opposition, in november of last year, the f.d.a. approved aquaboint technology's application for its g.e. aqua advantage salmon. so, again, i say salmon or fish even in quotation marks because what we're doing is we're taking a transgenic atlantic salmon egg which has genes again from this ocean pout, this eel, combine it with the genes of a chinook. the egg is meant to produce a fish that grows to full size in twice the time as a normal atlantic salmon. so, again, you just kind of ramping this thing up on steroids, if you will, to cause it to grow twice as fast. these eggs under the f.d.a. application, will be produced in canada. so it's not like you're getting any american jobs there. and then the smolt, although i don't want to use the term smolt because only part of this fish

is real salmon, but they're then going to ship this to panama where they'll be raised in pens. again, no u.s. jobs there. again, the f.d.a. made no mandatory labeling requirement. instead they make it voluntary. and in this bill that we have in front of us, the larger g.m.o. bill, does not create a clear labeling mandate either. and that's the concern that i have here. that's why i have fought to secure mandatory labeling requirement both before the approval of aqua bounty's application and since its approval. we've been making good headway on this issue over the time that i've been here in washington, but unfortunately the bill that we have in front of us today will wipe that work out instead of using the legislative tools that we have at our disposal to effectively and precisely amend

this legislation in order to address the issue of g.e. salmon. so i've offered up an amendment. it's been sponsored with senator sullivan, senator cantwell, murray and merkley. what it would do is require the f.d.a. to create a new market name for g.e. salmon in order to remedy this flaw in the current bill. so, in other words, give the certainty to the consumer. if you're shopping in your grocery store, you will know whether or not what you want to buy for your family is the real thing or whether it is a genetically engineered fish. so the amendment is essentially the same language that was adopted by voice vote, adopted by voice during the agriculture appropriations markup earlier this year. it is substantially similar to language that was adopted by voice in each of the previous two years. so we have this before us.

we've seen it, you've seen it, and yet it's not included right now. but for three years running the appropriations has -- the appropriations committee has approved the labeling of g.e. salmon without debate. so i'm sitting here thinking that this amendment shouldn't be very controversial here, but for some reason it apparently is. apparently it's caused all kinds of issues. i do not see why. so i have offered multiple sensible solutions over the course of several months while this bill was working its way through the process. and i'm here today to again push for consideration of what i believe is truly sensible, truly reasonable. it has been incorporated and adopted before. it makes sense for a host of different reasons, but certainly for the people of alaska. so i am here today as we talk

about the broader g.m.o. debate making sure that colleagues understand that my opposition here is to anything that would mistakenly allow genetically engineered salmon into anyone's homes and have it be mislabeled as salmon. so i will continue to demand that the voices of alaskans and those who care deeply about this, that these voices are heard. with that, mr. president, i see that other colleagues have joined. i thank you for your attention to this matter, and i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from indiana. mr. donnelly: i rise to talk about the bipartisan comprehensive addiction and recovery act and the opioid abuse and heroin use epidemics. as i have said, i believe it will take all of us working

together to address this public health crisis that is gripping hoosier families and communities across indiana and our country. we all have a role to play to address these epidemics. officials at the federal, local, and state levels, prescribers, pharmacists, law enforcement and first responders and parents and families. this bipartisan cara would provide states and local communities with important tools to prevent and treat drug addiction and support individuals in recovery. it includes several provisions adapted from my bipartisan legislation that would enhance prescribing practices and raise public awareness. we were also successful in getting a provision included that would encourage first responder units to connect individuals who receive nalaxone with treatment or other necessary services.

this bill includes programs that will make a difference and should be enacted into law. it is also critically important we fund these initiatives. cara is an important step, but make no mistake, there is work left to do to everyone -- to ensure our communities have the resources and funding to implement these important programs. we have a chance to do something meaningful and bipartisan that will help save lives. for every family and community in indiana and across the nation that has been devastated by opioid abuse and heroin use epidemics, we must get legislation to the president to be signed into law. i also want to talk about another issue that is important to hoosiers. later today the senate will vote in favor of final passage on a bill requiring the labeling of

foods that contain genetically engineered materials. i've worked with colleagues for months on this issue. i know this is about much more than just words or symbols on a label. it's about ensuring we have confidence in the food we eat and the food we feed our children. as a hoosier, i also know this bill is about preserving a long and proud indiana tradition of growing the food that feeds our communities and provides a safe and reliable food supply for the world. the labeling legislation before us is the result of us working together as republicans and democrats to achieve our shared objectives to provide consumers with access to accurate information about the food we eat and to do so in a way that does not mislead consumers into thinking their food is not safe. when this bill is enacted into law for the first time ever, consumers across our country

will have access to the information they want and it will be easy to find. that information would also be delivered in a way that is fair, objective, and based in sound science. today i ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill for final passage. not because everyone got everything they wanted, but because it's a good compromise that achieves our shared objectives. labeling genetically engineered materials will be required so consumers everywhere will have access to the information. it will provide fair and objective information without stigmatizing foods that are completely safe. it contains provisions based on an amendment that my good friend, senator carper from delaware, and i introduced which will require clear and direct access to information on bioengineering through multiple

methods of disclosure. consumers, farmers, and food producers have been looking to the senate for leadership. after months of discussion, we have found a sensible proposal that will bring the right information into our homes and to grocery stores in a responsible way. mr. president, i yield back. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from colorado. mr. gardner: thank you. for anybody who has been watching the news lately they have watched what has happened with the f.b.i. investigation of former secretary of state hillary clinton. and i think in the days that have followed the f.b.i.'s press conference detailing the findings of the f.b.i. investigation, it is very clear that secretary clinton has proven that she can't be trusted in protecting this nation's most sensitive secrets. that's the take-away from the f.b.i. director's press

conference days ago. that's not opinion. that's the conclusion that can be derived, that can be taken from the findings of a very intensive f.b.i. investigation. but had this happened to any other american -- in fact, there were details in press reports earlier today that perhaps classified information had been handled in an extremely careless way by members of the military, maybe others who were punished. but as f.b.i. director james comey said, he did not recommend a punishment in this case for secretary clinton's mishandling of classified information. but in other cases, he pointed out there have been adverse consequences. we saw in the news today, including security or administrative sanctions on those who violated the rules and policies and laws of handling classified information. and that's why senator john

cornyn and i have introduced legislation to address this very serious abuse of handling and mishandling classified information. the bill that we've introduced is called the trust act, because it makes sure that there are consequences for people who handle our classified, our most important secrets in an extremely careless manner. the trust act provides consequences for anyone who exercises extreme carelessness in handling of classified information. any clearance that secretary clinton holds ought to be revoked because of her mishandling of these secrets, and she should be denied access to classified material unless and until she has a legal right to such access by becoming president-elect. in addition, those around the secretary, the people with whom she e-mailed classified information to, e-mails that in some cases were marked

classified, they ought to lose their security clearances as well. secretary clinton has consistently misled the american people about her e-mails. just look at the associated press report published yesterday. in a news conference in march of 2015, secretary clinton said -- and i quote -- "i did not e-mail classified material to anyone on my e-mail. there is no classified material." that's not true. secretary clinton, nbc interview, july 2016, -- quote -- "i never received nor sent any material that was marked classified." that's not true. march 2015 in a news conference secretary clinton said -- and i quote -- "i responded right away and provided all my e-mails that could possibly be work related to the state department." that's not true. secretary clinton, march 2015, "the server was guarded by the

secret service and there were no security breaches." and as we can see through the f.b.i. director's statement, that also is most likely untrue. time and time again secretary clinton has not told the truth to the american people and there should be consequences related to these actions especially when recklessness relates to the most sensitive classified information that this country has. even president bill clinton noted the immense harm that results from dangerous actions like those outlined by the f.b.i. director. in an executive order 12968 president clinton said the unauthorized disclosure of information classified can cause irreparable damage to national security and loss of human life. secretary clinton is an intelligent person. she knew this information was

classified. and some of it was even marked classified. the f.b.i. director himself has said that even if it's not marked classified but you know it's classified, you should be aware of it. and if you have the potential to carry forward classified to disclose classified information, then you shouldn't send it over an unsecured server. as is the case with secretary clinton using an unsecured server hundreds and thousands -- hundreds if not thousands of times as disclosed. now "the new york times" today is reporting that based on the words and comments that you can parson the f.b.i.'s directors statements just a couple of days ago, you can basically tell that clinton's server, this unsecured server was very likely hacked by a foreign actress who quote were far too skilled to leave evidence of their work. that's why secretary clinton's security clearance ought to be revoked. and she should be denied access

to classified material unless and until she has legal right to such access. that's also why those people who acted with extreme carelessness around her, because they know better, should have their security clearances revoked, so they can't continue to perpetrate this kind of extreme recklessness, this kind of extreme carelessness as identified by the director of the f.b.i. the clintons are the great escape artists, the houdinis of american politics. they push the law to the very edge, and just when they get caught or trapped, they pull back. it's a double standard that the american people are sick and tired of dealing with, and i hope my colleagues will support the trust act to protect the integrity of americans and american classified information. mr. president, i also rise today to speak about the threat from north korea and the role that congress has played in enacting tougher policies to counter the kim junk union -- kim jung-un

regime. on february 7, north korea conducted a satellite launch which was essentially a test of an intercontinental ballistic missile but just disguised as something else, but the launch was certainly to test a missile that would in their hopes be capable of reaching the u.s. mainland. in response, on february 10, the senate came together 96-0, 96-0 to pass the north korea sanctions and policy enhancement act, a bill that i authored in the senate along with foreign relations committee -- authored in the foreign relations committee along with senator bob menendez from new jersey. together our legislation mandated not simply authorized but mandated sanctions against individuals who contribute to north korea's nuclear program and proliferation activities. malicious sales tax, censorship of its citizens, and human

rights abuses. the legislation imposed the first-ever mandatory sanctions on north korea and the first-ever cyber sanctions as well. this legislation was recognition that the administration's policy of strategic patience has been a strategic failure. as "the washington post" editorial board stated on february 8, just two days before our bill passed on the senate floor, president obama's policy since 2009, strategic patience, has fail. the policy has mostly consisted of ignoring north korea while mildly cajoling china to pressure the regime. i'm pleased to see that the administration is now shifting its failed policies by implementing key portions of the north korea legislation that cracks down on the north korean regime. on june 1, the treasury department designated north korea as a jurisdiction of primary money laundering concern under section 311 of the patriot act. which will further isolate north korea from the international financial system. yesterday, treasury took another

important step by designating kim jung-un and a number of his top officials as human rights abusers. this designation is long overdue and came about only because congress mandated it, along with a human rights report that was delivered to congress yesterday. we've known for years that this regime is one of the world's foremost abusers of human rights. the north korean regime maintains a vast network of political prison camps where as many as 200,000 men, women and children are confined to atrocious living conditions, are tortured, maimed and killed. i have spoken to defectors. i've had conversations with the defector from north korea who served in the military there, who spoke to me of their torture of these prisons, of people who were put in jail because of their opposition to the kim jung-un regime, people who were tortured because of their defiance of his leadership. on february 7, 2014, the united nations human rights commission

of inquiry released a ground breaking report detailing north korea's horrendous record on human rights. the commission found that north korea's actions constituted a crime against humanity. now, we all are probably asking ourselves why it took so long for the administration to come to the same conclusion and then finally do something about it, but nonetheless this week we finally are. but more remains to be done to send the strongest message that we can to this regime which poses a very serious threat to peace and stability throughout asia, eastern asia and the u.s. last month, north korea has successfully -- last month we learned that north korea successfully tested a missile that was capable of reaching u.s. bases in japan and the u.s. territory of guam. according to open sources, the dprk currently fields an estimated 700 short-ring ballistic missiles, 200 medium range ballistic missiles and 100 intermediate range ballistic missiles. to counter this threat, we need

to proactively work with south korea to immediately station the terminal high altitude area defense or thad in south korea. the regime's nuclear stockpile is growing fast. most recently, nuclear experts have reported that north korea may currently have as many as 20 nuclear warheads and has the potential to possess as many as 100 warheads within the next five years. our military leaders have repeatedly stated that north korea may have already developed the ability to miniaturize a nuclear warhead, to mount it onto their own intercontinental ballistic missile and to shoot it at the homeland. pyongyang is also quickly developing its cyber capabilities as another dangerous tool of intimidation and asymmetric threat to the u.s. as demonstrated on the attack by south korean financial communication systems in march of 2013 or the sony pictures hacking incident in november of 2014. according to a report that was released last year in 2015 by

the center for strategic and international studies, north korea is emerging as a significant actor in cyberspace with both its military and clandestine organizations gaining the ability to conduct cyber operations. according to the heritage foundation, contrary to perceptions of north korea as a technically backward nation, the regime has a very robust and active cyber warfare capability. the recon januarys general bureau, north korea's intelligence agency, oversees 3,000 cyber warriors dedicated to attacking pyongyang's enemies. cyber experts have assessed that north korea's electronic war capabilities were surpassed only by the united states and russia. last month, south korean authorities uncovered a massive north korean cyber hack into more than 140,000 computers at 160 south korean firms and government agencies. reports indicate that more than 40,000 defense-related documents were stolen, including the blueprints for components of the f-15 fighter jet.

let me say that again. north korea perpetrated a hack on south korea that resulted in them obtaining the blueprints for the f-15 fighter jet. yet in light of these gross violations, the administration still has not acted to impose sanctions on north korean cyber criminals as required by the law that passed 96-0 by this senate. in fact, the administration is now nearly two months late in producing a report required under the bill which would name and shame those violators, the perpetrators of these cyber attacks. the crux of the success of the sanctions effort, however, rests with beijing's compliance with china. nearly 90% of north korea's trade is with china, and at least so far we have seen only mixed evidence that beijing is serious about changing its policies toward pyongyang. while the administration needs

to pursue constant and vigorous diplomatic efforts with beijing, it should also not hesitate to impose penalties on chinese entities as appropriate if they are found in violation of the sanctions that this congress has passed. finally, we also need to make sure that we develop a strong trilateral alliance between south korea and japan including enhanced defense and intelligence cooperation to better deter the north korean threat. mr. president, we must never forget that more than 20 years ago, north korea already pledged to dismantle its nuclear program, and yet now we see a regime that has no respect for international agreements or international norms, that is on the cusp of over 100 nuclear warheads. the united states should never again engage in negotiations with pyongyang without imposing strict preconditions that north korea take immediate steps to halt its nuclear program, to cease military provocation and to make credible steps to respecting human rights of the people of north korea.

if the united states does not pursue increased actions against north korea now, we will face much greater threat in the future, and these threats will be immensely consequential to the safety and well-being of the u.s. homeland. mr. president, i thank you and i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. mr. markey: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, we just celebrated independence day, and rightfully so. it was a big break with the past, a big break with the whole history of the united states up until july fourth, 1776. well, we have good news.

there is another new dawn of independence which has arrived in the united states, and that independence is growing by the day. by independence, i'm talking about how we generate electricity in the united states. for 100 years, we were dependent upon oil, upon natural gas, upon coal as our principal source of electricity in our country, combined with nuclear generation plus some hydropower. but now over the last ten years, we have seen a true american revolution which has broken out. in 2015, in terms of new electrical generation in the united states, 8,600 new

megawatts of wind. and again, people say what's a megawatt? well, when you think of a big, big coal burning or natural gas burning electrical generating facility, that 8,600 new wind megawatts would be eight or ten new electrical generating plants using coal in our country. last year, 7,500 new megawatts of solar in the united states. seven to ten new coal burning plants never had to be built because instead solar was used as the means of generating electricity in our country. and the importance of that is that all of those greenhouse gases that otherwise would have

been emitted into the atmosphere from these new coal-burning facilities, these new gas-burning facilities in the united states will never happen, because those plants never had to be built. let's go back to 2015. in 2015, there were 6,000 new megawatts of natural gas, electrical generation capacity in the united states that was installed in all other electrical generating new capacity in 2015, including coal, was almost nonexistent, although there was some, but very small amount. now, let's go to this little bit of history that i think is important for the senators, the american people to hear about. back in 2005, let me give you an

idea as to what the profile of electrical generation in america looked like. in 2005, 50% of all electrical generation in america came from coal. 20% came from nuclear. that's about the same as it is today. natural gas was 19%. hydropower, 5%. that's about the same as today. oil, 3%. that's pretty much down to zero in the united states today. but wind and solar combined were less than .5% of all electrical generation in the united states in 2005. we had gone through the entire energy history of the united states, and that was the best we could do, .5%, wind and solar. again, the tax breaks weren't there for wind and solar. they were there for natural gas, they were there for coal, they

were there for nuclear. they were not there for wind and solar. and then policies in america began to level the playing field so that wind and solar could compete. so now by the time you reach 2015, coal is now down to only 33% of all electricity generated in the united states. natural gas is up from 19%, up to 33% from 2005. and again, natural gas emits half of the greenhouse gases that coal does when it is generating electricity in our country. nuclear stays the same at about 20%. hydropower is still 5% or 6%. but here's the interesting thing. all of a sudden, solar plus wind is up to 6% of all electrical

generation over the last ten years, but the interesting story is how fast wind and solar are now being added to the total mix of electricity in our country. so now let's go to 2016, this year -- this year. here's what's on the books for this year. 14,500 mega-watts of solar, 9,000 new mega-watts of wind. natural gas, about 8,800 meg watts, and nothing else come in. no coal on the books planned for this year in the united states of america. so you can see that solar and wind are on track to produce twice to three times as much new electricity as natural gas, and

then there is no other competition. so this revolution is taking place at a very rapid rate in our country. in the year 2016, we now have 310,000 jobs in the solar industry. we have 88,000 jobs in the wind industry. in other words, we now have 400,000 people working in the wind and solar industry in the united states of america. it's on pace to have 600,000 people working in those two industries by the year 2020. we're down to 65,000 coal miners in america, as this new set of technologies continues to expand, continues to lower in price, we are seeing a dramatic change in this energy mix.

now, let me add something else, which is that we're not alone here in the united states. last year in 2015, across the whole planet, one half of all new electrical generating capacity came from renewable energy. one half for the whole planet in new electrical generating capacity. here's something else that i think is important for people to understand. even as we make these incredible investments in the new energy technologies across the planet, for the last two years, global energy-related carbon emissions actually stayed flat while the global economy grew. so that kind of defies conventional economic wisdom that there is a direct correlation between how much you pollute and how much you can

generate in new gross domestic product. well, that has now been broken -- globally, gross domestic product continues to go up. emissions are flat. so that means that we're now on a pathway, as more and more renewables, more and more hybrid automobiles, electric automobiles, more and more new technologies come online, that we're going to see a decline in greenhouse gases, even as the global economy continues to grow. but how are we going to accomplish it? well, we have to have tax policies on the books that give incentives to these new technologies. you don't have to worry about the oil industry. they've been taken care of for 100 years. what we do have to look at, however, is that the koch brothers and others, who have a

business stake in oil, in gas, in goal, continue to argue against giving the same kinds of tax breaks to the renewable energy industry that have always been given to the fossil fuel industry. in fact, when we were last year debating whether or not we were going to have extensions of tax breaks for wind and solar, the koch brothers wrote a letter to every member of the house and senate saying that that would be destructive of the free market system. well, they forgot to write this letter with regard to subsidies for the oil industry, for the coal industry, for the natural gas industry, for the nuclear industry. all of a sudden, when there is a new technology that does not pollute and which they are not heavily invested in, now they decide that the purity of this

system requires that we begin by not having tax breaks for the new energy technologies. and how do they handle that? well, they just make sure that they have all kinds of interests out there who try to then make an argument, an economic argument, a climate argument that those same kinds of tax breaks that the other industries have always received are not justifiable, are not needed for the wind and solar industries. so this is an incredible revolution where in 2005 only 79 total new solar mega-watts were installed in the country. this year, we have 14, 500 are going to be installed. so the tax policies did not in fact give a break to the new energy technologies.

but the truth is that we're now on a pathway to having a revolution where by the year 2030 we could easily have 400,000 mega-watts of wind and solar and other renewables installed in the united states. by the end of next year, we'll have 150,000 mega-watts. mind you after 70 years, the nuclear industry has 100,000 mega-watts. and he and, again, every time i use that term "mega-watts," i know it can get confusing. but just understand that bottom line, wind and solar are coming as new additions to the grid at an average of 1 fo -- of 1% to % every year. so by the year 2030 it could be between 25% and 30% of all electrical generation at the current pace at which it is being deployed in our country.

and so that level playing field that we've been working hard to create and which we have to continue to work hard to create is making a huge difference. the clean power plant, which president obama has propounded, that will drive it more. the 30 states that have renewable electricity standards as goals within their own states, that makes a big difference. but also the policies which we create here, the tax breaks for these new industries, will make a huge difference towards meeting our goals. and so from my perspective, we have a chance to have america with 100% renewable electricity by the year 2050 in our country. we have a chance to change the whole path of the planet in terms of how they look at these energy technologies. no one had these kinds of cell phones in their pocket in 1993.

no one. they were big bricks. they cost 50 cents a minute. but we began to have a revolution. and seven or eight years ago, everyone started to have one of these phones in their pocket. unimaginable to a preceding generation of americans, but how about this: 800 million for instance now have these wireless devices in their pockets who did not have them in the year 2000. we can deploy wind and solar in africa, south asia, all around the planet if we make the same kind of investment in he will having these technologies. and just recently in germany for one day the whole country was renewable. in portugal, for morning hour -- for four days the entire country was renewables for electrical generation. so i believe we can do and should do 100% by the year 2050, and that's why i will be introducing a resolution in the senate expressing the sense of

this body that the united states should commit to generating 100% of all of our electricity from renewables by the year 2050. and i urge my colleagues to support me in this effort. massive job creation, reduction in greenhouse gases, world leadership, and an ability to avoid the worst, most catastrophic consequences. -- of climate change on our planet. last year was the warmest year ever recorded. this year is on track to be the warmest year ever recorded. it just keeps getting more and more dangerous. but the answer, the solution is within our grasp. thank you, mr. president. i yield back the balance of my time. the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i want to begin by briefly commending the

efforts of the junior senator from pennsylvania, senator toomey, for his work and leadership in crafting legislation which would protect families from the dangers of so-called sanctuary cities that the senate considered yesterday. sanctuary cities are, frankly, not particularly appropriately named because these are cities that have made a conscious decision to refuse to cooperate with the lawful orders of federal authorities, especially when it comes to removal of criminal illegal aliens. and the bottom line is, the failure to cooperate with federal law and federal officials is a danger to the very communities that many of our colleagues who blocked this legislation claim to want to protect. in other words, these so-called sanctuary city policies that refuse to cooperate with the removal of people who demonstrate their untrustworthiness by committing crime after crime after crime,

they are a threat to the entire community, including legal immigrants and native-born americans. senator toomey's legislation would have cut federal funding to these cities and counties that refuse to follow the rule of law and would empower local authorities to crack down on those crimes on our soil. unfortunately, once again our democratic colleagues filibustered this commonsense proposal. in addition to another bill, it would have helped protect our communities. it's beginning to appear they're making a habit out of blocking bills that this country needs. let me give you another example. this last week our democratic colleagues were faced with a choice. they have made the point over and over and over again that the zika virus, which is being carried by a mosquito which is native to our southern parts of the united states, that this threat was at our nation's doorstep, and they said, we need

some additional funding in order to combat this threat by mosquito eradication, which is part of it, by developing clinical trials for a vaccine, and advising and informing and educating the public on what to do to protect themselves, because we know -- we saw a picture of it on the senate floor of the devastating impact on a woman who is pregnant, on her a and her child. last week we had a picture of a child with microcephally, the shrunken skull and brain and the tragic circumstances under which this child's short liervetion the circumstances they would -- short life, the circumstances they would face. we could avoid all that if our senate colleagues would just quit playing politics. they had a choice, to protect pregnant women and their babies from the devastating impact of

the birth defect caused by the zika virus or they could play partisan politics. what did they choose? it is pretty obvious they've chosen to play partisan politics. every senate democrat voted for $1.1 billion in zika funding. what did the joint conference committee of the house and senate produce that they filibustered? zika funding for $1.1 billion. in other words, they voted against the very amount of money that they had previously voted for. they need to quit gambling with the health of americans. that's what senator reid said, the democratic leader, when he urged us to fund the president's request for zika funding. but then they abruptly did an about-face when presented with a bill at the same funding level that they themselves had previously voted on. so who's gambling now? who's gambling now?

and who's going to answer the mother of a child born with a devastating birth defect and explain to them why they thought that politics was more important than actually coming up with prevention and coming up with a vaccine that actually would stop the threat of these dangerous and devastating birth defects? if the democrats in the senate want to gamble on the future health of the next generation, i want no part of it. zika poses a real and immediate threat to our country, particularly in places like texas where i come from, and to ignore the devastating impact of this virus is irresponsible and heartless. so we'll soon provide another opportunity for our democratic colleagues to move forward with a bipartisan, bicameral funding bill that includes the needed resources to fight zika here at

home. at the funding level that the democrats in the senate have previously supported. our public health officials need to continue the good work they're doing to study the virus, to contain it, and to keep it from spreading here in the united states, and they need the financial resources to do it. it is just beyond comprehensible why our senate colleagues would continue to filibuster this important funding. saying that the bill lacks sufficient funding to fight the virus is just plain ridiculous. that's what they've said. according to reports from just yesterday, administration officials estimate that they still have nearly a half billion dollars of unspent ebola funds that could be put to use for combating zika. so i would invite our democratic colleagues to reconsider their previous decision to block this funding and consider the wide

ranging implications of their no vote from last week. i'd urge them to reconsider so we can get these funds into the hands of those who protect us and our children. mr. president, on another matter yesterday i spoke on f.b.i. director's comey's announcement regarding secretary clinton's use of a personal e-mail server. he called her and the staff that enabled her to use this private server on which to transmit classified information, he called them extremely careless. and he made clear that their actions were egregious in the sense that they put classified information at risk that our nation's enemies would love to have and use against us. in summary he said they should have known better which is pretty self-evident, and he said they put our country at risk. even more devastating his announcement on tuesday proved

that secretary clinton had been lying to the american people about her server from day one. it's clear now from director comey's investigation that she did send and receive classified information some at the very highest levels of classificati classification. it's clear now that her server didn't provide adequate security leaving sensitive information vulnerable to our nation's adversaries, and it's evident now she didn't give the authorities full access to all of her work-related e-mails. director comey said the f.b.i. uncovered several thousand more that she hadn't turned over. in a word this is unacceptable and for somebody with so much experience in government, as first lady, as united states senator and then as secretary of state to gamble with our nation's most important secrets is just completely irresponsib

irresponsible. but unfortunately it tends to reinforce a narrative that secretary clinton has been responsible for writing herself, and that narrative is when it comes to her activities, anything goes. the rules may apply to you and me, but they certainly don't apply to her. and unfortunately she feels like she's above the law and the rules don't -- as i say, the rules that apply to others don't apply to her. this is simply unacceptable. as director comey noted people who engage in what secretary clinton did, the mishandling of classified information are often at least held accountable through some security or administrative sanction. that's if they don't get fired or put in prison for their misconduct. we have to do what we can here to hold her and her staff accountable. it's part of the oath that we take to uphold the constitution and laws of the united states no less than if we were an f.b.i.

agent or a federal judge, we as senators take that oath. it's the right thing to do. it's really important that we send a firm message that this sort of behavior is unacceptable and hopefully we deter others from taking the same risks to our nation's national security and the lives of the men and women who serve in our intelligence services. we send a message this is not acceptable, there will be a price to be paid. so in light of the f.b.i. director's announcement, i've introduced legislation with the junior senator from colorado, senator gardner, to do just that. this legislation is called the trust act. and it would revoke the security clearance of anyone found to have demonstrated extreme carelessness in the handling of classified information and would keep them from receiving the clearance in the future so they couldn't do this again. it will also clarify existing

law so that everyone understands that extreme carelessness which the f.b.i. found in the case of secretary clinton and her staff that it basically becomes the legal standard, whether or not you constituted it was gross negligence. there are opinions i respect like former attorney general mike mukasey who said extreme carelessness and gross negligence are basically the same thing. heard mayor giuliani, former distinguished united states prosecutor, former third head of the -- third person in line at the justice department say there's plenty of evidence with which to prosecute somebody who's done the things and said the things that secretary clinton and their staff have, but we understand that director comey has taken that off the table and now attorney general lynch has said we're going to close the file.

but the truth is, secretary clinton and her staff have proven that they're either unable or disinterested in keeping safe highly sensitive classified information and they've gone so far as to cover up the scandal at every step along the way. and i think that should mean at minimum that they forfeit the privilege of having a security clearance so at least they can't do this again. director comey made clear yesterday that secretary clinton and her staff should have known better. that seems self-evident. somebody with long experience in the federal government from first lady to united states senator to secretary of state with the highest level of security clearance in the federal government, she should have known better, and she was reckless and careless in the way she handled this classified information. add to that the frightening implications of this sensitive

information getting into the hands of our adversaries, like the russians or chinese intelligence agencies and any reasonable person would come up to one conclusion. they've got to be held accountable and there's got to be some penalty for putting our nation's security at risk. i'll continue to call on the department of justice to be open and transparent here. director comey said he thought that the circumstances of this case while they didn't rise to the level sufficient for indictment, that transparency was really important. and that's why he made really the unprecedented announcement that he did which was frankly far exceeded his authority as the investigative agency where he said no reasonable prosecutor would have sought an indictment in this case. but i hope the justice department responds to the letter which i sent, today's date, where i asked him to

release any unclassified information as it relates to this scandal. all of the investigation which costs millions and millions of dollars to the american taxpayer, the american taxpayer deserves to be able to see this, especially in light of the fact that there will be no criminal prosecution according to director comey's recommendation and according to the decision of the justice department to close the case yesterday. i'd urge the secretary, secretary clinton, to ask the justice department as well to release the f.b.i. reports and any transcript of her three and a half hour long interview as well because i think the american people deserve it. i suspect what we'd find is that secretary clinton's lawyer said no matter what you've done before, don't lie to the f.b.i. in that three and a half hour interview because that lawyer and secretary clinton would know that no matter what you've done or haven't done before, if you

actually lie to an f.b.i. agent, that is an indictable and prosecutable crime in and of itself. so i have reasonable confidence that she did finally come clean and tell the truth to the f.b.i. in that interview, and now the only right thing to do in the interest of the sort of transparency that director comey talked about, since there can be no prosecution, there can be no indictment, the only right thing to do in the interest of transparency and public accountability is for that transcript of the three and a half hour long interview to be released to the american people so they can judge for themselv themselves. i believe the american people deserve at least that. mr. president, i'd ask unanimous consent that my letter of july 7 to the honorable loretta lirchl be made part of the record -- lynch be made part of the record following my remarks. the presiding officer: without objection. a senator: mr. president?

the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. a senator: mr. president, a judicial emergency is an official term that refers to a vacancy in our court system for a court that carries a heavy caseload or a vacancy that has remained open for an extended period of time. ms. warren: in the u.s. we now face dozens of judicial emergencies. why so many emergencies? why so many vacancies in courts with heavy caseloads? why so many long-term vacancies? well, the reason is simple. when it comes to confirming judges, senate republicans simply refuse to do their jobs. their view seems to be pretty simple. if government isn't working for them or their rich friends or their right-wing allies, then they will simply refuse to let it work for anyone. yesterday the senate confirmed one judge, brian martinotti to sit on the district court in new jersey. one judge, one noncontroversial nominee for a noncontroversial job who had been waiting for a vote for over a year.

the republicans who control the senate seem to think that is reasonable. it is not. 16 district court judges, 16 have been investigated, gone through hearings, been voted out of committee, and are pending on the senate floor right now. one circuit court nominee is also on this list for a vacancy that has remained vacant for more than six years. 14 states, 14 states have judges on this list. about half of these nominees have been sitting for nearly a year or more. these courts do an enormous amount of work. their work is not political, democratic and republican senators have worked with the president to select these nominees to fill vacancies on these courts. and those nominees deserve votes. right now there's no indication they're going to get votes and in a few days republicans who control the senate are planning to pack up their things and shut down the senate for most of the rest of the year.

this is ridiculous. no other workers in america get to walk off the job before the job is done, and the same should be true for the united states congress. we shouldn't leave until we do our work. the senate can can't right now to confirm these 17 nominations, all of whom have bipartisan support. so, mr. president, i rise today to make a request for unanimous consent that the senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations: calendar numbers 359, 362, 363, 364, 459, 460, 461, 508, 569, 570, 571, 572, 573, 597, 598, 599, and 600. , that the senate proceed to vote without intervening action or debate on the nominations in the order listed, that the motions to consider be

considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate, that no further motions be in order on the nominations, that any related statements be printed in the record and that the president be immediately notified of the senate's action and the senate then resume legislative session. the presiding officer: is there objection? the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: reserving the right to object. mr. president, as the senator knows, we have a process for considering district judges. it's the prerogative of the majority to set those votes. frankly, in light of the process that we do have, the senator knows this is not the appropriate process. but i do agree with her on one thing, that the senate ought to do its job. one of the things we could do, which is receive broad bipartisan, bicameral support is to fund the efforts to combat the zika virus that creates the terrible devastating birth defects we talked about a moment

ago. while i'll object to this request, there are things we ought to be able to do before we break. the presiding officer: the objection is heard. ms. warren: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. ms. warren: mr. president, we do not have a process that is working. the nation faces a judicial vacancy crisis. 10% of the district court judgeships in this country are empty. we face nearly twice as many judicial emergencies as president bush faced in 2008 or president clinton faced in 2000. cases are piling up. courts are starved for help. the supreme court of the united states sits paralyzed, unable to deal with some of its most challenging cases. but the majority whip is going to pack up and go home leaving 18 judgeships vacant because, well, that's the process? this isn't a game. there is no scoreboard. you don't get to ignore a

national crisis because you care more about scoring political points than keeping government functioning. president obama's job is to nominate judges to fill vacancies and the republicans' job here is to lead us to confirm those judges to fill those vacancies. do your job. so if you won't confirm all of the pending judicial nominees who have been voted out of committee and are currently waiting on the senate floor, then before you leave time for months, let's at least confirm the 13 judges on that list who were nominated last year to fill district court vacancies. mr. president, make a request for unanimous consent that the senate proceed to executive session to consider the following 13 nominations: calendars number 359, 362, 363, 364, 459, 460, 461, 508, 570,

571, 572, and 573. that the national proceed to vote without intervening action or debate on the nominations in the order listed, that the the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid on the table, with no intervening action or debate, that no further motions be in order to the nominations, that any reementd statements be printed in the record, and that the president be immediately notified of the senate's action and the senate then resume legislative session. officer snrer objection sno -- the presiding officer: is there objection? the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: reserving the right to object, mr. president, if i am not mistaken, we are trying to deal with a bitechnology issue when it comes to our agriculture supplies, sometimes -- well, voted out of the agriculture committee that i know the senator from kansas, the distinguished chairman of the agriculture committee, would like to get to. but for the diversions caused by these sorts of request, which

the senator knows will be objected to. but if the senator is really concerned about taking -- doing our job and taking care of our nation's birks then she ought to join me in voting for the $1.1 billion in funding for the zika virus, which is a national health care emergency. and certainly the pictures that i've had here previously demonstrating the consequences of the failure to deal with this zika virus demonstrated by this baby here that has, unfortunately, suffered a devastating birth defect of microcephally, literally a shrunken skull and brain and condemned it to a life -- wcialtion an uncertain future in life not to mention the consequences on the family. i would implore the senator from massachusetts, let's get to work doing this, which i believe the senator has already voted for,

the $1.1 billion in funding p. but when we brought this up, all we get is a rejection and a stonewall from our colleagues on the other side of the aisle and frankly i just don't understand it and it is a terrible mistake because i don't want one baby in america to suffer this sort of birth defect because we dithered and did not do our deuterwhen it came to providing adequate funding to combat the zika virus. now, this is something we should take care of before we break on july 15. we can fight about judges any other time, but this is a true public health emergency. and how senators can come down here and try to hijack the floor and try to say, well, let's talk about something else when we're ignoring the very work that is before us in dealing with this biotechnology agriculture issue or dealing with something that is even more pressing, like

avoiding birth defects and these sort of deaf statuting consequences as a result of the -- dwef statin -- devastating consequences as a result of the zika virus, i don't understand the senator's priorities. i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. ms. warren: mr. president, this has been going on in our a year and a half, that the republicans have delayed and delayed and delayed and gade delayed, until we face dozens of judicial emergencies. and there's always an excuse not to take up even noncontroversial appointments. so, okay, we can't get the 17 who were voted out of committee and are currently pend on the floor through. we can't get the 13 who were nominated in 2015, so how about this deal? there are four district court nominees that have been waiting around for a year or more. they are from tennessee, new jersey, new york, and california. when president reagan was in office, almost no uncontroversial nominees took

longer than 100 days to confirm. let's at least give these four nominees who have been waiting nearly a year or more for their votevotes. the senate can do this, it can do it quickly and we will be done. there's bipartisan support for every one of them. so, mr. president, i make a request for unanimous consent that the senate proceed to executive session to consider the following four nominations: calendar numbers 359, 362, 363, and 364. that the senate proceed to vote without intervening action for debate on the nominations in the order listed, that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid on the table, with no intervening action or debate, that no further motions be in order to the nominations, that any related statements be printed in the record and that the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, and the senate then resume legislative session. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. cornyn: mr. president?

the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: reserving the right to object, we can have a debate about judges, but i think we ought to first take care of the business that's before us you, that the senate has voted to proceed to, which is to deal with the legislation to avoid the state-by-state requirement for labeling for our food products that has been agreed to by the senator from michigan, the ranking member of the agriculture committee, together with the chairman of the senate agriculture committee, the senator from kansas. we ought to be taking care of that. but we also ought to be taking care of this. this is urgent, and how people can think that we need to deal with this -- these lists of judges and sort of hijack the agenda and distract us from our work that should be about preventing these sort of birth defects is frankly a misplacement of priorities. i object. ms. warren: mr. president? the presiding officer: objection is heard. the senator from washington. -- the senator from massachusetts. ms. warren: mr. president, it

would take no time to confirm these junls. these are all people who have been examined by the committee, who have passed out of committee, who are pend on the floor, who have bipartisan support. these are judges from tennessee, new jersey, new york, california, rhode island, pennsylvania, hawaii, utah, massachusetts, maryland, oklahoma, wisconsin, louisiana, and indiana. 14 states will be left without vital judges because of the republican blockade. and a certain point, reasonable people have to ask, why are republicans actually doing this? is it so that if donald trump is elected president he will be able to nominate more judges? what in the world has donald trump every said or done that makes the majority whip so enthusiastic about his judicial appointments? is it trump's enlightened views on the judiciary? donald trump is a guy who just a few weeks ago race-baited a federal jurnlings attacked a judge who spent years defending

america from the trairs of murderers and drug traffickers. trump attacked him simply because the judge refuses to bend the law to suit trump's personal financial interests. and where do you think donald trump got the idea that he can attack the integrity of the federal judges with impunity? he got it from you, from the republicans in the senate, and their decision to turn scores of highly qualified, nonpartisan judicial appointees into political footballs. talk is cheap. if republicans really do disagree with donald trump's approach to judges, then do something about it. confirm these highly qualified, noncontroversial judges. do it now before shutting off the lights and leaving town. i yield the floor. mr. durbin: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from illinois. mr. durbin: mr. president, i would like to address the issue

just raised by the senator from massachusetts and responded to by the senator from texas. she carefully avoided mentioning the obvious. this is the same republican majority that will not fill a vacancy on the supreme court. for the first moment in the history of the united states, in the history of the united states, we have a presidential nominee sent to fill the vacancy of the late-justice scalia, the republicans in the senate refuse to give him a hearing or a vote. that has never -- underline the word "never" -- happened in the history of the united states of america. when we say "do your job," is it starts at the highest court and goes straight down to every federal court in america. well, what i think is particularly galling, troubling, and worrisome, i sit on the judiciary committee. each one of these nominees has been carefully vetted by the department of justice, by the f.b.i., by republican staffers, everyone imaginable, culling through every aspect of their life to see if they are truly worthy of being a lifetime

appointee to the federal bench, and they all pass the test, and they all were voted out of committee. and they all languish on the floor of the senate for the very reason you mentioned. the senator from texas and many others are lying awake at night praying for the moment when president donald trump can pick federal judges in america. unless judge judy is coming out of retirement, i have no idea where he is going to turn to find judicial talent. but i will tell you, we have judicial talent languishing on this calendar at great personal expense. i thank the senator from massachusetts for raising this issue. i'd like to also comment on the zika virus and the threat to the united states. you bet it is serious. we've seen the photographs that have been displayed here about the children who are born with serious birth defects because of the zika virus. it is so serious that the president of the united states noaltified this -- notified this senate in february, february of

this year, to act immediately on providing $1.9 billion -- $1.9 billion to protect as many people as possible from the spread of this virus and the terrible effects that it has. $1.9 billion. not only just to deal with the mosquitoes and the infection but also to develop a vaccine so that we can liberate america from the concern of this virus showing up next year and the year after. hdz 1.9 -- $1.9 billion in february. to date -- to date -- the republican leadership in the house and senate have failed to produce the $1.9 billion that was suggested by the president. we had a compromise number of $1.1 billion that was approved by the united states senate with a strong bipartisan vote, almost a month ago. i think there were 87 senators who et vod for it -- who voted for it because we all understand it is a public health emergency. well, in our bicameral smg, the

bill -- system, the bill then went toafer the house of representatives. what happened next tells the story of what's wrong with the republican-controlled senate today. they took our bipartisan bill for $1.1 billion to fight the zika virus, they phut in a conference committee, they held a meeting but didn't invite any democrats. and they came up with a bill that provided $1.1 billion, but listen to how they did it. they took money away from fighting the ebola virus in africa, which we feared several years ago would spread to the united states and still is a threat to africa and to many other people. they took the money -- public health money to fight the ebola virus and said, we'll transfer it over. you can fight the zika virus. apparently the republicans believe we can fight only one public health challenge at a time. we don't have time for ebola. we're going to move to zika. the center for disease control, the preeminent agency in the world when it comes to fighting

public health disasters, has warned us, don't do this; we are still worried about the spread of ebola and the danger of it. but they didn't stop with that. they didn't stop with taking the ebola money and putting it into the zika virus. they then turned around and larded the bill up with every political ornament they could think would captivate the hearts of the right wing. listen to what they included in the bill: they included a provision that cut $500 million from the veterans administration to process veterans' claims. have you heard that issue? i sure have back in illinois. our veterans wait way too long 0 to get the disability payments they deserve for having served our kufnlt the republicans cut $500 million interest that effort. but they weren't finished. they then turned around and said, we want to make a an exemption in the clean water act. what has that got do with this? why do we need to do it at this moment? that's one thing they have been

longing for. the third thing they turned around and did after they cut the money from the v.a. and after they made this provision to change what the e.p.a. could regulate, as i mentioned earlier, take the money out of ebola, they then moved on to say, we know that women across america will be concerned about family planning because of the threat of the zika virus. so they put language in the bill prohibiting planned parenthood from providing family planning to those who are concerned about the spread of the zika virus. they just can't stay away from planned parenthood. and they included it. well, you'd think that was enough to make this the most controversial political bill to move from the house, but they had one more trick up their sleeve. a provision to allow the display of confederate flags in our veterans' cemeteries. confederate flags. why? why would you take an important bill dealing with a public health crisis and lard it up with all of these miserable

provisions that just excite hearts of some political right-wingers? they did it because they were hoping that we would stop the funding for the zika virus. it is stopped now, waiting for a clean bill. they know the president will never sign this bill, as written. if we would go back to the original bipartisan bill passed in the senate, we would certainly get approval for it. that's why i answered the senator from texas, we wait for the day when we can get back to bipartisanship on this important public health threat. last point i'll make and i see there are others seeking the floor, we will vote in a short period of time on this g.m.o. legislation. scri a lengthy -- i have a lengthy statement that i will put in the record about my position. i want to ask unanimous consent to include several parts -- several articles in the record at this point. the first -- the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: thank you very much, mr. president. the first is an august 20, 2015, article from the "new england

journal of medicine" entitled "g.m.o.'s, herbicides and public health." it makes the point very directly. there has been no credible scientific evidence that g.m.o. foods pose any danger to consumers who consume them, but there is a credible concern about the use of chemicals in the production of these g.m.o. products and how they are being larded on these fields and creating real concern about that ultimate impact on public health, about these agricultural chemicals and the runoff. the second article that i ask unanimous consent to include is from the campbell soup company. i ask consent that it be included. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: campbell soup company has decided they're going to face this issue squarely, honestly, and waste no time. it's a company that i trust. i can't imagine how many cans of campbell soup we've consumed in my household throughout my life. they said it's time to be honest with consumers.

we will tell them. we will tell them point blank on the label so they can read it whether or not there are g.m.o. products contained in the soup. then they can make the decision as to whether they want to buy it. i with issue that were the outcome of this entire debate but it's not. the third point i want to make is it is mindless for us to allow individual states like vermont to decide the labeling standards for national companies. it makes no sense. we cannot allow it to occur. the last point i'll make is this. one of the provisions in this bill i think is embarrassing. and it's a provision which i cannot support. we give three options to food companies when it comes to labeling for g.m.o.'s. either declare right on the label just like campbell soup, g.m.o., non-g.m.o. products included. secondly, use a symbol created by the department of agriculture which we can educate the public on, that can really signal as to whether or not this product has g.m.o. products or not.

and the third is the one that troubles me. it is something called a xy. r.l. or u.r.l. -- i may have the designation wrong -- but it's the scrambled screen that you see that you can't read that some computers can read. and what they want to do, these food companies is not tell you as a consumer whether it has g.m.o.'s or not. they want you to hold your cell phone as you go through the grocery store up to that box of macaroni and cheese to see if it has g.m.o. in it or not by reading all that's written on your cell phone. that is a bad joke. i just went shopping with my two four and a half-year-old grand kids. i cannot imagine walking through that store trying to keep them from raiding different displays and using my cell phone on box after box of macaroni and cheese. that to me is the secret decoder ring approach to this and i think it's an embarrassment to consumers to ask them to go through that. so i'll be voting in opposition to the g.m.o. bill when it comes

before us later in the day. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from north carolina. a senator: thank you, mr. president. you and i are fairly new to this chamber. i know the senate rules prevent me from engaging in anyone who happens to be in the gallery so i won't do that. mr. tillis: but i do have to admit just watching what's going on for the last 15 or 20 minutes, i can't help but think at least one or two of them are saying what on earth is going on down on that senate floor. we've heard arguments. the issue before us is on the g.m.o. vote. we've heard about judge. look, everybody says that we're in gridlock here. there are obviously instances where we disagree. let's set those aside and then address issues where we do agree we have pressing issues. and we have two of those before the senate floor today. the one immediately before us is on g.m.o. labeling. i'm going to get to that in a minute. the other one has to do with funding zika. it has to do with trying to understand why some 38 members

of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle voted for $1.1 billion in zika funding and now it's back before us. it's one vote away from going to the president's desk. and now they're all voting against it. collectively the members who voted for it for the $1.1 million and now voted against it represents states that have 671 d.c. cases reported to date. that looks like we're going to be a little bit here tonight and i'll get into details and share the roll call vote but today i want to talk about g.m.o. and i first want to start by thanking senator roberts and senator stabenow for the work they did for a bipartisan solution to this bill. we voted on cloture yesterday. we had a majority of over 60, i think 65 members vote. what cloture means is to get on the bill. now we're on the bill. what does this bill do? what it's trying to do is avoid the confusion and the cost when a state implements a law that

becomes defacto federal law of the land and increases the cost of prices to consumers. this right here is what we're proposing in the language that we have before us that i hope we vote on and i hope we focus on. this is only one choice of one state, the state of vermont. there are several dozen states who plan to have their own variants. and i'll talk about the absurd exempts and exceptions later on. bottom line, complexity creates cost. cost to the american consumer. in vermont alone, the vermont law, it will increase the average cost per household in vermont alone by $2,000 a year. there are people struggling to pay for the food that they have. there are people right now that are trying to decide do they pay to heat their home or eat. now we're talking about raising it for some of the poorest people up $2,000 a year? complexity equates to cost. this provides clarity. and i'm going to talk a little

bit about that but i do really appreciate senator roberts and senator stabenow for getting those of us who are willing to work together, who are willing to say to people at either end of the spectrum, guys, we're going to come up with a compromise and solve this problem. we have that opportunity before us now. and i hope that we'll get to an affirmative vote later today. but we've got to get to something simple. now, i think that as i said earlier, the state-by-state patchwork, if you imagine this is what vermont decided to do. what about california? what about my state of north carolina, all the other ones? some people say, well, you're preempting state law. when a state law affects interstate commerce across the nation because if i'm a campbell's soup or kellogg's or small mom and pop shop trying to distribute in vermont, if i don't get their labeling exactly right, i could be subject to millions of dollars of fines just because i have a jar or a can or a box on a customer shelf that isn't consistent with their labels.

in north carolina, i live in charlotte. charlotte is right on the border of north carolina and south carolina. you have a truck carrying cans that one can of campbell's soup has to be labeled one way in north carolina, another one in south carolina, does that make sense? it adds cost. it doesn't add value. that's why we're trying to prevent this patchwork of laws that could go on the books. now, i want to talk a little bit about g.m.o.'s for a minute because senator durbin said something that i think is very important. i sat on the agriculture committee. i've asked the heads of the f.d.a., the e.p.a., and the u.s. department of agriculture all the same question in the same committee hearing several months ago. i said, do you have any scientific data whatsoever that would suggest -- and let's go to the f.d.a. first, food and drug administration -- that would suggest that g.m.o.'s represent any threat to health. the f.d.a. appointed by the

obama administration leader said none whatsoever. then i moved to the e.p.a., the environmental protection agency. i asked precisely the same question. i got precisely the same answer. and then i went to the u.s. department of agriculture. i asked precisely the same question, got precisely the same answer. when you walk the halls here, people say i know. i know that they're safe. but for some reason we've lost the argument. ladies and gentlemen, the reason we can't lose the argument on agriculture biotech, what some people call g.m.o., is because our nation and our world's food supply relies on it. 98% of all the corn that's grown in iowa is grown as a result of g.m.o., not some sort of franken corn. corn that's heat resistant, moisture resistant, fungus resistant. if we were to go back and roll back 30 or 40 years of progress in agriculture biotech and take it out of our food supply chain, we could literally be in a position where people will starve. maybe not in the united states

but to all the nations we export to because we simply cannot produce the world's food supply if we go back ten, 20 or 30 years. so it's a very important part of our food supply. it's a safe food. it's an environmentally sound food and it's one that we just have to understand. now, having said that, i firmly believe that everybody has a right to know what's in their food. that's why i love the compromise bill that senator roberts and senator stabenow got before us today. it's pretty simple. now i know i can't interact with the gallery so i won't, but my guess is most of the people in the gallery that are over the age of about 12 have a smartphone. one or two of you may have flip phones and there's an alternative for that that i'll talking about. but most of you have smartphones. many come with a -- i know senator durbin is not familiar

with it but it's called a q.r. code reader. a q.r. code reader. i'll give you a chance if you're watching from home to actually scan it while you're hearing me talk live. everybody -- to me, i remember -- i think of president bush back in the 1990' 1990's when ht through a shopping line and was astounded because he saw a bar codder. wow, that's new technology. it had been around for a while. guess what, folks? q.r. codes have been around a while. when the distinguished gentleman from oregon spoke, he had a q.r. code on the screen. heck, i wanted to see what that is. i clicked on the q.r. code that \with us/us with on the campbe campbell's -- that was on the campbell's canl. it pro -- can. it proves a point you can go from the qrchts rrchts code to the internet -- q.r. code to get the -- to the internet to get the information real time. you can board an airplane with them. you can get information on your fuel. you can get medical services. it's everywhere. it's ubiquitous. it's prevalent.

everywhere you go you see them. when i go to the store because my wife is pretty strict on how much money i can spend, i'll scan a q.r. code to see if i can find a comparative shop and maybe i need to go down the street and buy the same product. it's an integral part of our life, in other words. for somebody to say it's new, weird, different, hard to, it only takes one budget tonl, one click on -- budget tonl, one click on your phone to get to the rich information on the internet. that's what this bill is about. what if the q.r. code was on a product, a can of soup, a bag of flour, any product that you'd buy in the grocery store that's subject to this law? you'd go to your phone. you'd hit q.r. code reader which is on your smartphone and it would immediately bring you to a website. this is what this proposed law requires. it immediately brings you to this website. in the cases i've done it, two or three seconds. the minute you get to this website you get all kinds of information. you get nutritional information,

caloric value, all the kinds of things you need to know what's in your food. right on this page you can click down and you can see whether or not it has any g.m.o. or agricultural biotech content. and then you can even draw it down further and find out what that means. it's in this bill. it can be done. small businesses use this. political people use this. everybody uses this as a way to rapidly get to the internet. i don't know about you all but i think this internet thing is going to take off. i think it's going to be here for a while. i think we're going to become increasingly comfortable with this sort of way to get the most rich information available to the food that we're going to eat. so for those who say this is some sort of weird code or outdated, i don't know if -- about you all but that's not the world that i live in. and i think it's a very effective way to get it. but let's assume that you're a small business and you don't have the ability to create a q.r. code. frankly i would tell the small business do it because that

creates a competitive advantage. that makes you look as big as campbell's soup. let's you compete. easy to put up a website. most of us have them or most of us know how to getthem up easily. i can put one up in two or three hours and have a q.r. code to get to it. let's say it's a mom and pop shop and they don't like q.r. readers. you can have an 800 number. for more product information call this number and they have a statutory obligation to disclose to you the contents of the food, whether or not it has any g.m.o. products in it. you can also if you don't want to hit an 800 number, you can do a simply web address. key in tom's corner store dot-com and get to the same information. the fact of the matter is this bill does that. it fully discloses and creates a statutory requirement that says the food manufacturer must disclose the content of their food, nutritional information, g.m.o. content, et cetera. now, the bill also -- it's

mandatory. there were disagreements on our side because we had members on our side of the aisle that said they didn't like mandatory. we doesn't in interest of compromise to accept a mandatory requirement. it takes two years before the rules are made, about three years before most businesses will have to be fully phased in. a good glide path for getting there, and quite honestly most of the manufacturers will get there because they understand the advantages of consumers getting to their web presence. there are other things they can do once they get there. we know that with q.r. code, we know u.r.l.'s and 1-800 numbers work. we know everybody has the right to know what's in their food. this law mandates that happens. it eliminates absurd exceptions and exemptions -- and put this other code up. anybody who wants to do this, i know this code works. if you're at home right now and you see this code you should be able to take your q.r. code scanner, go up to your tv like i did yesterday and go out to this

web site and see in realtime what i just demonstrated on the prior slide. why do we need to do this? why do we need a federal consistent framework for doing this? why is it the federal government's goal to get involved in this? because back to the first slide i don't want the people in vermont to pay an average of $2,000 for their food. i don't want the people in north carolina to pay $1,100 for the same food they bought last year because of these federally mandated, state mandated labeling requirements. let me give you examples of what i'm talking about in the vermont law. just imagine if this was multiplied by two or three dozen other states. frozen pepperoni pizza is exempt from the vermont law. frozen cheese pizza has to be label. vegetable beef soup is exempt

from the vermont law. vegetable soup has to be labeled. multiply that by dozens and dozens of other states and say, well, you know, we like delivered vegetable pizza has to be labeled but delivered meat pizza doesn't have to be. think of all these exemptions that could occur if we had 50 statehouses trying to create a patchwork of laws. imagine if we had 24, 36 different states we had to interpret, the cost would go up. the food is no more nutritious. it just costs more. that's why we need a federal standard. so to my friends on the other side of the aisle, and a handful on this side of the aisle, folks, this is just common sense. anybody should be able to figure this out on eight hours of sleep. this is not a -l difficult decision. we need to solve this problem now. then we need to get on to zika which i'll come back and talk about a little bit later on and then we can get to all the myriad things we need to get

done here. but when i came here in january of last year, i was accustomed to getting things done in the north carolina house. this is an opportunity to get something done that makes sense, that removes the threat of raising food costs and not producing one iota increase in health outcomes. so i hope that my friends on both sides of the aisle recognize this is an opportunity where we can prove to the people in this gallery and the people in this nation we can actually get things done. this is a compromise. this is something that my friends on the right do not necessarily like and i know some of my friends on the left don't like, but it's right. and it's necessary now so that we can protect the people who don't know if this bill doesn't get passed, they're going to be paying more food for no more value. thank you, mr. president. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. murphy: thank you, mr. president. i'm not supportive of the bill that we'll be voting on shortly

relative to the labeling of g.m.o.'s but i do admit that the senator is right in that this was an example of a group of democrats and republicans working on a solution that may get the support of a supermajority of this body. that of course is the difference between what happens on the process of developing a g.m.o. bill and the process of developing our response to the zika epidemic. everybody knows what happened here. we had a bipartisan compromise that passed the senate. it went to a conference committee. democrats were shut out of the conference committee. i'm a member of that conference committee. there was no negotiation between republicans and democrats. republicans on the conference committee threw out -- threw out the bipartisan compromise that was negotiated here in the senate in order to address the concerns of very conservative members of the house republican caucus, and the bill got loaded up with all of the things that senator durbin mentioned. at the top of list ban on funding for planned parenthood which republicans on the

conference committee knew would poison the well. they knew by putting in a ban for funding for planned parenthood that they would make it impossible to pass the zika supplemental request. we don't need to engage in hyperbole. that is just what happened. what happened is republicans decided to put a bill on the floor of the senate that couldn't pass knowing exactly what could pass because weeks earlier we formed a compromise that was thrown out the window. it's a little unpleasant to be lectured to about why democrats are unwilling to support the zika bill that's in front of us because republicans know exactly why we can't support it, because the compromise that we all worked on got thrown out and all sorts of political poison pills got added to it that everyone in the conference knew would mean that it wouldn't pass the senate. mr. president, i wanted to come down and talk about, frankly, another public health crisis that is confronting this

country. and that's the overdose crisis that is frankly plaguing every single state that we hail from. here's the picture of overdoses in my state over the course of the last four years, and it is a harrowing chart in that if you go back to 2012, we had just under 400 drug overdose deaths that year, and we are on pace in 2016 to more than double that number. our projected number of overdose deaths is 832. and if you look deeper into this chart, it's really fentanyl and heroin that are driving these numbers. in fact, our cocaine overdoses have remained relatively stable. it is fentanyl and heroin that are skyrocketing. tporb almost every other -- you could put this chart up for

almost every state in the country and see this phenomenon. here it is broken down by town. there is almost no town in connecticut that hasn't been visited by this epidemic. this small little town down here is one that you probably know. that's new haven, connecticut. and on june 23, just a few weeks ago, city officials in new haven declared a public health emergency when after 17 individuals overdosed and three people died from fentanyl in less than 24 hours. some of the patients needed as many as five doses of narcan to revive them. and public health and law enforcement in the city effectively ran out of narcan overnight because of this batch of straight pure fentanyl that killed three people and sent 17 others to the hospital.

that's just one night in one town. two years ago the united states congress authorized $4 billion in emergency funding to combat the ebola virus. $4 billion for a virus that had less than ten confirmed cases in the united states. in connecticut, we are going to have 830 people die from opioid overdoses this year. we're a small state. we represent 1% of the nation's population and we're going to have 830 people die from overdoses this year, and this congress hasn't appropriated one dime of emergency funding. and you can't help but think that there is a double standard here, that perhaps the reason that we are not allocating emergency funding for this epidemic which is killing dozens of people every week in my state

is because of the nature of the epidemic, that it's rooted in addiction and that we still have a stigma about addiction in which we blame the addict. well, marvin and laura bentonson came into my office and they told me the story of their beautiful, bright young daughter victoria who began slurring her words at the easter dinner table. victoria was a wonderful young woman but they knew something was wrong that easter. whep she left the house, they went into her room and they found needles and little packets of a substance and they say thus began our battle with heroin addiction. this is the father talking now. he said my daughter has now been through detox and six treatment centers. she's stolen and hocked all of my wife's jewelry while we were on vacation. she's stolen $3,000 to $4,000 from my oldest daughter's bank account, written thousands of dollars of bad checks from her

friend's checkbook and been arrested for shop lifting. the truth is addiction is a disease like cancer and there is no once you have it. it was our daughter's choice to take heroin but it wasn't her choice to become addicted. addiction is a disease and it can be treated medically just like every other disease. there may be an element of choice in taking that first dose, but after that there is a medical solution. and yet, for some reason we allocate $4 billion to combat ebola and not a dime to combat the epidemic of opioid abuse. the funding that we're asking for, and senator shaheen, my colleague, put a vote before this body to appropriate $600 million in emergency funding would go to sam is a for treating. -- samesa for treatment, $230

million would go to justice assistance grants to make sure we're catching the bad guys who are selling this kind of fentanyl that's killing people in new haven. and every day that we wait, this epidemic becomes worse and more people perish. we need to come together and appropriate emergency funding to take on this epidemic. and we need to do it soon. but we need to do other things as well. deep buried into our medicaid reimbursement laws is a discriminatory prohibition on medicaid funding being used for long-term substance abuse and mental health treatment beds. now the presiding officer and i are trying to repeal this provision as it relates to the treatment of people with mental illness, but it also relates to people who are struggling with substance abuse. medicaid dollars cannot be used for long-term treatment beds for

individuals with substance abuse and mental illness. it's realy one of the few instances in our reskpwursment policy -- reimbursement policy at the federal level in which we prohibit reimbursement for treatment prescribed by a medical professional. this seems rooted in the stigma about persons with substance abuse that they should get over it, they should cure themselves. they should make a different choice and so there's not a need for long-term beds. the second thing we need to do is in addition to appropriating emergency funding to take care of this immediate crisis, repeal the prohibition on medicaid dollars going to go long-term treatment beds. not everybody needs long-term treatment, but many do. many are co-phoerbd with the substance -- co-morbid with the substance abuse disorder and mental illness. yet you get kicked out of many treatment centers within a

handful of days. this is leading to the epidemic because once they show up in the emergency room, there is no place to put them. and third, we need to build on what the administration announced recently and pass something called the treat act. the treat act would allow for more patients to get prescription nalaxone for treatment of their addiction. bubuorfin is an effective drugs but now doctors can only see a handful of patients before they hit a cap. we have examples in connecticut of individuals traveling on 12 buses for 12 hours to find a prescriber who still had room under the cap in order to prescribe buprenorphine. the lengths he need to go to get

medical treatment for addiction are more evidence of the stigma that remains in the law. there is no cap when it comes to the number of patients that a cancer doctor can have or an orthopedic certain can have but there is a cap on the number of patients that addiction doctors can have. we've got to pass the treat act as well. mr. president, these addictions can be treated. i sat down with a group of former heroin users, individuals in recovery, in bristol, connecticut, back in march. i spent an entire day in march living a day in the life of the epidemic, visiting emergency rooms, first responders, and people in recovery. and greg told me this story about injuring his back in his line of work, which is being ann arborist. he's outdoors, working with trees and he injured his back. he got prescribed prescription

painkillers for his herniated disk. you know this story. he got hooked on those prescription pain killers and found as many doctors that could continue writing prescriptions as possible until he ran out. then he finally, when he couldn't find any more prescription drugs turned to heroin, and he became an addict. he looked and looked and looked for treatment but couldn't find it. finally he ran into courtney levante who runs a web site called ctsaboxone.com and she found him a treatment provider who could get him on medication therapy, and today he is in recovery. he is doing better. he has made the decision to change his life but he has the resources to do it. and there are millions of people who can tell that story as well

but not enough, because without this funding, without the repeal of this discriminatory medicaid rule, without the passage of the treat act, we are denying medical treatment to the thousands of people in my state who are grappling with addiction, and this year the 800 who will die of overdose. so i would hope that before we break, we will find the courage and the common sense to pass these measures, at least to get some emergency funding appropriated. i thank the body for the time, and i would just like to make a u.c. request. i have a fellow who has worked on this issue, dave kehee, and i ask that he be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the calendar year. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. murphy: i yield the floor. mr. hatch: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. hatch: i rise today to

celebrate -- i ask unanimous consent that these remarks be placed at the appropriate place in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. hatch: i rise today to celebrate the life of a cherished friend and champion of freedom, elie wiesel. in auschwitz and budget committee wald, elie traveled far beyond the limits of human suffering, extending deep into agony and pain and surpassed the torment of hell itself. yet elie survived this hell and he lived to tell his story. through his solemn witness, he worked tirelessly to ensure that the world would never forget the horrors of the holocaust. with elie's passing, we have lost a true hero of human rights and a luminary of holocaust literature. now that elie is gone, we must remember now more than ever his solemn charge to all mankind -- never forget.

never forget the holocaust, that it may never happen again. mr. president, elie was the living conscience of a generation. he knew perhaps better than anyone the depths of human depravity. having suffered as few ever have. he spoke on matters of human nature with a moral authority unmatched by his contemporaries. i was blessed to know elie and ion more -- even more fortunate to call him a friend. i first met elie when i was asked to serve with him on the board of trustees for the u.s. holocaust memorial museum. elie's warmth was immediate, his spirit contagious. that he remained compassionate and kind even after the atrocities of auschwitz is a testimony -- testament to his character and his resiliency and the resiliency of his spirit.

i remember speaking with elie when he came to watch prime minister netanyahu address a joint session of congress. i surprised elie that day when i showed him my misuzal which i have worn around my neck for the past 30 years. i carry this as a symbol of my respect and love for the jewish people of israel. this represents the lord's presence in our lives. elie was delighted that i, a gentile, would wear this religious symbol. i went in to show him my misuzal as if to say that i am still listening, i am still remembering, i am still fighting the incessant tides of anti-semitism that threaten jews across the globe. mr. president, through his writing, elie gave voice to millions of jews whose voices had been -- had stief ld.

-- had been stifled and silenced during the genocide. of course, elie account is but one story. there are six million more, although we can never begin to fathom the suffering of each individual holocaust victim. elie used the power of his pen to make their suffering more tangible to all of us. "night" was the foundation for elie's other works. i strongly encourage all of my colleagues to read elie's somber account of life in a nazi death camp. one of elie's most poignant verses stays with me to this day "never shall i forget that night, the first night in camp that turned my life into one long night seven times sealed. never shall i forget that smoke.

never shall i forget the small faces of the children whose bodies i saw transformed into smoke under a silent sky. never shall i forget those flames that consumed my faith forever. never shall i forget the nocturnal silence that deprived me for all eternity of the desire to live. never shall i forget those moments that murdered my god and my soul and turned my dreams to ashes. never shall i forget those things even where i condemned to live as long as god -- even were i condemned to live as long as god himself. never." how did elie ever find hope again after witnessing such unspeakable atrocities? he found hope in the promise of a jewish nation. he found hope in the belief that

israel matters. that israel is both a state and a state of being. although many disregard -- or disagreed with this view, elie remained steadfast in his support for israel. after being recognized for the nobel peace prize, elie pleaded before world leaders who had grown apathetic in their own support. he said -- quote -- "if you could remember what i remember, you would understand israel is the only nation in the world whose existence is threatened. if this removes but one war, it would mean her end and ours as well, but i have faith. without it, no action would be possible, and action is the only remedy to indifference, the most

insidious danger of all." unquote. elie warned us that neutrality only helps the oppressor, never the victim. he also taught us that we might and we must take sides. perhaps most importantly, elie told us to never forget. there is a quiet elegance and fierce determination in this plea. oftentimes, people try to put a positive spin on this same sentiment by saying always remember, but elie he is shoed this -- eshooed this because he was more concerned about making people feel better about the holocaust, he was concerned with helping them understand the true horror of the genocide to ensure that it would never happen again. he wanted all who listened, all

who read and all who prayed to understand that hate is a virus and it's a virus that spreads quickly. for elie, it was not enough to merely remember those who died. he wanted us to never forget how they suffered. today we can honor elie wiesel and his legacy by remembering always his humble plea -- never forget. mr. president, i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk shall call the roll. quorum call: mr. hatch: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that -- a

senator: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded and i speak in morning business for up to five minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. boozman: thank you, mr. president. the men and women who wear our nation's uniform are selfless heroes who embody the american spirit, courage, honor and patriotism. they are defenders of our freedom. i'm here to honor and pay my respects to one of america's finest, arkansas army national guard sergeant sylvester bruce klein. sergeant klein graduated from humphrey high school where he was a basketball standout. he continued his education at arkansas baptist and the university of arkansas at pine bluff. in 2002, sergeant klein enlisted in the arkansas national guard.

in more than a decade of service, he demonstrated his dedication, his perseverance and commitment to excellence in defense of our country. sergeant klein was a veteran of a combat deployment to iraq with the 39th infantry brigade in 2008. for his service, he was awarded the iraq campaign medal and a global war on terror service medal as well as other awards and decorations. sergeant klein served with the arkansas army national guard's company a, 39th brigade support battalion, 39th infantry bringing aid combat team. his mom called him mr. mom for his devotion to his children and to his entire family, which truly was his greatest passion. on june 14, 2015, sergeant klein died during an annual training

exercise with his unit at fort chafee, arkansas. i ask my colleagues to keep his family, his children, mother and father, sisters, brother and extended family and friends in their thoughts and prayers during these difficult times and i humbly offer my appreciation and gratitude for his service for the united states of america. i yield back the floor, mr. president. mr. boozman: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from arkansas. mr. boozman: i ask unanimous consent that vic howard and mark owens, congressional fellows in senator hatch's office, be

granted floor privileges for the remainder of the 114th congress. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. boozman: thank you, mr. president.

ms. murkowski: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from alaska. ms. murkowski: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are not. ms. murkowski: mr. president, i would like to spend a few moments this afternoon to shed some light and to speak about the issue of postpartum depression. now, as a physician yourself, you are clearly aware of the reality that many new young mothers face when they deal with issues relating to post pardon me -- postpartum depression, but

i think what is perhaps unknown is what the -- the relevance, really the incidents of postpartum depression here in the united states and the fact that here in this country one in seven mothers nationwide will suffer from postpartum depression. in my state of alaska the numbers are even more troubling. we are twice the national average in one in three. one in three new mothers in the state of alaska who will deal with the difficulty of postpartum depression. about a month ago -- it's been a little bit more than that by nol anchorage reporter who was building out a series to look at the impacts of postpartum