entire group of people called the yazidis, who have been wiped off the face of the planet, and you've had hundreds of thousands of people displaced, millions displaced. and they're going to look at america and say, you can't count on america. every young child in a refugee camp that was driven to that camp because of our failure to deal with isil, allowing assad to bury a family, they're going to grow up not liking us. the one day we will have to front them. if facts of this failed policy, it is going to be generation a there is still time to adjust. if you will adjust your strategy, not just listen to you listen to the 50 people who wrote the letter, listen to your military commanders, you make these adjustments, we'll be there with you. mr. mccain: mr. president, i would like to summarize. the reason why senator graham and i came to the floor at this time is because it's pretty obvious that the debate now is

over guns and there should be legitimate debate over the use and availability of weapons. and i hope that we could reach a reasonable compromise so that we could act. but i want to emphasize we would not be having this debate if it were not for the failed policies that led to where we are today where a young man, either instructed or self-radicalized took the lives of nearly 50 brave americans. that was not like a hurricane. it was not like an earthquake. it was because this president has failed to lead. look at the world as it was when the times when i was talking and look at the world today. and we have to have a strategy to defeat isis and we cannot stand to have this brutal dictator named bashar assad

continue to slaughter his own people. we have to stand with our allies and stand with our friends, but the most important thing is we have to have a strategy to defeat this enemy which has proven at least twice that it has the ability to attack the mainland of the united states of america. that is not there today. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that my -- the record that senator graham and i established be made a part of the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mccain: mr. president, i yield. a senator: would the senator from arizona yield for a question? mr. mccain: absolutely. mr. cornyn: mr. president, i say to my friend from arizona before lunch we had a vote on a very important amendment that you sponsored along with the chairman of the intelligence committee that received the majority vote of the senate but not enough to get us to the 60-vote threshold. and i know the majority leader

has noted -- put in a motion to reconsider which will allow him to bring that up because of some absent ism. i wanted to ask my friend during the time the shooter in orlando was under surveillance by the f.b.i. and actually was put on a watch list, the authority they had to gather information about him and particularly his computer usage by issuing a subpoena to the internet service provider in order to identify i.p. addresses and perhaps e-mail address, not content, they were denied the opportunity to get that kind of information. and i just wonder whether the senator has an opinion or would like to make an observation about -- do you have any idea perhaps the fbi might have been tipped to the fact that this shooter, let's say he was

accessing youtube videos of anwar al-alaki like nadel i hasn did in fort hood or let's say one of the e-mail addresses they were able to collect was one of a known terrorist or somebody the f.b.i. suspected was complicit in terrorism. obviously under the senator's amendment in order to get the content of that, the f.b.i. would have to go to the pfizer court and establish probable cause but does the senator have an opinion whether that kind of information which -- to which the f.b.i. was blinded by the lapse in this authority, whether that would be helpful information in identifying potential threats like we saw in orlando? mr. mccain: could i say to my friend and colleague who has done so much hard work on trying to achieve a careful balance and compromise that all of us could agree to on the issue of weapons

that i appreciate the question. i appreciate his work. i can't specifically state that i know for a fact that the failure of the ability of the f.b.i. to monitor and know about use of the internet, not content but use of the internet, such as the senator mentioned i.p. addresses and others, i can't say that that would have prevented it. but i can say, and the senator knows that the director of the f.b.i. said this is the most important tool that he needs to defend this country against further attacks. is there anyone now in america that doesn't believe there's going to be another self-radicalized or instructed individual who will try to attack the united states of america? of course not. so in their wisdom, a majority

of my colleagues over there and a group of my colleagues over here have rejected the urgent request from the director of the federal bureau of investigation. i've seen a lot of strange votes around here, i'd say to my friend from texas, but to see republicans who advertise themselves as trying to protect the people of this nation to not give the director of the federal bureau of investigation the tool that he needs the most to counter what is clearly coming is frankly one of the most puzzling and, frankly, disappointing actions that have been taken by my colleagues on this side of the aisle. mr. cornyn: i thank the senator and would merely add, mr. president, this is not a partisan issue as the presiding officer and his -- the senator

from arizona knows. the intelligence committee has voted in a bipartisan way with only one senator dissenting in the intelligence reauthorization bill to reinstate this very authority that the senator from arizona's amendment pertained to, but of all the votes we've had this week, that vote on senator mccain's amendment i believe was the one with the greatest potential to stop future terrorist attacks like we saw in orlando because we all know that the shooter in orlando was under two separate f.b.i. investigations. and he was put on a watch list. but with so much discussion about watch lists, he was no longer on a watch list so the fbi was not notified when he went in and purchased those two firearms that he used in this attack. we also know he was a licensed security guard and he actually had a license to own firearms.

so this is a complicated and complex and confusing picture that i think we've all been presented, and we're all trying to figure out what is the solution or what could we do to help reduce the possibility that something like this might happen in the future. but i can guarantee you one thing. it's not to limit the constitutional rights of law abiding citizens. that's not going to stop future terrorist attacks but if we fail to give the law enforcement and counterterrorism authorities the means by which to identify these self-radicalized terrorists before they kill, if we don't do that then shame on us. this is not partisan, as i said, because a bipartisan majority with one dissenting vote on the intelligence committee voted for this provision. about you we need to get serious about this. i know because of some act teism

-- absenteeism today, necessary i'm sure, we didn't have every senator here present and voting. so i hope in the interim from the time of that failed cloture vote on the mccain-burr amendment, until we vote on this again when the majority moves to reconsider it, we could have some serious discussions and serious efforts at trying to make our country safer and to protect innocent americans from terrorist attacks on our own soil. but if we deny the f.b.i. director the number one legislative priority of the agency, as he's told us time and time again, most recently down in the sciff, in a secure facility, obviously that part is not classified but he said this is a very important tool. and if we're going to ask the f.b.i. and our counterterrorism authorities to connect the dots, well, they can't connect the dots unless they can collect the dots. and again, this is with proper

and appropriate regard under the fourth amendment for american citizens when it comes to searches of their property or seizures. we know under the fourth amendment that there has to be a established probable cause that a crime has been committed, established before an impartial judge. we're not talking about the content. we are saying if there are enough dots to connect together to raise a reasonable suspicion on the part of our counterterrorism authorities, they ought to then have the opportunity to go to a judge and to get the content of that communication under appropriate constitutional fourth amendment procedures. but if they don't even have access to the basic information, then they can't connect the dots because they can't collect them. so of all the votes we've had this week, i believe the vote on the mccain-burr amendment was the most important because i

think it was the one most likely to produce additional tools that our counterterrorism authorities could use in an investigation to identify self-radicalized terrorists here in the united states before they strike. it's too late after they strike when we're all asking the question, what could we possibly do in order to prevent something like this from happening again? we now know what we could do. it may not be a panacea, but it's making sure that our law enforcement authorities like the f.b.i. have the tools they need in order to conduct these investigations again to collect the dots so they can connect those dots. mr. president, i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call: mr. coats: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from indiana. mr. coats: mr. president, are we in quorum? the presiding officer: we are.

mr. coats: i ask that the quorum call be vacated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. coats: i have seven requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the aproll of both the majority -- they have the aapproval of both the majority and minority leader leaders. the presiding officer: ♪ed. mr. coats: mr. president, a lot going on around here. we just finished before lunch with a vote that i was very disappointed did not reach the 60-vote threshold so that we could proceed to debate and vote on what i think is one of the more important issue issues thae are deal with and that is our ability to stop terrorist terroristattacks. as a member of the senate intelligence committee, we've had the opportunity to meet several times with director comey, the head of the f.b.i., asking him about do they have the tools necessary to prevent terrorist attacks against

innocent americans. simply because changes of technology, a tool that they had before is not as -- and by "tool," a method that they've had before in trying to determine who's trying to do us harm works for one type of technology but new technology, basically because of an omission in the language that was never intended by the congress, does not give us the ability to so-called connect the dots, to give us the opportunity to then go and seek a warrant for further investigation. this was the vote that we had on the floor. we came up just one or two votes short. i know the majority leader made a motion to reconsider, so we'll be taking this up again. but i hope my colleagues who did not vote for this will take the opportunity as a member of the

united states senate to come to the intelligence committee to sit down and look at the classified information, assure themselves that this does nothing that invades anyone's privacy rights. there seems to be a lack of information as to what is being asked for and what is thought of. in that regard, hopefully during this next few days we will have the opportunity for our colleagues to come and understand this. frankly, i.t. something that many have -- it's something that many have voted for but were not aware of this glitch in the language that's put us in this position. i would be happy to accompany any of my colleagues to a place where we could look through, on a classified basis, why this is so important. today i want to do what i have been doing now for about 46

weeks in the senate in this cycle, and that is discuss "waste of the week." "waste of the week" is something that we have been down here talking about. while i deeply regret that we have not been able to fashion a long-term program dealing with our debt and our deficit, which is so critical for the future of this country, the least we can do is look at the way we currently spend taxpayer money and, in doing so, weed out those programs that simply should not be used and simply don't justify the use of taxpayer money. so i was going to do this last week and, after the shooting -- or tragic events of orlando, didn't think it was the appropriate time to do so. so today i am doing two "waste

of the weeks" to make up for last week and this week. this week it is -- when congress created the national science foundation, the ages goals were to promote progress, help secure our national defense and advance national health, prosperity and welfare -- a great goal. i'm not here today to question the validity of the national science foundation. there is no question that research funded by the n.s.f. has led to remarkable discoveries and that the majority of the work they do, their research, is worthwhile. however, thanks to the work started by tom coburn, it has now become clear that the national science foundation has funded some research that truly falls in the category of a waste of taxpayer dollars, either because the research has

questionable benefit or because it is research that should more appropriately be conduct the by the -- conducted by the private sector or perhaps doesn't even need to be conducted. last year i highlighted one example of the n.s.f.'s waste: swedish massages for rabbits. yeah, you heard me right. swedish massages for rabbits, to see whether or not after a vigorous workout, a massage would make them feel better. first of all, i think we all know the answer to that question. we're out in the yard working, the back is a little stiff. many would a massage make you feel better? but do we need to spend taxpayer money to do a little research and then grab some animals as the subjects in order to come to that conclusion? that was in the several hundreds of thousands of dollars. but those are taxpayer dollars. i mean, if some university or some researcher wants to do that kind of thing, obviously they're

entitled to do so. but the national science foundation? is that what this was created for? wcialg i'm not -- well, i'm not going to go into all the details of that because we have done that before. but i was also down here -- and by the way these are all documented. inspectors general, the government accountability office goes into and does audits and they look at how money is spent and then they report this back to us. and when we look@this and say, how in the world did this ever get approved? who in the world agreed to spend this kind of money on this kind of research project when we are running deficits, when we are deeply in debt here as a nation? is this a wise way to spend hard-earned tax dollars? so we're trying to bring these to the light here in a transparent way so that our members will say, let's crack down on this kind of stuff. i mean, i don't want to go home and tell my constituents that their tax dollars are going thor

this kind of stuff. and we had another example several an months ago about wher -- you know, you can't make this stuff up -- whether or not if people are hungry they are more disposed to be a little curt or a little angry with their spouse. somebody came up with the idea that, let's test this out. and the expenditure there was considerable for this research. can't remember exactly what it was right now. but they gave husbands and wives voodoo dolls and bunch of pins. the and they said, every time that you feel bad feeling or want to say something to your spouse, you take your voodoo doll-- you have your voodoo doll that looks like your spouse, your wife -- the wife has one that looks like her husband -- and you take a pin and particular -- and stick it in

the pin. and when you did this you were asked the question, were you hungry at the time? and if you were hungry at the time, they said that -- count all the pins and say, well, okay, we've proven the fact that if you're hungry, you're more likely to be upset with your spouse than if you're not hungry. it's -- to come down here and explain this, people say, you can't -- this can't be true. tell me -- tell me that tax dollars are not used for something like this out of an agency as respected as the national science foundation. but yet they defended this process as a legitimate grant expenditure of taxpayer dollars and came up with a new word for the dictionary called "hangry." a combination of being hungry and angry. and are you hangry and if you are, you might be a little more quickly to be upset with your spouse because the pins in the

voodoo dolls prove that. i promise you, i'm not making this up, folks. i mean, this is documented. this is wit what is research prt included. today i want to name two additional examples. i'm really not picking on the n.s.f., but they keep -- you know, we keep reading about some of this stuff. two examples here that cost taxpayers nearly $2.2 million. the first example is a $171,000 grant to research how monkeys gamble. yes, you heard that correctly. researchers actually taught monkeys to gamble to see if they could develop a hot-hand men tavment let me put my cards on the table here and explain what this means. researchers taught monkeys to keep gambling and keep playing despite potential risks in order to maximize their rewards. instead of earning money, which monkeys aren't going to take the

money to the store and spend, the monkeys were rewarded with food and it turns out that the monkeys tried to get as much food as possible from their gambling game. in other words -- in other words, knowing that there was going to be the reward of more food if they kept gambling, the monkeys kept gambling. first of all, i didn't know monkeys could gamble. so i guess relearned something there. but, secondly, my bet is that taxpayers agree with me that there are much more pressing issues that deserve federal funding. the second example that i want to talk about is the nearly $2 million grant to cornell university for a study on popular landmark photos. this money was used to study photos that had been pos posted-

you know, i should have -- i think we've got a chart here. oh, yeah ... we actually came up with a picture of the monkeys gambling. here's their chips. somehow they taught them to gamble and they were rewarded with food. and monkeys figured out pretty quickly that if they kept gambling, they could get more food. not unlike my dog who is, you know -- we wake up in the morning. the first one up in my house, my wife or myself, feeds the dog. well, if we forget to tell each other that we fed the dog and i go running off to work or catch a plane to come back to washington, i get a call from my wife, did you feed the dog? yes, i did feed the dog. well, she's sitting here like she didn't get a thing. soulful eyes looking at you, oh,

if you could just give me something to eat. so, she say, i fed the dog because i thought, you surely didn't feed the dog because she looks so sad. hey, she's gaming the whole program here, and sheers she's vow -- and she's very successful with me. you poor thipg. -- you poor thing. my wife comes out later and says, i fed the dog. i animals figure it out pretty quickly. i don't know what this leads to as a conclusion. all i know is why should the taxpayer being paid for stuff like this? these are funk things to do for -- you these are kind of fun things to do for somebody. but the conclusion conclusions e to, it may benefit society but does it have to be done with taxpayer dollars? on and on we go. the second thing is this cornell study on photos. the researchers dlaim they would

search the -- the researchers claim they would search the internet's 40 million photos. researchers examine foalt tows uptote loaded to a popular site called flicker then determine some of the top photograph sites in the world. what do they find? unprice surprisingly, the most popular sites included the eiffel tower, big ben, the empire state building -- unfortunately, the indianapolis motor speedway wasn't included, which is disturbing to me. they also found that the apple store on 5th avenue in new york city is more popular on flirker than the white house. you can come to your own conclusions as to what you tbhi that. but we have to ask ourselves, was this research really worth $2k million? the researchers said yeah, it is because the work could help with online travel guides and improve

social media sites' ability to guess where a photo was taken. helping improve online travel sites geolocation services is not exactly part of the n.s.f.'s original mission, which he read to you. so what can congress do about these kind of things? well, one problem with congress's inability to crack down on wasteful spending is the lack of transparency. and what we're doing here is being transparent. we are exposing to my colleagues, we are exposing to the american public the kind of waste that is going on with their hard-earned tax dollars. they send to washington thinking erbgs oh, well, it will be invested in building new roads or buildings infrastructure or providing for our military, for defense or the v.a., the veterans who come home that need support. no, no, it goes to grants that goes to these kind of crazy things.

that's why i have submitted an amendment, an amendment to this week's bill that we're talking about this week to require the national science foundation to publish the full documents submitted by grant recipients outlining what the research will entail. we no longer can trust the decision-making process of the national science foundation. we want them to publish and provide to the congress and provide to the american people who's making these decisions and why they're making these decisions and where their money is going. right now the n.s.f. only provides short summaries of the proposals that are awarded funds, but these summaries are very limited, and of course they're written in language that makes it look like this is a legitimate something that we really, really need to do. we cannot appropriately fix the problem without all the information and without a clear understanding of the intent of the research grants that are awarded by the national science foundation. taxpayers have a right to know how their money is being spent.

so we take our ever-growing accumulation of wasted taxpayer dollars and we add to that nearly $2 million for gambling monkeys and a photo popularity contest, bringing our taxpayer price tag to nearly $176 billion. that's right, you heard me, mr. president. $176 billion of wasted taxpayer money on projects that really provide little or no benefit to the american people. this is what the government accountability office inspectors have determined. inspector generals have determined. and this is not small change. people work really hard to raise the kind of money and be taxed to the level of $176,000 only to

see every dollar, every penny of that essentially wasted through fraud or abuse. i'm going to keep coming down to the floor. stay tuned for next week's next revelation. we could probably come down every day and do this that the senate is in session because this is just scratching the surface. we're going to kaoepl -- keep pointing out how people's money is being spent, and hopefully on the basis of that congress will be taking action to make sure that it no longer falls in the category of waste, fraud, and abuse. mr. president, with that, 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. brown: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. brown: thank you, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent to dispense with the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. brown: and i ask unanimous consent to proceed as as if morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. brown: thank you, mr. president. i want to thank my colleagues on the veterans' affairs committee for their work on the veterans first act. i just left this committee where chairman isakson and senator blumenthal are in their typical bipartisan way working together with the v.a. to improve veterans health care and i'm appreciative of that. they will be on the floor later this afternoon to urge the senate to move quickly on this legislation. this comprehensive bipartisan will bring vets and their families k expanded benefits that will ensure the v.a. has the resources to provide veterans with the highest quality of care. no veteran should place --

should face exploitation by for-profit colleges, inadequate care or life on the street. we address all these issues with this bill. this bill will expand educational opportunities for veterans and their families including my constituent melissa twine. ms. twine is an air force veteran from bat taeuf i can't, east of cincinnati in clairmont county. her husband, captain twine died serving our country in the air force. the frye scholarship provides g.i. benefits. however, when congress extended the benefits to spouses and the veterans access choice and accountability act of 2014, a 15-year limitation was put on these benefits. captain twine passed away in 2002, meaning that now as his wife tries to go back to school to pursue her master's degree, she and so many other surviving

spouses don't have time to use this benefit. the bill will fix that and give them the opportunity to further their education. in addition to expanding the frye scholarship the bill will expand eligibility for the yellow ribbon program to help students avoid out-of-pocket tuition and fees to include all spouses and children of service members who give their lives fighting for our country. is the bill incorporates legislation i -p helped introduce to restore g.i. benefits of veterans who lost credit or training time because their school permanently closed. we've heard too many stories of shady for-profit colleges which close abruptly, leave students including many veterans in limbo. this will ensure veterans don't lose their g.i. benefits. we know shamefully too many veterans don't have a roof over their heads or a place to call home. the legislation incorporates elements of the veterans housing stability act which increases veterans access to permanent housing options.

this is an issue that we've been working on for years. last year i visited organizations around ohio that are doing terrific work to give veterans the support they need to get back on their feet and find permanent homes. with this bill, we'll give veterans the support they need. even one veteran on the streets means congress isn't doing nearly enough to tackle this problem. the legislation helps ensure whistle-blowers at the v.a. can disclose concerns relating to veterans' care without fearing retaliation. it expands a critical program to support veteran caregivers. as a country we made a promise to care for veterans in return for their service to this country. far too often people in this body are wreulg -- willing to vote billions of dollars for defense but not do what we should with veterans. this bill helps to change that. 9/11 veterans and their families already take advantage of this critical support. this bill will make the same support available to families and veterans of all generations.

i urge my colleagues to move quickly on this important legislation to protect and honor our nation's heroes. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the, my ensuing statement be at a different place in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. brown: thank you, mr. president. i know i'm joined in a few moments by my colleague from ohio, senator portman. i will make some remarks and then ask unanimous consent to move on a resolution senator portman helped me author. i will do that in a moment. mr. president, journalists, sports fans like to describe victories as historic. often that's a bit of hyperbole but in the case of the cleveland cavaliers, nba championship win on sunday, the word historic is warranted. today several hundred thousand people guard in downtown cleveland. senator portman and i talked about how we would liked to have joined them but we have day jobs

and we figure we couldn't go back. literally hundreds of thousands of people in downtown cleveland. some estimates were as high as almost all the adult population of cuyahoga county. the numbers were pretty spectacular. the win, the word historic is warranted in this cavaliers victory on sunday night. no other team in nba history has come from a three to one series deficit in the finals to win the title until now. no other major american city has gone so long as cleveland has -- had, i might add, without winning a major league sports championship. it's fitting for my city, my wife and i call cleveland home, that this championship came down to game 7. the series played out like a metaphor for what this title means in cleveland. ever the underdog, down three games to one. to understand what this victory means for our midwestern city on the lake, think about the last time we won a championship in a major sport. none of the pages sitting here were born.

in fact, some of their parents might not yet have been born. it was 1964. lyndon johnson was president. martin luther king was in the middle of a very successful civil rights campaign. robert kennedy, who sat at this desk on the senate floor, was still alive campaigning for civil rights and economic justice. america was beginning to hear more and more about vietnam on the evening news. we had no idea the nightmare that it would become. the beatles had just come to america. we had three tv channels. in cleveland it was 3, 5 and 8. the most popular shows were bonanza and bewitched. as a boy growing up in mansfield not far from cleveland, about 70 miles, i watched with pride a little more than two years before that ohio's john glenn orbited the earth in friendship 7. the moon landing was still a distant dream. none of us ever heard of ohio astronaut neil armstrong.

the cleveland browns with jim brown brought home the nfl championship for our city that december. it wasn't even called the super bowl back then. that's how long ago this was. it was simply the nfl championship. little did any of us know we wouldn't see another trophy for more than a half century. i was 12 years old at the time. the cleveland cavaliers did not exist. the nba was much smaller. three years earlier the cleveland indians had traded the beloved outfielder, the hero of all young fans, rocko calovito, traded him away to detroit. the indians were in the midst of losing season after losing season. within a year or two they put together a top line four-person pitching staff, start staff. but still cleveland, the cleveland indians didn't win. as a boy, my dad would take us up u.s. 42 often to see a double

hider when they played those kinds of double-headers on sundays. my dad would never take us to see the new york yankees, a team he despised because he knew that 15 or 20 cents of our ticket price would go to mickey mantle and kwro*e tkpweu bera and other yankees. every year i was naive enough to think the yankees would win the pennant. never in those years did they even get close. by july, usually certainly by august, often by july it was clear even to this 12-year-old boy that the indians weren't going to win the pennant. the next 52 years after the 1964 browns championship were challenged for the city of cleveland. the manufacturing economy that sustained northeast ohio eroded. decades of policy choices that closed factories and shipped jobs overseas, too often bad trade policy, bad tax policy. the population of the city shrink to almost half its

population from my boyhood, from my early years. beginning in 1995, ohio had 14 years of consecutive foreclosure increases, each year more than the year before. but today downtown cleveland is coming back not just because hundreds of thousands of people are in the downtown celebrating this first nba championship, but it's coming back, my wife and i moved into the city a few years ago. we wanted to be part of this renaissance, and we've seen the city beginning to return to its glory. nothing has embodied the hope and determination in the grid of our city like this team. we know that sports teams are far more than the sum of their parts. they are a point of connection for people from every walk of life in a city. there's a reason we've begun to call cleveland believe land. on monday a native clevelander who had to move away from his hometown posted on his facebook, we draw so much from our teams, it's wound up in our identity.

a token of the pride we have for the local tpraoeub from -- tribe from which we can -- came. one woman said cleveland sports were her connection to her family, her grandfather, parents, her uncles, cousins, some of whom had scattered across the state and across the country. our faith had been tested for decades. for the past decade the hope of this city at least in sports has rested on the shoulders of one talented young man. i watched lebron james play in high school. his best friends -- i worked with his best friend's mother worked with me in akron. lebron played for st. vincent, st. mary, a catholic school. i saw him at the university of akron arena where the team played home games because lebron was so in demand people all over northeast ohio came to see him in high school. i saw him play at barberton high

school in the state tournament. we knew he was a star. you didn't have to know much about basketball to know that. we were heart broken when he went to miami, but like families do we welcomed him back with open arms in 2014 and we pretty much forgot he ever left. if you're once an ohioan, you're always an ohioan. for the next two years he carried the weight of our city's championship dreams. he was all in. the city was all in. and this year his team delivered. king james will go down in the history books as perhaps the nba's greatest player. i'll debate that if anybody would like. certainly one of the greatest athletes of all time. many unanimously named the 2016 nba finals m.v.p. he led all players in points, rebound, assists, steals and block shots. nobody has ever come close to doing that in any championship series. his leadership was important, and victory was a team effort.

kyrie irving scored 26 points in the final game, the 3 pointer with less than a minute less. the coach put the team in a position to win. the hopes and dreams of a city riding on them, win is what they did ending that 52-year championship drought and restoring faith to cleveland. i wish i could have been on east ninth street this morning. my wife left home at 7:00 a.m. it should only have been normally a 20 minute drive to downtown. we live in the city, only five miles from downtown. she knew it would take at least an hour because of the crowds gathered. i'm heading back to my office in a few moments to meet my colleague from the golden state, senator boxer. she owes ohioans some beer. we bet cleveland-brewed beer against pwaeup -- bay area brewed beer. she'll be sporting a lebron james jersey to make the delivery. i had to do that last year. fair play.

turn-around is fair play. on behalf of the senate, on behalf of my colleague senator portman, who attended a number of games and is excited as i am about this, congratulations to the cavaliers, congratulations to the city of cleveland. congratulations to fans scattered far and wide across this country who never gave up. now on to next season. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of s. res. 509. submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 509, congratulating the cleveland cavaliers for winning the 2016 national basketball association finals. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. mr. brown: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be -- the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. brown: and i yield to my friend from ohio, senator portman. mr. portman: i thank my colleague and i thank the president. wow, what an incredible week for cleveland. while we're talking here today, there are several hundred thousand fans walking down the streets in cleveland in an awesome parade. as much as i appreciate being here in the senate doing my constitutional duty and my day job, i wish i was there. and i know senator brown feels the same way. since we can't be there, we wanted to provide this resolution today at the time of the parade and be sure that all of our colleagues know how proud we are of the cavs and get them on record. we're trying not to rub it in too much with our california colleagues, although i will say i have now got a case of great lakes beer in my refrigerator that otherwise would have gone to one of my senate colleagues, senator feinstein. instead i get a case of california wine. that's nice because last year it was the other way around. what an amazing season and an incredible finals.

i did get a chance to go to some of the games. i lived in cleveland for a brief time when i was a kid. cleveland was not known at that time as a great sports town. jimmy brown and the cleveland browns were our last team to win a championship. that was 1964. so 52 years is a long time. the drought is over. and the cavs did it in the northeast way. northeast ohio is an area where through grit and determination and perseverance, we're on the way back up, we're a comeback region, cleveland is a comeback city. that's how it happened. in many respects, the way we won the finals is the way we worked through the season, some of the challenges we had. we changed coaches in midstream. every single player showed grit and determination. whether it was iman shumperth or kevin love or kyrie irving, tris

tan thompson, and of course the king. he really willed victory that night. game seven, you saw the blocked shot at the end. you saw his layup at the end. he did get a triple double that night. he not only got a triple double, but throughout the entire series, he was a star. in the sense that -- and this has never happened in a finals before, ever. he did have more blocked shots. he did have more assists. he did have more points. he did have more rebounds. he did have more steals than any other player on either team. you think about that. it is extraordinary. he is the greatest basketball player living today, in my view, and he will go down in history because of this one series as being the guy who really pulled cleveland over the line. i went to the fourth game. this was the game we lost in cleveland. you know, we were down 3-1. no one has ever come back to win a series being down 3-1 in the finals, ever. but the fans did not give up that night. and more importantly, the

players i talked about and the other players who came off the bench and just did an awesome job never gave up. they never gave up because again they had that grit and perseverance that characterizes northeast ohio and because they wanted to make good on the promise. when lebron james came back to cleveland, what did he say? i'm going to bring my hometown, my home area is championship. born and raised in akron, a high school player who was a phenomenon in high school. a guy who loves his state, loves northeast ohio. i think he summed it all up. when he came back, he said i'm going to deliver a championship. i think he was very emotional after game seven in part because his goal, his dream -- not for himself but for cleveland was finally accomplished. he says about cleveland and northeast ohio, it's an area where you work hard and you earn it. he said you don't get success just through your talent, just through showing up. you get success by working hard and earning it. that's a great message.

and by the way, it's a message that he has imbued in the minds of young people all over northeast ohio, specifically in akron where so many young men and young women have been able to be more successful in life, thanks to his efforts, his funding, his foundation to help them get through high school, to get into college. but he's told them this is about grit, perseverance, hard work, discipline. you don't just get there because of your talent. he is probably the most talented athlete i know, but as we saw in game seven, it wasn't just about talent. it was about perseverance and determination and focus. so i'm very proud of the cavs. i'm proud of the way they won. i'm proud of cleveland. as you know, the republican convention is coming up in cleveland. someone asked me today do you think they will take down the cavs posters? i said i hope not. this is all part of a big celebration. it was great for cleveland in terms of the hotels and restaurants being full. certainly great for the economy to have the finals. but more importantly, it's great for the spirit of cleveland and consistent with the comeback

city, consistent with this notion that, yeah, we have had tough times before and we've had our share of challenges in cleveland. we still do. but we're believeland, cleveland. we believe. we believe that through hard work and perseverance, we can make progress, we can be successful, just as the cavs were during this final series. i also want to thank dan gilbert. he is the owner of the team. he's the guy that worked hard to get the team back together, to get the band back together. i'm sure bringing together kyrie irving and kevin love and tristan thompson and certainly the king lebron james, it's not easy to bring all those players together and to make it all work and jell. but gilbert believed. gilbert believes in cleveland. he is a detroit guy but he believes in cleveland. he has made a big investment in cleveland and the community and economic development there and certainly what the cavs did assist in that. ultimately this is a celebration, not just because they won the finals but because of the way they did it.

a tough season, switched coaches in midstream, had some injuries back and forth. they did it the hard way, through perseverance, determination, hard work. i'm proud of cleveland. senator brown and i are proud to have this resolution before the senate today. we're glad that it passed with unanimous consent. that doesn't happen with everything in the u.s. congress as some of you may have noticed, but it certainly happens here because the cavaliers in this case earned it. you earned it, northeast ohio, and that's what they did. i'm proud of them. thank you, mr. president, for allowing us to present this resolution and go cavs. we're all in. mr. president, i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: quorum cal

quorum call:

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from kansas. a senator: mr. president, thank now recognizing me. i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. a senator: also, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that i be allowed to address the senate as if in morning hour. the presiding officer: without objection. a senator: mr. president, thank you. i'm here to speak on f.a.a. reauthorization. and several stories have arisen in the last few days that are very discouraging to me and troublesome to a cause i care a lot about. mr. moran: i'm an advocate for general aviation and i was pleased that the senate was able to pass f.a.a. reauthorization act of 2016 by a vote of 95-3.

95-3 this senate approved legislation reauthorizing the f.a.a. for the next 18 months. that's an unusual occurrence around here when anything passes 95-3 that i also would indicate that our committee vote, i'm a member of the commerce committee and the vote there was unanimous to report that bill to the senate in a favorable recommendation and again demonstrating overwhelmingly bipartisan support in regard to this aviation legislation. kansas is an aviation state. wichita and south central, kansas, known as a significant provider of airplanes, general aviation airplanes and parts. we have lots of contractors in that process. we're also a rural state. wichita in fact is knowns a the air capital of the world but in addition to the manufacturing sector which is so important to our state's economy, so

important in our ability to compete globally, we're a rural state and airplanes and airports matter to us greatly. and so while we care a lot about the manufacturing of general aviation airplanes, we also care a lot about airports and their ability to take care of flights coming in and out of small communities across our state and certainly across the country. that general aviation airport is a connection to the rest of the world and it allows for medical expertise to be flown into a community in life saving efforts, but just more on a day-to-day basis, it allows for us to have access to customers, to suppliers, to clients because we have manufacturing and other businesses in rural communities across kansas whose connection with their customer base and suppliers is through that airport. so in the absence of general

aviation manufacturing, our state suffers greatly but in absence of general aviation airports, our state would suffer greatly as well. what i'm worried about is that the house has not acted in any positive way to the passage of this bill and the deadline of july 15 is rapidly approaching. and what that would mean is if the house does not take up the senate passed version, the expectation, in fact the stated circumstance is that the house would pass a short-term extension of the current f.a.a. legislation and leave the senate bill hanging. many of the folks in this senate who have served longer than i have would recognize the history of this issue in which one extension after another was required because consensus was never developed and the leadership was not provided to resolve the differences over the

years on f.a.a. reauthorization. and the point i want to make by being on the senate floor today in expressing my views to my colleagues is do not allow us to get into this position again in which we would have a series of extensions of the f.a.a. legislation. we need the house to act on the senate bill that's pending in their committee, that's pending on the house side, and differences need to be resolved. at the moment the house has thought passed an f.a.a. reauthorization bill. time is short. july 15 the current law expires, and my plea to my colleagues in the house where i formally served is take up the senate bill, address the issues that you want as members of the house and representing your constituency, and send us the bill back so that we can conference this issue and have a more long-term reauthorization

bill. certainty matters. certainty matters to the manufacturers in kansas. certainty matters to the airports and the pilots who utilize those airports and do not allow us once more to be in this circumstance of an extension one time after another and the uncertainty that that provides. it is, the bill in my view that the senate has approved in such an overwhelming fashion, it would be a shame if the important reforms that are included in that bill were held up by the house in large part because of a significant controversial proposal to privatize the national air traffic control system, and it sharply divides congress. everything that i've read and heard from, everything i've read publicly and everything i've heard from my friends and colleagues, former colleagues in the house is there are not the necessary votes present to pass that provision in the house, and

i from my own experience here in the senate, those votes don't exist in the senate commerce committee, and they don't exist on the senate floor. so let's not tie this bill up over a proposal that does not have the votes to pass, and let's not lose the opportunity to take advantage of the reforms that were included in the senate f.a.a. reauthorization bill. we should not consider what would be called a clean extension of the f.a.a. when the authorization under our bill is the same length. the house is talking about sending us an 18-month extension. the senate bill passed is an 18-month extension. and what would be missing is the reforms that we have worked so hard to include after significant amounts of testimony after a number of hearings and conversations within the commerce committee to make certain that we were doing good

work. don't let that opportunity pass us by. so my point in having this, in this case monologue, hopefully a dialogue on the senate floor is, first of all make sure we stand firm. i'm a senator who would be opposed to a short term, even 18-month extension if it does not include the broad array of things that the senate has included in our bill, and my message to my house colleagues and friends is don't bog this process down in a way that makes it impossible for us to pass the reauthorization legislation to begin with. these are important issues that we ought not let be sidetracked by a proposal that remains dubious and with great concern is considered by members of congress. and as i said earlier, every indication that i know and see

is that proposal would not receive support in the senate or even in the house. so my request, once again, is please, to the u.s. house of representatives, please take up the senate bill, work it, work your will in that bill, but send us something more than just a short-term extension that doesn't include the important and necessary reforms and improvements that the senate-passed bill does. mr. president, i apreasht the opportunity to dish apreasht the opportunity -- i appreciate the opportunity to have a discussion about this topic. i would yield the floor as soon as i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call: