inspectors saw firsthand that the core of that reactor had been filled with concrete, rendering it incapable of ever producing plutonium again. and inspectors from the international atomic energy agency continue to assess that iran is keeping up with its commitments in the nuclear agreement. i've never been to iran. i hope to go someday. but a place i have been to is southeast asia. i served three years in a war in that part of the world, with a one with whom we were at war. some places at war for many years, the vietnam war. the names of 55,000 men and women on a granite wall about two miles from where we're standing here today close to the

lincoln memorial, 55,000-plus men and women who died in that war. 55,000. when the war is over, war is winding down. my active duty tour with the united states navy as a naval flight officer came to an end, and i resigned from my regular commission, assumed a reserve commission and continued to fly with the navy as a p-3 aircraft mission commander and naval reserve for another 18 years. the month after i retired from the navy as a captain, i was a member of the house of representatives. i led a trade delegation, not a trade delegation but a delegation of six of us, the vietnam veterans, members of the u.s. house of representatives back to vietnam, in august of

1991. we went at a time when even though we were not at war with iran, there was still great animosity between our two countries. some of that spurred by the fact that thousands of americans, m.i.a.'s, we never found out what happened to them. they disappeared, some cases almost without a trace. and we had very little cooperation from vietnam to try to find out the truth of their demise. there is a lot of speculation that they are being held as p.o.w.'s in iran -- not in iran, but in vietnam, cambodia, and laos, and there were actually photographs of people alleged to be our m.i.a.'s that were being held in captivity. we didn't know where but the assertion was in vietnam or cambodia or laos. it turned out during our congressional delegation trip there in august of 1991, it turned out that the pictures

that were shown on the cover of "newsweek" and "time" magazine and front pages of newspapers all over this country were not americans. they were soviet nationals. it was a -- really an effort by people in cambodia, bad people to try to extort money apparently from the families of the m.i.a.'s, american m.i.a.'s who never came home, and that the people in those pictures are actually soviet nationals, not missing americans. during the midst of all this back and forth about the missing m.i.a.'s from america, from that war, six of us led a -- a congressional delegation. we went to vietnam. we met with the new leader of vietnam. he just became the leader in august of 1991 of the communist party, making him the top leader of vietnam. we presented to him from the bush administration, george herbert walker bush

administration. this was the deal, if you open up your war museums, allow us to explore, excavate crash sites, have freedom to move around your country to see what americans respond or believe americans respond. if you do all those things, we will reciprocate. we will move toward normalized relations with your country. and there is a lot of lack of faith on the sides of both countries, vietnam and -- vietnamese were fearful we would move the goal post. even if they did all the things they are required to do to normalize relations, we would move goal posts and still not normalize relations. for our part, there was concern that they will never do those things anyway, so why should we bother? at the end of the day, we engaged with the vietnamese, and they engaged with us. they did the things they were supposed to do. we did as well. we normalized relations about four years later. john kerry, john mccain did good work in the senate. our delegation did i think good work in the house. and one administration, george

herbert walker bush administration passed the baton to that of president clinton and normalized relations were established about four years later. the first u.s. ambassador of vietnam was a member of our delegation, former p.o.w., former air force pilot, pete peterson. fast forward about 25 years later, a month and a half ago, president obama was nice enough to invite me to join him in a trip back to vietnam. took along a couple of congressmen as well. and the -- a lot had changed in those 15 years, 25 years, a lot had changed. and to today, the united states of america is vietnam's top export market. today vietnam is part of the 12-member transpacific trade partnership that we are endeavoring to establish and get approved here and 11 other countries. the vietnamese announced while we were over there a month and a

half ago a $11 billion deal with boeing for 137 737 jets. they announced they were going to buy from pratt whitney, aircraft engine company, another $3 billion worth of engines to put in 63 airbus. the president lifted the ban on arms sales to vietnam, and a lot of other announcements were made. while we were over there, we learned that a survey of the vietnamese people, two surveys done earlier this year. one indicated that to the vietnamese people, 84% of them had a favorable opinion of the u.s., 84%. another indicated 95% of the vietnamese people have a favorable opinion of the u.s. highest of any nation by -- highest regard of any nation by the vietnamese people. they like us more in vietnam than we like them. kind of ironic. meanwhile, in iran, iran is also

