with spraying, we're going to eliminate the clean water act, which makes it extremely dangerous. that's why the e.p.a. looks at this so closely. all other federal agencies, the lean water act is the law of this land and has been for decades. they eliminate that. the republican leader gets up here and talks about, i hope they're happy -- 0 words to that effect. mr. president, the bill we got back as it relates to zika takes $500 million from veterans, from the veterans administration. that's what they did. can't make this stuff up. and what was that money to be used for? processing claims. the presiding officer has been out front on wanting a way to speed up veterans' claims. they need to be handled more expeditiously. there was a provision put in the original legislation to give them $500 million to speed that

up. now it's out with the zika bill. it's gone. two years ago a ravaging epidemic swept africa -- ebola, something that was terribly hurtful to the people of africa. the pooh emin america were -- the people in america were afraid. we had nurses and doctors coming here to be treated because we had better facilities than they have in africa. well, it's still around. they're still putting out fires as we speak. but the bill we got back from the house took $107 million from ebola funding, and everyone knows that obamacare, the $543 million they took to help fund the zika matter -- i could raise a point of order right now, it would go out. no one disputes that.

but just on the effort to show how crazy they are over there in the house, as speaker boehner said, they couldn't get something passed there unless they did something to take care of the really, really, really right-wing crazies. what did they do? they struck a prohibition on displaying the confederate flag. they wanted to be able to fly confederate flags on military cemeteries. how could anyone in good conscience vote for that? we can't. we're not going to. and it sets up the terrible precedent of offsetting emergency spending. it's july 14. the senate is going to take a short seven-week break. as you heard the republican leader talk, oh, it's all been

done. man, we've done great things here. he scheduled the senate for a seven-week summer break, vacation, time off -- call it whatever you want. it's the longest senate recess in more than 60 years. we'd like to stay here and work. i'd like to work for people of nevada and work for the rest of the american people. the republicans, they're not going to hear of this. they want to go. they want to go listen to donald trump. they might not be able to be there, because their kind of embarrassed to be seen with him, but they're going to watch on tv. we'll be back in september, we'll tie up some loose ends and make sure the federal government gets funded. but that's all we have the ability to do now. let's look at just a few of the things that are being left behind.

zika -- the republicans are choosing vacation over protecting pregnant women and their babies from these terrible birth defects that can be prevented. have we done a thing about guns? no, no, no -- even though the republican leader -- and i'll talk about that in a minute -- said we'd have a vote on guns. we're not having a vote on guns. the legislation sponsored by the senator from maine, a republican senator, joined by a significant number of democrats -- the republican leader said we'd have a vote on that? well, he thought it would be a good idea to make it so success spcted terrorists can't -- suspected terrorists can't go out and purchase a gun. no, we're not getting a vote on that. criminal justice reform -- look at what's going on in the country today. is there a need for justice reform? of course there is. we have a bipartisan bill that's

drowning in the judiciary committee. we understand there's only a handful of republicans that don't support this. democrats support t but they refuse to address the failings of our criminal justice system despite ample bipartisan support on and off capitol hill. how about the supreme court? will republicans still refuse to give merrick garland a hearing and a vote? do i need to say more about that? i don't think so. flint, michigan -- the whole city was ravaged by lead. thousands of boys and girls now will never be who they could be because of lead in the water. no relief for them, zero relief. 100,000 people live in that city. they were all ad vrsly affected. -- they were all adversity affected. they were all poisoned. opioids, it wa we passed a bill. it was a first step.

but they refused to fund it. so they make due with money they got before. all these additional agencies passing the opioid conference. they don't have the money to do the things we are asking to do. these are just a few of the things. i guess they're immediate issues. what about the other problems that they've ignored, the republicans have ignored for 19 months? how about something for the middle class? how about creating a few jobs? how about building some roads or repairing our very, very delicate bridges, dams, water systems, sewer systems? nothing on minimum wage, nothing on pay equity. nothing on student loan detect. -- on student loan debt. nothing on job creation. nothing, nothing, nothing. we have crum crumbling roads and bridges. what about basic american

rights? what has senator mcconnell said or done about ensuring justice for the american people? nothing. here's what one of the major publications said today. headline: "july 14, "politico." "mcconnell's historic judge blockade." supreme court nominee merrick garland may be the most prominent casualty of the resistance on the federal judiciary but the pace of overall judicial confirmations under mitch mcconnell is on track to become the slowest in more than 60 years. under the mcconnell-led senate, 20 district and circuit court judges have been confirmed at a time when vacancies are hatchered the -- are hampering the federal bench nationwide." this is nothing to be proud of.

this is nothing to be proud of. so the republican leader instituted a blockade of judicial nominations. he did it last year. last year they made history by confirming the fewest judges since the 1950's. but they'll do even less this year. because of their obstruction, judicial emergencies -- those courts are more cases than judges can handle -- have more than doubled. that means americans seeking justice are being denied their constitutional rights. here's the issue. i've been there, spnts a lot of time in courts -- spent a lot of time in courts. that's what i did. i was a trial lawyer. i can remember going to both the state courts but the federal court, and they said, we're sorry. we're going to do criminal cases for the next few months and not do anything with civil cases.

civil cases are just as important as criminal cases. but under what the republicans have done, the judges are going to be forced, because of the law, to do criminal cases and put the civil cases to the back of the bus. what about voting rights? senate republicans have done absolutely nothing -- zero -- to protect americans' right to vote. time and time again this republican senate has proven itself to be a colossal failure. yet, senator mcconnell has had the nerve every day to pat himself on the back for all he and the roons have done in this congress -- and the republicans have done in this congress. the bipartisan bills passed in this congress were blocked by republicans in past congresses. that's a fact. i, as leader here, had to file cloture more than 500 times because of obstruction and filibusters by the republicans.

so let's be real hon eflt here. let's -- so let's be real honest here. let's do logic. these bills passed because democrats have been a constructive minority. we've worked with republicans when they were willing to work with us. but there are too many reasons why this republican congress has been a flop. republicans made a calculated disoition appease the most -- decision to appease the most radical factions of their party. and who do they have? they have donald trump. promise after promise to the american people has been shattered, broken. senator mcconnell promises to pass a budget every year. we have to budget. senator mcconnell promised a full senate workweek. we've worked one friday in 19 months -- one. senator mcconnell promised no show votes. yet today the republican leader

will force unnecessary revotes on zika. he'll force revotes on defense approps, i'm sure. this will be the eighth time this congress that the republican leader has resorted to this tactic. it is his signature move. he is the record holder -- it is not a good one, but he is the record holder on revotes. senator mcconnell has promised an open amendment process. i can remember his coming out here, reid filled the amendment tree. well, he must have learn interested me, because he's gotten really good at t he's filled the amendment tree 16 times. these are all commitments the republicans have played to the american people, and they have -- have made to the american people, and they have not been honored. there have also been a number of promises made within the senate that have been broken. both sides of the aisle have been left waiting for the republican leader to keep his word. his personal word. this troubles me, mr. president. i've been in this congress 34

years. i don't like to talk about this, but i've experienced his not keeping his word firsthand. i had a meeting right here regarding a woman by the name of jessica rosenworcel. she wanted to go on the federal communications comirks wanted to be renominated. that was in december of 2014. senator mcconnell and i had an agreement i thought was made in good faith. the agreement was simply this: i would agree to do a republican -- we always did them together, we paired them. no, we've got to do this. he worked for -- he worked for senator -- who did he work for? -- the senator from arizona. yep, that's where -- he worked there. he wanted to make sure they took good care of the senator who had just left the senate. so the agreement was that we would confirm michael o'reilly

to the f.c.c. but in exchange, as soon as the new year came, they would go with rosenworcel. that would be the next congress. reilly was a longtime staffer for senator kyl, who had -- also worked for senator cornyn. jessica is a very talented lawyer who worked for jay rockefeller. it's very unusual to do what i agreed to do, but i, in good faith, accepted the word of two republican united states senators. we traditionally confirm members on bipartisan boards by pairing nominees, one democrat, one republican. i agreed to do this, out of the goodness, frankly, mr. president, o of my heart. i have never, ever had the experience where someone just simply didn't keep their word. that's what's happened. and i wasn't alone. somebody who works here on the

senate floor and has for years was there when that conversation took place. the republican leader asked me to make an exception, and i did. i agreed with his personal commitment that when the next congress convenes, the republicans would reconfirm jessica rosenworcel. i was promised that. i didn't have to agree to this, but i did it because the republican leader said he would do his part and get rosenworcel confirmed. 19 amongsts and the republican leader has -- 19 months and the republican leader has yet to keep his word to me. so we had a big, important spending bill last year. it was -- it did a lot. no one disputes this: the staff of senator mcconnell made a mistake and they didn't put language in at the end of the section regarding renewable tax credits. everybody acknowledged that it

was too bad. he acknowledged the drafting error. his staff made a mistake. the republicans committed to correct the drafting error in the next revenue bill the senate considered. this has been unfulfilled. we can do it on f.a.a. it is not going to be done there. he's told leader pelosi we're going to do that. i promised reid we would do it. well, it hasn't been done. so, mr. president, it's a sad senate when people do not keep their word. maybe on those two issues a new day will come in september. this is what democrats and the american people have come to expect from republicans: promises not kept, commitments not honored and work not done. integrity is a simple word, but here in the united states capitol it's everything. i hope it's turned around come fall. i hope after taking this

two-month break we can do something to address all these issues including zika, merrick garland, guns. but that's as much as we can do if they refuse to do their jobs. mr. president, i'm sorry that senator mcconnell and i have taken so much time but we do that once in a while. i'm going to ask the chair to announce the business of the day. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the time until 11:30 a.m. will be equally divided between the leaders or their designees. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from nevada. mr. heller: i rise to speak today on an issue congress has always been able to rally around with bipartisan support. we don't hear that mentioned a lot in these chambers recently, but something that we've always been able to come together on and that's our nation's veterans. as a member of the senate veterans' affairs committee advocating on behalf of our

nation's and nevada's brave heroes has been one of my greatest privileges. it's also been a challenge especially in recent years. whether it's timely appointments for health care, eliminating the disabilities claims backlog or addressing poor performance, i'm constantly fighting for accountability within the v.a. it's taken years of work on the local level in both northern and southern nevada to get good leadership in our v.a. regional office and the reno and las vegas v.a. hospitals. however, all of that work is in vain if congress does not provide the v.a. with the robust funding it needs to deliver high-quality care and benefits in a timely manner. under republican leadership in the senate we've been trying to return to regular order and the appropriations process. and you would think that for an issue as serious as veterans, that the senate would be able to come together to pass the military construction and veterans affairs appropriations

act. yet my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are continuing to play partisan politics and have rejected this effort. this important appropriations bill, something we'll be voting on later this afternoon, includes an increase of funding over last year as well as important provisions that i've been advocating to help nevada's veterans. first off, it includes an amendment i filed to ensure completion of the rural veterans burial initiative so that rural communities like elk, nevada, have a veterans cemetery that haopbs our veterans and -- honors our veterans and their services. i secured an amendment to hold the v.a. accountable to the progress they are making to eliminate the disabilities claims backlog. and as cochair of the v.a. backlog working group, i've been fighting to get this backlog to zero. but i'm concerned that the v.a. isn't feeling the pressure to get that job done.

a lot of progress was made, but for ten months now the v.a. has been stuck with a 20% backlog. i haven't forgotten the commitment the v.a. made to give veterans a timely answer on their disability claims, which is why my amendment sends a clear message to the v.a. that congress is still watching and still expecting results. and it's not just my amendments that are important to this bill. it's the funding that will help those who sacrifice most: our veterans and their families. and when i sat down with veterans and the military community in round tables in both northern and southern nevada just a few months ago, i was struck about how far we really have to go. mr. president, thousands of veterans are suffering from post traumatic stress and struggling to find the care that they need. post traumatic stress not only impacts veterans, but it impacts their family members who aren't always sure just how to get the help they need. some have fallen into

homelessness and don't know where to turn, and frankly, they just don't trust the v.a. at its worst we have more than 20 veterans committing suicide every day. let me repeat that, mr. president. we have more than 20 veterans committing suicide every day. 20 a day. i had a nevada veterans wife tell me how she had to jump through hoops just to get her husband an appointment through the choice act. it took her three months, three months to get that appointment and she said to me how she would never give up fighting for her husband's health. i continue to see how veterans come to my office for help and getting an appointment while moving their disability claims along. we cannot afford the v.a. to solve these problems without funding. we can't expect them to solve these problems without funding. so i continue to urge my colleagues to pass the conference report today for v.a. appropriations so that we can

fix these problems. and while funding can go along to providing resources for veterans, we cannot forget that the v.a. still struggles with accountability. there are plenty of high-quality v.a. employees working every day to help our veterans, and many of these employees are here in the state of nevada. these are the ones that cared for my father at the reno hospital, and i give the v.a. credit for his health today. but when there are these -- but again, there are those employees who are gaming the system and have forgotten that the v.a.'s mission is to serve the interest of veterans and their families and no one else. yet, the v.a. can't even fire these people because the department of justice calls it and says it's unconstitutional. so think about that, mr. president. there is nothing more disappointing to me than the department of justice preventing these v.a. employees from being fired or demoted after poor

performance. instead of siding with veterans, the department of justice sides with bureaucrats who don't belong at the v.a. i think it's an insult, mr. president, an insult to veterans and an insult to the american public. i know the v.a. committee chairman isakson and other committee members share my concern about this, including yourself. rather than ignoring this issue and congress's intent, it's time for the department of justice to step up, step forward to talk to congress about what can be done to ensure that bad v.a. employees are quickly removed. accountability has to be the prior of the v.a. secretary mcdonald understands this and just as important is the funding for the v.a. should be a priority for this united states senate. again, i call on my colleagues to move the v.a. appropriations bill forward so that we can keep our commitment to veterans and begin to fix the long list of issues that playing our v.a.

mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from colorado. mr. gardner: thank you, mr. president. on july 5 the united states lost a great public servant and colorado lost one of its fiercest advocates. bill armstrong's contributions to colorado and the country embody the virtues of integrity and devotion and kindness and reflect his priorities of liberty, faith and family. his mark on this world will never be forgotten. over the course of his life senator bill armstrong was known for many of his achievements and title: united states senator, united states congressman, youngest majority in the state legislature to be elected and most recently president of colorado christian university, just to name a few. but what has been reinforced to me over the last number of days since his passing were not the titles he held or bills and amendments he passed through committee or the senate, but the way in which he carried himself, the respect that he gave his

staff, his family, his constituents. he was thoughtful, peaceful, grateful individual. and he always interacted with those values in mind. it's the stories about how he treated his staff and how he listened to his constituents that stand out in our minds in today's reflect on the impact he had on this country, the stories his compassion had on impressionable minds at colorado christian university on republicans and democrats alike despite the partisan fights that riddled congress while he served. he once described himself as relatively inflexible on principles but flexible on the details. never confusing the two when working toward meaningful solutions that required compromise, always listening, ever respectful of those he may have disagreed with. and while i never worked for senator armstrong, a number of my closest friends, advisors and so many elected officials in colorado are part of the

armstrong legacy, alumni of his great work. the stories they shared with me about their time with bill armstrong are incredible. sean conway, a former staffer for bill armstrong now a county commissioner in colorado talks about the time that senator bill armstrong went to meet with the refuseniks, jewish people living in the soviet union being persecute ford their views and wanted to leave the soviet union for a better life. he went there without contacting his staff, without letting them know how he was, where he was because he was afraid the k.g.b. would find out the work that he was doing, the harm it could cause the people he was meeting with and perhaps even to the staff back home. but he knew he had to bring that message of what was happening of the persecution in the soviet union, he had to bring that back to his colleagues in the senate to make sure they understood and could put an end to the tragedy that was happening in the soviet union. one former staff member recounted that bill armstrong was one of the brightest and most successful persons he'd ever met, he had a spegt --

special pweuft of intellect and drive. he never went to college. he didn't really talk about that not because he was ashamed of not going to college, but because he didn't want to be seen as somebody who could somehow be an example for people to not go to college. he didn't want students to think that they could get away with not going to college. and so he just didn't talk about it. he's known as the father of tax indexing, his work on social security with ronald reagan for years helped build a legacy at home in colorado and beyond. instrumental in passing the colorado national forestry act and we know of his relationship with christ, his work at colorado christian university and the leadership that he continues to provide to this day. alan simpson on the farewell speech the day that senator armstrong was giving his farewell speech, said that you've heard the saying that you would rather see a sermon than hear a sermon. alan simpson and all of us got

to see that every day in bill armstrong. on the day senator armstrong came to the senate floor to say farewell, he was joined by others, including our colleagues and many others as he left the united states senate in his farewell speech and from my understanding and conversations with his family, he left this, he left life hearing these words of the scripture read by his family from the last verse of the last book of the holy scripture. the grace of the lord jesus be with all. amen. and senator armstrong walked off the floor of the united states senate after serving fellow man the last ten years at colorado christian university, the house, the senate and the colorado legislature. he's now walked into a far better place that we all hope to join someday. mr. president, i yield to my colleague from colorado. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senior senator from colorado. mr. bennet: thank you, mr. president. it is indeed a privilege to be here with my colleague, senator gardner, as we recognize the

life of a dedicated coloradoan, former senator bill armstrong. last week senator armstrong passed away after a five-year battle with cancer. he is survived by his wife ellen, daughter ann and son will. he was an accomplished businessman, a long-term public servant, a dedicated educator and most important, a husband, father, and grandfather. he held strong principles and beliefs which he conveyed with eloquence and clarity. no one ever could question senator armstrong's devotion to colorado or to his students. as a young entrepreneur, senator armstrong bought his first radio station at the age of 22 and began a long and successful business career. over the course of his life he owned or operated more than a dozen businesses including radio station kdzw in denver and the sun newspaper in colorado springs. he served as chairman of oppenheimer funds in denver.

much of senator armstrong's life was driven by service when he joined the army national guard where he served from 1957 to 1963. following his military service, he began his almost three decades in public service. he was a member of both the colorado house and senate and served as senator gardner said as senate majority leader before being elected to congress in 1972. after three terms in the house of representatives, he was elected to the senate in 1978. senator armstrong brought to this chamber real-world experience, which is often in short supply; business acumen which is often in shorter supply; and a deep belief in the potential of those he served in colorado. his business background and his knowledge of economic issues earned him spots on the banking, budget and finance committees. throughout his time in the senate, senator armstrong brought important attention to the deficit and budgetary issues. he was a founding member of the

senate deficit reduction caucus and he ultimately chaired the finance subcommittee on social security and president reagan selected him to serve on the national commission on social security reform. this commission was not like those we see around here these days. it actuall -- it actually produced meepgful proposals and extended the longevity of the social security program for decades. it served as a model of how congress can work together to tackle difficult and complicated issues. and while senator armstrong was deeply conservative, he often found ways to forge bipartisan compromise. his service on the commission was emblematic of this approach, something sorely lacking in washington today. he was also a strong advocate for our military and men and women in uniform. he fought to honor those who served in the korean war and create a permanent g.i. bill. he recognized the importance of

providing access to post secondary education, a passion he continued to pursue long after he left this chamber. he pushed to ensure pay four ow service members. in an opinion piece in "the new york times" he wrote, "with the g.i. bill to boost recruiting, pay increases to ease the retention problem, the all-volunteer military forces can be preserved and we can end the disgraceful treatment of americans in military uniform." his impassioned advocacy led the army times to call armstrong the -- quote -- "military pay champion of the senate." and as a western-state senator, he of course worked on wilderness and conservation issues that are so important to our state, including the colorado national forest wilderness act of 1980. because of his integ dprit and work ethic, his colleagues asked him to serve as chairman of the senate republican policy committee for six years. president reagan once referred to senator armstrong as one of

the strongest voices in the united states senate. president bush called him one of the finest men in washington and one of the best and brightest. the best testaments to senator armstrong came from his own colleagues in the senate. former senator dole described him as having -- quote -- "been widely recognized as one of the most gifted and persuasive speakers. requestings "senator hatch said, "senator armstrong has been one of the most eloquent advocates in the senate for his point of view." senator cochran said, "i do not know of anyone in this body who's more respected for his integrity and ability than is bill armstrong." and my preyeder, his fellow senator from colorado saided, "i do not think any individual has expressed his views more articulately than has bill armstrong, nor has anybody pursued them more passionately than he has." i have enormous respect for that passion, mr. president, as i

know senator gardner does. it is precisely that sense of indignation that sometimes bill armstrong showed on various issues, the kind that drives this institution and should. those quoting tim ward. like many of his predecessor, the pace of the senate was often confounding and frustrating. but he believed it to be the greatest deliberative body in the world. he appreciated the role the institution plays in our country and felt it was an honor to serve here. more than just the institution, he loved his fellow members. he loved the people of the senate. he called them a family brought together by shared experiences and ideals and great love of our country and aspirations for the future. his respect and appreciation for the senate, for the work we do here, and for the people that are here showed his approach to his job. as senator wilson noted, in his

zeal as an advocate, he's been respectful of those who oppose him. more than that, he was, senator wilson believed, generous in terms of his own personal conduct, even in heated debate. the "durango herald" called hill civil and patient, interacting with members of congress. "the denver post" recognized his patriotism. i ask to add these editorials to the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. bennet: senator armstrong described himself as flexible on he details. he attempted to persuade people his way. but when it came time to et go the job done, he understood thousand make a deal. senator armstrong has a fiercely passionate yet pragmatic, respectful and constructive approach to his work.

we could use a lot more of that around here. later in lave, senator armstrong decided to give back to his country and community in a different way by serving as president of colorado christian university. he called his work at the university the most significant, energizing and rewarding work i have ever undertaken. he had a vision for the clenl and for his students and he devoted all of his energy to their success. under his leadership, colorado christian has flourished. enrollment more than doubled. freshman retention increased. the school has been ranked in the top 2% for its core education. the university's endowment has lbl doubled. the school has gunk development plans to expand and update his campus. he cared deeply for his students and will be greatly missed by the c.c.u. community k i recently asked senator armstrong whfor his input on higher education. i knew i could count on him for

thoughtful advice. he was glad to help. senator armstrong had a deep respect for our democracy and our country's future. he represented a time when members of congress held true to their convictions but knew when to forge compromise for the greater good. he is a legacy that will benefit americans for generations to come. his example will be missed, cher ieshed by those of us who still serve in the senate. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor. but before i do that let me observe one last point. none of success going to be here photographer and we should keep that in -- be here forever, and we should keep that in mind. i think senator armstrong understood that. he was committed to stewardship when he was here. that's an example we should all follow. i yield the floor, mr. president. a senator: mr. president, senator armstrong was filled with grace, humility and boundless spirit. mr. gardner: i ask that my full remarks be entered in the record. the presiding officer: without objection.

mrs. ernst: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mrs. ernst: i ask consent to engage in a colloquy with colleagues for 20 minutes with the remaining time reserved for senator mccain. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. ernst: thank you, mr. president. i'd like to thank my colleagues here today that are joining in this colloquy. we have the junior senators from alaska and montana, hoped to be joined by the junior senator from north carolina as well. but as i stand here today, mr. president, my brothers and sisters in arms are deployed overseas. regardless of what the president tells you, our service members are at war. they are in combat, and their combat boots are on the ground. i think our colleagues across the aisle have forgotten that, as they continue to filibuster our defense appropriations bill,

we have men and women serving overseas. they are serving for us overseas. they also seem to have forgotten that all of those servicemen are paying attention. i know because i was once one of those service members deployed overseas, paying attention to the actions of the folks here in washington. right now our service members are watching you, minority leader, and r. our enemies are -- and our enemies are wampg just as closely -- are watching just as closely. this bill appropriates $515.9 billion for our national security -- $900 million of this funding is for the national guard, a critical arm to the security of the united states where i served for 23-plus

years. my national guard unit is in the middle east right now. my iowa army national guard unit, the unit that i commanded as a battalion commander, is serving in the middle east right now. you don't care about their safety, minority leader, while they selflessly serve to ensure ours. you don't care that this bill has funding for equipment critical to their missions. you don't care that their families are depending on them to come home safely. and you don't care that your actions, once again, make america look weak. the minority party is filibustering this bipartisan

defense appropriations bill solely at the expense of our men and women in uniform. those are the facts on the ground today. i know the importance of this bill firsthand, and i stand here today ready to vote in favor of it, and i know my colleagues understand that as well. so once again i want to thank the members that are joining news this colloquy today, the junior senators from alaska, montana, and north carolina. i know this is a very important issue to all of us, to all of us. and so with that, i would like to turn it over to the junior senator from alaska, who also is a fellow in arms, lieutenant colonel dan sullivan, united states marine. and with that, junior senator from alaska, i'd like to hear your comments.

mr. sullivan: thank you, my distinguished colleague from iowa, who has distinguished service, just retired from the military as a lieutenant colonel herself, and we're honored that you're leading this colloquy today. i'm honored to be here with some of my colleagues. our freshman class sees this as a critical issue, mr. president. we've been down here, many of us, all week to stress the importance of what senator ernst just talked about: funding our troops and stopping this filibuster. -- that denies our troops funding. now, unfortunately, we've been out here all week. i haven't seen -- i'm not sure if i've seen any of my colleagues from the other side of the aisle coming down to the floor to try to explain this to the american people, that they've filibustered funding for our troops -- not once, not twice, not three times -- four times in the last year. and hopefully they're not going to do it again today. five times. you know, mr. president, it's

been a good week for the senate. passed the comprehensive addiction and recovery act bill that was bipartisan. senator whitehouse, senator portman, senator ayotte let led that. the f.a.a. authorization, senator thune, senator nelson -- that's going to protect the american people in the aviation space. but we have more important work ttoday on defense issues, on national security issues, and much of it is dealing with supporting our triewrntion which is not a bipartisan -- our troops, which is not a part sang issue. just this past week, the president, the secretary of defense have made many more commitment with regards to our troops. 8,400 troops in afghanistan, 560 additional troops in iraq, 1,000 additional troops in poland, in a battalion headquarters. two carrier battle groups in the south china sea. they're protecting us. they're supporting us. we should be doing the same

thing. it's that simple. so like my colleagues here, i find it amazing -- i find it remarkable -- to be quite honest, i find it sad that the minority leader is encourage a filibuster of the defense appropriations bill again for the fifth time in a year. i think my colleagues on the other side of the aisle should reject this approach. they're going to have the opportunity in the next hour to come down here and actually vote to fund our troops, and i guarantee you, regardless of what state you're from, regardless of what political party you represent, the american people in every state in the united states support doing what we're talking about here, which is funding our troops and dropping this ridiculous filibuster against the people, men and women, who are out there right now protecting us.

so i call on my colleagues, all of them, to do the right thing by our troops -- to do the right thing by our troops, do the right thing by the american people, and that's vote today to fund our troops. all of my colleagues have been very focused on this, but no more so than my colleagues from iowa, north carolina, montana. all of us have significant military populations, experience, and i'd like to yield the floor to my colleague from montana, steve daines, to further discuss this important issue. mr. daines: thank you, senator sullivan. what an honor to stand here today, standing next to two lieutenant colonels, lieutenant colonel ernst, lieutenant colonel sullivan. and, by the way, lieutenant colonel ernst was the first woman to ever serve in combat

and serve in the united states senate. for their service, i am truly grateful. thank you. i want to thank senator sullivan for really organizing and bringing us together as well as senator ernst. their leadership, as those who have wore -- or do wear the uniform of the united states military and now serve in the senate is critical in this most perilous time for our initial as we face -- for our nation as we face threated interest all over the world. to think that that body, the united states national is going to recess tonight for an extended summer recess and leave without a very important, unfinished business of funding the u.s. military, funding the troops. today the senate democrats are expected to once again block the consideration of defense appropriations act of 2017. denying our troops the proper funding, the support needed. what kind of message does that send to the men and women who are standing today, putting their lives at risk to protect our country?

what message does that send to them? as senator sullivan said to senator ernst, this isn't the first time, not the second time. it's not the third time. it's not the fourth time. it is the fifth time we will see our friends across the aisle, the senate democrats, filibuster the funding of our troops. this reminds me of "groundhog day." what's even more frustrating, they are refusing, the senate democrats, to even debate the issue. i spent 28 years in the private sector, and i'll tell you one way to ensure you don't get anything done is to not even discuss it. and that seems to be the road the senate democrats are taking. it is the low road, not the high road. they would prefer to once again obstruct what we call regular order in this body much in the same fashion they did during the past few years which became the hallmark of a failed democratic-led senate majority. and while our troops are actively engaged in multiple

theaters across the world and they need the critical support for our growing mission overseas, my friends from across the aisle are actively blocking our troops from being combat ready. but let's remember, just remember this, a few short weeks ago the united states house of representatives, they passed this bill on a solid bipartisan vote, 282-138. 48 democrats supported that bill. it passed with strong bipartisan support. and then over here on the senate side i serve on the appropriations committee, we passed in bill out of the appropriations committee by 30-0. 30-0. that's called a shutout. that's called running up the score. i remember that clearly. not one democrat opposed this bill to fund our troops when it passed out of committee. and yet, and yet when it comes to the floor, the senate minority leader now is

instructing the senate democrats to filibuster getting the bill even debated here as well as passing the senate floor. what changed? nothing has changed except for the fact our troops are not getting the funding and support they need. is that what you want mr. minority leader? the passage of this legislation is critical to carry out the missions in an increasingly dangerous world. and i can tell you one thing, our enemies are not waiting for senate democrats to fund our troops to make it a fair fight. this bill pays the salaries of 1.2 million military active duty, 800,000 reservists. the senate democrats are saying no to almost 10,000 troops engaged right now as we speak in combat in afghanistan. an additional 5,000 troops in harm's way in iraq. and many more throughout the globe. i come from montana. we were the highest per capita vet populations in the united states. i'm proud of the maelstrom air

force base. we have one-third of our nation's icbm's ready at any moment here to defend our freedom. they silently sit across the plains of montana. but senate democrats are failing them. it's unacceptable. and as the senate heads home for the work period, i challenge my democrat colleagues to go back home, look at those veterans and those active duty troops in the eye and ask did i serve these selfless men and women or did i let the minority leader of the democrats play cheap party politics with funding their pay? the minority leader's constituents in nevada deserve more. montanans deserve more. the american people deserve more. i want to now recognize the junior senator from north carolina, thom tillis, who has an amazing group of active military and veterans in north carolina. i'm proud to stand here with senator tillis. senator tillis, look forward to hearing what you have to say.

mr. tillis: thank you, senator daines, and for all the work you do in supporting our troops. lieutenant colonel sullivan and ernst, thank you for your service to the nation, your continued service. and senator sullivan, thank you for continuing to pound on this. it's important. yesterday or earlier this week i talked to about how this is approaching personal with me. i'm going to try and not get as loud as i got a couple of days ago, but i really want to talk about what this means. i want to talk about the process, an appropriations process where every single member, 30 democrats, voted for this bill. what we're trying to do now is have the broader membership vote for it and send it out of the chamber. 30 democrats. i wouldn't be surprised if you went on their social media presence or if you took a look at press releases that they rightfully announced to their constituents how they voted to support a bipartisan appropriations bill coming out

of committee. now i want them to follow up with a press statement that says harry reid tells me i've got to vote "no" now. i've got to say "no" to troops. i'm not going to support providing critical funding for training and readiness and overseas contingency operations. i don't know about you all in the gallery or people watching on c-span, i don't feel particularly comfortable with the situation around the globe. i don't like what russia's doing. so we have to put resources in portions of europe to make sure that we can counter the potential threat there. i don't like what china's doing in the south china sea so we're going to have to pay more attention to that to protect that region. i generally don't like what iran is doing. they're funding hezbollah and hamas and the network. i don't like what's going on in syria. i think iraq has problem much of

it created because of the president's withdrawal. good news, he recognizes maybe we need to increase our presence there. how are we going to pay for those extra 560 soldiers that are going to secure the airstrip brought over by the iraqi forces? where does it come from? that's a commitment he made so it's going to come from somewhere else. it's certainly not going to come from the increased funding we're trying to get through this appropriations bill. i don't know about you all, but i believe the generals and intelligence community that come before our committee and say we're in some of the most dangerous times in their lives. the threats are everywhere. america has to lead because when america doesn't lead the world is a less safe place. america leads the tip of the spears are our armed services, our presence across the globe to protect the freedom of other nations and to protect our own freedom. failing to vote for this bill is failing to make sure that they're trained, equipped and capable of defending freedom. now i want to talk about the personal side of things for the

folks down at fort bragg and camp lejeune and new river and cherry point, marines, people in the 82nd airborne, 18th iran corps, the conversations -- 18th airborne corps, the conversations they're having. when they come home from training and they hear we're not getting enough repetition, we're trying to teach these men and women how to jump out of planes in hostile situations with 100 pounds of equipment connected to them and do that safely. i don't know about many people, but i don't think i'd want to do that if i wasn't trained and ready and had the muscle memory to make sure i was going to do that safely. the global response force in fort bragg takes it to another level. they not only have to drop 1,000 men and women out of planes, they have to drop entire cities out of the planes. earth movers, medical planes, all the things you need to

provide relief in the event of disaster or you need to support a combat operation. we're sapping the resources to be able to do that. here's how the discussion i think goes with a man or woman who goes home before they get deployed. honey, i'm about to be deployed somewhere. maybe it's iraq, maybe afghanistan, some other part of the world. and i'm a little bit nervous because i only got about 80% of the training i really needed that the army or the air force or marines deemed necessary for me to be able to do that job safely and be certain that i can complete the mission. i'm sorry, hon, i'm sworn to defend this country, so i'm going to do it. but i know that i'm not at the level of training and capability that i should be. then they say goodbye, and that spouse hopefully sees that person come home again. so you know, guys, politics is an interesting thing. debate is an interesting thing. we've heard the theater on the floor today that has nothing to do with the votes that we have before us. we've heard global warming. we've heard all these other things. what we haven't heard is from

the 30 democrats that voted for this precise bill. some people will lead you to believe it's changed since they voted for it. it hasn't changed. it's precisely the same bill. but they've got a minority leader who says don't vote for it. play my game. let us then come down here and say do your job. we're doing our job right now. joni ernst is doing her job. dan sullivan is doing his job. steve daines is doing his job. i'm doing my job by saying you guys went into a committee and you voted for this bill. you went home and told everybody you're supporting your troops. now you've got a minority leader that's telling you don't do your job and let's go on the floor and pretend that those of us who want to support our troops aren't doing our job. it's disingenuous at best and dishonest at worst. and, mr. president, and my colleagues here, we need to pound this issue. i need to go home and ask the, and be able to tell the story and say we support you fort bragg. we support you and we're going

to do everything we can to get this bill passed. mr. mccain: mr. president, parliamentary inquiry. how much time is rage on -- remaining on the republican side? the presiding officer: a total of 6 minutes on the republican side. senator ernst has 1 minute left in her colloquy. mrs. ernst: mr. president, i yield back my time. mr. mccain: mr. president i ask unanimous consent -- the presiding officer: the senator from arizona. mr. mccain: -- to reserve the balance of my time until just before the vote at 11:30. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. mccain: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that we be in a quorum and that my time be preserved for the remaining 7 minutes before the vote. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mccain: i ask unanimous consent that senator perdue be recognized for five minutes and not to be taken from my time. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. perdue: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from georgia. mr. perdue: mr. president, i appreciate the accommodation. i want to add to what has been said here in the last few

minutes. we are at a very critical juncture during this congress and indeed in our country. what i want to talk about today is the nonsense that's going on right now about funding our military. these are men and women around the world in uniform whose mission it is to protect our freedom. let me remind everybody that there are only six reasons why 13 colonies got together in the first place to create this union. one of those was to provide for the national defense. and yet here we are basically trying to do what the president has asked and fund the military, and we're being obstructed by the people across the aisle. i just don't understand that, mr. president. we have people right now who are in danger of not being able to fulfill their missions around the world. as a member of the foreign relations committee, i've traveled extensively over the last year and a half. i've seen around the world where dedicated men and women don't have the resources to fulfill their missions, and it endangers the very freedom that we have

here at home. i believe that this is a critical point in this congress to tell the american people we're either going to break through this gridlock and move to do what's right or we're going to sit here on our hands and argue the political side of this while our men and women are in danger. some of the hardest things to understand right now, mr. president, is the fact that in the last 30 years, we've continued literally to disinvest in our military. this chart shows under the last three democratic presidents how we disinvested in the military. this is -- this green line is a chart of the percentage of g.d.p. that we spent on our military, and so it's gotten down all the way to today we're spending 3% of our g.d.p. it's the lowest point in the last 30 years, mr. president, and i will say this. the 30-year average here is about 4.2%.

that differential was 100 basis points. what that means is about -- in today's size of economy, it's about $200 billion. now, put that in perspective, we're spending about $600 billion on our military today. can you imagine what difference that would make? the last time a secretary of defense put a budget up based on a bottom-up estimate of need based on the missions around the world was secretary gates in 2011. in 2011, he estimated that for 2016 and be 2017, what we're talking about here in this budget, his estimate was some tens of billions of dollars more than what we're doing now, and his estimate was prior to isis, prior to russia's activity in crimea, ukraine and georgia, and what happens now, mr. president, is in the next ten years, unless something is done, under the current presidential plan of spending for the next ten years, not only are we going to add $9.5 trillion to our debt, but we are going to reduce military spending to 2.6% of g.d.p.

now, that's another roughly $100 billion of cuts if the economy were to stay the same. mr. president, i just don't understand this brinkmanship that we see. this is not the first time. i think this is the fifth time we're going to have voted on funding our military. the reaction of the other side befuddles me from the standpoint that they tell us they want to support our men and women, they give us these heart-wrenching stories, and yet then they stand up and won't even let us get the bill on the floor. mr. president, to be brief, it's time for the democrats to stop the obstructionism and the political showmanship. this is about the security of our country, about the lives of our men and women abroad. they deserve per than this. we can do -- they deserve better than this. we can do better atlantic this. the world is more dangerous than at any time in my lifetime. it's time, mr. president, that we stand up and tell the world what we are committed to, and that is to provide for our own national defense. that means funding this defense appropriations bill.

mr. president, i yield back and i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from arizona. mr. mccain: i ask unanimous consent proceedings under the quorum call be suspended and i be recognized. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mccain: mr. president, i ask to be recognized. if the senator from new hampshire, senator shaheen comes to the floor, i would yield to

her until the time that i already have reserved. mr. president, we're about to vote on a couple of motions to instruct the conferees on the defense authorization bill and also on the defense appropriations bill to move forward on it. all of these votes are very vital to the future of this nation in a time of turmoil and a time of the greatest number of refugees since the end of world war ii, threats throughout the world, and attacks on the united states of america. mr. sullivan very appropriately his motion to instruct the conferees is for us to account for and authorize funding for the recent actions taken by the president of the united states and the secretary of defense.

a force of 8,400 sailors, airmen and marines within afghanistan, the president's for the european reassurance initiative which is additional funds, sufficient naval air ground and amphibious force structure to fulfill the commitment that secretary carter made at the shang shang rally within the pacific theater. every time we turn around, we here of another increase in our military presence in iraq, afghanistan, and buildups, for example, in eastern europe, which was recently decided at a meeting of the nato nations. yet with all of these promises and commitments, we see no request for additional funding to take care of these new missions and new requirements

for our military activities. so i think that senator sullivan's motion is entirely in order. does it really make sense to have these very large multi-- when you put them all together billions of dollars of increased requirements and yet -- and announce them with great fanfare and yet never coming over, not yet, once to request additional funding for it? that is obviously at best disingenuous. the other -- so i urge my colleagues' support for the motion by senator sullivan to disagree and insist that the final conference include authorization for the commitments that are described in the motion. the second, of course, is an issue that has been plaguing us or been the subject of great

discussion and debate and heartache, frankly, on the floor of the senate and that is the issue of the afghan special immigrant visas. mr. president, this is heartbreaking that members of the united states senate for their own parochial interests -- just a couple actually -- would block this legislation which calls for the ability of us to bring these people to the united states who literally risk their lives on our behalf and lives are in danger as we speak. and my colleagues don't have to take my word for it. i'd like to say, for example, ambassador ryan crocker, probably the most distinguished diplomat i know wrote recently, he said, speaking of these interpreters, this is truly a matter of life and death.

i repeat what ambassador crocker said. this is a matter of life and death. i know hundreds of people who have been threatened because of their affiliation with the united states. some have been killed. today many are in hiding praying that the united states keeps its word. we can and must do better. general petraeus said, many of our afghan allies have not only been mission essential serving as the eyes and ears of our own troops and often saving american lives, they've risked their own and their families' lives in the line of duty. general petraeus has stated eloquently that these individuals put their lives on the line to save the lives of american service men and women and yet we had members of this body who blocked such a proposal to allow them to come to the united states of america? remarkable.

remarkable. general nicholson said, it's my firm belief, general nicholson, our commander in afghanistan, he said it's my firm belief that abandoning this program would significantly undermine our credibility and the 15 years of tremendous sacrifice by thousands of afghans on behalf of americans and coalition partners. i say to my colleagues, this is pretty straightforward. this is pretty straightforward issue. and why we are even having to do this is still a testimony to the nature of the way we seem to be doing business around here, and that is that people would literally put the lives of our allies in danger for their own parochial interests, for their own amendment that they are demanding not only be taken up but passed which has nothing to do with the lives of these great

individuals who saved the lives of americans, whose lives are in danger according to our military leaders and our most respected diplomats. retired general stanley mcchrystal, one individual known to all of us, said protecting these allies is as much a matter of american national morality as it is american national security. we're talking about in the view of general mcchrystal, one of our great outstack leaders -- outstanding leaders. we're talking about our moral obligation here. so i hope and pray that we can get a unanimous vote on this motion to instruct. finally, mr. president, we are going to have again a vote on the defense -- to move forward on the defense appropriations bill. i understand that it probably will fail and that to me is an

unbelievable act. it's unbelievable given the situation in the world today and the threats we face, that in the words of the director of national intelligence and in the words of the director of the c.i.a. that there will be further attacks on the united states of america, that my friends on the other side of the aisle are refusing to take up the legislation that pays for the defense of this nation. it's beyond belief. now, i don't like provisions in the defense appropriations bill, and i've made it very clear. and i want to have us to be able to take it up, to amend, to make it better. maybe some of us, maybe a majority of us have priorities that were not in the defense appropriations bill. suppose we don't like the fact that they appropriated a billion dollars for an ice breaker that has nothing to do with defense, that they have this long laundry

list of pork barrel projects that they call scientific research projects. i want to debate and amend those. a lot has happened since the defense appropriations committee -- the appropriations committee has passed out unanimously, unanimously the defense appropriations bill. a lot has happened. and all of us, all 100 of us should have the ability to amend and make it better. instead we are being put down on the path to a continuing resolution and an omnibus bill of which there will not be debate, which there will not be amendments to make it better for the men and women who are serving. the president just announced that we're going to have 8400 men and women who are serving this country in afghanistan instead of 5400. shouldn't we take that into consideration in our deliberations on the appropriations bill?

shouldn't we accommodate for that as is our role and obligation as the congress of the united states? we have the power of the purse. so we're now looking at a situation where we have a world, we have a world that is literally on fire. and that is apparent every day we pick up the newspaper or turn on television. and instead of having a robust debate and discussion and amendments as to how we can best defend this nation, we are going to again have my friends on the other side of the aisle stop us from taking i up. why? the appropriations committee reported out unanimously. the democratic leader said he didn't want another -- quote -- mccain amendment that would

increase funding for defense without a commensurate increase in funding for nondefense. i've said to my colleagues, if you're talking about the c.i.a., if you're talking about homeland security, if you're talking about other agencies of government to protect this nation, then fine. mr. president, i'd note the presence of the senator from new hampshire on the floor. could i ask that they be granted five minutes and i be granted two minutes after that. the presiding officer: the senator from arizona's time has expired. but without objection. mrs. shaheen: thank you, mr. president. and thank you to my colleague from arizona. i'm pleased to be here on the floor because in a few minutes i'm going to be offering a motion to instruct the conferees for the ndaa to extend the afghan immigrant visa program

and authorize additional visas for deserving applicants. for those who remember the debate we had on the floor during the ndaa, you will remember that we had come to an agreement. the opponents of this program had agreed with john mccain and me that we needed to keep the promises that we had made to so many of those afghan interpreters who made a life and death difference in helping our service men and women on the ground in afghanistan as they fought the taliban. this is a program that senator mccain and i have worked on for several years. we have been successful in previous years in getting this extension and keeping the word that we have the promise that we have made to those afghan interpreters and keeping the word of the american government that we are going to help those who helped us, and yet we go into this ndaa conference

without an extension of the special immigrant visa program. without congressional action, the afghan s.i.v. program will largely sunset around december. it will leave thousands of afghans who stood along side our men and women and other government personnel at severe risk. i just talked to a woman this morning who told me the story of an afghan interpreter who just arrived in the united states last night. she said, he had been waiting three years to get his special immigrant visa. and during that time, he was so worried about his family that he slept in another room at night when he went to bed. so if the taliban found them, he would -- they would kill only him and not the rest of his family. you know, this country owes a great debt to the afghans who

provided the essential assistance to our mission in afghanistan. the thousands of brave men and women who like this man who just arrived in the united states put themselves and their families at risk to help our soldiers and our diplomats accomplish their mission and return home safely. congress must not turn its back on these individuals. that outcome would be a moral failing, and it would also carry significant national security strategic costs going forward. so i would hope that when we have this vote on the motion to instruct, that my colleagues will agree with senator mccain and i that this is something that we need to do. we need to make sure that one of the things that comes out of that ndaa conference is an agreement to extend those special visas to those

individuals who are still in the pipeline. so thank you, mr. president. i thank my colleague from arizona for all of his work to try and get this done, and i hope that working together we can make this happen. the presiding officer: the senator from arizona. mr. mccain: i want to thank the senator from new hampshire for her leadership, her dedication and her tenacity in making sure that this issue is not dispensed with until it is finished and we fulfill our commitment to the men and women who are serving who have literally sacrificed their lives as interpreters for the good, the welfare and the safety of our members, the uniformed military who the senator from new hampshire and i hear from all the time on behalf of their interpreters. we hear from them all the time saying don't abandon them. they saved my life. can't we understand how important this moral obligation is? finally, mr. president, i hope that my colleagues will not vote to block consideration of the

defense appropriations bill. we need to debate and we need to improve and we need to provide for the needs of the military and this nation's security in an ever-changing environment. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion. we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to disagree in the house amendment, agree to the request for the house for a conference and the appointing of the following conferees -- senators mccain, inhofe, sessions, wicker, ayotte, fischer, cotton, rounds, ernst, tillis, sullivan, lee, graham, cruz, reed, nelson, mccaskill, manchin, shaheen, gillibrand, blumenthal, donnelly, hirono, kaine, king,

heinrich, signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived, and the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the motion to disagree to the house amendment, agree to the request by the house for a conference and to appoint conferees with respect to s. 2943, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2017 for military activities of the department of defense, for military construction and for defense activities of the department of energy to prescribe military personnel strength for such fiscal year and for other purposes shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

the presiding officer: on this vote the yeas are are 90. the nays are 7, three fi.es of the senators having voted in the affirmative, the motion is agreed to. under the previous order, the compound motion to go to conference is agreed to. majority leader. the senate will be in order the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the next two votes be ten minutes in length. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. the senator from new hampshire. could we have order. the senate will be in order. the senator from new hampshire. a senator: mr. president, i have a motion to instruct which is at the desk and i ask for its