later in the become and senate lawmakers could take of could take up a bill expanding government funding beyond the end of this month. and now live to the senate floor here on c-span2. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain dr. barry black will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal god, our sustainer, you know the mistakes and wrongs we sometimes do, that we are sometimes selfish, stubborn and unkind.

send your spirit to empower us to live worthy of your great name. guide our senators as they confront the struggles of our times, bringing them confident assurance that your purposes will prevail. in the hectic pace of their living, help them to slow down long enough to hear your still, small voice of wisdom. eviscerate the tensions that pull them apart and keep them from being whole.

lord, you know us better than we know ourselves so have your way in our world. we pray in your holy name. amen. the president pro tempore: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to our flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. mr. mcconnell: the democratic leader. mr. reid: the republican leader is on his way. i ask that the quorum begin to be called. the presiding officer: the clerk

will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: mr. president, days before obamacare passed the senate in 2009, the senior senator from new york predicted that americans would come around soon on the unpopular bill that his party was trying to force through. the reason people are negative is not the substance of the bill, he mused, but the fears that the opponents have laid out. when those fears don't materialize and people see the good in the bill, the numbers are going to go up. today, years later, one need only read the headlines to see just how wrong that prediction was. one-third of the u.s. won't have

a choice between obamacare plans in 2017. another headline. "frustration mounts over obamacare co-op failures." and another headline -- "insurers propose massive increase in individual health insurance rates." and as my constituents read just recently, "get ready to pay more for health insurance in kentucky." these headlines tell the story of a failing partisan law and its continuing assault on the middle class. when republicans warned of predictable consequences like these, democrats waved off our concerns and forced their partisan law through anyway, with the middle-class forced to bear the consequences of its sentence. it's time the democrats started finally listening. that's why last week senators came to the floor to share the heartbreaking stories of how obamacare continues to hurt their constituents and impact

their states. senator capito called obamacare nothing short of devastating in her home state of west virginia. working families, she said, are being faced with skyrocketing premiums, co-pays and deductibles. senator isakson warned that the numbers do not lie in georgia. obamacare, he said, is forcing insurance carriers to leave the market, eliminating competition and choice, all while placing the burden of higher costs on the backs of working taxpayers in this country. and senator mccain explained how americans have been hit by broken promise after broken promise and met with higher costs, fewer choices and poorer quality of care. noting that his home state of arizona had become ground zero for the collapse of obamacare. just last month, the obama administration told americans not to worry about rising costs because they could shop around to find the best plan and save

money on health insurance. but many americans in places like ohio are going to be severely restricted when it comes to choosing an insurer next year, as the state's director of insurance pointed out. in fact, 19 of ohio's counties are set to have just a single insurer in the exchange and another 28 counties will have only two options. restrictions like these mean families could lose access to doctors they know and trust, face higher premiums and more out-of-pocket expenses and have fewer options to shop around for more affordable coverage or plans to meet their family's changing needs. one self-employed ohioan summarized the pinch facing so many across the country. they fine you if you don't have insurance, and then they take your options away. that's what she said after

learning she would lose her plan. her frustration is one felt across ohio and across america. more than two million people could be forced to find a new plan next year. a majority of the nation's counties are expected to have only one or two insurers often plans in the exchange, and eight entire states are expected to have only a single insurer in the exchange to choose from. that's because just last night we learned that connecticut would likely become the latest state with only a single insurer on the exchange next year. we learned something else last night as well. one of the few remaining obamacare co-ops will not offer plans in new jersey next year. this is part of a broader trend we have seen across the country. with obamacare co-ops shuttering and forcing americans to find new coverage as a result. just look at what happened in new hampshire. the granite state's co-op was, in the words of new hampshire public radio, the exact type of

business that was supposed to make the individual insurance market more competitive under obamacare. but the co-op recently announced that it would close down operations in the state anyway. that's forcing thousands to find another plan and it's forcing taxpayers to foot the bill. here's what what one new hampshire editorial had to say after the announcement. the entire obamacare scheme was set up on faulty premises. you can't force people to buy health insurance they don't want. subsidize meet yoker insurance plans people can't afford and still claim to hold down rising medical expenses. the program, the paper continued, is destroying itself. by collapsing co-ops and withdrawing insurers aren't the only signs that obamacare is destroying itself. just look at my home state of kentucky where premiums could rise by distressing rates, in

some cases as high as 47%. it's no wonder my office continues to hear from people who are desperate for relief from this law. like one louisville mom who said her family's health care costs will consume nearly a fifth, a fifth of their budget this year. this health care law has been far from affordable for my family, she said. every year, we extensively research for the least expensive coverage we can find. nevertheless, our premiums continue to skyrocket. our out-of-pocket expenses have greatly increased as well. no, we didn't have junk insurance before obamacare, she continued, but i'm rather certain that what we have now is junk insurance. i wish someone would explain to us how hardworking middle-class family paying this much for health insurance became a loser under obamacare. and here's another letter from a lexington father of three and

small businessman whose provided insurance to his employees at no cost for decades because he says it's the right thing to do. now he worries how he will be able to afford that next year with his small business facing substantial increases when it comes to health care expenses. here's what he said. at these rates, we will likely be forced to consider alternatives, including foregoing -- forgoing insurance altogether or pushing some of the additional costs to our employees. this is thanks to, as he put it, the cynically named affordable care act. these are the realities of obamacare for middle-class americans across our country. democrats can deny it. democrats can say this is all some messaging problem. democrats can pretend that obamacare has been terrific for the country as the democratic leader tried to convince us last week, or they can accept that many years after obamacare's passage, the opposite of senator

schumer's prediction is proving true. and it's anything, anything but terrific. the reason americans are negative about obamacare is precisely because of its substance. unfortunately, their fears have materialized. obamacare is shrinking choices and higher costs present a stark contradiction to what its champions promise. democrats gave us plenty of soaring oratory back in 2009, i remember it well, but we're finding that sleepless nights, unpaid bills and broken promises are actually becoming the hallmarks of this partisan law. it's time for democrats to stop denying reality, stop ignoring the concerns of our country and stop pretending that obamacare's failures can be solved by doubling down on obamacare with a government-run plan. it's time for democrats to finally work with us to build a

bridge away from obamacare and toward real care for the country, because as one kentucky op-ed asked, if the a.c.a. is failing so completely in delivering on its own promises, why keep it? why throw good money after bad? mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the democratic leader. mr. reid: i have a few things to say in a minute, but the first thing i want to say is before coming to the senate, before i came to the house, i was a trial lawyer. i tried over 100 cases to juries, and some of those cases were very, very difficult. during the time that we were there in court with the opponent

attorney, there was -- there it was very hard. but as i look back to those days, never after a case was completed were there any hard feelings between me and my adversary during the trial. the reason i mention that today, i was thinking of my time here in the last few years. i have been in the senate a long time. one of them, someone who has been here a long time but not as long as i have, is the assistant republican leader. he's had a distinguished career prior to coming here in the law. he was a member of the -- i'm sorry, the texas supreme court. he was noted for being the lawyer that he is. so i want to say to him, he's here on the floor today, we have had our differences. we speak about them often. yesterday, i criticized him for something i thought that he had

done that was wrong, not in good keeping with the standards of the senate. but i want everyone to know that my criticism of the senior senator from texas is not based on anything dealing with his character, his integrity. i'm going to continue criticizing him and others who i feel are not living up to their responsibilities as a member of the united states senate. i want the record spread because a lot of my intention the last several months has -- attention the last several months has been directed toward the senator from texas. i want him to know and i appreciate his being on the floor today that i look back with -- pride is probably the wrong word but satisfaction about my time in the courtroom and those difficult cases that i had. when it was all over with, the

feelings the two attorneys, they were over with. there were no ill feelings and we would move on to our next client. so i hope the senator from texas accepts my brief statement here in the manner that it was offered. mr. president, on other matters, the republican leader loves to come to the floor once or twice a week to talk about how bad obamacare is. what i say to him, his constant attacks on obamacare does not take away if the fact that there is 20 million people who have health insurance today they didn't have six years ago. the senator from california came as the speech was given by the republican leader and said to me, remind him what's going on in california. we love obamacare. it's working wonderfully. millions of people in california have health insurance they

didn't have before. and she reminded me that in those states where the republican governors have agreed to do medicaid, it's great. in fact, where states have expanded into medicaid, the rates are approaching 10% lower than in other states. that's -- i mean not look at california. let's look at nevada. we have a conservative republican governor brian sandoval is his name. i've learned to accept the fact that he's doing a good job in spite of the fact that in running for governor he beat my son. brian sandoval is a good person. he's doing a good job as governor of the state of nevada, and he stepped aside and was not worried about the criticism he would receive by helping the

people of the state of nevada. and he has medicaid in the state of nevada which the rates there, some 70% lower had he not done this. my friend the republican leerd complains about -- leader complains about the few choices in obamacare marketplace. that takes a lot of chutzpah to do that. before obamacare, people had no choice or the choirs was either -- choice was either paying a lot or a whole lot or not doing anything. many people just skipped insurance. they were willing to take their chances. now, people can go to the marketplace. they have lots of choices. that's why 20 million more people have health insurance now they didn't have before. there are many examples, my friend the republican leader just ignores them.

pre-existing conditions. think about that. prior to obamacare, if you had a child who was born with a birth defect of some kind, you had a child that developed diabetes, you were an adult who had a car accident or a woman, a woman, that was a pre-existing condition you had to pay more for your health insurance if you could get some. everyone seems to ignore the good that's come from obamacare. 85% of the people in the marketplace get financial assistance in buying their coverage. people are paying an average of $175 a month for their health insurance. so action mr. president, obamacare is a signature issue of the obama administration. as he announced yesterday, he's

very happy with what obamacare has done for the american people and it should be made better and it could be made better so easily if we would have a little bit of cooperation from the republicans, a little bit. but we're going to continue focusing on making sure that people understand how well it has worked. mr. president, last evening at 4:00 or thereabouts, i had the opportunity to go to the white house and visit with the president. leader mcconnell, speaker ryan and leader pelosi. we met for about an hour and 15 minutes. it was a very good meeting. we had to discuss a number of issues but discussed a lot of them. won't talk about all of them today. but there was a discussion about a path forward to fund government, prevent a government shutdown, in spite of what "the

wall street journal" said today. "the wall street journal" said in an editorial that republicans should just close government again. i don't think there are many republicans that agree with "the wall street journal" editorial. but there is reason for some very, very cautious option mism about our meeting last -- optimism about our meeting last night. we'll proceed carefully and i know the republicans will do the same. we've been down this road with the republicans before. this happy talk is just that a lot of times. we've been optimistic in the past only to see republicans fail to live up to their end of the agreement. if we're to pass a c.r. that keeps our government open and funded, there are a number of problems that must be addressed. we have to stop ignoring the problems with zika. this has been a problem according to the president of the united states since last february. we've done nothing to give these people some relief.

and they need it. these people we thought, mr. president, was just a problem that affected women and pregnant women. it's gotten so much more serious than that. that's plenty serious but now they're looking at the virus going into people's eyes causing vision impairment, blindness. that's men and women. so we have to get something done with d.c. we thought we had it all done here with the work done by senators murray and blunt. we had a bill. it wasn't everything we wanted. it certainly wasn't what the president wanted, $1.1 billion. and we sent it to the house. and we don't need to go through what they or what gymnastics they went through to throw a big

monkey wrench into the good wrong we did over here passing it by 89 bipartisan votes. so last week there were 17,000 americans affected with zika. now we're told by the centers for disease control that there's now 19,000. that's a 13% increase in seven days. and each day it's only going to get worse. we need to treat the zika virus like the genuine health crisis it is, not a bargaining chip for the republicans to use to attack planned parenthood, fly the confederate flag, cut veterans spending by half a billion dollars and other such things that they stuck in that bill that came back from the house. we want to work with the republicans to secure zika funding but we'll flatly reject any attempt to undermine women's health. once we have taken care of zika,

we must then as the senator addressed republicans, issues dealing with the continuing resolution, riders dealing with the environmental protection agency. they want to weaken the clean water act by exempting pesticide spraying from the e.p.a. overseeing what goes on there. we need to find a way forward on both of these important issues while trying to navigate senator cruz's attempt to slow down the c.r. unfortunately this is what we've come to expect from my friend, the junior senator from texas. when the senate has a deadline, he tries to obstruct government funding bills. so we have our work cut out for us. i'm cautiously optimistic the senate will complete its important work on zika and the c.r. and i hope we can do it quickly but it can only happen if we work together and resolve,

not to play politics with these important issues. i yield the floor. i ask the chair to announce what we're doing today. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. the senate will resume consideration of s. 2848 which the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 523, s. 2848, a bill to provide for the conservation and development of water and related resources and so forth and for other purposes. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the assistant republican leader. mr. cornyn: mr. president, while the democratic leader is still on the floor, let me express my gratitude to him for his remarks earlier. it's true that for better or for worse, we both bear the burden of legal training and experience in courtrooms where we learn that adversaries don't necessarily have to be enemies. and to disassociate the arguments we are making from many personal animosity which i

think is a very healthy and constructive thing to do, i always remember the excerpt from the taming of the shoe where the speakers do its adversaries in the law, strive mightily but eat and drink as friends. so i think that kind of civility is an important admonition for all of us, one that maybe we don't always live up to but one that i think we should continue to strive to emulate. so let me just say to the democratic leader i appreciate his commends and perhaps we can all do a little bit better in that category. but as he also pointed out, we do have some very big disagreements and it seems like each day is likely to bring more news about the awful side effects of president obama's

signature health care legislation, obamacare as it's become to be called. the truth is the implementation and the reality of obamacare has been nothing short of a disaster for many of the people that i represent in texas, but it's not limited to the 27 million people or so who live in texas. it really is the -- the problem has been visited on many people as the majority leader commented about earlier with some of the statements he made with regard to its implementation and various other -- in various other states. unfortunately when congress and washington make a mistake, it's the american people that have to pay the price, and it seems like the consequences of obamacare are only getting worse. i think it's worth remembering, i certainly remember on christmas eve in 2009 at 7:00 a.m. in the morning when the senate passed the obamacare

legislation with 60 democrats voting in favor of it and all republicans voting against it. i think that was the beginning of the failure of obamacare because what our democratic friends, including the president failed to learn is that any time signature legislation that affects one-sixth of the economy and every american in this country, any time we pass a law like that in the absence of some political consensus where each side gets something and gives up something and builds consensus, then that law is simply not going to be sustainable. and beyond the policy problems that the law has obviously manifested. i still remember like it was yesterday the president said if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. he said if you like your policy, you can keep your policy. he said the family of four,

average family of four would save $2,500 on their health care costs. mr. president, none of that has proven to be true. in fact, just the opposite is true. so that's unfortunately part of the legacy of broken promises of obamacare. it was essentially sold under false pretenses. back in my old job before i came to the senate, i was attorney general of texas, and we had a consumer protection division that sued people who committed consumer fraud, who represented one thing to consumers and delivered another. we sued them for consumer fraud. unfortunately, the american people can't sue the federal government for consumer fraud or else they would have a pretty

good case because of the trail of broken promises known as obamacare. i just want to point out a few -- a few instances of how obamacare has proven to be such a disaster for the folks i represent in texas. like many people under the so-called affordable care act, which really should be called the unaffordable care act, many of my constituents in texas are paying more for their insurance, and of course many remember the p.r. campaign that the president and his administration rolled out to the american people. he promised better coverage, more choices, lower prices. i mean, on the one thing that you would think that health care reform would deliver that obamacare has been a complete failure, and that is lower costs for consumers. in fact, because of the mandates in obamacare, things like guaranteed issue, which is an

arcane topic but because of the way in which it was structured, it was bound to cost more money, not less money. and how in the world are you going to get more people covered by charging them more than they currently pay for their health care? you're not. unless you're going to come in the back door and use taxpayer subsidies to sort of cushion the blow, but even then many people are finding obamacare simply unaffordable, or maybe they can get coverage but they find out that they have a $5,000 deductible. so when they go to the hospital or when they go to the doctor, basically while they may think they have coverage, they basically are self-insured. so unfortunately my constituents have learned that obamacare has simply failed to deliver, and many people in my state are suffering, and over the past two months it seems like every week i read another headline in a

texas newspaper about the way it's hurting my constituents, and i brought a few of those with me today. first of all, here's a headline in the "san antonio express news." "obamacare hitting texas hard as insurers propose steep rate increases." now, you might say well, why are we -- why are you upset with obamacare when it's the insurance companies that are raising rates? well, the reason the insurance companies are raising rates is because people aren't signing up for obamacare if they can avoid it unless they happen to be older and subject to more illnesses, which means that the cost goes up for those that are -- that are buying those policies. the article talks about how insurance companies are losing hundreds of millions of dollars under obamacare. and again, why would we care about insurance companies losing

hundreds of millions of dollars? well, as we found out, many of them simply can't sustain themselves in states so they're leaving. the majority leader talked about that a moment ago. but just to make obamacare viable, many of them are raising premiums by as much as 60% next year just to stay in business. 60%. unfortunately, texas is not unique. other states like new york and illinois are looking at double-digit premium increases in 2017 as well. that's because under the president's signature health care law, insurers are forced to pass along higher costs to customers. if they can't do it, their only other choice is to leave, leaving consumers with fewer choices and maybe only one choice in the state, and that's what happens when the governmens

of the universe in washington, d.c., think they know better than the market. it's basic economics. but the bad headlines don't stop there. here's one from the "austin american statesman." "thousands affected in texas asset in a rolls back obamacare plans." aetna alone has more than 80,000 customers in texas. it's one of the biggest health care providers in the country. their leaving means that thousands of people will have to find a new health care plan. so much for if you like what you have, you can keep it, assuming they even liked the plan, which obviously is more expensive than what many people were paying before obamacare passed. and again, it's not just my constituents in texas who are hurting. starting next year, aetna will offer exchange plans in only four states, four states, down

from the current 15. so consumers will have even fewer choices starting next year. but aetna wasn't the only one -- the only company to leave the state. this is a headline for "the waco tribune-herald." scott and white is one of our premier health care careers in texas. the headline is -- "scat and white health plan leaving obamacare." according to the article, more than 44,000 texans will have to find another insurance plan in 2017. and again, because of the extra costs burdening these companies, they simply can't afford to offer coverage, and they have no alternative but to back up and leave. and finally, mr. president,

here's a headline from the "texas tribune." "health insurers' exit spells trouble for obamacare in texas." in this story, the tribune reports that in addition to scott and white and aetna, an insurance start-up called oscar health insurance also announced it would withdraw from texas exchanges in the dallas-fort worth area. the dallas-fort worth area is one of the most populous parts of the state. this is absolutely unacceptable. with so many insurance companies fulg out of texas, texas will have less -- texans will have less health care options, plain and simple. i'm beginning to wonder whether the conspiracy theories that we heard early on about obamacare that it was built to fail because really what the advocates wanted is a single-payer government-run system, and that this was just a

predicate or prelude to that because it could not work as structured. well, you can draw your own conclusions, but the fact is consumers will have less choice and their health coverage will come at a higher price. according to one estimate, 60 counties out of our 254 counties in texas will just have one health care option in 2017. unless other insurance companies decide to enter the market, which is highly unlikely, given the way that obamacare is structured. so that means prices will continue to go up, and you wonder why people are frustrate ed in america. why our politics seem so polarized and why people seem so angry at what's happening in washington. at a time when their wages have remained flat because of this administration's economic policies and overregulation being a large part of it, their

costs -- the costs for consumers continues to go up. so that means people's real disposable income is going down, and they're not happy about it, and they shouldn't be. texas is a big state. we have very highly populated areas like the metroplex in dallas-fort worth, san antonio and austin, but we also have a big rural state as well. people who live outside of the major cities or the very demographic that obamacare was supposed to help, but they will be disproportionately hurt as fewer companies are able to offer insurance away from major population centers. company after company is packing up and leaving the exchanges in texas because obamacare simply won't work as structured. it can't deliver on its promises. and at the end of the day, hardworking texas families have to pay for the partisan policies

of this administration and our democratic colleagues who jam this through congress rather than try to build some consensus on a bipartisan basis that would make this sustainable. i remember being at a -- at a program where james baker, iii, who obviously served in the reagan administration, joe califano, former secretary of health and human services, a democrat who served in the clint administration or the carter administration, a democratic administration, but they made the commonsense observation that any time you do something as big, pass legislation as big as obamacare, that it's bound to fail because you can't expect people who opposed the legislation from the very beginning to say well, here, let me try to rescue you from a bad

decision in the first place, and when they were essentially frozen out of the process. so you saw when, for example, social security became law, that consensus was reached, and that's the way it should be done. and so unfortunately my constituents in texas and the american people are paying the price for a bad decision made in 2009 and 2010 to make obamacare a purely partisan piece of legislation. i get letters from my constituents all the time who liked their insurance before it was canceled because of obamacare, they liked their doctor who they could see under their existing health care policy, and they even liked the price they were paying for it. it was affordable before the mandates of obamacare. but one by one, they lost their

coverage when obamacare became the law of the land. i've had some of my constituents tell me they feel terrorized by obamacare. strong words. and others have told me bluntly that they need relief from it. please help us. we're drowning in higher costs, in fewer choices, and we don't like what we have under obamacare. so the bottom line is for all of the purported benefits that the democratic leader talked about, more people on medicaid, more people with some form of coverage, we know that a huge majority of people feel like they got a raw deal, and we knew it would be that way from the beginning, and that's the reason many people, including myself, opposed it. that's also the reason why just this year senate republicans passed a bill under the budget

reconciliation process to repeal obamacare, because we feel the american people deserve better. not surprisingly, president obama vetoed it. but what we demonstrated is the political support here in the senate working with the house to hopefully under the next president, to build a health care system that the american people can afford and gives them the choices that they want, because unfortunately obamacare did not deliver on its promises. so we have got our work cut out for us in 2017. we demonstrated that there is enough votes there to repeal obamacare. all we need now is a president who will sign it, as we work together to repeal a more affordable alternative to obamacare that gives people the

choices that they want and they deserve. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the assistant democratic leader. mr. durbin: mr. president, when both the republican majority leader and the republican assistant majority leader and whip come to the floor to address one issue, it's pretty important to them, and it clierl is the focus of their attention. the issue today is the affordable care act, obamacare, which was passed by the senate six years ago and the house as well, and what i have missed in most of the debate -- no, in fact, what i have missed in all of the debate from the republican side is their proposal, their alternative. they don't have one. no, what they want to argue is we need to go back to the good old days. the good old days of health insurance before the affordable care act. and you hear the senator from kentucky and the senator from

tennessee talk about getting back to those good old days and getting rid of the mandates, the mandates in the affordable care act. what were those mandates in the affordable care act? well, here's one. it said that if you or any member of your family had a preexisting condition, you could not be denied health insurance. does any family across america have someone with a preexisting condition? it turns out quite a few. my family, many others. 129 million americans out of 350 have a preexisting condition in their family. now, what did that mean in the good old days before the affordable care act, which the republicans want to return to? it meant that health insurance companies would just flat out say no, we're not going to cover you. you have a child who survived cancer. you have a wife who is a diabetic. no health insurance for you.

those were the good old days the republicans would like to return to. but for 129 million americans, it means either no insurance or unaffordable insurance to go back to the republican good old days under health insurance. there was also a provision, another mandate in the affordable care act which said you cannot discriminate against women when it comes to health insurance. why would health insurance companies charge more money for women than men? well, women are made differently, have different health needs. but why should they be discriminated against when this comes to the cost of health insurance? one of the mandates said you treat women and men equally when it comes to the payment of premiums. the good ol' days you could discriminate against women. it meant that 157 million american women could pay a

higher premium for the same health insurance as a man. so the good ol' days, which the senate republicans would like to return to in health insurance, would go back to discrimination against women. there was another mandate. the mandate said that if you were a family that had a son or a daughter and you wanted to keep them on your family health insurance until they reached the age 26, the health insurance companies had to give you that option. it was mandated. in the good ol' day, which the senate republicans would like to return to, there was no requirement that you be alads to continue -- allowed to continue coverage for your son or daughter until age 26. what difference does that make? i remember when my daughter was going to college, graduated. and i called her, i said, jennifer, you have health insurance? oh, dad, i don't need that.

i feel fine. well, no parent wants to hear that. you never know what tomorrow's diagnosis or tomorrow's accident is going to bring. so one of the mandates which the republicans would like to get rid of is the mandate that family health insurance coverage your children up to age 26 while they're graduating from school, looking for a job, maybe working part-time. they want to go back to the good ol' days when you could tell a family "no, your son or daughter cannot stay under your health insurance plan." there was another provision, too. there used to be a senator who sat right back there -- i picture him right now -- paul wellstone of minnesota p. he was an extraordinary senator who died in a plane crash -- you probably remember. over on that side of the aisle, right in that seat, pete domenici of new mexico. pete domenici a republican senator from new mexico. two polar opposites in politics,

paul w wellstone and pete divmet but they had one thing in common: both of them had members of their family with mental illness. and the two of them came together, paul wellstone and pete domenici, and said every health insurance in america should coverage mental health counseling and care. mandate mental health counseling and care. those two senators from the opposite poles in politics knew together that mental illness is in fact an illness that can be treated. health insurance plans didn't cover it, didn't want to cover it. but the mandate that they came up with included in the affordable care act said, yes, you will cover mental health illness and mental health counseling. well, you've just listened to the senator from texas talking about doing away with mandates, mandates that require the coverage of mental health illness.

there's something else they included, too, and most of us didn't know this. it doesn't just say "mental health illness." it says "mental health illness and substance abuse treatment." and what i'm finding in illinois -- and we're finding across the country because of the opioid and heroin epidemic, is that many families get down on their knees and thank good n.a.s. their health insurance -- that their health insurance now gives their son or daughter facing the addiction of opioids or heroin health insurance coverage for treatment. another mandate, another mandate in the affordable care act which the senators from texas and kentucky believe should be gone. that isn't all. there's also a mandate in the affordable care act that we do something to help senior senior citizens pay for their prescription drugs. under the plan devised by the republicans, there was something called the doughnut hole where

seniors could find themselves after a few months each year going into their savings accounts for thousands of dollars to pay for their pharmaceuticals and drugs. we put a mandate in the affordable care act to start closing that doughnut hole and protecting seniors. the republicans would have us go back to the good ol' days when the medicare prescription drug program, when seniors were defleet pleating -- were depleting their savings because of the cost of lifesaving drugs. when you go through the long list of things that are mandated in the affordable care act, you have to ask my republican critics, which one of these and makes would you get rid of it? they suggested -- at least the senator from texas suggested we should get rid of all these mandates and go back to the good ol' days of health insurance. it's true the cost of health insurance is going up. my family knows it. we're under an insurance exchange from the affordable

care act. we know it. others know it as well. but to suggest this is brand new since the affordable care act is too ignore reality and to ignore the obvious. if you take a look back in time -- and not that far back in time -- before the passage of the affordable care act, you find some interesting headlines. the senator from texas brings headlines from texas of the last few months. in 2005, five years before the affordable care act was law, there was a "los angeles times" headline that read, "rising premiums threaten job-based health coverage." shouldn't come as any surprise to those of us who have any memory, the cost of health insurance premiums were going up every single year. 2008, four years before the affordable care act became law, a "new york times" headline read, "health care costs rise twice as much as inplacing."

2008, two years before we passed the law, partisan "washington post" headline, "rising health costs cut into wages." it is naive -- in fact, it is just plain wrong -- to suggest that health care costs were not going up before the affordable care act and health insurance premiums were not going up. if you could buy a policy, you could expect the cost of it to go up every year. what we tried to achieve with the affordable care act was to slow the rate of growth in health insurance costs. we've achieved that. more thank 20 million americans now have health insurance who did not have it before the affordable care act, and we're also finding the cost of programs like medicare have gone down over $400 million because we're finding cost savings in health care. cost savings brought about because of the affordable care act. i said $400 million. idit's $473billion.

sorry. i was wrong. saved in medicare since the affordable care act because the rate of growth in health care costs has slowed down. for employer premiums, the past five years included four of the five slowest growth years on record. health care price growth since the affordable care act became law has been the slowest in 50 years. have some premiums gone up? yes. primarily in the individual market. now, the senator from texas and i have something in common. the biggest health insurer in my state is also a major health insurer in texas: bluecross blueshield. and blue cross came to me and said, we're going to have to raise premiums. how much i can't say. ultimately, it's still going through the decision process. what was the reason, they said?

not enough people are signing up for the health insurance exchanges. what we are trying to do is to get more people to sign up for health insurance so that we literally have universal coverage across this country. we've made great progress -- 20 million people. more are covered. but to argue that we should go back to the good ol' days of health insurance, of discrimination against people with preexisting conditions, discrimination against women, making the decision that if your child had a medical condition, your family wouldn't have helt hundreds, to say that we should go back to say, is that what the republicans are proposing? i'm still waiting for the republican alternative to the affordable care act. they've had plenty of time to work on it. now, they call it a partisan law, but let's make the record clear. in 2009, when president obama was sworn into office and started this effort to reform health insurance in america, max

baucus, democrat of montana, was the chairman of the finance committee. he reached out to the ranking republican, chuck grassley of iowa, to try to devise a bipartisan bill. they took a long time deliberating and meeting. many of us were frustrating saying when is this going to result in an actual bill? in august of 2009, senator grassley announced he was no longer going to be engaged in that negotiation and deliberation. from that point forward, no republicans participated in the drawing up of the bill or an alternative. it passed on a partisan roll call despite the best efforts of many senators t to engage the republicans in at least debating the issue and helping us build the bill. they were opposed -- remained opposed. still oppose it today. still have no alternative, no substitute. it is their hope that we somehow

return to the good ol' days of health insurance. well, they weren't good ol' days for millions of americans. it meant discrimination, exclusions, expenses, and treatment no one wante want -- s to return to. one topic that's never meninged by the republicans when they come to the floor tawngdz about health insurance -- i listened carefully yesterday, again today with senator mcconnell and with senator cornyn. the one thing they failed to mention, did you hear them say anything about the cost of pharmaceuticals and drugs? not a word. yet when you ask health insurance companies, why are premiums going up, some are saying they're being driven by the cost of pharmaceuticals. one company says 25% of our premium increase goes to the cost of pharmaceuticals. well, we know what they're talking about, don't they? when people take over these pharmaceutical companies, grab a

drug that's sometimes been on the market for decades, decide to raise the price 100%, 200%, in the case of epipens, 550% -- these pence that save kid -- these pen pens that save kids tt have allergic reactions. so if we're going to deal with the drivers in the cost of health insurance, my friends on the republican side have to be open to the suggestion we need to do more to protect american consumers from being fleeced by farpharmaceutical companies. why are we paying so much more for drugs in america that are literally cheaper in canada and cheaper in europe? because our laws don't give the consumers a fighting chance. our laws allow pharmaceutical companies to charge what they wish, with little or no oversight. if you want to bring down the cost of health care, we have hospitals already engaged in that effort. doctors engaged in that effort. medical professionals committed to that effort.

but what one hospital administrator said to me is, senator, when are we going 0 get the pharmaceutical companies to join us in trying to reduce the cost to consumers? let me just close by saying, the senator from texas said -- and there were those in the senate who wanted to have a government health insurance plan. guilty as charged -- not as the only plan but as a competitor when this came to these health insurance plans. what if we had medicare for all across the united states as an alternative in every insurance exchange and allowed consumers across this country to decide whether that is an option that is valuable for them? i'm not closing out the possibility of private insurers. let them compete as well. but consumers at least deserve that option. a nonprofit medicare-for-all insurance plan. it was stopped because we didn't

have the support of all the democrats, to be honest with you, and no support from the republican side. i still think that's a viability alternative that we should explore. so i'll still wait. there will be more and more speeches about the affordable care act, and i'll still wait after six years for the first proposal from the republican side for the replacement of the affordable care act. i haven't seen it yet but hope springs eternal. i yield the floor. mrs. fischer: mr. president? the presiding officer: the? er from nebraska. mrs. fischer: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i rise to offer remarks on the water resources development act today. specifically, i would like to address amendment number 4996, which is whic -- which has now n modified and included in the inhofe-boxer package. first to senators inhofe and boxer, thank you for your commitment to passing the wrda

bill every two years. i appreciate your efforts to work with every member in this chamber to make certain that that commitment is upheld. the bill reflects our duty and ability to ensure safe, reliable water infrastructure. in large part, it achieves this by granting greater flexibility to the local stakeholders to manage their communities' diverse water needs. for example, in nebraska our 23 natural resource districts will be allowed to conduct feasibility studies and receive reimbursement during project construction instead of waiting until that project is completed. wrda also includes real reform for state municipalities like those in omaha struggling with unfunded combined sewer overflow mandates. personally i am relieved that

wrda 2016 eliminates the e.p.a.'s flawed median household income affordability measurement. regarding amendment 4996, i want to thank the chair and the ranking member of the e.p.w. committee and their staff for working with me in a bipartisan manner to ensure america's farmers and ranchers have greater certainty for their on farm fuel and animal feed storage. mr. president, this amendment provides a limited exemption to farmers from the e.p.a.'s spill prevention containment and control, or the spcc rule. two years ago i worked with senator boxer who was then chairman of the committee in a good-faith efforts to address concerns raised by my constituents about this rule.

and i am really glad for the opportunity to do so again. my modified amendment would wholly exempt animal feed storage tanks from the spcc rule both in terms of aggregate storage and single-tank storage. further, this amendment includes additional language that will exempt up to 2,000 gallons of capacity on remote or separate parcels of land as long as these tanks are not larger than 1,000 gallons each. ultimately this will allow ag producers greater flexibility to access the necessary fuel kneeledded to power machinery, eqiment and irrigation pumps. some may think these are just technical tweaks, but let me assure you they are critically important to farmers and ranchers across our country. most agriculture producers live

miles away from the nearest refueling station, and producers, therefore, rely upon on-farm fuel storage to provide the supply that they need at times when they need it. this amendment will ensure producers can maintain that on-farm fuel storage. it would bring some reasonable, measured exemptions to the spcc rule for small and medium-size farms and for livestock producers. this compromise comes at a critical hour for our ag producers. they are struggling through one of the toughest farm economies since the 1980's. markets are weak. margins are tight. this compromise offers much-needed regulatory relief. for many, it's a lifeline. it lifts an unnecessary burden.

so i urge my colleagues to support these commonsense exemptions that will limit harmful federal regulations on the men and women who feed a very hungry world. mr. president, i'd like to comment briefly on those harmful regulations. as i mentioned, the senate passed a provision in the 2014 wrda bill requiring the e.p.a. to do some research before determining what is and what is not an appropriate safe fuel storage level for the average american farmer. well, it's miew -- my view and it's shared by many producers across the country that if there's no risk, then there's no reason to regulate. don't fix problems that don't exist. the e.p.a. released results of

this study last year, and it is difficult for me to call it a study. the word "study" ceas with -- carries with it the implication of careful scrutiny. the e.p.a.'s study was in reality a collection of assumptions lacking in scientific evidence. it supported a recommendation that moved the goal post on the exemption levels below the minimum that was previously agreed to by this chamber and signed into law. the e.p.a. report failed to show that on-farm fuel storage poses a significant risk to water quality. it cited seven examples of significant fuel spills and not one of them occurred on a farm or a ranch. even more misleading, one

referenced a spill of 3,000 gallons of jet fuel. well, mr. president, i know in your state of south dakota and in my state of nebraska, it would be very hard to find a farmer who employs the use of a jet engine when they are harvesting a cornfield. to place these costly fees and heavy regulations on farmers and ranchers at so difficult a time is really a dangerous thing, and it's a serious thing. to do so based on a false report with misleading information, that's irresponsible. i know the impact of federal policies from firsthand experience. farmers and ranchers understand their success is the direct result of careful stewardship of our natural resources.

we depend on a healthy environment for our very livelihoods. we know the values of clean water. you can't raise cattle or corn without it. no one works harder to protect the quality of our streams and our aquifers. when it comes to preventing spills from on-farm fuel storage, producers already have every incentive in the world. we live on this will land, and our families drink the water. so again, i would like to thank chairman inhofe and ranking member boxer for their willingness to come together, reach a compromise and safeguard the livelihoods of our farmers and ranchers. the senate's approval of wrda will be a relief for farmers throughout nebraska and all across america who should not face these unnecessary regulations.

the bipartisan provision regarding on-farm fuel storage completely exemption animal feed ingredients, and it does provide greater flexibility to producers to access the fuel where they need it, and that's reflective of the world realties that we face in production agriculture. i appreciate my colleagues' support and cooperation on this issue. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. mr. wyden: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. wyden: mr. president, if ever there was an issue that ought to be bipartisan, it's tackling the zika virus, because this virus of course is taking enormous toll on our country. what we're seeing is women and men getting infected, research

stalling out, babies being born with deformities and severe disabilities. my view is there shouldn't be anything bipartisan about tackling this. it ought to be just common sense. the senate ought to come together, and we ought to have done it quite some time. yet, republican leaders seem to be putting this into slow motion because they want to limit access to the very health services pregnant women depend on for their care. it seems when you listen to their view, it is almost like giving pregnant women cans of bug spray and wishing them good luck. now that, in my view, just defies common sense what i've

always felt -- and this has been true throughout my time in public service -- that the big public health issues were the safety and well-being so many americans is on the line, you say what we're going to do is we're going to do our job. we're going to come together. we're going to do it in a bipartisan fashion based on what researchers and public health authorities say make sense. and yet, here the senate is on an issue that's at the forefront of the minds of millions of american women and families, and what we're being told by republicans is that the price of dealing with the zika virus is limiting women's rights and reducing access to reproductive health care. and so much of that agenda is a

preventive agenda, which is exactly what the public health authorities say is most important. so my hope is that very quickly this congress is going to say we're going to set aside the anti-women, anti-family language and, as part of a must-pass bill, we're going to say we're coming together as a body, democrats and republicans, addressing what are clear public health recommendations of the leading specialist in this country and do the job that americans told us to do, which is when you have something that affects millions of americans and their health and safety -- i had a number of forums on the zika virus this summer in oregon.

great concern, concern, for example, at the oregon health sciences center, our premier health research body, very concerned about the research agenda stalling out. so i would just say to my colleagues let's set aside this question of trying to find ideological trophies as part of the zika legislation. let's address the clear public health recommendations that we have received. let's do it in a bipartisan way. let's do it in a way that reflects common sense. and let's do it quickly. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor.

mr. barrasso: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. barrasso: thank you, mr. president. i come to the floor having seen the minority leader and then the minority whip both on the floor this morning talking about the president's health care law. it's a law that the president said people should forcefully defend and be proud. and what i heard was in defense of a bill today, now a law, that was passed solely along partisan lines a number of years ago, and it's very hard to be proud or defend that law based on what the american people are experiencing. so i come to the floor noting that the president is from the

home state of illinois. the minority whip is from the home state of illinois. and there have been a number of stories in the press recently from that state about just how horrendous the impact of the law has been on the people of the president's home state to the point that just yesterday there was a story in the "washington examiner" with the headline "illinois gets ready for huge obamacare rate hikes." people say what's not to like about obamacare? according to crane's chicago business report just last auguss plenty in illinois. plenty in illinois not to like about obamacare. but it's not just illinois. it's not just nevada where the minority leader is from. a gallup poll of the entire

country that recently came out showed that more americans are negative than positive about the health care law. have therein -- there been some people that have been helped? absolutely. but overall most americans in this case have said the impact has been more negative than positive. it's interesting because the way the question was asked, they asked: has this health care law helped you personally or has it hurt you and your family? mr. president, i was astonished to see that 29% of americans say that obamacare has hurt them and their family personally. three out of ten americans say that this law has hurt them and their families personally. how does that happen? well, maybe they lost their doctor. the president said if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.

many people couldn't, in spite of what the president may have told them. the president told them their insurance premiums would drop by $2,500. instead, people are noticing premiums going up around the country. the president said if you like your plan, you can keep your plan. we know that has not been true. and then the thing that i found additionally astonishing and concerning to all of us as americans and as a doctor most concerning to me is the question is how will this health care law affect your family in the future? more americans expect the health care law to make their families' health care situation worse in the long term. this is people talking about their own families, not the minority leader or the minority whip or the president of the united states coming here to the floor, talking about this and that theoretical aspects. i'm talking about american families. people, men, women, children all trying to live a healthy life

and finding that it has been impeded, hurt by the president's health care law. i mean, it's amazing. 36%. more than one in three americans expect this health care law to make their families' health care situation worse. did we hear about that during the debate on the senate floor? when the bill was written behind closed doors and harry reid -- in harry reid's office when nancy pelosi said first you have to pass it before you get to find out what's in it. do the american people know that here six years later over one in three say they are personally, their health care and their health and their own families is going to be worse because of this law. so the state of illinois, the headline from yesterday, illinois gets ready for huge obamacare rate increases. first line of the story. half the insurers selling plans in illinois obamacare marketplaces are hiking prices by 50% on average, according to

the final rates that the state published wednesday. now, these are rates approved by the state of illinois. the president said we won't let them go up that high. the state of illinois said that's the only way that they can stay in business. another headline, illinois obama rates could soar as states submit insurance premium increases to the feds. rates could increase by average -- we know what the approval rate is -- over half of them are going to be increasing by over half, by over 50%. so the enact, it's interesting for a 21-year-old nonsmoker. you're talking about somebody who is healthy, doesn't smoke, probably doesn't go to the gym. if they are buying the lowest priced silver plan in cook county, illinois. we're talking chicago, we're talking the president's hometown next year, that 21-year-old healthy individual, nonsmoker could pay a premium of $221 a

month up from $152 a month. well, that's $70 higher every month, $840 for the year higher premium, a 21-year-old who is just trying to get health insurance because the law says they have to buy it and the president says you just can't get what works for you. you have got to buy what i say works for you. you have to listen to the president on this. you can't choose what makes sense for you. now, the president says hey, don't worry. taxpayers will subsidize it. well, if you're not receiving a taxpayer subsidy, you're paying the subsidy for that person. but a lot of people don't get the subsidies. according to the situation in chicago, about 25% of the people who buy insurance on the exchange, the customers there, which is about 84,000 people, they don't receive tax credits. they don't receive the subsidy. so they are feeling this in their pocketbooks because the president says they have to buy it because he thinks he knows better, and it sounds like the minority leader and the minority whip have that same opinion.

so when the headline comes out what's not to like about obamacare and then the answer to that question is plenty in illinois, it talks about illinois residents who buy health insurance through the obamacare exchange should brace themselves for steep premium increases. but it's not just the premiums. they also have to brace themselves for fewer doctors to choose from, less choice in doctors, less choice in hospitals to go to when they enroll and the enrollment opens on november 1. the big national health insurance companies have pulled out of illinois because of substantial losses. there was actually a co-op in illinois called the land of lincoln co-op. it lost $91 million, and they closed their doors. is it only illinois? is it only nevada where they're down to just one choice in most of the state? because the president promised a marketplace, but instead it's a monopoly because the companies have pulled out, people have

very few choices, if any. while people buying insurance coverage through the illinois exchange may howl because of the increase in the prices, premiums are jumping even higher in other states. for instance, the insurance commissioner of tennessee, declaring the state's exchange market -- quote -- very near collapse, very near collapse in tennessee. they approved an increase of the one insurance company, 62%. 62% increase. is that what the president means when he says forcefully defend and be proud? the president and the senators who are on the floor today talked about the issues and the president pointed to this. he said oh, well, people aren't going to have to go to the emergency room after the obamacare health care law has been passed because they will only have to use it for emergency, not for routine care. well, what came out in -- in the "chicago tribune"? the president's hometown

newspaper. august 30, this year. illinois emergency room visits increase after obamacare, increase. it says emergency room visits in illinois increased by more than 14,000 visits a month, on average, in 2014 and 2015 compared to before the president's health care law was signed. this is from the annals of emergency medicine. they follow these things. well, the article goes on in the "chicago tribune" and it says one of the goals of expanding coverage to all was to reduce the use of pricey services such as emergency department visits. that's what the president said. that's what the democrats said when this bill was being debated because the emergency room was the area of last resort for people who didn't have doctors, doesn't see them regularly, so with the health care law, they wouldn't need to go to the emergency room. but the study's authors noted that this spike in visits in

illinois runs contrary to what the president promised and the president's goal. the co-ops have been especially troubling and certainly in illinois the land of lincoln co-op, but it's not just illinois. co-op after co-op after co-op have failed, including one yesterday in the state of new jersey, gone. what does crane's newspaper, chicago business say about illinois? illinois obamacare plan to fold after three-year run. land of lincoln health and obamacare insurer that launched three years ago to bring competition. the idea the president said he wanted to bring competition to the online exchange is liquidating among big financial losses. location after location, state by state, people that have relied upon the president's promises have been bitterly disappointed. and the thing that is so

distressing about what happened in illinois with the co-op, because it failed during the middle of the year, done. people then need to go find new insurance. well, we have talked before, mr. president, about the issues of high co-pays, high deductibles. when a co-op fails and you have to buy new insurance, you have to start over from scratch with paying the co-pays, paying the deductibles, so somebody that actually bought insurance through the president's idea of this co-op that has now failed find themselves with a new insurance company if they can find one because the law says they have to buy it, finding themselves with new insurers, but they have to start over. so the land of lincoln, the so-called co-op health insurer on the state exchange is going to shut down at the end of september, coming up in just a couple of weeks its 49,000

illinois members. this is according to the "chicago tribune." its 49,000 illinois members have to get new insurance coverage for october, november and december because it's done the end of this month. they will likely have to start from zero again on their deductibles and out-of-pocket maximum payments, in some cases costing them thousands of additional dollars. is that what president obama means when he says forcefully defend and be proud? there is very little to be proud about about what this president has brought upon the american people, which is why we see so many families suffering. the final issue that i bring to you, mr. president, is the fact that so few people are signing up in spite of the fines, in spite of the taxes, in spite of the mandates to the point that the "washington post" had a front page story, "health exchange signups fall short." they expected at this point 24 million people signing up. there are 11 million. so they are 13 million short. there are still almost 30 million people in this

country uninsured. but it's not because they are making it hard to sign up. oh, no, mr. president. you may have seen this story that came out yesterday on cnbc news. obamacare marketplaces remain vulnerable to fraud. a new government audit finds. two new government audits reveal that the nation's obamacare marketplaces, the article says, remain vulnerable to fraud, vulnerable to fraud after investigators successfully applied for coverage for multiple people who do not exist. they made up people, they applied, and the obamacare exchange sold them the insurance and counted them as good. it says in several cases this year, fake people who hadn't filed tax returns were still able to get obamacare tax credits. not just get insurance but get subsidies from hardworking

american taxpayers, were still able to get obamacare tax credits to help pay their monthly premiums for coverage right now. this year is the first year in which applicants for those subsidies had to actually have filed federal tax returns for prior coverage years, but they hadn't filed them. it didn't matter to the obamacare exchange people. they are so desperate to get people to sign up because so few people are signing up that they will sign up people who don't exist. now, they put up ten fictitious applications. eight of them failed the initial online identity checking process, but all ten were successfully approved according to the government accountability office. it is amazing that yet people all around the country know how poorly this law is working in terms of them, their lives, their families. i heard one of the senators

today say the republicans have no options, the republicans have offered plenty of responses to what is happening with the obama health care law. the state health care choice act allows states to make a lot of decisions that are now being made by unelected, unaccountable washington bureaucrats. we have plans working toward patient-centered care to allow people to get the care they need from the doctor they choose at lower costs, things rejected by the democrats because the president has said forcefully defend and be proud. and hillary clinton has said defend and build upon. she wants to do it with additional taxpayer subsidies, subsidies that go to people that do not exist, subsidies that don't deal with the cost of care, subsidies that don't deal with the fact that people are meeting -- facing high deductibles, high co-pays, can't keep their doctors, and yet in

spite of what the president may say and the democrats may say and candidate clinton may say, a huge number of american people have considerable fears that their life will be made worse by the president's health care law and almost three in ten americans today, 29% of americans today say that they and their family have been personally harmed by the president's health care law. that's a sign of failure, mr. president. it's not a sign of success. it's not something that people should forcefully defend and be proud of. it's a sign that we need to take a different path, a path that is not the obama approach, it's not the one-size-fits-all, it's not the washington knows better than the people at home. we need to get the decisions out of washington made at home so the american people, people who just want to get up, go to work, take care of their family and get affordable care when they need it can get the care that

they need from a doctor that they choose at lower costs. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from west virginia. a senator: thank urks mr. president. i'm here today to speak in support of wrda. the presiding officer: the senate is in a quorum call call. a senator: i note the absence of a quorum. i ask consent to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. a senator: thank you, mr. president. i'm here today to speak in support of wrda. mrs. capito: i want to say thank you so much to chairman inhofe and to ranking member boxer for the way they've worked to very well together to get this very important piece of legislation across the finish line. they did this with the transportation bill and it has this piece of legislation has broad bipartisan support. as you know, west virginia suffered historic flooding this summer. you can see this in greenbrier county in west virginia on june 25, 2016.

this just shows how swollen and how filled all the waterways were. we lost 23 west virginians from the storms and tens of thousands suffered catastrophic damages to their homes and to their livelihoods. and wrda contains a number of provisions that will help prevent this kind of devastation in the future. we can no longer wait until it fails to fix our nation's infrastructure. in addition to a major loss of life, communities across west virginia are dealing with significant economic losses that will take years to discover. our friends in louisiana are going through the same sort of very difficult building back. let me touch on some of the highlights of the wrda bill. i sponsored a provision in wrda with my fellow senator from west virginia, senator manchin to study the feasibility of implementing projects for flood risk management within west virginia's river basin,

something such as this to prevent this. this bill also addresses dam safety and includes a provision i've been working with senator jack reed. i would like to thank him for his hard work in this area. national inventory of dams, there are more than 14,000 high hazard potential dams in the united states. as you know, the state of west virginia has a lot of mountains, a lot of valleys, got a lot of water. we've got a lot of dams. 422 of those dams are located in my state, my small state of west virginia. put simply, when a dam has high hazard potential, it means if the dam fails, people will lose their lives and their property. this provision allows for $530 million over ten years for a fema program to fix those dams. i know that states across the nation will welcome this provision. flood prevention and mitigation is only one of the important

parts of this wrda bill. wrda also addresses the issues with our nation's drinking water infrastructure, an issue again very important to all of us. in my state of west virginia, we dealt with this firsthand. in 2014 following the freedom industry spill into the elk river. as you may recall, that caused 600,000 people to lose their water for a larger period of time, several weeks in some cases. wrda provides assistance to small disadvantaged and underserved communities. it will replace lead service lines in these communities and address sewer overflows. we have so much aging infrastructure in this country. it includes 170 million to address lead emergencies like those in flint, michigan and other public health consequences. it provides $70 million to capitalize the new water infrastructure financing innovation act better known as wifia. that program provides loans for water and wastewater

infrastructure anywhere in the country. this program is modeled after a similar and highly successful program that supports our highways. maximizing the use of our waterways is another part of wrda. in my state are rivers not only provide commercial transport but also vital recreational opportunities. i've offered a bipartisan amendment which i hope will be accepted into the final bill that emphasizes the increasing use of locks along the river for recreational use. finally wrda includes consensus legislation to allow e.p.a. to review and approve state permitting programs for the cole coal ash disposal. the rule went into effect last october but e.p.a. does not currently have the authority to approve our state permitting programs. this bill fills that gap benefiting utilities, states, and the environment by

authorizing state's oversight of coal ash disposal. there's no other environmental regulation solely enforced through private lawsuits which is what we're seeing so this bill fixes that by giving states the authority and it empowers local entities to help keep their infrastructure strong and functioning. lastly the bill gets us back to a regular schedule of passing wrda every two years. doing so will allow us to continue to modernize our water transportation infrastructure and keep up with flood protection and environmental restoration needs across the country. so let's seize this opportunity. this is a significant bill with a number of benefits for states, a lot of states all across the country. this legislation proactively addresses a number of concerns r. it will bring short and long-term gains to our economy and show the american people that congress can come together in a bipartisan way to fix problems, to support needed

improvements to our infrastructure, and make the right investments in our communities. and lastly, i'd like to add the devastating floods that we had in west virginia took as i said 23 lives but what it showed us i think us west virginians is what a great nation we live in. i want to take the time to thank people from across this country who drove to west virginia, who sent money to west virginia, who raised money for west virginians, who sent supplies, who said prayers, for all the many peoples that were devastated and still suffer the devastation from a flood such as this throughout our state. you know, we do i think sometimes focus a little bit too much on what's going wrong in this country. for me one of the things that's going right is the volunteerism, the benevolence, the loving embrace that we felt in west virginia from the rest of the country when we went through

such a devastating flood but that other areas of the country feel when they suffer like consequences. so with that, mr. president, i'd like to yield back. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from california. mrs. feinstein: thank you very much, mr. president. the presiding officer: the in a is in had a quorum call. fine foon i ask that the quorum call be dismissed. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. feinstein: thank you, mr. chairman. it is really propitious that you are in the chair today because i am going to talk about our bill, which is part of the wrda bill. let me begun by thanking you for

your leadership. we put together this in 2015. this has to do with lake tahoe. and you were the main author of the bill. senator reid, senator boxer and i were supporters. here it is in this bism and i want you to know how i feel. this is the way the senate should work, that we work together for something that has so benefited both of our states and we're able to say that we're getting the job done. and i just want to say congratulations to you. this is so special for me, and i'm delighted that you're in the chair. and maybe i could go over just a little bit of the 20 years because we missed you -- i know you couldn't be at the summit this year. but i want i know that you were really missed. and i want you to know that senator reid put together one

amazing summit. as a matter of fact, i called him and said, harry, you can't have a rock group at this summit. this is a serious thing. you know, we meet every year and we go over all of the science and all of the planning and all of the problems at the lake. and he said, let me tell you something. i'm retiring. it's my turn to do this, and i'm going to do it my way. and, mr. president, i want you to know, there were 7,000 people for the summit. and our governor spoke, your governor could not be there -- he was committed to an event in your state. senator boxer spoke, senator reid, of course, spoke, and the president came. and i was worried that all of us speaking would have a difficult time because there were 7,000 people expecting to hear this

las vegas group called the killers. well, i must tell you, they were the utmost in terms of an audience, and after the program was finished -- before the rock group came on -- what i had hoped is that we have a whole new constituency of people to work for the preservation of this lake. i want to just report to you quickly some of the numbers, if i may -- and i thought i had them here. we have spent $1 mo.9 billion an investment on the lake. $635 is federal dollars. $759 million california dollars. $124 million nevada dollars. as you know, southern nevada land sales have gone into this, thanks to your governor and also senator reed.

$99 million by local governments. and i want you to pay attention to this number: $339 million has been raised over the 20-year period by business. so what we've had is a by-state very real combined effort to handle lake tahoe. now, i also want you to know that at the stakeholders' lunch following the summit, jeff schladoe said that his greater concern was the fact that this lake is now warming quicker than any great lake in the world. and that the ambient -- the state of lake tahoe shows that the ambient air temperature has gone up nearly five degrees.

so we are going to have a continuing problem. and i am really so proud of the accomplishments that we together have made. and i really want to thank you for this. it's really important. tahoe is one of two big clear lakes in the world. the other is bical in russia. so let me just cite what we've done. we've controlled 729 miles of roads from erosion. we have included 65,000 acres of hazardous fuels treatment. we have restored more than 16,000 acres of wildlife habitat. and we've restored 1,500 acres of environment zones, 2,270 linear feet of shoreline has

been added to the lake. but i think overall what we have now is a by-state -- a bistate team tahoe. i think it took us 20 years to get there. i remember when senator reid got president clinton to come at the beginning. of of us were there at the beginning. at that time, everybody was fighting. planning agencies were fighting with homeowners, environmentalists were fighting with others. that doesn't exist today. today we have effected a team. and i'm so pleased that you were in the chair -- this is completely unplanned -- so that i can say "thank you" and how very proud i am that we have achieved this, that it's part of the wrda bill. and i want particularly to thank your colleague, my colleagues, senator inhofe and senator

boxer. the only way you get this done is by working together. and i think the fact that they have worked together has ensured that we now have this opportunity to deal with this new challenge, which is unprecedented warming. and along those lines, just a word: as i understand what's happening, the projection is for less snow and more rain, which means more warm water. and so the fish that are cold water fish, the trucking river, which is fueled by tahoe, all of the streams that play into tahoe really depend on that snowpack. so the next few years i think are going to be crucial, and i want you to know that i so look forward to working with you. we must continue the tradition, which senator inhofe and boxer

have recognized, senator reid helped to begin, and we've got to carry it on. so i am delighted that the senate is working again and that this bill is part of the wrda bill. and i just want to end by once again thanking you very much for your leadership. and i yield the floor. thank you very much.

a senator: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. rubio: mr. president, is the senate in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are. mr. rubio: i ask unanimous consent the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. rubio: mr. president, i have five requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders.

the presiding officer: so noted. mr. rubio: thank you, mr. president. i ask that i be recognized to speak as if in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. rubio: thank you, mr. president. i'm pleased to report that we finally have some encouraging news yesterday on the zika funding front with the announcement by the senate majority leader that additional money to fight the zika virus would be included in the continuing resolution which is the budget document that will hopefully move us forward, at least through december, and that hopefully will be moving through the senate here very soon. throughout my time in the senate, i have regularly opposed these short-term spending bills because i don't think funding government on a month-to-month basis is the smart way to run the government of the most powerful and important nation on earth. but with zika becoming a public health emergency the way it has, this is a necessary exception for me to make, and that's why, assuming all else will obviously reserve to see all the other details of this budget document,

but assuming it all is as has been reported and as i am aware from the conversations that are ongoing, that that's why i will be supporting this continuing resolution. it's worth making an exception for something like that when the zika funding is in it. at this point, i just really believe that we need to get zika funding approved and moving. we need to make sure that the fight against zika doesn't run out of money before the end of this month. that's for me the most urgent priority. we can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. the perfect, i believe, is still the full funding that was originally requested at $1.9 billion which i supported. the good is what will hopefully be finalized soon and hopefully will pass quickly. but the unacceptable, the unacceptable would be to do nothing and to let the money run out on these ongoing efforts to fund the fight against zika. even the $1.9 billion the administration requested months ago may not ultimately be enough. we don't know for sure how much more may be needed to win this fight, but the $1.1 billion for

zika that's being negotiated would be a big step in the right direction, and it would mean real resources for my home state of florida, which in the continental u.s. and the mainland has been disproportionately impacted. just yesterday there were another six cases, i believe, of confirmed transmissions that occurred in the state, not travel related and of course the suffering that's now ongoing on the island of puerto rico in which a significant percentage of the population has now been affected and/or infected by zika. i have been talking about this issue since january and it's been frustrating to see it tied up in washington political games. as i have said repeatedly, i believe both parties are to blame for us getting to this moment. on the one hand, i believe members of my own party have been slow to respond to this, and there was these efforts i believe to try to cut corners on the funding which will cost us money in the long term. on the other hand, you have democrats here inventing excuses, just making it up in order to oppose it and they do so for purely political reasons.

and you have an administration playing chicken with this issue by claiming that money would run out in august only to discover that they had more money than they could -- than could be redirected from other accounts. and now thanks in part to the lack of action by congress, by the administration, we have nearly 19,000 americans who have been infected, including 800 in florida and 16,000 on the island of puerto rico. we have 86 pregnant women in the state of florida that have tested positive for the virus which as we know carries the risk for heartbreaking birth defects. the florida department of health announced, as i said earlier, it wasn't six, it was eight new nontravel-related cases, bringing that total to 64. that basically means eight new cases of people that got zika somewhere in america, probably in florida. and zika has also had a devastating economic impact on florida. the "miami herald" reported that miami hotel bookings are down, that air to south florida is

falling, business owners in affected areas report steep losses. polls show many visitors would rather stay away. and as tourism takes a hit, well, so will the entire economy in the state of florida since tourism is one of our cornerstone industries. and that's just see all of us from florida working together across the aisle to get this done. for example, i have worked with my colleague, senator bill nelson, the senior senator from florida on zika from the very beginning. i will be meeting with our governor, governor rick scott later today about this same issue. the bottom line is that at the national level like the state level in florida, there is no excuse for this issue to be tied up in politics any longer. my colleagues, zika is not a game, and we need to pass this funding as soon as possible so that our health officials and experts have the resources they need to conduct the vital medical research that will lead us to a vaccine and ultimately help eradicate zika in florida, across the united states, on the island of puerto rico and beyond. so yesterday's announcement is encouraging. we're closer than we have ever

been to getting something done. and now i hope will be the time for action. hopefully we'll have something soon that's public and that we can get passed right away, and i sincerely hope that senate democrats won't once again make up or find some excuse to oppose this. and i hope that members of our party will work cooperatively on this as well. and i hope ultimately that the house will also do the right thing so we can get this done and we can move forward on the research necessary for the vaccine, on the money needed to eradicate these mosquitoes and ultimately on the treatments that people will so desperately need to deal with the issue of zika once and for all. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. rubio: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. rubio: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate stand in recess as if

under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands in recess until

senate stands in recess until >> a lot of excitement as he travels across the country with a number of members joining him in the future of making america great again. now, on the floor this week we have four different bills. we will deal with tax increases to obamacare, changing the veterans administration,

transparency in government and security. those are issues that mike has been talking about across this country, but they're issues that america has been telling him about. so first of all, we will deal with, as you know, on obamacare the premiums continue to rise and now the taxes. martha mcsally has a bill to protect the seniors and the middle class from the tax increase going up with obamacare. secondly, we watched failure in the v.a. system. the backlog in disability claims. but it's become so bad that you can't even fire an employee when they show up drunk. our chairman, jeff miller, has a bill to deal with that. and as all americans believe, you should have transparency when it comes to washington and bureaucracy. we'll be moving a bill dealing just with that. and last, the challenge of where we find security around the world. this is not the time to be releasing those terrorists in

gitmo and bringing them to america. we'll have a bill that prohibits that as well. so just as our governor, mike pence, travels this country talking about the future, in the house we'll be leading a better way agenda and look forward to -- after this election -- to have a team in the white house that will sign the bills to protect us from the tax increases, give us greater transparency, reform the v.a. system and give us all the security we need. >> it was great having our friend mike pence join us today. governor, we appreciate you being there. you could tell enthusiasm in the room with our members, many of whom mike served with. but it was the same kind of enthusiasm i've seen as i've gone around the country traveling, campaigning for house republicans. you can sense in those states, whether it's a swing state or not, that there is incredible