not unlike vietnam, a young nation. about 78 million people who live in iran. more than half of them are under the age of 25. and they have a great affection for our country. some of the leaders do not. but many of the people do, particularly the younger people. and they want a better life with us and a better relationship with us. they have had elections since the joint agreement was agreed to and the elections have enabled both the parliament and the council of experts which elects the next supreme leader. the moderates, the reformers made great strides in those elections earlier this year. very encouraging results. a year later, among the other things that have happened, the iranians have decided that they have had a hard time accessing capital to be able to purchase things. i request one more minute, mr. president.

the -- it just says the vietnamese have finalized a large deal, purchase of american jets. the iranians announced about two weeks ago that they will be purchasing a number of 747 jumbo jets built by boeing, 737's, 777's. the value of the deal is worth about $17 billion over the next four, five, six years. so i -- i would suggest to our colleagues who said you can't trust these guys, well, we still have problems with what they're doing with some of their missile testing, we have problems with the support of hezbollah and some other terrorist groups like that, but for the most part, they have kept their word on the deal, the joint deal that we signed, the joint comprehensive plan of action, and we're starting to see some commerce transact between both countries that actually inure to our bottom line to strengthen the economy of this nation.

so i just want to say that it's time for us to spike the football, to say everything's fine, it's going to be fine, no. eyes wide open. that's important. eyes wide open. but having said that, i think most fair-mined people would say so far so good. let's continue to be vigilant and hopefully a year from now, the second anniversary of the signing of this joint agreement will have even better pieces of news, better news. not just for us, not just for iran but for the whole rest of the world. and with that, i thank you, mr. president, for that extra minute, and i yield to the senator from massachusetts. thanks so much. mr. markey: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. mr. markey: mr. president, i'd like to start my remarks on the comprehensive addiction and recovery act with a story i received from one of my constituents, david. he's a patient at hope house in boston. hope house is the oldest and one of the largest residential treatment programs for adults in massachusetts. this is what he said. senator markey, addiction has

totally ruined my life. they quickly took everything from me and my family. it has stripped me of my dignity and my self-worth, along with my self-respect, and i also lost the trust of my entire family. addiction started late for me. i was 44 years old. i had everything i could possibly dream of. a beautiful wife, a son, two stepdaughters that i raised and put through college. we also built a new home in 2000. i had a great career, and i was a few years away from retiring. then my family and i went on vacation for two weeks and i came home with a parasite in my sphum for which i was prescribed pain medication. that was at the end of april of that year. in may, i had my appendix taken out. in june, i had to have my gallbladder out, all the while being prescribed pain meds. before i knew it, i was addicted. it wasn't long before there were no more scripts to be had. then i was doing heroin. this was so scary for me because

i had not used any drugs my entire life. within two years, everything was gone -- wife, family, job, house, everything. and it's been a real struggle to get out and to stay clean. between not being able to get a detox bed, or if i did after five days only to be told there were no beds available for further treatment, which meant back on the street to start the whole process all over again. i finally did make it to the hope house, which i am so grateful for. i know i am going to make it this time. i just feel that i can do it. and i thank you for the chance. i thank everyone who is helping me for the chance. i pray for david and all the patients at hope house. they found the help they needed and we hope they will have the strength and the support to achieve long-term recovery. i am proud that this opioid legislation contains provisions of the treat act, the recovery

enhancement for addiction treatment act, a bill i introduced with senator rand paul of kentucky and other colleagues here in the senate. the treat act addresses the demand side of the opioid epidemic. i firmly believe that if we are going to reduce the supply of heroin, fentanyl and illicit prescription drugs, we have to reduce the demand through treatment, but for far too long, outdated and scientifically unsound federal restrictions have severely limited access to effective medication-assisted treatment like saboxone for opioid addiction. the treat act removes these restrictions. importantly, the treat act would allow appropriately trained nurse practitioners and physician assistants to treat patients with these life-saving therapies. these treat act provisions which are included in the cara conference report will increase access to treatment, especially

in community health centers and rural communities across this country, and i am grateful that these provisions are included in the bill that we will vote on today, and i am hopeful that they will have an impact in the future. it's been a long haul and hard work over the last few years, but we have achieved a measure of success that will impact lives as soon as this bill is signed into law. i would like to sincerely thank senator murray and senator alexander for their support on the treat act. i'd also like to thank senator hatch and representative pallone and upton and all the cara conferees who worked to get the treat act provisions included in this final package we are voting on today. and i'd also like to express my appreciation to senators whitehouse and portman and all of the senate and house cosponsors of the treat act that supported efforts to get the law changed so that more people who

need it can get the treatment which they need. but in massachusetts, i am hearing enormous frustration from people who don't feel that adequate resources are being brought to bear on this enormous epidemic of prescription drug and heroin addiction, and just like david, countless people suffering from addiction cannot find a bed for detox, and then when they are at their most vulnerable moment in recovery, they cannot find a place or provider for long-term treatment. for the months that we have been debating cara in this chamber, we've heard the statistics. our nation is experiencing more deaths from drug overdoses than from gun violence or auto deaths. 80% of people suffering from heroin addiction started on opioid pain medications approved by the food and drug administration and prescribed by doctors who aren't required to receive education on safe opioid prescribing. nearly 30,000 people in the united states died of an opioid

overdose in 2014. approximately 1,300 of those were in massachusetts. of those 1,300, 754 had fentanyl in their system. massachusetts is 2% of america's population. if you multiply 154 types 50, you're up to 30,000 people dying from fentanyl in our country. that's a -- we haven't even begun this battle on fentanyl and it's coming and it's coming with an urgency that is very difficult to even imagine of the total deaths from opioids in america would be the equivalent of a vietnam war every single year. for fentanyl, it's 50 times more powerful than morphine. unbelievable. that's how powerful it is. 50 times more powerful. so this is just something that we're going to have to deal with. and approximately 2.5 million

americans abuse or were dependent in 2012. fewer than one million received treatment for their condition. so out of the 2.5 million who needed help, only 1 million got it in our country. we are being overwhelmed by a tsunami of heroin and prescription drug addiction by fentanyl and we must stop it before it drowns any more families in our country. so we had an opportunity here in order to make sure that we put real funding into this bill for more treatment. we're not going to meet that challenge here today, but we do need funding for those families, funding for treatment providers who help put people on the path to recovery, funding for our sheriffs, our firefighters and other first responders who carry the overdose prevention drugs that save lives, funding for the public education campaign so that we prevent addiction before it takes hold. we will not save lives and stop this scourge of addiction unless

we in fact ensure that there is full funding for treatment. we will save lives with more treatment options, with more narcan, with more counselors, with more education, with more beds, with a better continuum of care, but we must fund it. the bill that we are voting on today is a good step, but we still have much further to go. without that funding, this effort will not do the full job that our country wants us to do. ouowe are fighting a war. we are hemorrhaging by the day. if we are to staunch the flow of suffering and death, we desperately need funding to implement all the programs in this bill. ladies and gentlemen, we are at a defining moment in our national discussion to address the public health crisis of addiction. our work doesn't stop here. it has only just begun. let's be clear. stopping the overprescription of opioid pain medication that is

fueling addiction and overdoses starts with the prescribers. we need to require anyone who prescribes opioid pain medication and other control substances to undergo mandatory training on safe prescribing practices and the identification of possible substance use disorders. we need to make sure that people would enter the judicial system don't arbitrarily have their medicaid coverage terminated making it more difficult to access treatment once they are released and fueling once again the vicious cycle of incarceration. we need to make sure that all opioids approved by the food and drug administration are first reviewed by independent experts to ensure that these drugs are not only safe and effective but also won't continue to fuel the epidemic of addiction in this country. we need to make sure that prescription drug monitoring programs are fully utilized and that positionally interoperable in order to prevent doctor shopping, and we must let big

pharma know that their army on capitol hill will be matched by an army of advocates to raise awareness and save lives. the united states congress has an opportunity to let all those struggling with addiction know that help is on the way. we know that we have heard their stories and we know that we will not forget them. we must let them know that no matter how dark life seems right now, that there is hope and that sunlight will grace them once again and that this chamber has not finished this job, this journey that we must be on with every family in our country because substance abuse is a crisis, the likes of which we have never seen in america. have never seen in america. testing.p testing. stand today congratulating all those who worked on this bill but also saying that we must pledge that we are going to continue to stand up and fight for the funding and there are investments we need to make. we must stand united to end this

crisis of addiction in our communities now and for generations to come so children will have to look to the history books to find that there ever was a year like 23016 -- like 2016 and this epidemic which is raging across our country. mr. president, i yield back the balance of my time. the presiding officer: under the previous order, all postcloture time has expired. the question is on the adoption of the conference report. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to change their vote or to vote? if not, the ayes have it 92, the nays are 2. the conference report is adopted. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from arizona. mr. flake: i ask unanimous consent that the senate be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. flake: mr. president, i come to the floor today to speak in support of legislation i've introduced called the venue equity and nonuniformity

elimination act, or the venue act. this addresses patent venue reform. patents are an important part of the economy and are vital to promoting innovation and spurring growth. however, the health of the patent system is at risk. specifically, there is an ever-increasing problem of frivolous patent lawsuits brought by nonpracticing entities, also known as patent trolls. this problem is exacerbated by plaintiffs being able to hand-pick friendly judicial venues that are otherwise unrelated to the alleged infringement. an article in the harvard business review states that patent trolls cost defendant firms $29 billion per year in direct out-of-pocket costs and -- quote -- an aggregate patent litigation destroys over $60 billion in firm wealth each year." unquote. it's clear that these types of abuses impose substantial costs

on the economy and simply cannot be ignored any longer. additionally, according to a 2013 whitehouse patent report, the bull -- white house patent report, the bulk of patent reports targets small and investor-driven companies. this is a real threat to innovation. the venue act addresses this issue and assures that patent cases are litigated where there is a connection to the patent dispute. under the venue act, in order for a case to be properly litigated, it must be brought where either, one, the defendant has its principal place of business -- i'm sorry -- or, two, the alleged infringement act occurred, or, three, where the inventor conducted research and development that led to the patent. in addition to the provisions related to the proper venue, the venue act provides a more streamlined avenue for those seeking review of erroneous venue determinations. i believe my legislation strikes the right balance for determining when venue is

proper, but i also understand that addressing venue is just one piece of the puzzle when we're talking about overall patent reform. there are a number of ways that patent reform can be achieved, and that's why i support the principles of the patent act and believe it goes a long way in combating this growing problem. the patent act includes much-needed reforms such as fee shifting, heightened pleading standards and customer stays that would provide relief to retailers, smaller businesses and start-ups that are constantly under assault by these nonpracticing entities. i commend chairman grassley for ushering that legislation through the judiciary committee. however, one piece of that comprehensive package is venue reform. such a reform was included in the house version of the patent bill. i believe it needs to be added to the senate bill as well. all one has to do is look at the numbers and the problem

surrounding venues becomes clear. in 2009, 9% of all patent -- u.s. patent cases were filed in one particular federal district. 2009, 9%. by comparison, in 2015, that number increased to just over 44%. that's an increase of over 400%. again, from 9% in 2009 to 44% in 2015. in addition, of the cases brought in that federal district in 2015, 95% of those cases were brought by nonpracticing entities. such a distortion in case distribution is problematic. especially when the venue has no real connection to the alleged infringement at issue. one hope for relief was the federal circuit case in t.c. heartland, but after the court's decision on april 29, after a decline to impose more stringent venue restrictions in patent cases, it appears that judicial

relief will have to wait. therefore, this decision has only to be made -- needs to be made here in congress. i hope that it will bring renewed attention to patent reform as we move this venue act through the senate. while there are a number of solutions to the overall patent troll problem, venue reform is of utmost importance and must be central to any larger reform effort. i urge my colleagues to support the reforms contained in the venue act, and i yield back. mr. grassley: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: i come to the floor now to speak about allegations that the f.b.i. has facilitated ransom payments to terrorist groups. unfortunately, the administration has been

stonewalling the senate judiciary committee's investigation into this very important matter. we have seen many terrible terrorist attacks recently. the government's highest duty is to provide national security for our citizens. that means fighting the radical islamic terrorist groups who mean to harm us. an important part of fighting radical islamist terrorist groups is going after their funding. the u.s. government should do everything it can to stop money from flowing to groups like al qaeda and isis, and the government has had significant successes in fighting terrorist funding. ransom payments for hostages are one of the key sources of funds for terrorist groups to raise

money. the government should not be participating in helping to make such payments. yet, in april of last year, "the wall street journal" reported that the f.b.i. had helped facilitate a $250,000 ransom payment to al qaeda. it was from the family of kidnapped aid worker warren wine stein way back in 2012. that report was later confirmed by "60 minutes" in an interview with dr. weinstein's widow. around the same time that that "wall street journal" article stated, army lieutenant colonel jason emory contacted my judiciary committee staff.

now, this person is a decorated war hero who reached out to congressman hunter, senator johnson and to my office to raise concerns about ineffective hostage recovery efforts. he alleged that the f.b.i. was involved in a ransom payment made in an effort to recover czar gentberg dove. to be clear the u.s. government should take all appropriate measures to recover american hostages, but those measures cannot include ransome payments that end up funding more terrorist operations. ransom payments are a very big business for terrorist groups. according to a 2014 investigation by "new york

times," al qaeda and its affiliates have taken in at least $125 million from kidnapping for ransom since 2008. isis also takes a huge amounts from ransom payments. the united nations estimated that isis collected between $35 million and $45 million in ransom payments in the single year of 2014. now, it may not appear to be this way, but you've got to conclude this is a serious threat to our national security. in 2012 david s. coyne who was the treasure secretary's -- or i should say treasury department's under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence at

that particular time explained why in a presentation on this issue. he said, and this is a fairly long quote, ransom payments lead to future kidnappings and future kidnappings lead to additional ransom payments. and it all builds the capacity of terrorist organizations to conduct attacks. al qaeda affiliates use ransom money to help fund the full range of their activities, including recruing and indominating -- indoctrine naturing all the new members, paying salaries, establishing trading camps, acquiring weapons and communication gear and helping to support the next generation of violent extremist

groups, end of secretary cohen's quote. paying ransom actually incentivizes terrorists to kidnap more people, and it funds their terrorist attacks. the administration says that it is still u.s. policy for the government to deny hostage takers the benefits of ransom but its policies on helping others make ransom payments is quite murky. if the f.b.i. pays lip service to the no ransom policy we not making payments itself but facilitates payments by others, then the financial incentive for terrorists to kidnap remains exactly the same. the judiciary committee has

jurisdiction over the department of justice including the f.b.i. the f.b.i.'s hostage recovery efforts including any take sill at a timive -- facilitated ransom payments must be subject to the constitutional oversight by this judiciary committee. now, the justice department has failed to fully cooperate with my committee's inquiries. in may of last year i wrote the attorney general. i asked several questions about the f.b.i.'s alleged involvement in facilitating payments to terrorist groups. among other things, i asked -- quoting from my letter -- has the f.b.i. been involved in any transfer of money in connection with attempts to secure the release of hostages held by al qaeda, taliban, isis or any

associated forces -- end of quote. now, the justice department failed to respond for five months. in the meantime the president issued executive order 13698 and presidential policy directive 30. those presidential edicts established a new hostage recovery policy as a result of an interagency review. then five months after i sent my questions to the attorney general, the justice department finally sent me a response. that response failed to answer my questions. instead the response just

summarized the public documents released by this administration when it announced its new hostage recovery policy. now, for me merely pointing to publicly available documents is not a good-faith cooperation with independent fact finding. so i wrote to the white house last fall. i asked that the administration provide the committee the classified parts of the new hostage recovery policy p.p.d.-30 as well as the classified part of the policy it replaced nspd-12. but the administration failed to share those classified parts of the policies with the committee. now, think about all this.

the f.b.i. plays a key role in hostage recovery efforts. the judiciary committee is responsible for overseeing the f.b.i. and yet the administration refuses to even tell the committee in full what its written policy says. that kind of stonewalling ought to be unacceptable to all 100 senators. so i referred the matter to the inspector general of the department of justice last october. in february he informed me that his office had opened an initial inquiry. that inquiry is ongoing. my investigation continues as well. yesterday i sent another letter to attorney general lynch and director comey seeking complete

answers to my questions and complete copies of the policy documents. if the public reports are accurate, then there is a very real possibility that the president has helped -- or the f.b.i. has helped send millions of dollars to al qaeda and isis. that money inevitably was used to help terrorists kill more innocent people. the judiciary committee needs all the facts to get to the bottom of the issue. the f.b.i. should cooperate. the department of justice should cooperate and the white house should cooperate. the f.b.i. director comey and attorney general lynch should fully respond to all the questions in my may 25 letter.

there is no excuse for stonewalling oversight, but it is especially inexcusable in a matter as important as this connected to the federal government's protection of american people and our national security. it is shocking that the only answer the f.b.i. can come up with is to these allegations is what i just described, silence. burying our heads in the sand does not make the issue go away. if our government is assisting in paying ransom money to terrorists, congress needs to know. the public needs to know. the government officials involved need to be held accountable. the facts cannot be hidden from the f.b.i.'s oversight committee.

the policies implementing our laws on this topic cannot be kept secret from the f.b.i.'s oversight committee. mr. president, the letter i referred to here to the f.b.i. and to the justice department i want to get permission to put in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. grassley: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: i ask that the calling of the quorum call be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: i ask unanimous consent that following the prayer and pledge on thursday, july 14, the chair lay before the senate the house message accompanying s. 2943 and senator mcconnell be recognized to make a compound motion to go to conference on s. 2943. further, that after the cloture is filed on the compound motion, the time until 11:30 a.m. be equally divided between the two leaders or their designees and that at 11:30 the senate vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the compound motion to go to

conference. further, that if cloture is invoked, the senate agree to the compound motion to go to conference and there be two motions to instruct in order -- an order made by senator shaheen and senator sullivan. further, that senator shaheen be recognized to offer a motion to instruct the conferees and that there be up to four minutes of debate equally divided on the motion and that following the use or yielding back of that time, the senate vote in relation to the shaheen motion, that following the disposition of the shaheen motion, senator sullivan be recognized to offer a motion to instruct conferees and that there be up to four minutes of debate equally divided on the motion, and that following the use or yielding back of that time, the senate vote in relationship to the sullivan -- in relation to the

sullivan motion without any intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the executive session for the consideration of calendar 659 through 678 and all nominations on the secretary's desk, that the nominations be confirmed en bloc, the motions be reconsidered -- that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate and that no further motions be in order and that any statements related to the nominations be printed in the record, the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, and the senate then resume legislative

consideration. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: i ask unanimous consent that the committee on rules be discharged from further consideration of s. 2893 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. 2893, a bill to reauthorize the sound recording of -- mr. grassley: i -- constitute the reading of the resolution. i ask -- the presiding officer: without objection, the committee is discharged. the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. grassley: i can unanimous consent that the blunt amendment at the desk be agreed to, that the bill be amended -- as amended be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: mr. president, i

ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of s. 3207 submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. 3207, a bill to authorize the national library service for the blind and physically handicapped to provide -- mr. grassley: i ask the reading thus far constitute the reading of the whole. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: -- the presiding officer: the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. grassley: i further ask that the bill be read a third time and passed and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on banking, housing and urban affairs be discharged from further consideration of s. 1555 and the senate proceed to

its immediate consideration. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. 1555, a bill to award a congressional grold medal and so -- gold medal and so forth. the presiding officer: without objection the committee is discharged and the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. grassley: i ask dpurt that the bill be -- further that the bill be read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the consideration of s. 532 submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 532 celebrating the 140th anniversary of the state of colorado. the presiding officer: without objection the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. grassley: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be