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 consideration. the presiding officer: the clerk will report.

the clerk: the senator from new hampshire mrs. shaheen moves that the managers on the part of the senate at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two houses on s. 2943, the national defense authorization act for fiscal year 2017 be instructed to insist that the final conference report include language to extend the afghan special immigrant visa program through december 31, 2017, and authorize additional visas to ensure visas are available for applicants who neat the -- meet the criteria under the program. the presiding o -- the presiding officer: there are four minutes equally divided. the senator from new hampshire. mrs. shaheen: thank you, mr. president. the senate is not in order. the presiding officer: the senator is correct. the senate is not in order. the senator from new hampshire is recognized. mrs. shaheen: i rise in support of my motion to address the senate national authorization act conferees to extend the afghan visa program and authorize additional visas for deserving applicants.

the s.i.v. program allows afghans who supported the united states mission in afghanistan to seek refuge in this country because they face grave threats as a result of helping our men and women on the ground there. i just want to point out that when we had the debate on the ndaa, we had an agreement on what an amendment to extend the special immigrant visa program would look like. the presiding officer: will the senator suspend? the senate will be in order. will senators please take their conversations out of the chamber? the senator from new hampshire. mrs. shaheen: that amendment would have allowed for 2,500 additional special immigrant visas to cover those people still in the pipeline who are facing threats because of helping american soldiers. and while we had agreement from the majority of the body, unfortunately because of an unrelated issue, we were not

able to get this amendment passed. so this is an opportunity for us to come back at this, to do what's right, to do what our commanders and our diplomats say we need to do for the national security interests of america, and so i hope all of my colleagues will join me in supporting this motion to instruct, and i would like to now ask my partner in this effort, senator mccain, if he would say a few words. mr. mccain: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent for two minutes. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. sessions: reserving the right to object, i assume if senator mccain speaks in favor of this, i'd like to reserve -- ask consent for two minutes to speak in opposition. the presiding officer: there are two minutes equally divided. there are two minutes in opposition remaining, and the senator from arizona is asking for two additional minutes. mr. mccain: mr. president -- mr. sessions: i would object. unless i have --

the presiding officer: the senator from arizona has 25 seconds remaining. mr. mccain: mr. president, please don't take my word for it. how about general david petraeus. 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 have risked their own and their families' lives in the line of duty. if this program falls far short of that need, we'll have serious national security implications. ambassador ryan crocker. this is truly a matter of life and death. i know hundreds of people have been threatened because of thei- the presiding officer: the senator's time is expired. mr. mccain: mr. president, i would -- the presiding officer: the senator's time is expired. mr. mccain: i ask for an additional 30 seconds. mr. sessions: i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. who yields time in opposition? the senator from alabama. mr. sessions: mr. president, i work with senator mccain and senator shaheen, and we agreed

2,500 new refugees would enter under this program, and we had some language in there that tightened it up. this legislation just gives an unlimited number to come under the program and does not have the language that tightens up the program a bit and brings it to an end eventually. that's the differences of opinion at this point. i'm disappointed this was brought up. last night we first learned about it. i would just note that there are 7,000 visas authorized over the last few years. only 3,500 have been used. 3,500 remain. the house extends the program but does not add any additional numbers. they considered it at length. chairman goodlatte opposes this, and the motion fails to acknowledge the need to pay for and prioritize the visas. these visas will cost, according to c.b.o., $281 million over ten

years. 2,500 would cost that much. so this has an unlimited number. so i think the right thing for us to do is not agree to this motion to instruct. i would be glad to work with senator mccain and senator shaheen and support the agreement we reached last time that got blocked by other members for other reasons, but i oppose this because it's unlimited, it's unpaid for, and i don't believe it's necessary based on the facts on the ground. mrs. shaheen: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from new hampshire. mrs. shaheen: could i ask for a clarification? the vote we are having is not on a particular piece of legislation, is that correct? this is a motion to instruct the conferees, so it does not deal with the particular piece of legislation that senator sessions has suggested. the presiding officer: that is correct. the vote before the senate is on the senator's motion to instruct the managers on this matter.

mr. sessions: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. all time is expired. the question is on the motion. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. there is. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presidinthe presiding office there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or wishing to change their vote? seeing none, the yeas are 84. the nays are 12. the motion to instruct is agreed to. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from alaska. mr. sullivan: madam president, i have a motion to instruct at the desk and i ask for its consideration. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from alaska, mr. sullivan moves that the managers -- mr. sullivan: i ask that the reading be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sullivan: madam president, i rise in support of my motion to instruct in relation to the ndaa of 2017. in the past few weeks, the president and the secretary of

defense have made additional military commitments across the globe for our men and women in uniform. and we've read about these. these include 5860 -- 560 troops to iraq to help enforce the fight against isis, a decision to keep 8,400 members of the military in afghanistan to fight against terrorism, a thousand troops in poland and a headquarters to beef up nato's eastern flank, two carrier strike groups in the south china sea to protect the freedom of seas. i believe many of us are supportive of these commitments. however, madam president, in order to really support these pledges, we need to make sure that we fully authorize these commitments so that our brave men and women in uniform have everything they need to fight and win these battles. when our service men and women train here and deploy abroad, they need to know that the

congress of the united states, that the senate of the united states stands with them, supporting this motion to instruct let's them know that we have their back as we should. i yield to my colleague from rhode island. the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. reed: madam president, we worked closely with senator sullivan on this instruction. it is consistent as the senator has indicated with the president's proposals with respect to our force structure in afghanistan, with our european response initiative where we are increasing our presence and are cooperating more closely with our european allies. it's consistent with our position in the pacific as articulated by secretary of defense ash carter. it is consistent with proposals that have been made in other areas. and it does not expand the authority of the president. it simply recognizes what he has asked, not just our congress but more importantly the men and

women who wear the uniform of the united states to do. and this instruction will help us in our deliberations. i would thank the senator for his proposal and urge passage. mr. sullivan: madam president, as you can see, there's bipartisan support for this america. i ask that all of my colleagues support it now. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? the ayes are 85, the nays are 12. the motion to instruct is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. the senate will come to order.

please take your conversations out of the well. the senate will be in order. the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to the motion to reconsider the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to h.r. 5293. the presiding officer: question is son the motion. -- the question is on the motion. hearing no further debate, all those in a n. favor say aye. opposed, nay. the ayes do have it. the motion is bread to. mr. mcconnell: i roar can be the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed pro h.r. 5293. the presiding officer: question is on the motion. hearing no further debate, all those in favor say aye. opposed, nay. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it.

motion is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: for the information of all senators, the next and final vote will be cloture on the milcon-v.a./zika proposal at 2:00. and that'll be it for the week. 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 524, h.r. 5293 an act making appropriations for the department of defense for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2017 and for other purposes, signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: the senate will be in order. by unanimous consent the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the

motion to proceed to h.r. 5293, an act making appropriations for the department of defense for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2017, and for other purposes shall be brought to a close upon reconsideration. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? if not, on this vote, the yeas are 5, the nays are -- 55, the nays are 42. three-fifths of the senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted in the affirmative, upon reconsideration, the motion is not agreed to.

mr. mccain: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from arizona. mr. mccain: madam president, i was about to leave the chamber, but in light of the results of the last vote, i'm compelled -- i'm compelled to speak out more in disappointment than in rage, although i think a lot of men and women who are serving in the military, who are dependent on what we do for their safety and their livelihood, that for pure, pure partisan and political reasons we will not be moving forward to consider a bill to train, equip the men and women who are in the military, to give them their pay and benefits, and defend this nation. how -- how do you do that in good conscience? i understand we're in an election year.

i understand all that. but how in the world do you refuse to take up legislation that is -- that it's only purpose is to defend this nation, which is under assault? what do we tell -- i just came back from spending the 4th of july with the troops in afghanistan. they depend on us. they depend on us. we're their elected representatives. and what have we done now? we refuse to move forward with legislation that allows them to defend themselves. and they're in harm's way. so, madam president, all i can say is that when we see polling data that shows that the american people have a very low opinion of us -- i see numbers, 13%, 14% of the american people

approve of congress -- this is validation; this is validation of their absolute disgust with our failure to do the work to protect the nation. isn't that our first priority? that's always been mine. to secure the nation, to make sure that we are made as -- protect ourselves as much as possible. and we rely on these young men and women. we reline them to defend the -- we rely on them to defend the nation. and the now we -- and now we won't even act to arm, equip, and pay for them? that's disgraceful. that's disgraceful. yes, this side of the aisle has been guilty of partisan behavior, and i will 34r50ed guilty to -- and i will plead guilty to all that. but in in the world -- how in the world do you go home to your home state, as we will tonight and tomorrow, and meet these

young men and women who are serving, as is one of the great privileges we have, and look them in the eye -- look them in the eye and tell them, oh, i voted against legislation which was to arm and train and equip you and protect this nation? i voted against it because the democratic leader said, well, he didn't want an amendment that would increase spending on defense -- on defense. but without getting too redundant, i hope that maybe we might take the next couple of months before we come back and examine what we're doing and why we can't agree at least on debating and amending and making better, which we can do -- because that's what the senate is all about. can't we do that for them? do we have to be so divided that

we won't even move forward with perhaps one of the most important pieces of legislation that this body and this nation is responsible for? i hope my friends on the other side of the aisle will examine their consciences. i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. moran: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from kansas. mr. moran: madam president ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. moran: thank you. i now ask unanimous consent that the senate be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein up to 10 minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. moran: madam president, i have another request. there are seven requests for committees to meet during today's session -- national session -- senate session. they have the approval of the majority and minority leader. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. moran: madam president, i would notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quoarp quoru

quorum call:

quorum call:

a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from nebraska. mrs. fischer: madam president, i ask that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. fischer: madam president, i rise to draw attention to important legislation that would ensure american taxpayers know how their hard-earned dollars are being spent. this morning i was pleased to join senator lankford to introduce a bill that expands on similar legislation that i introduced with senator gardner last year, known as the judgment fund transparency act.

the judgment fund is administrated by the treasury department and is used to pay certain court judgments and settlements against the federal government. it is essentially an unlimited amount of money made available to the federal government to cover its own liability. the fund is not subject to the annual appropriations process. and even more remarkable, the treasury department has no reporting requirements. because of this, the judgment fund payments are made with very little oversight or scrutiny. because the treasury department has no binding reporting requirements, few public details exist about where the funds are going and why. this is no small matter, as the judgment fund disburses billions of dollars in payments every

year. for example, between 2013 and 2015, the federal government paid more than $10 billion in judgment fund awards with scant transparency or oversight. hardworking taxpayers and members of congress have every right to see exactly how tax dollars are being spent out of this judgment fund. i was proud to see my original version of the bill pass the senate as part of the energy policy modernization act in april. still, recent developments show more oversight is needed, and that is why i've joined with senator lankford to update and expand the judgment fund transparency act. this update is the result of payments made through the judgment fund to iran earlier

this year. in january the obama administration transferred $1.7 billion to iran's central bank. it was paid in connection with the settlement or of claim relating to arms sales to the shaw -- shah. last month new reports indicated that the u.s. payment was transferred to iran's defense budget. in defending the payment, white house spokesman josh earnst argued it was exhibit a for tough diplomacy in a way that makes the american people safer in advancing their interest. close quote. madam president, i disagree. a $1.7 billion payment that goes

to iran's military does not make our country safer. iran was designated a state sponsor of terror in 1984. its military has long provided weapons, training and funding to groups such as hezbollah, hamas, and other proxies throughout the middle east and beyond. last month the state department released its lates country reports on terrorism. it states in 2015 iran's state sponsorship of terrorism worldwide remained undiminished. in fact, the state department report noted that in some areas, such as iraq, its support to terrorist groups has actually increased. madam president, i am haunted by the fear that some of these very terrorists, groups that may have

taken american lives, may have received money from the united states treasury. the bill that i'm introducing with senator lankford today takes action. it would prohi -- prohibit the judgment from being used for this purpose while maintaining key provisions from the original bill requiring openness and transparency. if the administration wants to deliver another payment to a regime that's going to sponsor terror, it should make its case to congress and to the american people. more transparency leads to greater accountability. sunlight is the best disinfectant. through this bill, we can tack taxpayer-funded payments to foreign nations and prevent harmful transactions from happening in the future.

madam president, i thank senator lankford for his diligent work on this issue, and i urge my colleagues to stand behind hardworking american taxpayers and support this legislation. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. i would suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. barrasso: thank you, madam president. i ask unanimous consent the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. barrasso: thank you, madam president. two weeks ago, i came to the floor to talk about the threat that is posed to all of us by the zika virus. since then, more than 3,500 americans have contracted this terrible virus. unborn babies have been put at risk for a serious medical condition called microcephaly. that's a condition -- i will tell you this as a doctor -- where babies are born with smaller heads and with brain development problems. adults can be paralyzed, even killed by this virus. so here we are ready to vote in the next 15 minutes on an appropriations bill that is supposed to do something about this virus, the zika virus, but how are the democrats

responding? well, they're peddling myths and they're playing politics. that's what they do. they already blocked this legislation once, and now they're ready to block it again. it's unbelievable. this legislation includes $1.1 billion to fight zika. the head of the centers for disease control and prevention said it would fund all of the agency's immediate needs in the fight against zika at this point. when the senate voted on this in may, every democrat in the body voted to support this act same amount of money. two months ago, democrats thought this was the right answer, but now they are willing to let the american people suffer because of this virus. what happened? what changed in the last two months that would have the democrats who voted for it now vote against it? nothing's changed. except that the situation has actually gotten worse, more dangerous for people. i think the democrats were never serious about wanting to do

anything at all. democrats decided that they would rather have a political issue than have a real solution. democrats aren't going to be able to dodge responsibility this time, madam president. we're running out of time to prevent an epidemic. last week, senator bill nelson from florida said we're at the 11th hour in the 59th -- and the 59th minute. that's exactly right. so why are senator nelson and his democrat colleagues playing a game of chicken with the american people? there was a poll that came out last week from the kaiser family foundation. it found that 76% of americans support this legislation that we have on the floor, the zika legislation. democrats ought to start be listening to the american people. they should stop playing political games and take the money that they ask for, that the center for disease control says is the right amount of money to fight the spread of this threat to the health of the american people. madam president, this is not the first time that democrats in

this body have put their own political talking points ahead of the american people in terms of their health care. the beginning of this year, republicans passed legislation to repeal the president's health care law. why? so we can replace it with health care reforms that work for the american people. we want -- to act and protect them from a health care law that's harmed so many people across the country. many people it's absolutely punished them, punished them. president obama vetoed the legislation and democrats in congress resisted every attempt to undo years of damage caused by obamacare. republicans offered solutions. democrats just want to try to preserve the president's legacy no matter what. democrats are totally ignoring all of the chaos and all of the harm that's being caused by this health care law. taxpayers pay to set up 23

different insurance coops across the country. 16 of them have now folded. only a third of the original companco-ops are still operatin. taxpayer money wasted to never be paid back and more than 850,000 americans have lost their insurance that they got through the co-ops because the insurance co-ops can't afford to stay in business under the health care law. the co-op in illinois just collapsed this week. it's the president's home state. last week it was co-ops in oregon and connecticut yet the senator from connecticut comes down to the floor and says the health care law is working. it is not, even in his home state. there are more than 20,000 people in oregon who have been left scrambling to find new coverage starting july 31, just a couple of weeks from now president it's not just people who belong to the co-ops would are losing their insurance. the largest insurance company in minnesota says they're going to stop selling insurance in that

state at the end of the year. blue cross-blue shield of minnesota covers over a hundred thousand people. all of them are going to lose their insurance and have to find coverage elsewhere. president obama said if you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance. not for the people in oregon, not for the people in illinois, not for the people in connecticut, not for the people in minnesota. now, americans who don't lose their insurance, they're going to have to get ready to pay a lot more for it next year, even if they can keep what they have. they sure don't like it, mr. president. more companies have been saying how much they plan to charge next year and the numbers are staggering. in montana, blue cross-blue shield just announced on friday that it's raising obamacare rates 62%. who can afford that? it's incredible. and the president has the nerve to call it the affordable care act and to tell members of the senate that they should forcefully defend and be proud. there is very little to be proud

of, madam president. it's happening all across the country because of this law. premiums are skyrocketing. so are deductibles. so are co-pays. every other cost that pay people out of their pockets for health care is going up. all of this since obamacare went into effect, and it's because of obamacare. we read a story the other day, it said before obamacare for every doctor there were six administrators out there tying to administer health care in the country in terms of doing the paperwork, pushing the paper around. now it's nine for every one doctor. so we've gone from six to nine administrators for every one doctor practicing medicine. look, people across the country are rejecting what president obama is continuing to claim is working well. just before the 4th of july, we learned that 1.6 million people who signed up this year for obamacare have already quit by the end of march. they signed up beginning of the year, quit by the end of march.

1.6 million. the congressional budget office said they were expecting by this time over 21 million to sign up for obamacare. well, more and more dropouts. we're only half that number and it's just more evidence that the president's health care law is cratering. it is collapsing. look, there's so much bad news out of this obamacare information that we continue to have that the white house feels they can't hide it any longer so they dribble it out over the 4th of july weekend, right before the 4th of july when people are paying attention to other things because they don't want the world to know how badly this is actually working. but yet what the president says is forcefully defend and be proud. the president is ignoring the fact that 1.6 million people who already signed up for his -- listened to him this year and signed up, they've already gotten out of it because it's a bad deal. he totally ignores the 850,000

americans who lost their insurance because of his failed co-ops. instead he actually wrote an article in the journal of medical association patting himself on the back, congratulating himself. it came out this monday on how great he thinks this health care law is. it is delusional for him to think that. it is ignoring the reality of what the american people see. it says he is living in a cacoon of self-delusion. that's what we're seeing across the country. the president ignoring the facts. in the article the president actually says that the health care law should be expanded, expanded he said by offering government-run health insurance plans. if president obama and the democrats in congress think that america needs more government control, more control over people's health care, they are really out of touch with reality. a senator: madam president? i wonder -- the presiding officer: the senator from mississippi. a senator: i wonder if the senator would yield for a

question. a senator: most concern. mr. wicker: i make as point about tremendous cost increases, that medical consumers have experienced and also the number of insurers who are just leaving the scheme all together. and so americans really are not any better off. and i appreciate the gentleman coming to the floor time and again with the facts on this. but in particular i want to go back to a point that the gentleman made with regard to what we're going to vote on in a few minutes. do i understand from my friend from wyoming that we will soon be voting on -- at the top of the hour we'll be voting on a proposal that funds the zika disease at an amount that the c.d.c. says is necessary and an

amount that our friends on the democratic side have argued for and voted for time and again. do i understand that to be correct? mr. barrasso: madam president, the distinguished senator from mississippi understands correctly because at this point the request and what the democrats voted for earlier this year, $1.1 billion which is what the centers for disease control says is the correct amount, the democrats are now seeming to vote against. they voted against it earlier this week. mr. wicker: and this very bill that we'll be voting on funds zika at that amount? mr. barrasso: at the amount requested. mr. wicker: at the amount requested by the c.d.c. i was disappointed to hear the gentleman say that he believes democrats will come in and once again block this funding this afternoon. if that happens, when will be the next opportunity that this body will have to vote on this vital funding? mr. barrasso: i think, madam president, we're talking at least seven weeks from now. if the democrats don't change

their tune, there's a lot of damage that's going to occur over that period of time. it's time to kill the mosquitoes now. remember, as my colleague knows from mississippi, it's the mosquitoes that carry the virus, the virus that if bitten and that person gets that virus, it can cause all these very consequential health impacts to babies who are yet to be born as well as to adults. mr. wicker: i would just observe and there may be others that want to speak in the very short time we have. i would just observe, madam president, that we have a bill before us that gives the administration what they've been requesting, that gives our friends on the democratic side of the aisle what they have asked for time and time again saying that the senate should act. we have an opportunity to do that today and to leave here with a victory for health care and a victory for the american people and yet if we do not act as it appears we will not, because democrats will come in and object and not give us the 60 votes, then it's going to be

a month and a half to two months before we can provide the funding for this vital disease prevention legislation. so i would just say that i would call on my colleagues, we're at the 11th hour to reconsider to position. let's go out for the conventions with a positive note and give the american people the funding that the experts in our government tell us is necessary. i'll yield back to the gentleman and thank him for yielding the time. mr. barrasso: i appreciate so much, madam president, the comments by the senator from mississippi who's absolutely right, because there are two components to this. one is to kill the mosquitoes now. the other thing we need to do, move ahead with is coming up with a vaccine that people can use to help prevent this virus from taking hold if they happen to be bitten by a mosquito. so we need to do two things.

we need the research where we kill the mosquitoes now. i was astonished that the senator was opposed to the fact that what we wanted to do was make it easier to spray to kill the mosquitoes because you have so spray near water. it's where they tend to multiply. it's where the mosquitoes breed. it's where the zika forms. they're so concerned that there would be a regulation that for a short period of time would be laid aside, you'd still have to use the things that have only been properly approved. you're spraying near water. it seemed like the democrats were willing to line up for the mosquitoes instead of the people being bitten by the mosquitoes. this is how ludicrous this has gotten, madam president. the money requested by the c.d.c., the right amount of money is here on the floor to be voted on today. we've got to get the research going. you've got to spray and kill the mosquitoes. but once again the democrats seem to rather have a political issue than a solution. i would recommend that the democrats come out of that lunch meeting that they're having now with their nominee for president, hillary clinton. they're not on the floor

defending theirself. they're out there visiting with hillary clinton. they need to come to the floor of the senate and vote to approve this legislation today to get the money to the centers for disease control, to do the research, to kill the mosquitoes. we are offering solution, madam president. republicans are here offering solutions. democrats are offering gridlock and the same old political games. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: madam president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to the motion to reconsider the motion to invoke cloture on the conference report to accompany h.r. 2577. the presiding officer: the clerk -- hearing no further debate, cloture on the motion -- the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye. opposed no? the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: i move to reconsider the motion to invoke cloture on the conference report to accompany h.r. 2577.

the presiding officer: any questions on the motion? hear nothing further debate, all those in favor say aye. those opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: 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 conference report to accompany h.r. 2577, an act making appropriations for the departments of transportation and so forth and for other purposes signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the conference report to accompany h.r. 2577, an act making appropriations for the

department of transportation and housing and urban development and related agencies for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2016, and for other purposes shall be brought to a close upon reconsideration. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote: