suggest, madam president, it is directly connected to president obama and this administration's refusal to acknowledge what it is we're fighting. if you direct the prevention efforts to stopping radical islamic terrorism, you know what? we had all the information we need on mateen to keep a very close eye on him. and yet if that's not what you're fighting, then you close the investigation and yet another attack goes forward. i would suggest that this

willful blindness is one of the reasons why we saw the circus yesterday on the senate floor. senate democrats should be asking these questions, and yet we don't hear them asking those questions. instead, they want to shift this to gun control. they want to shift this to putting the federal government in charge of approving every firearms transaction between law-abiding citizens in america. mind you that would not have prevented this attack. mind you it was not directed at the evil of this attack. mind you it ignores the global jihad we're facing but it is a convenient political dodge. we need serious leadership focused on keeping this country safe. a second component of keeping this country safe that identifying the enemy would produce is defeating isis. utterly and completely defeating isis. and yesterday's circus when

calling for taking away your and my constitutional rights, how often did senate democrats say let's utterly destroy isis? not with a pinprick attacks that we're seeing, not with a photo op foreign policy of this administration, a failed effort that's -- that leaves the terrorists laughing at us but instead using overwhelming air power, instead using the concerted power of the united states military with rules of engagement that allow us to fight and win. madam president, right now sending our service men and women into combat with rules of engagement tying their hands behind their backs, it iswrong, it is immoral and it's not accomplishing the task. you want a response to the orlando attack? president obama and vice president biden will no doubt give a self-righteous speech about gun control trying to

strip away the rights of law-abiding americans. how about them standing up and having the president pledge that isis will be driven from the face of the earth? you want to see a response to murdering innocent americans? if you did he claire war on america, you're -- if you declare war on america, you're signing your death warrant. that is the response of the commander in chief. that's the seriousness we need. and a third component of focusing on the enemy is that we should focus on keeping us safe and in particular passing two pieces of legislation both of which i've introduced, the first of which is the ex-patriot terrorist act. this is legislation that provides if any american citizen goes and takes up arms and joins isis, joins a radical islamic terrorist group, that he or she forfeits their u.s. citizenship. so you do not have american citizens coming back to america with u.s. passports to wage jihad on america. we've seen americans like jose

padilla, anwar al-alwaki who have abandoned their country and gone and joinedded up with the terrorists in waging war against us. and just this week the c.i.a. director testified to the senate that more are coming, that isis intends to send individuals back here to wage jihad. rather than engaging in political showmanship, trying to gain partisan advantage in the november election, how about we come together and say if you join isis, you're not using a u.s. passport to come back here and murder american citizens. that ought to be a unanimous agreement if we were focused on keeping this country safe and likewise let's talk about the problem of refugees. what are the consequences of the willful blindness of this

administration that president obama in the face of this terror attack says that he will admit some 10,000 syrian muslim refugees despite the fact that the f.b.i. director has told congress he cannot possibly vet them to determine if they're terrorists. indeed here's what f.b.i. director comey said quote quote we can only query against that which we have collected. if someone has never made a ripple in the pond in syria in a way we could get their identity or interest reflected in our database, we can query our database till the cows come home, but there will be nothing to show up because we have no record of them. this is an f.b.i. director appointed by president obama who is telling the administration they cannot vet these refugees yet what does the administration say? what does hillary clinton say? who do the senate democrats say? let the refugees in even though isis is telling us they're going to use those refugees to send terrorists here to come and murder us.

this transcends mere partisan disagreement. this is loon si. -- luancy. we know the paris attack was carried out in part by people who came in using the refugee program, taking advantage of the refugee program. indeed earlier this year, january 6, 2016, omar is a heed ah listen harden a palestinian been in iraq who entered the united states as a refugee in 2009 was charged with attempting to provide support and he wanted to set off bombs using cell phone detonators at two malls at my hometown of houston, texas. this is a refugee who came from iraq and yet do you hear the administration saying this is a dangerous world. jihadists are attempting to kill

us. we have to keep us safe. they don't say that. the legislation i've introduced which i would urge this body to take up would impose a three-year moratorium on refugees coming from any nation where isis or al qaeda or radical islamic terrorists control a substantial portion of the territory. we can help with humanitarian efforts. we can help resettling refugees in the middle east. america is a compassionate country that has given more than ten times as much money as any country on earth to caring for refugees. but being compassionate doesn't mean we're suicidal. it doesn't mean we invite to america, we invite to our homes people who the f.b.i. cannot tell us if they are terrorists or not qha should the senate be doing? -- what should the senate be doing? we shouldn't be engaging in a sideshow of gun control. by the way, i will say on behalf of a lot of american citizens in

the wake of this terror attack, it is offensive. i sat in that chair and presided yesterday over some of the show. it was offensive to see democrat after democrat praddling on about the n.r.a. it wasn't the n.r.a. who murdered 49 people in orlando. it wasn't the n.r.a. who set up pressure cookers in the boston bombing. it wasn't the n.r.a. who murdered 14 innocent souls at fort hood. and it is offensive to play political games with the constitutional rights of american citizens instead of getting serious about keeping this country safe. i would urge this body to take up both pieces of legislation, the ex-patriot terrorist act to prevent terrorists from using u.s. passports to come back to america and trippa to prevent refugees from countries with majority control, major control from isis or al qaeda from

coming in as isis terrorists as refugees. those would be common sense steps. the overwhelming majority of americans would agree with and yet in this politicized environment, that is not what our friends on the other side of the aisle want to talk about. until we get serious about defeating radical islamic terrorists, we will continue to lose innocence. i would note one aspect of the attack on sunday morning widely reported was it was at a gay bar. and there are great many democrats who are fond of calling themselves champions of the lgbt community. i would suggest there is no more important issue to champion in

that regard than protectin americans from murder by a vicious ideology that systematically murders homosexuals, that throws them off buildings, that buries them under rocks. the regime in iran now supported by billions of dollars of american taxpayer dollars at the behest of president obama murders homosexuals regularly. and i will confess some in the press pool were a little bit puzzled. well, how could a republican be speaking out against this? let me be very clear, madam president. i am against murder. i am against murder of any american and nobody has a right to murder anybody because they differ in faith, because they differ in sexual orientation, because they differ in any respect. we're a nation founded on protecting the rights of everyone to live according to their conscience, scorgd to their faith -- according to

their faith, and this murder in orlando was not random. it was part of a global jihad, an ideology, an islamist ideology that commands its adherence to murder or forcibly convert the infidels by whom they mean every one of us. this body should not be engaged in political games. we should be focused on the threat and keeping america safe and defeating radical islamic terrorism. and as we remember the victims of this latest terror attack, the greatest memorial we can give to them is to redouble ourselves to a seriousness of purpose to prevent the next terror attack from taking innocent american lives. i hope that's what this body does. i hope we do so in a bipartisan manner. i yield the floor. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the

senator from vermont. mr. leahy: madam president, i'm a proud cosponsor of the comprehensive addiction recovery act and i'm glad this important bill is now going to be moving to conference. i'm glad as the senior democrat on the judiciary committee i'll be a conferee. but not beyond the idea just being a conferee, it's urgent we find a comprehensive and real solutions to the epidemic of heroin and prescription opioid abuse. i'm -- many times a month i hear from people i know and some i don't in vermont, in the grocery stores, on the street, even come out of church on sunday telling me of their concerns either within their own family or their

own neighborhood, the problems of opioid abuse. in communities throughout the nation -- and communities throughout the nation are grappling with this. whether they're in urban areas or rural areas or a state like the presiding officer and i represent that has a mixture of both urban and rural. now, i think the federal government has to do its part to provide the support necessary to sustain those efforts. it means real money and for rural communities which are predominantly the communities of my home state of vermont, it means better access to the opioid antidote naloxone which saves lives. i've held hearings throughout vermont, and i've heard from not only the police but physicians, faith community, parents,

teachers, and others that naloxone can save lives. so it's really not a question whether there is a heroin opioid epidemic. the question is how quickly can we respond. we have to act now. the american people expect us to. and that is an expectation they're justified to have. so let's fulfill their expectation. i support the efforts by my neighbor from new hampshire senator shaheen. i support her motion to instruct conferees to provide funding for state and local efforts to combat the opioid epidemic. i also support my fellow new englander senator whitehouse and his motion to instruct conferees to address the needs of rural communities. you come from a state of 625,000

people, 625,000 very, very special people, it is very rural. we need the help. i support senator whitehouse in this. i see other senators on the floor and so i yield the floor. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from new jersey. a senator: madam president, i rise today to be a voice for the three and a half million american citizens living on the island of puerto rico. mr. menendez: i rise so they are -- so their concerns for themselves, their families, their livelihoods will be heard. to ask that we improve a house-passed legislation known as promesa. the word in evening -- english would mean promise but the only thing the house bill promises is the people of puerto rico with

years of subrow gaition at the hands of a democratic control board. now, all of us in the senate are faced soon with an immediate and serious choice, one which will have profound consequences on the people of puerto rico for a generation. i've said from the beginning, in terms of the challenges that puerto rico has, $70 billion debt, pays a third of every dollar it receives toward paying interest, unsustainable for them, unsustainable for any governmental entity that would face that challenge, made tough, horrible decisions, closed schools, closed hospitals, reduced public safety and still cannot meet the challenge. that they need a clear path to restructuring under the bankruptcy laws. now, that's not a bailout. a bailout is when somebody has a debt, you bring them the money

and you say okay, we're going to take care of your debt. that's not the case. restructuring is about taking the debt that you have and giving the wherewithal for that debt to be restructured in a way that is both sustainable and can take care of the obligations therein. it needs an oversight board that represents the people, the citizens, the united states citizens of puerto rico, their needs, their concerns and acknowledges and respects their democratic rights as americans. but sadly, madam president, the legislation passed by the house last week falls far short, far short of what we need on several fronts. instead of offering a clear path to restructuring, it creates more obstacles. it creates a supermajority 5-2 vote by an unelected control board to get to the possibility of restructuring that could derail the island's attempts to

achieve sustainable debt payments. without any authority to restructure its debt, all this legislation will do is take away the democratic rights of three and a half million americans and leave the future to wishful thinking and a prayer that the crisis will somehow be resolved. but even if the board did allow restructuring after a series of hurdles, it will come at a steep price, and that price is the right of self-governance. in return for being able to rework its debts, the people of puerto rico will be forced to relinquish their fundamental right to govern themselves and make their own decisions. the very same rights that we fought a revolution to secure 240 years ago. now, this shouldn't come as a compromise what i'm saying to anyone who read the house

natural resources committee report, which was unequivocal when describing the vast powers this control board that we will be voting on will exercise. in an analysis by the nonpartisan congressional budget office, it states -- quote -- "the board would have broad sovereign powers to effectively overrule decisions by puerto rico's legislature, its governor and other public authorities. so let me repeat that. broad, broad. words have consequences and meaning in legislation and in law. broad sovereign powers to effectively overrule decisions made by the elected government of the 3.5 million united states citizens who call puerto rico their home. the c.b.o. imop went on to say

the board can -- quote -- effectively nullify, nullify, cancel, goodbye, hasta la vista, any new laws or policies adopted by the elected people of puerto rico that did not conform to requirements specified in this bill. nullify. so not only can the control board set budgets and fiscal policy, it also has the power to veto other laws. essentially this means that the board combines -- think of this -- it combines the legislative powers of congress with the veto powers of the executive to form an omnipotent entity, the powers of which are virtually unprecedented. we talk about checks and balances in our government as one of the creations of the founders that was essential to a modern democracy. well, we obliterate the checks and balances and the rights of the people of puerto rico by

having an op nip tent entity, the powers of which are virtually unprecedented. as the bill's own author noted in the committee report, and i quote, "the oversight board may impose mandatory cuts on puerto rico's government and instrument alts. a power far beyond that exercised by the control board established for the district of columbia, when there was a control board, when the district of columbia found itself in fiscal challenge." a power far beyond that exercised by the control board established for the district of columbia. the fact that the puerto rican people will have absolutely no say, no say over who is appointed or what action this board decides is blatant neocolonialism.

instead, their fate will be determined by seven unelected, unaccountable members of a so-called oversight board that will act as a virtual oligarchy and impose their unchecked will on the island. if the board uses the superpowers in this bill to close more schools, shutter more hospitals, cut senior citizen pensions to the bone, if it decides to hold a fire sale and put puerto rico's natural wonders on the auction block to the highest bidder, if it puts balanced budgets ahead of the health, safety and well-being of children and families similar to how the control board travesty that unfolded in flint, there will be nothing, nothing the people of puerto rico or their elected representatives can do to stop it. and of course the bill doesn't stop there. it also provides an exception to the federal minimum wage for younger workers, and it exempts the island from recently finalized overtime protections. at a time that we're working to

increase workers' wages, the people in the country have said through this election process my wages are stagnant. i feel that i can't meet the challenges of myself and my family, promesa goes the opposite direction and it actually cuts workers' wages. so it amazes me that the solution to get puerto rico's economy growing again is to ensure that workers make even less money in an island which is 3.5 million united states citizens, 40% are below the federal poverty level. so we're going to cut their wages. no, lowering people's wages is not a pro-growth strategy. what it is is a pro-migration strategy. all it is going to do is intensify out-migration to the mainland where people who are

u.s. citizens, who happen to live in puerto rico, they are eligible for a higher minimum wage here, they have common sense overtime protections, they are eligible for full medicare-medicaid reimbursement, they are eligible for the tax credit as they try to raise their child and realize their hopes and dreams and aspirations, they are eligible for the earned income tax credit. all they have to do is take one flight to the united states, and yet we somehow think that a policy that subjugates these 3.5 million citizens and takes away the essential rights they have as american citizens is going to be a good fiscal policy for us as well. now, every time i talk about my brothers and sisters in puerto rico, i like to remind my colleagues in this chamber and in the others that they have fought on behalf of america since world war i.

through world war ii, the korean war, vietnam, desert storm, desert shield, iraq, afghanistan, the war on terror. sphact, if you go visit the vietnam memorial as it commemorates its 50th anniversary, you will find a disproportionately high number of puerto rican names etched in that black stone as compared to the rest of the american population. i remember being in the visitor's center when the speaker of the house had a celebration of the 65th infantry division, and -- an all-puerto rican division, one of the most highly decorated in u.s. military history where they receive the -- received the congressional gold medal, the highest honor that congress gives any citizen. and we talked about their

enormous contributions, their sacrifices on behalf of the nation. these men and women, many gave their lives and still serve so that we can remain the land of the free. they will go back home to where their freedom and their right to self-governance will be stripped. these heroes will serve the same rights and respect -- deserve the same rights and respect as u.s. citizens in new jersey, in wisconsin, in pennsylvania, in florida, in utah or any other state in the nation, but what this bill tells the people of puerto rico is that although you may be good enough to wear the uniform of their country, you may be good enough to fight and die to defend the united states, that you are not good enough to make your own decisions, govern yourself and have a voice in your own future. now, i'm not advocating to

completely remove all oversight powers. to the contrary. i support helping puerto rico make informed, prudent decisions that put it on a path to economic growth and solvency. but it's -- despite its name, the oversight borden visioned by this bill doesn't simply oversee. it directs, it commands. it doesn't assist. it absolutely controls potentially every significant public policy decision that affects those 3.5 million united states citizens. now, the senate has an opportunity to change that situation. we have a chance to improve this bill and strike the right balance. now, i want the opportunity to offer a number of targeted, commonsense amendments to restore a proper balance and ensure the people of puerto rico

have a say in their future and to temper the powers of the control board and give the people of puerto rico more of a say as to who's on the board that's going to determine their future for quite some time. now, madam president, i know, as all of us know, success is never guaranteed, but at the very least, the people of puerto rico deserve a thorough and thoughtful debate on the senate floor. i do not take lightly nor should my colleagues a decision to infringe upon the democratic rights of the 3.5 million united states citizens in puerto rico. those 3.5 million american citizens living in puerto rico and their five million family members living in our states and in our districts deserve more than the senate holding its nose to improve an inferior solution. and i'm pleased to say that this sentiment has some bipartisan

support, as i sent a letter with senator wicker to senate leadership asking for a full and thorough debate. and i hope we do not get jammed at the final moment as an attempt to push an undemocratic bill through the senate by waiting until the very end of this session as a tactical maneuver to avoid a thoughtful debate and an opportunity for amendments. i take majority leader mcconnell at his word when he said -- quote -- "we need to open up the legislative process in a way that allows more amendments from both sides, and i'm hopeful he's going to honor that commitment. like some of my colleagues, i was once a member of the house of representatives, and i have enormous respect for that chamber, but i didn't get elected to the senate to abdicate my responsibility and simply rubber stamp whatever bills come over from the house

of representatives. and i would hope that we would immediately call up this bill for debate and do what we were elected to do, fix problems and make the lives of the american people better. these 3.5 million citizens, just because they are puerto rican, they are no less a citizen than you or the presiding officer or my colleagues who are on the floor or those who get to serve in this institution. they deserve better. they deserve better than to be jammed with an undemocratic process that will affect their lives in ways far beyond anybody in this chamber would be willing to accept. and with that, madam president, i yield the floor and observe 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 louisiana. a senator: i ask unanimous consent to end the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. a senator: madam president, i have five requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: without objection. duly quoted. mr. vitter: i ask consent that the mandatory quorum call be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. vitter: and i ask consent that following and notwithstanding the adoption of the compound motion to go to conference on s. 524, that senator shaheen and senator whitehouse or their designees be recognized to each offer a motion to instruct conferees and that there be two minutes of debate equally divided on the motions and that following the use or yielding back of that time, the senate vote on the motions to instruct conferees with no intervening action or

debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. leahy: madam president, i believe this -- plaintiff the senator -- the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. leahy: prior to the cloture vote, the democrats still have some time. i yield back that time. the presiding officer: all time is yielded basketball. -- is yielded back. the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion, the we the undersigned senators in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to disagree to the house amendments, agreed to the request from the house for a conference, and t presiding officer appoint the following conferees: senators grassley, alexander, hatch, sessions, lahey, murray, cornyn and wyden with respect to s. 524, a bill to authorize the attorney general and secretary of health and human services to award grants to address the national epidemics of prescription opioid abuse and heroin use.

and so forth and for other purposes signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is it the sense of the senate that debate on the motion to disagree to the house amendments, agree to the request by the house for a conference, and to appoint conferees with respect to s. 524, a bill to authorize the attorney general to award grants to address the national epidemics of prescription opioid abuse and heroin use shall be brought to a close. the yays and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote: