at the same time i want solutions for those nebraska families still struggling to find quality and affordable health care. but let's be honest, these solutions are not more bailouts and tax subsidies. no more one size fits all federal mandates. we must all conclude that obamacare is a clear failure. we must once and for all scrap it and then replace it with patient centered solutions. i want to have that conversation and i am ready and willing to do so. thank you, mr. 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: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. a senator: i would ask consent the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. a senator: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, first order of business in this return to session is for us to pass appropriation bills and to keep government open on october 1. mr. cardin: i know that people are busily at work in order to be able to make that reality. i was on the floor yesterday talking about the need to fund zika. to me that is urgent. we have to get that done now. and i explained then that there are real risks to the general population of maryland and colorado and every state in this country from the zika virus. so today i'm going to talk about two episodes that occurred in maryland during the recess, two

disasters. and i mention that in this context because we need our federal agencies fully functioning and fully funded in order to deal with things that just happen in america. in my own state we had two horrible disasters during the recess. and i'd like to talk a little bit about that. marylanders were heart broken by the devastation that has hit our community in ellicott city. my condolences go out to the families and friends who lost loved ones in the tragedy. i want to especially thank the first responders who have worked firelessly to save lives and property after the historic flooding in ellicott city. ellicott city is a historic maryland treasure founded in 1772 and known for its vibrant business community and its culture of kindness and resilience, suffered significant flooding throughout the intense rainfall on the evening of july 30, 2016. the national weather service

predicts that a rainfall of this magnitude should statistically occur once in every 1,000 years. six inches of rain poured down on ellicott city, an amount of rain that normally falls over the course of one month in a period of only 90 minutes. shortly after the storm hit, i toured ellicott city with howard county executive alan kelman. officials from nema and other federal, state and local officials. the devastation is truly frightening in terms of the damage to property, businesses, homes, vehicles, and infrastructure in ellicott city. as "the baltimore sun" reported, saturday, july 30 began unremarkably for a summer day in the mid-atlantic with thunderstorms expected. joseph anthony blevins was out on a date night with his

girlfriend heather owens and he suggested they stop at main street in ellicott city. they had just left the matinee at a movie theater in laurel and were heading home to windsor mill with the roll of her eyes they agreed to stop in the city's historic district. let me continue here with "the baltimore sun's" reporting of this story. it was raining when heather owens and joe blevins pulled into a parking lot off main street around 7:30 p.m. and they sat in the car to wait out what they expected to ab short downpour. they didn't know the weather service had issued a flash flood warning for much of central maryland about 12 minutes earlier. when they realized the rain was not going to let up, they decided to go home. they pulled back on to main street but within 5 minutes their car began floating. the car struck a guardrail and plunged into the swollen river. owens was able to get out of the passenger side window and thinks she grabbed something, perhaps a branch of a tree on the river

bank as the current pulled her downstream. she looked for blevins and saw him in the river gasping for air and reaching in vain for something to hold on. she scrambled on to the rocky bank on the nearby railroad trashes heading towards houses on higher ground to get help. the rushing water had torn her pants and shoes off but she survived with a fractured jaw. residents and first responders later looked unsuccessfully for blevins. he died during the flooding leaving behind owens and his three children. a confident meteorological and geographical factor turned this hard summer rain into a instructive torrent. the river rose 14 feet above its normal flow, shops and restaurants that line main street were swamped and flooded as water rushed down the street and rose underneath of it. an inch or two of water running through char channels underneath

buildings -- i had a chance to see firsthand and it's incredibly buildings were washed away. the river normally flowed underneath that and had for a long time. but because of construction and because of the amount of water that fell, the water was funneled into main street. and it became a force of itself going down main street as well as the river rising plow it causing major destruction. jessica lynn wasula also died in the flood. she was a 35-year-old mother who lived in lebanon, pennsylvania and going to ellicott city that night with three women for a girl's night out. she had dropped off her so-year-old daughter at her brother's home and drove two hours from pennsylvania for dinner and painting saturday in ellicott city, a chance to share

an evening with her sister-in-law and two other relatives. as the four women left the italian restaurant on main street in the historic district, a wave of flood water began to sweep their car away. they got out and clung to a telephone pole as waist high wall of water washed over them. wasula was swept away and died in the flood. while we mourn the loss of jessica and blevins, let me thank the first responders of ellicott city who no doubt saved many lives during this historic and deadly flood. i am fleeced our congressional delegation has moved quickly. communities, homeowners and small businesses recover from this disaster. i want to recognize and praise the federal agencies who really stepped up to the plate and worked hand in hand with our state and local officials. let me start by thanking the

small business administrator. specifically, maria contraire a sweet. a survey of ellicott city found that more than 25 structures with 40% or more uninsured damage required to recommend an s.b.a. physical declaration. at least 60 homeowners, renters and businesses in ellicott city and surrounding areas sustained major damages or were destroyed. more than 80 structures sustained minor damage as well. in this case, a federal disaster declaration from the s.b.a. was necessary to ensure howard county business owners got the business disaster loan assistance and injury disaster loan assistance to repair, damage. i know many of these shop owners. she is are not chains. she is these are small business people who have set up their own unique business, providing retail services in a way that

reminds us of how retail used to be in this country. main street in ellicott city is main street, america. these people are very resilient. but when you have this type of damage and you know how long it's going to be before you can return the structure to its use, it requires a helping hand. and i was pleased that the s.b.a. came through for the citizens of ellicott city by approving a formal disaster declaration which will allow the homeowners, businesses, and nonprofit organizations impacted by this epic storm and resulting floodwaters to apply for economic injury disaster loans which provide low-interest assistance to help businesses meet the financial obligations and pay ordinary and necessary operating expenses. the s.b.a. repeatedly has proven its willingness and ability to help marylanders struck by crisis. i express my sincere thanks to the s.b.a. for the assistance

extended to our neighbors in need and will continue to work with team maryland, including senator mikulski and congressman cummings, to identify additional resources to aid ellicott city. the maryland delegation has come together to support the state's request for a federal disaster declaration for howard county after the deadly and devastating flood inellicott city. after the impact this flood has had on our state and local resources, i join my colleagues in write large to the president urging him to approve the federal disaster declaration at the request of our governor, governor larry hogan. i also acknowledge the extraordinary help from officials from region 3 of the federal emergency management agency, particularly mary ann attorney. offices are headquartered in philadelphia but include the state of maryland. i appreciate administrator turney coming coming down for a

site visit. she was there immediately. i met with her. she understood the urgency and importance of being on the ground. i was pleased to have the opportunity to meet with her and others during her site visit to ellicott city. i want to thank her for her coordination with state and local officials in responding to this disaster. mr. president, i also want to share with my colleagues another major disaster that occurred in maryland over the senate recess. on august 10, a massive explosion and fire took place at the flower branch apartments in silver spring, maryland. seven individuals died in this catastrophe which caused dozens of injuries and displaced over 100 residents. mr. president, i was at this scene also, and we lost life. people lost their lives, and i want to mention their names.

i was surprised to learn there was survivors when i took a look at the amount of damage that was done by this explosion. the first responders showed me parts of the building that were found hundreds of yards away mangled by the force of the explosion, and there was immediately a fire that consumed the rest of the premises. as "the washington post" reported, the destruction was so devastating that authorities were unable to immediately determine how many people died, and there was difficulty in making identifications. among the victims were two little boys, debbie morale less and fernando hernandez who had become friends as their mothers took new lives in the august. a couple, you a gus stay and maria who built a house-cleaning business and a retired parenter assault pentagaul. we mourn all their lives and extend our deepest condolences

to their families. i toured this site with our federal, state, and local officials, including officials from the montgomery county maryland fire and rescue service. our hearts go out to the families who have been impacted by this horrible tragedy in nonts g.m.o.ary county. i want to thank the local responders, as well as a wide range of nonprofit and faith based groups who have answered the call to help victims and loved ones put the pieces back together as best they can. it was heart-warming to see the community uprising. and to provide whatever they could. they provided help to the first responders. the temperature was over 100 degrees when is this occurred. it was oppressive temperatures, very difficult working conditions, and the community came together to help the first responders. we had a team coming in from out of town that were expert in this

type of action to help in dealing with this tradges di tr. to those who have been victimized tbhi explosion. at the federal level i commend the work of the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, and firearms in helping with the investigation of this massive explosion and fire. i am pleased that the national transportation safety board has launch add formal investigation into this incident. that's because there is an expected gas line issue involved in the explosion. i am hopeful that the national transportation safety board investigation will uncover the causes of the explosion and fired and hold individuals accountable for any wrongdoing as well as lead to additional safety recommendations as to how to prevent in this this future. we should also examine our

outreach and education efforts to the immigrant communities. this community is an imgrants community. english is for many not the first language. we were there to help and make sure we did everything we can to make sure they were properly taken care of. again be, i want to thank the federal, state, and local government agencies who helped the citizens of ellicott city and silver spring respond to these terrible disasters. working with our nonprofit and faith-based communities we can recover and rebuild from these tragedies. and, mr. president, as i said in the beginning, this is just another example why it's critically important that we do our job here. and that we pass the necessary appropriations bills so that our federal partners can help our state and local governments and help those who have been victimized by these types of disasters, that they know that they have the federal agencies

fully tooled, fully budgeted to help them respond to these tragedies. with that, mr. president, i would suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: mr. coats: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator indiana. mr. coats: mr. president, in may of this year -- the presiding officer: the sna senate is in a quorum call. mr. coats: my fault, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent to dispense with the call of the quorum. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. coats: thank you. mr. president, in may i spoke on the floor about the appalling practice of the palestinian authority to reward terrorists and encourage more terrorism against israeli citizens and

americans. my purpose then was to draw attention to these payments and especially the fact that u.s. taxpayer money was being used in this disgusting way. i had hoped that others would share my outrage. unfortunately, that i that has t occurred, although i think it will. already the country of norway has raised this issue through its foreign minister. just recently a german parliamentarian of the green party raised this issue. countries are becoming aware of the fact that they are subsidizing terrorist acts by palestinians against jews, against americans in israel, and that aid money that is going to this country from our countries, from a number of foreign countries, is being used for that purpose. let me give you some of the facts regarding that. i want to repeat these, and some of this is repee tissue us of

what i said in may, but i think this is so unconscionable, such inhumane behavior, that we are subsidizing, that we need to understand what it is and take action to make sure it doesn't continue. since 198, the palestinian authority, which i will recovery to as the p.a., has been honoring and supporting palestinian terrorists serving criminal sentences in israeli prisons and rewarding the families of those persists -- those who have committed these criminal acts -- rewarding their families with financial support based on the severity of the crime. this system has now, as we have learned through some documentation obtained, been formalized and expanded by president abbas in presidential directives. palestinian terrorist prisoners

are regarded by the p.a. as patriotic fighters, as heroes and actually as employees of the government of palestinian authority. while in prison, they and their families are paid premium salaries and given extra benefits as rewards for their terrorist actions. when they are released from custody, the terrorists then become civil service employees. shockingly, monthly salaries for both incarcerated and released prisoners are on a sliding scale depending on the severity of the crime and the length of the prison sentence. thus, the more heinous the crime, the longer the sentence and the longer the sentence entitles the criminal and his family to a much higher premium salary. for example, a prisoner, palestinian prisoner with a

five-year sentence for creating a criminal act against an israeli citizen or american citizen or someone who is not a palestinian receives about $500 per month, whereas a more serious criminal -- say, serving a 25-year sentence perhaps for murder -- receives $2,500 a month. it is an incentive. it is an incentive to do an ever-more criminal, heinous act against a human being. and they are paid on a sliding scale basis. that, by the way, is six times the average income of a palestinian worker. where else in the world does a prison receive such benefits that actually increase with the severity in violence of the crime? u.s. federal prisoners, for instance, earn between 35 cents and $1.15 an hour and snroirnt

hon a sliding -- and certainly not on a sliding scale. in 12014, mack mewed abbas issue add presidential decree that moved this payment system from the p.a. to the plo p.l.o. the openly being a nounalled reason for this shift was to sidestep the scriewt nigh of this payment system by foreign governments, including us, the united states, who are contributed so much of the money that keep the p.a. afloat. they were receiving criticism and there were inquiries by countries providing aid, including arks including our state department, and including some legislation that was enacted by the congress, and they created a shell game. she just simply took the money -- they just simply took the money that was given to the palestinian authority and because they were critical, there was criticism of their use of it as these payments, they

shifted it to the p.l.o. through a shell game process that they thought we would not discover, and we did, and fortunately we did. unfortunately, given these facts, given the fact that we now know what is happening with american taxpayer dollars, and some of our allies' taxpayer dollars, there shouldn't be any question in terms of what is happening and what we ought to do. but apparently many of our leaders have been intentionally turning a blind eye to this practice in the hopes that we will ignore what's going on. this nefarious scheme has been going on now for 18 years, and almost no one has been saying anything about it. and that is why i'm on the floor today. that is why i was on the floor in may. and that's why i'll be on the floor again, to continue to

bring these facts to light so that we can take action to prevent this from happening. but where is the outrage, outrage over the fact that a government is deliberately encouraging and financially rewarding its citizens to engage in a criminal act? this administration has explicitly avoided criticism of the p.a. on this matter and is ignoring the misuse of taxpayer money and helping the p.a. reward its terrorists to honor its marytrs. it's time they stood up, acknowledge the facts and put an end to this. how can this silent criticism -- how can the silence be consistent with our antiterrorist efforts and counter terrorist efforts? how can this silence be ignored? one answer is that the administration has ignored the misuse of taxpayer dollars

simply because it doesn't want to stir the pot. there are problems in the middle east. we're dealing with a number of them. and maybe the conclusion -- i'm just speculating, but maybe the conclusion is let's not raise another issue that could cause further conflict until the middle east. but there are worse things here than just silence because not only does the state department decline to actively oppose these terrorist payments, even they offer false excuses for the outrage, excuses that no rational person would believe. for instance, the department of state's bureau of counterterrorism said in a recent report that this payment system was -- and i quote -- "an effort to reintegrate released prisoners into society and prevent recruitment by hostile political factions." this is simply an absurd interpretation of the terrorist rewards program.

and its far more sinister motives are obvious to anyone who is paying attention. at the same time, though, we must admit that these payments, this payment scheme has gotten little or no attention here in the united states senate. nor -- for 18 years the p.a. has been using american taxpayer money to reward terrorists. yet, until i spoke about it in may, i am not aware the subject has even come up on the senate floor in any of the recent years that i'm aware of. we should be holding hearings on this issue in appropriate senate committees, as there have been recently in the house of representatives. and thank goodness for that. more of my colleagues should be demanding that we stop financing such a scheme and we should enact legislation that imposes a solution, if necessary. now i can only speculate on why outside groups that support --. the presiding officer: the senate will be in order.

mr. coats: thank you, mr. president. i can only speculate why outside groups that support israel are also hesitant to press congress to take action. some may be reluctant to impose more pressure on a financially weakened dependent p.a. believing that it would deprive abbas of what little remains of his authority and status as a negotiating partner. thus, making a negotiated settlement even less likely. even some israeli officials may share -- may share -- this view and have worked for years to act as a break on efforts by congress to cut off aid, presumably to preserve the p.a. stability as a west bank security provider. welshings we've seen -- welshings we've seen where that's gone. nowhere. despite possible consequences we cannot give the p.a. a pass to support, to condone and even reward terrorism, no matter what the consequences might be.

the palestinian authority does not deserve immunity just because of its fragility. these payments provide rewards and motivations for brutal terrorists, plain and simple. to provide u.s. taxpayer money to abbas and his government so that they can treat governments as heroes or glorious marytrs is morally unacceptable. to tolerate such an outrage because of concern for abbas' political future or preserving the p.a. o'security role amount. if the p.a.'s fragile financial condition requires u.s. assistance, then it is their policy, not our policy that needs to change. we need an immediate response to this outrage. first, i am working with my colleagues to end american financial support for incarcerated terrorists or the families of these so-called marytrs. we will identify the amount of money that flows from the p.a. to the p.l.o. for this purpose

and cut u.s. assistance by that amount, at the very least. legislation to that effect is now in both the house and the senate versions of appropriations bills that we must work together to ensure that this language survives any future omnibus or continuing resolutions and is repeated in future appropriations bills. if this partial cutoff of u.s. aid is not sufficient to motivate the palestinian authority to end this immoral system of payments to terrorists, we should propose a complete suspension of financial assistance until they change their policy. i'm aware that suspending assistance to the palestinians will have other consequences that we and israel will have to address. but i believe the pressure that we and other like-minded governments could apply to this matter will bring president abbas and other palestinian

officials to their senses. in any case, whether it does that or not, the moral imperative is clear. payments that reward and encourage terrorism must be stopped and must be stopped now. mr. president, i thank you and i suggest -- i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota. ms. klobuchar: mr. president, i rise today to bring attention to an urgent issue affecting all americans. actually the number-one thing that i heard about when i was home, and especially at our state fair, which, by the way, is the biggest state fair in the country because we don't count texas because they're open for a month. but two million people, record crowd, 1.9 million to be exact. i went out there most of the days and i was able to talk to folks right where they were. and the issue that they're talking about is the high cost of prescription drugs in our

country. the price of insulin has tripled in the last decade. the price of the infectious disease drug, dareprin has increased 5,000% overnight. an antibiotic went from $20 a bottle to nearly $2,000 a bottle in just six months. and of course the price for an epi pen which got so much attention over the last few weeks which is used to treat life-threatening allergies -- my daughter carries one everywhere she goes -- that shot up by nearly 500% since 2007. it seems every week we hear another disturbing report of drug companies focused on profits. according to a 2016 reuters report, prices for four of the nation's top ten drugs increased more than 100% since 2011.

the report also shows that sales for those ten drugs went up 44% between 2011 and 2014, even though they were prescribed 22% less. i continue to hear from people across my state and the nation about the burdensome costs of prescription drugs. there are heartbreaking stories about huge price tags that are stretching family's budgets to a breaking point. this is just an example. i brought these home with me from the state fair and then brought them to washington. just a few days at our state fair booth where people just came up and filled out cards about their stories of increasing drug prices. just a few of the e-mails from just since august 25 that we've gotten. calls that we've gotten into our office every single day. take, for example, the dwyer family from cambridge, minnesota. at 11 years old abbey was

diagnosed with a rare form of leukemia. a few years later her older brother aaron was diagnosed with stage 3 lymphoma. thankfully both abbey and aaron are doing much better, but the family faced astronomical out-of-pocket expenses during their treatment. abbey is on a drug with an average wholesale price in the u.s. of $367 per day, which is double the average price in other countries. or the example of a family from elk river, minnesota. due to their son's allergies they must buy four epipens a year. two for home, one for school and one for day care. that's not overdoing it. i can tell you having had a child with allergies since she was four years old, that you don't just buy one. you have to buy one for school and then you also have to buy one maybe for grandma's house. and then one gets lost. so you end up not just buying one epipen. in reality most families are

buying four to six which is two packs, three packs, sometimes even four packs. so this family from elk river, minnesota, buys four epipens a year, two for home, one for school, one for day care. this year the family paid $533 for a two-pack even after using mylan's coupon and they shouldn't be forced to spend over $1,000 each year to make sure their son is safe each and every day. i remembered from a family in lakeville, minnesota whose daughter was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes. she needs insulin on a daily basis. this means paying $1100 a month for cum laude, a fast acting form of insulin. this is on top of the other cost they pay for their daughter's diabetes, test strips, insulin , pump and glucose monitor. these families are not alone. a study showed one out of four

americans whose prescription drug costs went up said they were unable to pay their bills. one out of five were forced to skip doses of their medication. seven percent of people even missed a mortgage payment due to rising prescription drug costs. that's just not right and our country must do better. and i think one of the most frustrating things about it, having heard about the epipen because of my role with this all during the last few weeks is that i got screen shots of photos of this exact same product in australia for $150, from someone that saw it online. in great britain, i was on a show broadcaster out of europe, and there the host had it right there on the screen at $150. out in canada, in fact the canadian prices in minnesota being so close to canada, are 50% on average than american drugs across the board. the burden extends beyond patients, of course, to states and the federal government.

programs such as medicare, medicaid, and the children's health insurance program or schip paid roughly 41% of the nation's drug costs. so american taxpayers are left footing the bill. so people who think, i don't need one of those epi pens. medicaid is buying them. we learned last week that the company that manufactures epipen and perhaps other companies have found ways to make taxpayers pay even more. mylan marketed epi pen like a brand name drug. we heard about this this week because they just introduced a generic version. it controlled, however, their other version, their marketing version controlled at least 85% of the market. and they would claim they were having some innovations, and

that's how they justified that enormous price increase from $100 to about $600 from 2009 to present. however, through the medicaid program -- so remember they're marketing it not as a generic. everyone knew that because they just introduced a generic. in the medicaid drug rebate program, they wrongly classified -- we found out this week -- when i had sent a letter along with senator grassley and senator blumenthal, we found out they wrongly classified epi pen as a generic drug to the government. to the government they claimed it was a generic drug and this misclassification means mylan has been paying lower rebates to medicaid, increasing the burden on american taxpayers. so you think okay, misclassification, what does that mean? welshings i can tell you what means. in minnesota alone, because i specifically asked about minnesota, in one year my state overpaid an estimated $4.

3 million. why don't we multiply that out by all the states in the union and all the years where it's been happening? at this point we do not know the total amount taxpayers have overpaid on epipen or how many other drugs from other companies are misclassified. that's why i've called on the department of health and human services to conduct a nationwide investigation to determine how much the misclassification of, first of all, epipen has cost states and the federal government, and, two, identify other misclassified drugs from other companies. take these examples from the canadian international pharmacy association: in the u.s., a 90-day supply of abillfy, a drug used to treat depression and other mental health disorders, costs $2,621. in canada, a 90-day supply of

the exact same drug is only $467, which is over 80% cheaper. so you see these examples of these high-priced drugs, and i think one of the things we need to do -- i don't know how those are classified -- but is to see how are these being classified for medicaid purposes. working with the department of justice, h.h.s. should use all the tools it has to recover any overpayments. as i mentioned, in 2009 -- so we've asked specifically about epipen. well, mylan paid almost $120 million -- i don't think this has been that well-known -- back in 2009 to correct a misclassification of drugs. that was in 2009. now we found out with epipen, which is about 10% of their profit, that this has been misclassified for years and years and years. misclassification is just one way the government and, as a result, taxpayers are paying more than necessary for prescription drugs. one thing is absolutely clear:

we must act now to make the cost of prescription drugs more affordable for all americans. there is not one silver bullet that will fix the problem across the board, but there are some commonsense solutions to address the problem. today i'm going to offer four such solutions, any one of which would provide real relief. but the combest way is to -- but the best way to to do all of them. the first is, i mentioned canada a few times. i just mentioned some of the canadian prices for the drugs. canada, as minnesota, we can see canada from our porch -- well, they spend a lot less money than we do on prescription drugs. as i mentioned, last year average prescription drug pricings in canada were less than half as expensive than they were in the united states. a price gap that has significantly over the last ten years. i mentioned a few of them with abilify, celebrex,

anti-inflammatory drug, cost $849 in the u.s. for a 90-day supply. canada, the $180. that is nearly 80% less. i mentioned epipen, a $623 -- of course now we're going to get the rebate and the generic introduced after public outcry, which is not the way this should be working -- but a two-pack in canada cost 62% less. that was $237. these staggering differences are why i introduced bipartisan legislation with republican senator john mccain to allow americans to safely import prescription drugs from canada. the safe and affordable drugs from canada act would require the f.d.a. to establish a personal importation program that would allow americans to import a 90-day supply of prescription drugs from an approved canadian pharmacy. now, there may be other safe

drug suppliers in other countries -- i think we know that. but we thought, in order to kind of get the noise down, let's focus on one country. that's our narks one of our best -- that's our neighbor, one of our best trading partners. why don't we go with the people of dan for an experiment to see -- of canada for an experiment to see how this works, by allowing these drugs in from canada. to provide needed safeguards, the f.d.a. would publish and online list of approved canadian pharmacies so people know where they can purchase safe drugs. these pharmacies would need both a brick-and-mortar and online presence and must have been in existence for at least five years. these pharmacies would not be allowed to resell products sold from outside canada. these products would be required to have the same active ingredient, dosage form and strength as an f.d.a.-approved drug. there would also be safeguards to ensure the importation

program is not subject to abuse. patients must have a valid prescription from a doctor and certain types of inclusion, including -- drugs, including controlled substances, would not be permitted. this is a safe and commonsense step that would save families real money and inject greater competition. we are about dmetion this country -- we are about competition in this country. that is how we bring prices down. we have a friendly neighbor to the north that clearly has lower-priced drugs than ours. that's why senator mccain and i joined, along with senator susan collins and angus king of maine, to say let's do this. that's one solution. second solution: pay for delay. this is kind of one of those things, when i told our citizens in minnesota about this at the state fair, they could not believe it. beyond the drug importation legislation, we can crack down on illegal pay-for-delay deals that prevent less expensive

generic drugs from entering the market. pay-for-delay deals occur when a brand-name drug company pays a generic drug competitor -- a potential competitor -- not to sell its products. this is going on in the united states of america. my booth at the state fair is next to bob's snake zoo, which sometimes people come out yelling and screaming because they get a little scared from the snakes. this is scarier than that. in fact, phrma companies are paying generic companies to keep their products out of the marketplace. that is why i've introduced the preserve access to affordable generics act with republican senator chuck grassley of iowa. this gives the federal trade commission greater ability to block these anticompetitive agreements. by allowing generic drugs to enter the market more quickly, the government would save more money through the purchase of

lower-cost generic substitutes. by limiting these sweep heart deals would general $2.9 billion in savings and save american consumers billions on their drug costs. who can be against this? you literally have two competitors, one accepting money, one paying them off, to keep their products off the market. the supreme court had a case which made some difference. the f.t.c. has a bunch of open cases many but it has been aagreed at hearing after hearing that senator grassley and i have held that this would be a smart thing to do. remember, $2.-9d billion is what it would save. but it would save more. the government saves much. it would also save consumers. third idea -- allowing medicare to negotiate pricings. this is another thing where minnesotans and americans cannot believe this is the kairks but in fact the combined incredible market power of the seniors of america has not been unleashed

in terms of getting good deals for the seniors of america. under current law, prescription drugs for medicare beneficiaries are provided through private prescription drug plans. the plans are responsible for crafting benefit packages and negotiating with pharmaceutical companies for prices and discounts. the department of veterans affairs and medicaid can currently negotiate drug prices with pharmaceutical companies, but the law bans medicare from doing so. this makes no sense, ans it's a bad -- and it's a bad deal not just for our seniors but or all taxpayers. that's why i introduce the medicare prescription drug price negotiation act. this legislation would allow medicare to directly negotiate with drug companies for price discounts. the federal government would leverage its large market share to negotiate better price for more than 39 million seniors. that is market power covered

under medicare part d. last and foon finally, the creates act. i've worked on this imi bill wih senator patrick leahy, and senator mike lee to introduce the bipartisan creating and restore equal access to samples act. what it would do is put an end to strategy that delay generic competition and cost american consumers billions of dollars. to receive approval from the food and drug administration, a generic must test its product against the brand-name product to establish equivalence. you would want that. without access to brand-name samples, there can be no generic product. for a long time, generic companies would simply buy these samples from a wholesaler. now some brand-name companies prevent generic companies from obtaining samples, or the brand-name company sumly refuses to -- simply refuses to --

the longer the brand-name company can delay the generic company's approval the longer the brand-name maintains its monopoly. the creates act would allow a generic drug manufacturer facing wurch these delay tactics to bring an action in federal court in order to obtain the needed samples or to stop a branded company from dragging its heels on negotiating safety protocols. the bill would also allow a federal judge to award damages in order to deter future delaying conduct. the congressional budget office estimates that this bill would save the government $2.9 billion over ten years. the savings to consumers and private insurance companies would likely be far greater. so let's review this as my colleagues come to the floor. number one solution: allow for safe drugs from canada. would bring down the prices, would bring in competition. a bipartisan bill, democrats and

republicans, that i have with senator john mccain. number two solution: allow for more generic competition by passings the creates act that i just mentioned, that bill with senator leahy, grassley, senator lee and myself, a bipartisan bill that allows for samples to go quukly to the generic companies so they can actually create the drugs that will compete and bring the prices down. solution number three: stop those pay-for-delay deals that are unbelievable, that would bring in c.b.o. estimate $2.9 billion over ten years by saying to generics and the if a ma companies, you can't -- and the phrma companies you can't pay each other to stop consumers. the final idea, which i think is the biggest idea: negotiation under comi medicare part-d thatd take the kind of negotiation we see at the veterans administration, which have brought down the prices for

veterans of america, and harness that bargaining power of 39 million seniors so we get better prices. four ideas, three of them have democratic and republican sponsors. i want to vote on these proposals because i believe based on what i sawalit at you w at our state fair booth that these anticompetitive sprays to stop and we need to bring down the price of prescription drug for hardworking americans in this country. imawf thanthank you, mr. presid. i yield the floor.

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. inhofe: i ask unanimous consent the quorum call in progress be vitiated. the presiding officer: the senate is not in a quorum call. mr. inhofe: mr. president, i ask -- first of all, being one of the managers of the bill, the wrdz bill that we're all anxious to consider along with senator boxer, she and i both are in agreement, as well as the leadership, that we should take this bill up, consider it. i do have a talk i want to make concerning the bill. but with the understanding that we have been asking for amendments to be, come forward

from the republicans primarily. she's done the same with democrats. i believe there is a number of amendments that have come forward. however, i'm going -- the way we're going to run this is that any amendments that are going to be considered, number one, must be germane. and, number two, have to be acceptable by both managers of the bill, senator boxer and myself. with that, i would ask that we could move forward on this bill and would yield to the leadership. mrs. boxer: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from california. mrs. boxer: if leadership would give me 30 seconds, i'm in full agreement with the remarks of my chairman, senator inhofe. we once again, i think, have proven we can get this done. we can get infrastructure done. i think the way the agreement came together with the two leaders is excellent. we're going to go to the bill and any amendments have to be looked at by the two managers,

and we have to agree before those amendments go into the package, into the managers' package. with that, i would yield the floor. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the democratic leader. mr. reid: we have given everyone our amendments. there's seven. and i think that everything can be worked out on all of them. there's one that's relevant to the underlying legislation that is offered by the senator from connecticut. i'm trying to think who is the senior there. one of the senators from -- senator blumenthal. and i am not sure that i want to go into this deal. both of you have to approve that amendment. i think we should at least be allowed to have a vote. we have agreed, we have agreed to half-hour debate on it is plenty. based on that, if you guys

can't work something out, i want to have a vote on blumenthal. six of them. senator boxer can do what you think is appropriate. on this one, with blumenthal, if you can't work something out, if this isn't satisfactory, i want half-hour debate and a vote on it. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: mr. president, i might just say i think we have a broad bipartisan agreement here that we'd like to pass the bill. nobody wants to be unreasonable. we've heard both the chairman and the ranking member that whatever interest there is in the bill is related to the bill. what i'm going to propound here is an opportunity for us to get on to the bill and to move forward.

and i think this is as close to a good-faith situation as i can imagine. and i hope we trust each other enough to go forward and complete a bill that almost everybody seems to be in favor of. so i don't know how to reassure my good friend, the democratic leader, but i hope i have. mr. reid: mr. president, i do not understand why we can't have the two managers agree they will do their best to work out these amendments of ours and of yours. but if we can't, i want to at least have a vote. vote it down if you have to. but i want to have, i want to make sure that blumenthal is protected. we have half-hour debate. if you guys can't work something out, then we have a vote on it. one vote. mr. mcconnell: there may well be some votes. i would recommend people talk to the chairman, the ranking member. let's process the bill.

mr. reid: a vote on blumenthal, that's all. one vote. 30 minutes. if you work it out to satisfaction, we don't need to have that vote. what could be more reasonable than that? mrs. boxer: mr. president? my understanding about this amendment is it's a jurisdictional dispute between democratic senators and what i think the best way to go is to see if we can, jim and i, do what we've done before when we've had conflict among our colleagues. we worked it out with senators on the other side of the aisle last time we did wrda. we should have a chance. i don't think that -- okay.

i'll stop. mr. reid: i don't object. let's go ahead with the bill. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i thank my colleague. mr. president, what is the pending business? the presiding officer: the motion to proceed to s. 2848. the presiding officer: i know of no further debate on the motion to proceed. the presiding officer: is there any further debate. hearing none, the question is on the motion to proceed. those in favor say aye. opposed, nay. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. respect respect -- the clerk will read s. 2848, bill to provide for the conservation and development of water and related resources and so forth and for other purposes. mr. inhofe: on behalf of the committee i withdraw the committee-reported amendments. the presiding officer: the amendments are withdrawn. mr. mcconnell: i call up the inhofe-boxer substitute amendment number 4979.

the presiding officer: the clerk will read the amendment. the clerk: the senator from kentucky, mr. mcconnell, for mr. inhofe proposes an amendment numbered 4979. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the reading of the amendment be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. inhofe: amendment number 4980. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from oklahoma mr. inhofe proposes amendment numbered 4980 to amendment numbered 4979. strike section 6002 and insert the following. mr. inhofe: i ask consent that the reading be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. the senator from oklahoma. mr. inhofe: i ask unanimous consent i be recognized for such time as i shall consume.

the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. inhofe: mr. president, yesterday -- well, first of all, let me just say something about this, and i'd ask if the the, senator boxer would like to be heard before i make some remarks on this, or if we could have a colloquy, in which case i would ask the question. we've done some good things in our committee, and we have two different people who don't think alike on a lot of issues. however, we both agree that infrastructure is important. we got through a highway bill that many people said couldn't be done and hadn't been done since 1998, and we were able to do that significantly. we got through the chemical bill which a lot of people said no, that's not going to be done. and yet we did. so i look at this and i see that this is, we have so many things right now that should go into a

where did -- the wrda bill. initially the bill would be coming up every two years and we went through a time where that wasn't the case. both the minority and seniority of our committee agreed we should get back to that two-year cycle and that's what we're doing too. so i would ask senator boxer, do you agree that we've done a pretty good job on some of these and we need to keep going. mrs. boxer: if i might respond to my friend through the chair. first of all, i'd like to ask unanimous consent to place my speech into the record. and i will respond very briefly to my friend. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. boxer: he speaks for me on a lot of these infrastructure issues. and it does shock a lot of people because they know, you know, the most conservative, the most progressive, how could they ever, ever get along. but what i tell people is we respect each other's points of view. when we can't agree, we don't get personal about it. we accept each other's opinions.

and where we can work together, we find a sweet spot. and we've done it several times. i just want to say, you know, in terms of water infrastructure , the people of this country, they have a right to have clean water. they have to have ports that work, that the dredging is kept up with. they have to have ecosystem restoration where our marshlands, we're losing them, and they are flood control. and many, many corps of engineers reports that have been done, we don't want them to sit around because, as my dear friend knows, if we don't pass wrda, there's no authority for the corps to move forward. and we've got these projects all over. so this bill is about saving lives from floods, saving lives from lead and water. it's about major economic benefits to our nation. and i would say with my friend's

support and my support back to him, we created this wfia program that we based on the tifia program. tifia is transportation infrastructure financing. now we have water infrastructure financing. what this does is it allows communities to leverage the funds that they have. get very low-interest loan and move forward and make sure that they modernize their water systems. so i am so pleased that we're able to have this agreement. this is another one of our usual perils of pauline where we think we're going to the bill and then we're not. but everybody acted in good faith. senator reid, senator mcconnell, senator inhofe and myself, and senators from michigan and senators from all over the country. but, you know, as i wind down my days here, i'm so honored to have this opportunity to once

again work with my dear friend. and what a pleasure it is. people don't get it. they don't get the fact that we actually can set aside our differences, which are great, and come together. and i know he's going to be, regardless of what happens in the election, you're going to be, senator, i think the chairman of armed services. is that correct? maybe. or maybe ranking. mr. inhofe: a lot of things have not transpired yet. mrs. boxer: we don't know where he's going to land. but i want to say wherever he does land is going to be a fortunate thing for the democrat who is his partner. working with you, senator inhofe, has been so amazing and so productive. and this bill is a great symbol of the work we've done together. i'm so thrilled and i hope that our colleagues will all work with us because we want to help

everybody, but we also want to make sure there are no poison pills and no, you know, crazy amendments that set us back. we'll work together on that in good faith. and with that, i would yield the floor back to my friend, thank him for yielding to me. i'll put the statement in the record and i really look forward to rolling up our sleeves and getting this done. with that, i would yield the floor back to my friend. mr. inhofe: let me respond also and thank the senator from california. let's continue this productivity. we have a chance to do it now on this very significant bill, and i think we've had a conversation with the leadership, and i think you and i and the leadership agree that we can have some limitations on amendments, but i've been over here asking for our members to bring amendments now several times. actually we started this about three weeks ago. and i don't have them in my hands yet. so i would suggest since we have this tentative agreement, that

all amendments would go through the managers -- that's you and me -- that we go ahead and say they have to be germane. and if they're not in by noon on friday, no more amendments can come in. it just seems like we always have to have ted lines around here -- deadlines around here to get things done. i will be proposing that after i make a few remarks. i think that our members can depend on that being a condition. does that soñ -- does that sound reasonable? mrs. boxer: it sounds fair to me. mr. inhofe: let's talk about this. yesterday i talked about what's going to happen if we don't pass a wrda bill. keep in mind we've gone sometimes as long as seven or eight years without passing one. we're supposed to do it every two years. i think this could be the time that's going to become a reality. i'm going to repeat the things i said yesterday. what's going to happen if we don't have the bill. because i think every member,

democrat and republican, is going to be affected by this and they're going to be concerned if we don't get this thing passed. first of all, there are 29 navigation, flood control and environmental restoration projects that are not going to happen. they're not going to happen unless we pass this bill. there will be no new corps reforms to let local sponsors improve infrastructure at their own expense. i want to talk a little bit about that. it's not very often we have a bill where we have to encourage people to let other people pay for what government normally would be paying for. so that's a good thing, an agreement that we have come to in this bill and it's a good provision. if we don't pass the bill, there's not going to be any fema assistance to states to rehabilitate the unsafe dams. if we don't pass the bill, there will be no reforms to help communities address clean water, safe drinking water, infrastructure. i can remember from a state where we have a lot of -- i come from a state where we have a lot

of small community, rural communities. they don't have abundant resources. when i was mayor of tulsa, the biggest enemy i had was unfunded mandates urgs the -- mandates, the federal government coming along and saying you have to do this and trying to figure out to pay for it. this bill helps us do that. if we don't pass the bill, there will be no new assistance for innovation, approaches to clean water and drinking water needs, and there will be no protection for the co-utilities from run away coal ash lawsuits. we specifically address that i have to admit there are a lot of things we worked out in this bill that democrats alike and republicans don't like and republicans don't like and democrats like, but we -- that's how we got things done. sooner or later there is an outcry out there for us to get things done. we are certainly -- this is a good way to encourage these people to understand that there is hope in what we're doing.

now, i've got some charts. the first one i want for show is the map of the inland water system. 40 states are directly served by ports and waterways maintained by the corps of engineers. this system handles over 2.3 billion tons of freight each year. this is commerce that's critical to the united states. i invite you to look at this chart here. these are the states and look up there in tulsa, oklahoma. everyone knows where oklahoma is, kind of in the middle of the until. how many people in america know that we are navigable in oklahoma? but we do. we have a navigation way that goes all the way up. we're fighting to keep the navigation way strong. that's what this bill is all about. so if you look at all of the things that are being serviced here, this is what this bill is all about. that's how far-reaching it is. we have to keep our water transportation operational.

the senior vice president of marathon petroleum corporation told the e.p.w. committee, barbara's and my committee, the environment and public works, said to our committee that they have a number of situations up and down the ohio river where lock gates have failed to function and maratho marathons s were stopped for 50, 60 days at the cost of millions and millions of dollars. he told us there was one lock where the gate literally fell off and took months to repair. so the second chart that we have is the ohio lock repairs. this could be anywhere. but this is what it looks like when you get down there. when we have lock problems in my state of oklahoma, i go out there and i get down there with them and look and see what can we do. but that's fairly recent in oklahoma. look at the ohio river. i can't teld you how -- tell you how old it is but you can see

the repairs that have to take place. now, this problem is not exclusive to the ohio river. it exists in most major locks throughout the inland waterway. now, these projects are experiencing a slow federal action. under the current law a local sponsor has to wait for the court to get federal appropriations and fish federal -- issue federal contracts before locks and ports can be maintained even when a lock gate is literally falling off. under current law they are not allowed to use their own money to help out. the corps maintenance budget is stretched thin so wrda 2016 comes up with a solution. and this is a logical solution. in wrda in the bill that we're going to consider and hopefully get passed we let local responsors, responsors -- sponsors like the ports to either give money to the corps

to carry out maintenance or do their own maintenance using their own dollars. this is an opportunity. these are not taxpayer dollars but the need is so critical, there are people out there willing to do this. so we are able to do that with the passage of this bill. we also have to modernize our ports. we've got to invest in our nation'ses now so -- nation's ports now so america can handle larger vessels. the new vessels that are coming through the panama canal now are vessels that require a greater depth. now here's a comparison. the top one is the post-panama max. get an idea of the number of containers they can transport. this is a current picture of the vessel at the bottom and the new vessel on top. as you can see, the post panamax

vessels can handle double the cargo of the predecessors. this increasing cargo volume means cheaper shipping costs which translates into cheaper costs for consumers. in order to achieve this, we have to deepen our nation's strategic ports to accommodate it. wrda 2016, the bill we're talking about now, has a number of provisions that will ensure we grow the economy, increase our competitiveness in the global marketplace and promote long-term prosperity. these provisions include important harbor deepening projects like -- for charleston, south carolina and the everglades, brownsville, texas and throughout america. the one -- the charleston harbor, and this chart shows where the charleston harbor is, it's authorized to be deepened under this bill. right now it's at 45-foot depth. in order to use the panamax to come into that particular port,

it's got to be down to somewhere close to 51 feet instead of 45 feet. now, what happens if that doesn't happen? if it doesn't happen, they have to go to some place in the caribbean where they offload from the large vessels and divide it up into small vessels dramatically increasing the cost. anyone who is concerned about low cost have to keep in mind that that's a major, major opportunity for not just comarlston harbor but for -- charleston harbor but for harbors throughout the united states. let's talk about flood control. let's start with the levees. the corps has built 14,700 miles of levees that protect billions of dollars worth of infrastructure in homes. we have some of these in my hometown of tulsa, oklahoma. the corps projects it prevents $50 million in damage. some have failed recently.

this chart here shows that the iowa levee -- iowa river levee breach. this is a levee in iowa that was overtopped and eventually breached by disastrous flood waters. in many cases levees like this were constructed by the army corps of engineers decades ago. and are no longer -- no longer meet the corps post-katrina engineering guide lines. fema has decided many of these levees don't meet fema flood insurance standards. even though they own the levees, the levee district needs permission from the corps to upgrade a levee it meet fema standards. several members of this body have told me take their local levee districts are caught up in a bureaucratic might mayor when they try to get that permission from the corporation. well, you shouldn't have to do that. everyone benefits from this.

so in wrda 2016 we are streamlining the pro jess to -- process to allow levee districts to improve their own levees using their own money to do it. they're using their money. these are nontaxpayer money. i don't know who could oppose this effort. there's also an issue with how the corps rebuilds levees that have been damaged by a flood. right now the corps will only rebuild to the pre-existing level of protection which may be inadequate and may not meet fema standards. so what we're to do -- it was einstein who defined instanty by doing the same thing over and over again and expecting to have different results. to stop this insanity of wasting federal dollars by rebuilding the same inadequate levee over and over again, wrda 2016 allows local levee districts to increase the level of flood protection at their expense when the corps is rebuilding a levee

after a flood. no one can argue with that one. let's talk about dams. according to the national inventory of dams, there are 14,726 high hazard potential dams in the united states. a high hazard potential dam is defined as a dam that will result in the loss of lives. if you look at this, this is a dam that broke. and when that happens downstream, you know people are going to die. this is one of these areas where we just can't imagine anyone would object to this. it's a picture of a dam in iowa that failed in june to 10 after the area received so inches of rain. we can -- 10isms of rain. we can avoid disasters like this by making investments in the water infrastructure. by not passing wrda, we leave communities like this one and many others throughout the country vulnerable to

catastrophic events. wrda 2016 helps avoid disasters like this by providing two new dam safety programs. keep in mind we're talking about right now 14,000 high hazard potential dams, life threatening dams. 14,000. wrda is operated -- one of them is operated by fema and one operated by the bureau of indian affairs to support tribes. these are -- those are the two efforts we're making. hurricane and storm damage risk projects in south carolina, florida, north carolina, new jersey, louisiana, california, flood risk management, environmental restoration projects in illinois, wisconsin, california, florida, oregon, and washington. so this is all over the country. we talk about the e.p.a. clean water mandates. communities around the country are trying to keep up with more

and more of the federal mandates coming from the e.p.a. i had to deal with this when i was mayor of tulsa. it was the unfunded mandates that was the great etion problem that we had -- greatest problems that we had. one of the gomes i had coming to congress was to -- goals i had coming to congress was to stop the mandates and we thought we did at one time. this will be a great help. even though our water is much cleaner and much safer than it was 30 or 40 years ago back when i was mayor of tulsa, the e.p.a. keeps adding more and more regulations and these new mandates drive up our water and sewer bills to the point that they become unaffordable to many families. under the threat of e.p.a. penalty, communities can be forced to choose between meeting new unfunded federal mandates or keeping up with basic maintenance repair and replacement activities to keep our drinking water and wastewater operational. our seventh chart here is the philadelphia main break that took place.

if we don't maintain our infrastructure, it will fail like this water main in philadelphia. if we don't replace our infrastructure, aging sue better pipe -- sewer pipes will leak resulting in sewer overflows. we still have communities that lack basic water and sewer services. atlanta, omaha, baltimore, cincinnati, houston, communities all around the country are facing these problems. then the tunnel boring machine for d.c.'s $2.6 billion sewer project chart. this has a picture of it right now. you can see what is involved in these. these sewer projects are huge. they're very costly. for example, there's a picture of a tunnel that's being built here in d.c. as part of a $2.6 billion project to address sewer overflows. the wrda bill, senate bill 2848, addresses these issues in two ways.

it targeted federal assistance and tools to empower local governments. the federal assistance, in our 2016 wrda bill, we provide $70 billion to capitalize wif -- tifia. we're using wifia in the same way. this provides just $70 million in federal funds can provide up to $4.2 billion in secured loa loans. it worked in the highway bill. it will work in this one. those loans have to be matched by another $4.4 billion. there is $70 million in federal investment will result in $8.6 billion in infrastructure. that's in this bill. this fund something offset by reductions in the advanced technology funding program. the 2340r from michigan has assured me they are supportive

of this in spite of the fact that's where a lot of the manufacturing takes place of our vehicles. also there are tools to empower local governments. while the federal assistance in this bill is targeted, all communities need tools to fight back when e.p.a. enforcement officials try to take control of their water and sewer systems. the wrda bill also requires the e.p.a. to update its affordability guidance. so when e.p.a. imposes costly sewer upgrades 0en a community -- on a community, the e.p.a. will have to consider the real impacts and real household including the low-income households. so finally, i want to talk about coal ash. that's been very controversial for a long time. there's compromise legislation to authorize state permit programs to manage fly ash from the coal-fired power plants.

coal ash is used for making roads and bridges. it is more durable and less expensive than alternatives. many states require coal ash to be used in their highway projects. when the coal ash rule went into effect last orkts it created huge uncertainty for both the disposal and beneficial use of coal ash. because unlike many other environmental regulations, the e.p.a. rule is enforced through citizen lawsuits. this is something we've got to stosm the bill fixes that by giving states authority to issue state coal ash permits that will provide protection for the citizens and citizen suits. it is important to every state in our country, and i can't imagine that we're not going to be able to get this passed. our goal -- this is a goal by the democrats and republicans and minority and majority -- is to get this thing done and to get this thing done in this work

period, and i think it can get done by next week. we are to the point right now where i want to repeat we have the opportunity to do it what we're supposed to be doing in managing our infrastructure. this is something that we have an opportunity to do now and do it well. again, one of the requirements is -- and the leadership has agreed to this and the managers -- that's senator boxer and myself -- that we are going to have to get all the amendments that anybody wants in by noon on friday. nothing will be considered after that. nor will anything be considered that is not germane. we are pho going to be passing judgment on these amendments as they come in. but bring them in because after noon friday, it will be too late. so, anyway, we have this opportunity on the floor to get this done, and i think this will be one of the last of the really great things h we will be ail to do, accomplishments for thisologicallive session. with that, -- accomplishments

for this legislative session. with that, i would yield the floor.

mr. cornyn: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority whip. mr. cornyn: mr. president, this summer the american people have heard a lot about secretary clinton and how sheens with to great lengths to set up a private e-mail server in violation of federal law and accepted protocols, not only the state department but in the u.s. government. in early july, f.b.i. director comey announced findings from the bureau of investigation that confirmed what many people knew all along, and that is that that secretary clinton simply misled the american people about it from day one. she didn't tell the truth, and she tried to cover it up. contrary to her previous statements from her and her staff, secretary clinton did send and receive classified information on her private e-mail server, including some at

the very highest levels of classification. we learned that contrary to her representations, her server did not provide adequate security, leaving sensitive information vulinerm to our nation's enemies -- vulinerm to -- vulinernerablr nation's enemies. we learned that she didn't give the authorities full access to all of her work-related e-mails. in fact, director comey said the f.b.i. discovered thousands of e-mails that she simply did not produced, even though she was required to do so. now, all of this may seem like old news, but the fact is it's simply unacceptable. many a glad the f.b.i. released its -- much of its investigation

on friday, but as was observed bay number of people, this was sort of a typical washington news dump. get it out an friday and hope that by monday morning people have moved on to other things or have forgotten about it. but these regular scandals that seem to be associated with the clintons, while they addressed her e-mails and they obviously evidence contempt for our freedom of information laws and the kind of transparency that president obama touted when he became president and spoke on the day of his inauguration, january 20, 2009. most of the american people have come to believe they simply can't trust secretary clinton. according to a recent cnn poll, about 70% said that she isn't honest and trustworthy. almost 70%.

that's an astoundingly high number, but i really can't blame them. and of course secretary clinton has got no one else to blame but herself. unfortunately, director comey's announcement back in july wasn't the end of the story, though, because last month even more e-mails came to light that the revealed the line blurred between the clinton foundation and the state department under secretary clinton. many of the new e-mails were between top clinton aides and an executive at the clinton foundation requesting favors of secretary clinton in her official capacity. now, there's a lot of information out there, but i've just highlighted about three of them here. one exchange requests a meeting between secretary clinton and the crown prince of abou bahrai. according to the emaicialtion after the clinton foundation staffer intervened, a meeting wags quickly put together.

"the washington post" has noted that the crowell prince spent upwards of $32 million on an education program contacted with -- you guesses it -- the clinton foundation. another is from a person who we'll identify as just a sports executive trying to get an expedited visa for a british soccer player. he donated between 5 million and 10 million to the clin clinton foundation. and several other requests were for last-minute meetings and other favors, including one business executive who pearntlely got quick's a access -- apparently got quick access to secretary clinton. he do donated between $5 million and $10 million to the clinton foundation. so what do all of these examples have in common? obviously they're asking for help. through secretary cline continue's direct line at the state department, and they gave

millions of dollars to the fowption. these obviously were big-time donors. let me add that i don't no i doa lot about the details involving these allegations because the clineton foundation doesn't provide the date and exact amount but just ranges. secretary clinton and her team were quick to prioritize these big donors and respond to them quickly. and even if possible follow through with whenever request was made of them. it is clear that major clinton foundation donors enjoyed great access to secretary clinton while she was serving as our nation's premier diplomat. the clinton foundation interfered with official day-to-day work at theday state department when the secretary and her stave should have been focused on keeping people safe and making sound foreign policy. this was an original concern of mine before secretary clinton

was even injured as secretary of state. after president obama's election in 2009 during the senate confirmation process, i objected to faflt-tracking a vote on her nomination because i saw the real and myriad possibilities for conflicts of interest in the relationship between secretary clinton as secretary of state and the clinton family foundation. and i told then-secretary nominee clinton that we kneaded more transparency ans we feed more assurances as to the integrity of this whole arrangement. when i requested her about it, i was assured by secretary clinton herself that the clinton foundation would take steps necessary to mitigate my concerns about conflicts of interest and pe perceived confls of interest. but i would note that this was not just my concern.

it was concern raised by the then-chairman of the foreign relations committee, senator richard lugar. and it was raised by president obama and his white house itself. and what was produced out of those concerns was a very lawyerly like memorandum between the clinton foundation and the obama administration. in fact, i believe that is precondition to secretary clifnton getting the nomination from president obama because he didn't want the conflicts of the interest that he knew could arise as a result of the clinton foundation's bein activities to impugn the obama administration. but this assured the president and the american people that the foundation would follow certain transparency matters to make sure that secretary clinton request unanimouconducted ameriy

with the utah mott integ grivment the foundation agreed it would make available the names of all donors, including new ones. what was the result? in ensuing needs and secretary clinton made a habit of regularly crossing the lines drawn in the memorandum of understanding, and with her verbal the arrangements and understanding with me. even though the foundation agreed to disclose all foreign donations to a family foundation run in part by the secretary of state of the united states government. so even though they agreed to disclose all foreign contributions, they didn't, even though some foreign donations were supposed to be submitted for review to the state department, they weren't. at least one organization within the foundation failed to annually schoals its list of

donors. today the american people still back basic information about many of the donations, like the exact amounts donated to the foundation, as i already mentioned. i don't know anybody who feels comfortable with or who can defend those obvious conflicts of interest between the secretary of state representing the united states and her family foundation soliciting and receiving multimillion-dollar donations from heads of state of frn countries, not to mention other people who obviously were trying get the help of secretary clinton in some official capacity. secretary clinton was performing her job as secretary of state and at the same time the clinton foundation was shaking down donors who at least thought they were buying access. i don't know how to describe that in any other terms other than it is deplorable, and it

completely undercuts the integrity of our process. this isn't funny, as former secretary clinton told you. he said the only difference between him and rob inhood is he didn't steal from anybody. this whole scandal further underscores the clinton philosophy that anything goes. she clearly feels that the laws that apply to you and me don't apply to her. and it's no wonder the american people have come to distrust her and believe that she is simply incapable in many instances of telling the truth. i hope the american people keep asking questions of secretary clinton and her foundation, and i hope soon that we all get some answers. the american people deserve complete unobstructed trans transparency into this matter

and it is clear they won't get that from secretary clinton herself. as regards the vote that confirmed secretary clinton, it did occur in reliance upon her assurances of transparencey and to maintain the independence of her office as secretary of state from the activities of the foundation, i among many other of my colleagues voted to confirm secretary clinton as secretary of state. but my belief today is she simply did not keep up her end of the bargain and, thus, if that vote were held today, i could not and would not vote to confirm her as secretary of state. mr. president, i would ask unanimous consent that the senate be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island.

mr. whitehouse: thank you, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent to speak for up to 15 minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. whitehouse: thank you. the senate reconvenes after several weeks of work in our home state, and i am back for the 145th time asking my colleagues to wake up to the pressing reality of climate change. we are sleepwalking through this moment, willfully ignoring the warning signs of an already altered earth, largely because of a decades-long corporate campaign of misinformation on the dangers of carbon pollution. just last week while we were back home, scientists at the international geological congress presented the beginning of a new geological epoch, the

infrappo scene. transitions between gee lodge cabal epoching -- geological epochs are marked by a significant national in the record like a trace of the meteorite that wiped out the dinosaurs at the end of the crutaceous epoch. what are the beginnings of the signal of the anthropo is scene. humans have increased carbon dioxide in the earth's atmosphere from 280 parts per million before the industrial revolution to 400 parts per million and rising today. a pace of increase not seen for 66 million years and a level never seen before nr human history on this planet. we've also dumped so much

plastic into our waterways and oceans that microplastic particles can be found virtually everywhere and are now even infiltrating our food chain. we've poured so much pollution into our atmosphere that thin blue shell under which we currently thrive, that permanent layers of particulates such as black carbon from burning fossil fuels are left in sediments and glacial ice. the signals that we are leaving are many, and they are clear. dr. paul crutson, nobel prize winning atmosphere chem mist who coined the term anthroposcene remarked this name change stresses the enormity of humanity's responsibility as stewards of the earth. his words echo those of pope francis who tells us in his

encyclical, humanity is called to recognize the need for changes of life style, production and consumption in order to combat this warming, or at least the human causes which produce or aggravate it. yet, attempts to address climate change are stifled in this chamber by an industry controlled, many tentacled apparatus deliberately polluting our discourse with phony climate denial as it pollutes our atmosphere and oceans with carbon. polls show more than 80% of americans favoring action to reduce carbon pollution, so our inaction signals the filthy grip these bad actors have on this chamber. before the recess, 19

colleagues came to the floor to shine a little light on this web of climate denial spun by those actors. all told, we delivered over five and a half hours of remarks describing the activities, the backers, and the linkages of dozens of denier groups. a growing body of scholarship examines this climate denial apparatus, including work by harvard's naomi oresky, michigan state aaron mcwriting, riley dunlap, yale's justin farrell and robert brewell. their work reveals an intricate, interconnected propaganda web that encompasses over 100 organizations, trade associations, conservative think tanks, foundations, public relations firms and plain

old phony baloney computer front groups. in the words of professor farrell, the apparatus' -- quote -- "overtly producing scep schism and doubt about sign -- skepticism and doubt." we got the attention of the climate deniers. shortly after our web of denial floor action, senator schatz and i received a letter from exxonmobil telling us that it believes the risks of climate change are real, that it no longer funds groups that deny the science of climate change and that it supports a carbon fee like our american opportunity carbon fee act. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to submit a copy of this letter to the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. whitehouse: it's a nice letter, mr. president, but its

claims simply do not conform with our experience. in 2015, for instance, exxonmobil reportedly funneled millions to group touting climate denial. according to its own publicly available 2015 worldwide global giving report, exxonmobil contributed over $1.6 million to organizations that were profiled in our floor statements, including the american legislative exchange council and the u.s. chamber of commerce. exxonmobil's letter claims the company's support for a revenue-neutral carbon tax dates back seven years. if that were so, you would think at some point in those seven years exxon executives would have expressed that support to the authors of a

carbon fee bill. my and senator schatz's american opportunity carbon fee act meets all the relevant criteria mentioned in the letter, yet exxonmobil has not endorsed the bill or lobbied our colleagues on its behalf or even expressed interest in meeting with either of us to discuss the whitehouse-schatz proposal and how to make it become law. behind exxonmobil's professed support for a carbon fee, here is what we really see: zero support from the corporation and implacable opposition from all exxonmobil's main lobbying groups. the american petroleum institute, for instance, the u.s. chamber of commerce, and its array of various front groups. the actual lobbying position of

exxonmobil is vehemently against the revenue-neutral carbon tax exxonmobil claims to support. mr. president, the letter from exxonmobil was not the only letter in response to our july floor speeches. 22 organizations in the koch-funded network with lengthy records of climate change denial also sent a letter objecting to being characterized as koch-linked climate deniers. this group of organizations that purportedly is not a group sent their letter out on a common letterhead. since the web of climate change denial is designed to be so big and sophisticated with so many

parts that the public is made to believe it is not a single special interest-funded front, that may not have been their smartest move. interestingly, some of the groups that participate in this letter were not even mentioned in our floor remarks. such is the web of denial. in our reply to them, senators reed, schumer, boxer, durbin, franken, warren, markey and i note they are all well supported in the climate web of denial to the tune of at least $92 million in a network bound together by common funders, shared staff, and matched messages. it is one beast, though it may have many heads. we offered these organizations a simple test. if you're for real, disclose all of your donors.

there's a lot of dark money going into these groups. so we asked, show us that you represent many, many millions of americans, as they claimed in the letter. not just many, many millions of dollars from the koch brothers fossil fuel network. i contend that these organizations are well-funded agents of hidden backers with a massive conflict of interest and that it is their job to subject our country to an organized campaign to deceive and mislead us regarding the scientific consensus surrounding climate change. and to do so with the purpose to sabotage american response to the climate crisis.

i contend that the conflict of interest of their hidden backers runs into the hundreds of billions of dollars. if you use the office of management and budget's social cost of carbon, you can calculate the annual polluter cost to the rest of us from their carbon pollution at over $200 billion per year. think what mischief people would be willing to get up to for $200 billion -- that's with a "b" -- dollars per year. the international monetary fund estimates that the effective subsidy for american fossil fuels is actually even higher -- $700 billion per year. for that kind of money, mr. president, you can fund a. front groups.

the front group's letter points out that our founders intended for public policies to be well informed and well debated. well, i could not agree more. on july 31, leading national scientific organizations, including the american association for the advancement of science, the american meteorological society, and the american geophysical union sent members of congress a no-nonsense megs that human -- message that human caused climate change is real, that it poses serious risk to modern society and we need to substantially reduce greenhouse gas emissions. i will quote their letter. "observations, not theories. observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring and rigorous scientific research concludes that the greenhouse gases

emitted by human activities are the primary driver. they continued, this conclusion is based on multiple independent lines of evidence and the vast body of peer-reviewed science. end quote. that, mr. president is the voice of fact, analysis and reason. we are well informed by the real scientists. the scientists have the expertise and the knowledge and the facts. what they don't have is that massive conflict of interest that requires setting up an armada of front groups and gives them the $100 billion motivation to run this scheme. it's time, mr. president, to let the scientists and the