quorum call:

mr. portman: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. portman: madam president, i'm on the floor today to talk about the epidemic -- officerster we're in a quorum call -- the presiding officer: we are in a quorum call. mr. portman: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be

dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. portman: with snarks madam president, i am here on the floor to talk about an epidemic that has gripped my state of ohio and affected every single state in this body and every community we represent, and that's the issue of prescription drug, heroin, and now fentanyl and other synthetic heroin addiction. this epidemic is affecting our communities in fundamental ways. it is breaking families apart. it's causing crime. in fact, in my home state of ohio, as i talk to law enforcement first of all, in every county, they tell me it is the top reason for crime and the growth in crime. it's certainly affecting our first responders. when i go to a firehouse and talk to the firefighters there about what they do with most of their time, they tell me they do a lot more heroin runs than they do fire runs. and thank god, because they're out there saving lives every single day. they now carry narcan with them, which is a form of naloxone, a miracle drug that reduces the dangers because it reverses the

affects of an overdose. they've applied n.r.a. kang 19,000 times in the last year in ohio. so this is something that is out in all of our communities. sometimes there is a huge spike in these overdoses. we had that in columbus, ohio, this week where in the space of just 24 hours we had 27 overdoses. we're working with the county coroner's office and with the health department in the city of columbus to try to help them determine what the cause of this spike in overdoses was, but a it appears to be another case where there was a particularly dangerous batch of heroin, probably has something to do with the synthetic herns coming into our -- heroins into our state and country, phantal in, u-4, a few placks of u-fentanyl can kill you. this is really dangerous stuff. i wish i could say it is getting better, but i fear it is only

getting worse. ist a been on this -- i've been on this floor talking about this issue every single week since february. during that time period we passed by a vote of 92-2 legislation to help address this issue. 92-2 is a rare vote in this place because republicans and democrats came together on this issue, we were able to pass something that will help. we spent three and a half years working on it. my colleague, sheldon whitehouse, and i were the cosponsors of it. others were involved to make sure we can get prevention and education efforts out there, do more in terms of treatment for people who are addicted and need to get help. longer-term recovery, which we believe is essential to successful treatment because all the facts indicate that unless you have that longer-term recovery the relapse rate is very high. we help our police officers, firefighters and other first responders by saying let's get them the narcan and training they need to be able to save

those lives. it helps specifically with our veterans, with pregnant women who are addicted, babies born with dependency. some very specific programs are going to help to turn the tide. overall i would say the legislation is important because for the first time ever not only is congress supporting recovery, as we talked about, but also we are finally addressing this issue, as i think it needs to be addressed, as a public health issue, saying this is not a question of someone making a bad moral choice as much as it is a disease. and it needs to be treated like a disease. and until addiction is treated as a disease, i think it's going to be very difficult for us to turn this tide and begin to save these lives. in my home state it's been the top cause of accidental death surpassing car accidents probably since 2007. sadly, that is now the case in many states around the country. and nationally we believe it's the number-one cause of accidental death. think about that. it's a situation that affects every state and our entire

country so that in the legislation that was passed yesterday called the continuing resolution, which is basically just a bill to continue the funding of government through december -- it's a short-term spending bill -- we were able to have included in there $37 million to help implement this legislation, the comprehensive addiction and recovery act. i'm very proud of that and very pleased this united states senate and the house was willing to go along with that. i know it's unusual because typically in a continuing resolution you simply fund the previous year's funding and there are no new programs, no new starts. frankly, the administration did not recommend a new start in this instance, although they did recommend an anomaly or an addition to the c.r. in 27 other areas. so we had to rely on the members here in the house and senate to do the right thing and to make an exception and to include this funding. and i want to thank my colleagues for doing that. i think it's critical that we begin to fully fund this

comprehensive addiction and recovery act otherwise known as cara and do it now and not wait until the regular appropriations process in december. so that $37 million will help us stand up some programs, four in particular i want to mention this morning. one is the community-based coalition prevention grants. second is the grants for access to overdose treatment. third is the recovery grants. and fourth is the state incentive grants for a comprehensive response to this opioid issue. we're dealing with prevention, education, treatment and recovery helping to get states more engaged in this issue to help them so the federal government can be a better partner. on the prevention side, what it does is start to tell people what's going on. we're doing that here today on the floor, but specifically, to let people know what this connection is between prescription drugs and prescription drug overprescribing and abuse and

heroin and fentanyl. the reason i think this is very important is that probably four out of five heroin addicts in ohio started with prescription drugs. and many people don't know that. and when they're prescribed a prescription drug for pain relief, sometimes they don't realize the potential here for an addiction. to the young people who are listening today, you need to know this. you need to understand this. everybody does. but this is something that if we're going to turn the tide, we have to change the way we deal with it to ensure that people are getting the education that they need to avoid getting into the funnel of addiction in the first place. this program called cara again also increases the availability of this nalaxone or narcan, which is very important. it has long-term recovery grants, including grants for recovery colleges, recovery universities. in other words, programs within colleges and universities to help on recovery because unfortunately many of our

students we are finding need these recovery programs as they are trying to work through their addiction. it also supports recovery high schools and increases eligibility for alternatives to incarceration so drug courts, veterans courts, instead of putting people in jail for using these drugs, to say let's do a diversion here to say if you stay sober and clean you will stay out of jail, we'll get you into treatment. these programs as i see around our state can work to be able to get people back on their feet. these are critical changes and the experts who helped write this legislation over the last three and a half years, who came here to washington where we held if four different conferences on this issue, we brought in the best minds, the best practices, they tell us they believe this legislation will make a difference in our communities day to day. now, of course, it's up to the administration to actually implement this aggressively. congress has done its work to pass these new programs, to pass this legislation.

now it shifts over to the executive branch for administering it. there is no excuse that the funding is not there because we were able to provide this funding. it's an exception to a normal c.r. but we got the funding in, the $37 million to get these programs up and running again so we can begin to turn the tide of this addiction epidemic. there are some aspects of the legislation that are already working that don't require a new program or setting up a new program. for instance, nurse practitioners, physicians assistants are now permitted to be involved in administering suboxone at treatment clinics around the country. that shouldn't require a lot of time and effort for new programs. earlier this week i had the opportunity to be at a fire station in norwood, ohio. this is a community of about 19,000 people that had 56 overdoses since june 1. so one small town in ohio, 56 overdoses this summer. i met with law enforcement.

i met with firefighters. i met with other first responders. i got to meet with a treatment specialist who they had brought in to help work with them. they're doing some really interesting intervention work with families. they showed me a video of a young man who was overdosing. they showed me the video of police officers and firefighters administering narcan not once, not twice, but three times. they showed how he was brought back to life. it was tough to watch. but firefighters and other first responders, police officers, see that every single day. every three hours somebody dies in ohio of an overdose, but every three hours many more are saved by the administering of nalaxone narcan to bring them back to life. the key is as they're doing in norwood, ohio, to intervene with that person, with the family, with the friends and to get that person into treatment so they're not administering narcan again the next week or sometimes even the next day.

over the last four years the number of heroin overdose has tripled. let me repeat that. in the last four years the number of heroin overdoses has tripled. and sadly, there's reason to believe that this trend is continuing. even though our first responders save the vast majority of those who overdose, in ohio we are losing more lives every day. we have more drug overdoses and more drug overdose l deaths this year at the end of september than we had all of last year. of course the numbers don't really tell the story. the story is about people. it's about dreams that have been shattered. it's about lives that have been cut short, often lives that are promising and young. it's about people like the 25-year-old student who was found dead of a heroin overdose in a bathroom stall at columbus state university last week. 25 years old. his whole life ahead of him. it's like people like the hess

family. their son jason was a college student, talented musician, gifted athlete. one of his classmates got him to try heroin. said just try it. almost immediately the drugs became everything in jason's life. as jason's dad has said, he liked his dealer more than he liked me. i've met with several hundred addicts or recovering addicts in ohio over the last few years. many of them tell me the same thing, which is the drugs do become everything. so they become everything ahead of friends and family and work. jason struggled with his addiction for 15 years. he was in and out of jail a lot, in and out of hospitals. in the past two months his dad saved his life twice with nalaxone because his family members are now permitted to get narcan over the counter. a few weeks ago jason died of an overdose, 35 years old. when his mother heard the death

notice a few hours later, she was informed about it, she went to a cemetery with a bottle of valium and she committed suicide. it was her 60th birthday. in a note she left behind, she said this. thanks, heroin. another victim. that was the note that she left for all of us. with this crisis getting worse and taking such a toll in ohio, again, we've got to get this legislation implemented as soon as possible, and we have to continue to fight not just for more funding but for better ideas and ways to address this problem at every level and in a comprehensive way. we need the support for safe disposal sites for prescription drugs. that's part of the legislation, so that when you go to the drugstore you're at the drug counter, you're at the pharmacy and you're getting your medication, you also have an opportunity right next to you to dispose of some of the

medication you may not have used. what the experts tell us -- and i've been to these drop-off sites. i was at one recently in walgreens in toledo where they're implementing the program to provide these sites and disposal of safe drugs so they don't get in the wrong hands -- they tell me in most families in america there are drugs available that can be dangerous. many times it's prescription drugs that are painkillers that are very addictive. in marion, ohio, recently, an 18-month-old girl was able to get into her family's percocet. 18 months old. she overdosed. we need these disposal sites to help prevent kids like her. we need cara's prevention efforts such as the national awareness campaign but making the link between prescription drugs and heroin. people need to understand this. kelly clicksby of marion,

ohio, needed that information. earlier this year when i visited the crawford board of alcohol drug addiction and mental health services where they're working hard every day to fight back against this epidemic, when i visited there, the director judy demohodgkin's teld me they're so overwhelmed with patients that she said -- and i quote -- "most of the time i feel like i'm drowning." they are overwhelmed but doing a great job and kelly is an example. she was prescribed painkillers. she was addicted, became addicted to those painkillers and as in the case of many people, when those pimps became too a -- those pills became too addictive and too expensive when she couldn't afford them she turned to heroin. heroin is less expensive and more available in many cases. within a year she lost her job, her house, her car, c custody of her five kids. over the next decade she and her husband randy got a divorce. she was arrested four different times for shop lifting.

she went to jail 19 times. she overdosed. paramedics saved her life with nalaxone, this narcan we talked about. when she was in the grip of this addiction, kelly didn't want to get out of bed in the morning. she felt a constant sense of despair. kelly's life turned around when her best friend christina died of a heroin overdose. she realized at that point she needed to get treatment. nine months to the day after paramedics saved her life, kelly got clean. now with the help of medication -- in her case vivitrol, which is medication that actually blocks the craving for the opioid and it's worked very well in many cases in ohio, including in our drug courts. but with the help of vivitrol and with the help of people at the marion counseling center kelly has been sober for a year half. she is back together with her husband randy. she's back together with her kids, her family. she is now a grandmother. she is leading a 12-step program

to help others. so she's beating this because she got treatment. cara, comprehensive addiction recovery act, will help get more people into treatment so we can have more success stories like kelly's. as i said, we need to raise awareness about how easy it is to become addicted to these opioids. i believe that will also help us to be able to push aside the stigma that is so often associated with addiction. that's one reason people don't come forward and get treatment. kelly said that the stigma of addiction kept her from getting help when she needed it. she said you feel horrible for stealing because you need to get high. then you get high and feel horrible for getting high and then you have to steal again. i felt guilty because i used and i used because i felt guilty. and the stigma kept me from coming forward. think about tara guest from lorain, ohio. she was a nurses aide at a nursing home. she had been a good student and a talented artist. one day she was on her way to

work and hurrying downstairs in her apartment building and she slipped and she fell. she broke her ankle. when she went to the doctor, the doctor prescribed her percocet and then oxycontin. she became addicted. when the prescriptions expired, she turned to heaven. -- to heroin. her mom found out about tara's addiction when she was evicts interested her apartment and started living out of her car. lori, her mom, like so many moms and dads have experienced in ohio and across the country, she said when her kids were young, we never discussed heroin, i never thought it would be part of our lives. you don't think it's going to be your child, you don't think it's going to be in your family. when it is, the stigma is so great, it makes you feel ashamed and you don't want to talk about it. her daughter tara fought this addiction for two years. at just 24 years old, she died of an overdose of heroin that was laced with fentanyl.

fentanyl is the synthetic heroin that is creeping into our communities, this poison that's coming into our country from other countries, particularly china and india, coming here by the mail system. for tara, it started with a broken ankle. it could happen to anybody. that's why we need this prevention effort to warn people about the dangers and to help end the stigma to keep people from hiding it, to get them to come forward. for all these reasons, the prevention, the treatment, the recovery and ending the stigma, the people we represent need this legislation to be enacted but also to be implemented as soon as possible. in order to help as many people as we can, we've got to get the funding, the c.r. working, and we've got to continue to fight for funding. madam president, we have talked about a lot of tough stories today, and unfortunately the

grip of this addiction is so great that there are a lot of heartbreaking stories, and it's getting worse, not better, but there is also hope and there's hope that i see every week when i'm back home in ohio. i recently met sheila humphrey whose child succumbed to a heroin addiction and an overdose and death. she has started an organization with other moms and family members, and they're having great success, again in intervening with these families and explaining the reason to get treatment and get into recovery. she gave me this bracelet. it talks about the rally for recovery in 2016. we had one in ohio last weekend. i was able to tax and spend. at that rally, with the ohio citizens advocates for addiction recovery, i got to meet so many people who were in recovery. they came forward to talk to me

about their stories. they came forward to talk about what they are doing to help others. they talked to me about the need for us to have more treatment, better recovery programs. i met someone who has not only meeten his addiction but is now an addiction counselor in dayton, ohio. his name is gary. gary kinnella is helping others to be able to get their lives back on track and he is incredibly persuasive because he's got a story to tell. he told me, senator, there is hope. don't give up. he's telling me don't give up. i'm telling my colleagues people expect us not to give up. they're not giving up. this guy, gary, is a recovering addict. he's not giving up and he's asking us to ensure that we do everything we can to help, to be a better partner with state government, local government, and with the nonprofits that are out there in the trenches every day doing this work, with the folks like gary who are looking for our help.

this will give more people more help. so on behalf of all of those i talked about today, those whose lives were cut short, their family members, on behalf of our communities, let's continue this fight. let's ensure that we do, in fact, get cara implemented quickly. let's ensure that we continue to push not just to provide funding but new ideas and better ideas. there is legislation we just introduced in the last couple of weeks called the stop act that stops this synthetic heroin, the fentanyl and u-4 from coming into our country and other countries by requiring that packages include information about where the package is from, what's in it, where it's going. that's not required now in the postal service. it is required by private carriers so these traffickers are using the postal system, including the u.s. postal system to move this deadly poison into our communities. we need to stop that. so there is more we can and should do. it's our responsibility to do that. and, madam president, as we break for these elections, as

the lame-duck period in december comes upon us after that, let's continue to work to ensure that we are able to turn this tide and bring back more hope. i yield back my time. mr. casey: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania. mr. casey: madam president, i would ask consent to speak as if in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: thank you, madam president. i wanted to come to the floor today as i did last week to once again speak about wills eye hospital in philadelphia. when i was here last week, i was talking about the hospital itself and the truly excellent work that is done at that

hospital, and unfortunately to talk as well about the unfair treatment that hospital is receiving from the center for -- centers for medicare and medicaid services, we know by the acronym c.m.s. c.m.s. is using an arbitrary ratio of the number of in-patient -- in-patients and out-patients to make the argument, quality although it is, but to make the argument that wills eye is not a hospital and should be an ambulatory surgery center, which could have drastic implications and ultimately force wills eye hospital to close down. this hospital is almost 200 years old. last week, wills eye hospital started an online petition on

change.org so people could show their support for the hospital, and i wanted to share some of those comments today with -- with members of the senate. these online postings, of course, don't just come from philadelphia or pennsylvania. they come from states across the northeast and even beyond. just a couple of examples, jash croft from pennsylvania, landsdale, not too far from philadelphia, said, and i quote, i owe my life, my life, my right eye and my sight to wills eye hospital and its brilliant ocular oncology team. losing federal designation as a hospital would have a devastating effect on the lives of thousands, many of them children who desperately need the specialized expertise of wills, unquote. so said jack croft.

and ann chattergy from philadelphia said the following -- "wills eye hospital provides care to so many complex patients from all across the world. it's not just a -- quote -- surgery cernt, unquote. state regular lors got it right but federal regulators should revisit this. and the comments go on from there. we continue to hope that they will do that. my words in addition to the comments. kathleen o'brien from vestel, new york, not from pennsylvania -- quote -- "i needed wills eye hospital since 2005 to treat and monitor my ocular melanoma. they are the best in the world for my very rare cancer. medicare is my primary insurance provider. it makes no logical sense to

take away this vital institution to thousands of children and adults. they not only treat but save lives." unquote. erica roach from cape may county courthouse, new jersey, said, and i quote -- "this hospital, meaning wills eye hospital, provision specialized care not available anywhere else. doctors at wills eye quickly diagnosed and successfully treated my daughter's rare eye condition that has been -- had been misdiagnosed for years by other less specialized doctors. the possibility of closing this world-class hospital due to senseless bureaucracy is just unthinkable." unquote. so said erica. two more. mike stanley. mike is from overland park, kansas, half a country away from

pennsylvania. quote -- "we live in overland park, kansas, and for the past two years have been flying from kansas city to philly for treatment for the retinoblastoma eye cancer you referred to," meaning comments that i had made when i was at wills eye hospital. to continue on with mike stanley's comments -- "thankfully, my daughter is now 4 and in remission. we travel back to philly next week and wills. please let us know what we can do to support c.m.s. changing how they classify wills eye so we and others can continue to get the best care in the world." unquote. alexis butler from chelsea, michigan, said -- and i'm quoting -- "i'm signing because of the volunteer at camp sunshine at sabago lake. i have met many children who

have been saved by wills eye hospital. their cases aren't handled much by other hospitals as well as they are at wills." and she concludes with this -- "it needs to survive." unquote. so said alexis from the state of michigan. i'll do one more. the final comments come from nancy cotton from morrelton, new jersey. she says diagnoses please do not be blinded by rubber stamp bureaucracy. not everything fits into clear slots. visit wills eye and look in the faces of those whose vision was restored, saved as well by the parents whose children's very lives were saved. this institution fills a desperate need for highly specialized service! save wills eye!

" that's how nancy cotton from new jersey ends her comments. so, mr. president, you can see from these comments that these are real people talking about their real lives or that of a family member, sometimes a child, commenting from the vantage point of what they had experienced in terms of the benefits that wills eye hospital has provided. i hope c.m.s. is listening, not just to these comments but the many others that have been sent in. none of these comments are compulsory. none of these comments are part of some -- some organized political effort. people are just responding in a very authentic and substantial way. this is very rare when you have this kind of commentary that is so specific about how wills eye hospital has made life better

for people across the commonwealth of pennsylvania, people across the northeastern part of the united states and well beyond that as we can document from the comments from kansas. so what we're trying to do is to work with wills eye and c.m.s. to work this out, to remove a -- a bureaucratic barrier or obstacle in the way of keeping wills eye hospital open as a hospital so that it can deliver the kind of eye care, the kind of life-saving eye care that not only these people experience but i experience myself, as a father. my wife and i had a daughter who is fortunately doing very well. she is out of college. but she had a moment in time when she was a little girl where she would have lost eyesight in one of her eyes were it not for wills eye hospital. that's fact. that's documented. we know that. so i join those comments that we

heard today and will continue to make them part of the record. so we're working to say what is -- to say it's a world-class institution is a vast understatement, and it has affected so many lives including my own. so c.m.s. got this wrong. they have an obligation to get it right, to fix it so that wills eye hospital can continue into the future. so we're grateful that -- we're grateful that so many people are taking the time to go to change.org and focus on all the benefits of wills eye hospital, and i'll continue to make this case a high priority for the work that i do, the work that our office does. time is running short now for the hospital, and c.m.s. has some work to do to make sure that we get the result, not only

that i want but i know that people across our commonwealth and our country want. madam president, i would yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: quorum call:

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. .brown i ask unanimous consent -

mr. brown: i ask unanimous consent to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection brown we are in morning business. thank you, madam president. just came from a discussion on the trans-pacific partnership and the damage is will do to our country. we've had 25 years of trade policy which has cost jobs in places like lorain, ohio and cleveland, ohio and dieton, ohio. -- dayton, ohio. we know these trade agreements pull down worker safety standards and environmental rules and protections and food safety laws and rules. we know they cost us jobs. i know what's happened in my state. i see what's happened in places like omaha and the presiding officer's state and all over our country. the trans-pacific partnership i appreciate senator mcconnell, speaker ryan saying they don't plan to bring the trans-pacific partnership up for a vote in the lame-duck session of congress. i believe it would be a bit

underhanded to do that when the public is speaking pretty loudly if the trade agreements -- that the trade agreements don't work. let me talk about one part in particular that affects my state. there is something called rules of origin in the auto industry where in order to qualify for a tariff reduction or tariff elimination to sell products, to sell a car under nafta and nafta was a very flawed agreement. i helped to lead the opposition to. we almost defeated it down the hall in the house of representatives. under nafta, if a car were -- if a car was -- it had to equal take for nafta tariff reduction, removal, a car had to be mostly made -- 60% more or less made in one of the three countries, u.s., mexico and canada. under the trans-pacific partnership and there are 12 countries in that, peru and the u.s. and mexico and canada, wealthy countries, vietnam, poorer countries under the rules

of origin, in ttp, a country -- a car can be more than half made elsewhere, like china and then still sold into the united states or sold into canada or mexico. so fundamentally what this means is it's created a loophole. you can drive my jeep cherokee made by union workers 150, 110 miles from my home in toledo, ohio. you can drive a jeep cherokee through this loophole. this will undermine the auto industry, undermine the supply chain. it will money loss of jobs from auto assembly in youngstown, toledo, sharonville to the -- all other kinds of -- whether it's glass, whether it's tires, whether it's the steel in the cars, all this will undermine those jobs. so, madam president, i again thank senator mcconnell and speaker ryan that they have promised not to bring up this

agreement. i hope they're men of their word. it's a disaster for our country. it's bad for our country. i appreciate that both presidential candidates one more knowledgeable than the other perhaps about trade policy have opposed the trans-pacific partnership. i close with this. i see candidates make all kinds of claims about their position on trade, and i see all kinds of candidates in their own private businesses doing certain things but i know that we can make things in the united states of america, the shoes i have were made by workers in maine and massachusetts. the suit i wear was made by union workers in a company 11 miles from my home in cleveland. and american workers just want a level playing field. they just want the opportunity to compete. they want the opportunity to make things. we know how to do that in our country. our trade policy should reflect that. madam president, i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

fish --. mrs. fischer: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from nebraska. mrs. fischer: i would ask that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. fischer: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of h.r. 5944 which was received from the house. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: h.r. 5944, an act to amend title 49 united states code with respect to certain grant assurances and for other purposes. the presiding officer: is there objection proceeding to the measure? without objection. mrs. fischer: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon

the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. fischer: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 583, s. 2360. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 583, s. 2360, a bill to improve the administration of certain programs in the insular areas and for other purposes. the presiding officer: is there objection proceeding to the measure? without objection. mrs. fischer: madam president, i ask consent that the committee-reported amendment be agreed to, the bill as amended be read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. fischer: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of h.r. 5946, which was received from the house. the clerk: the clerk willh.r. 5o

amend the internal revenue code of 1986 to exclude from gross income prizes or awards in competition of the olympic games or paralympic games. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. mrs. fischer: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. fischer: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 651, s. 2959. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 651, s. 2959, a bill to amend the white mountain apache tribe water rights quantify indication act of 2010 to clarify the use of amounts in the wmat settlement fund. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the report? without objection. mrs. fischer: madam president,

i ask consent that the committee-reported amendments be agreed to, the bill as amended be read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. fischer: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of h.r. 2733, which was at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: h.r. 2733, an act to require the secretary of the interior to take land into trust for certain indian tribes and for other purposes. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. mrs. fischer: madam president, i further ask that bill be read a third time and passed and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. fischer: madam president, i ask that the chair lay before the senate the message from the house on s. 246, walter

sobeleth commission on native children act. the presiding officer: the chair lays before the senate the following message. the clerk: resolved that the bill from the senate s. 2246 entitled an act to establish the alice spotted bear and walter sobeleth commission on native children and for other purposes do pass with an amendment. mrs. fischer: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the motion to concur in the house amendment be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. fischer: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the commerce committee be discharged from further consideration of s. res. 579 and that the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution

579, recognizing the 40th anniversary of the first class of women admitted to the coast guard academy. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the committee is discharged and the senate will proceed. mrs. fischer: madam president, i further ask that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. fischer: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate now proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following senate resolutions which were submitted earlier today: s. res. 600, s. res. 601, s. con. res. 55. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. the senate will proceed to the measures en bloc.

mrs. fischer: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the resolutions be agreed to, the preamble preambles bbl -- be agreed to and the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table en bloc. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. fischer: i ask the chair lay before the senate s. con res. 166 received from the house. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: house concurrent resolution 166 providing for conditional adjournment with the house of representatives. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding? without objection. mrs. fischer: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. fischer: madam president, i understand there are two bills at the desk, and i ask for their first reading en bloc. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the titles of the bill

for the first time en bloc. the clerk: s. 3464, a bill to provide incremental increases to the salary threshold for exemptions and so forth and for other purposes. h.r. 6094, an act to provide for a six-month delay in the effective date of a rule of the department of labor and so forth. mrs. fischer: madam president, i now ask for a second reading and i object to my own request. the presiding officer: objection is heard. the bills will receive their second reading on the next legislative day. mrs. fischer: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that not withstanding the senate's adjournment, committees be authorized to report legislative and executive matters on thursday, october 27, from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. fischer: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that not withstanding the upcoming adjournment of the senate the president of the senate, the

president pro tempore, and the majority and minority leaders be authorized to make appointments to commissions, committees, boards, conferences or interparliamentary conferences authorized by law by concurrent action of the two houses or by order of the senate. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. fischer: i ask unanimous consent that the junior senator from louisiana be authorized to sign duly enrolled bills or joint resolutions on thursday, september 29, through monday, november 14. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. fischer: madam president, i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of h. con. res. 122 which is at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: h. con. res. 122, concurrent resolution supporting efforts to stop the theft, illegal possession or sale, transfer and export of tribal,

cultural items and so forth. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. a senator: i ask unanimous consent the udall amendment to the resolution be agreed to, the resolution as amended be agreed to, the udall amendment to the preamble be agreed to, the preamble as amended be agreed to and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. fischer: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn and then convene for pro forma sessions only, with no business being conducted on the following dates and times and that following each pro forma session, the senate adjourn until the next pro forma sessio, 10:30 a.m., october 6,

10:30 a.m., october 7, 2:00 p.m., october 10, 9:00 a.m., october 13, -- i correct myself, madam president. october 7 at 2:00 p.m. october 11 at 9:00 a.m. october 13 at 2:00 p.m., octobe, october 20, 3:00 p.m., october 24, 10:30 a.m., october 27, 10:30 a.m., october 31, 4:30 p.m., november 3, 2:00 p.m., november 7, 10:30 a.m., novembed november 14, 5:30 p.m. i further ask that when the senate adjourns on monday, november 14, it next convene at

4:00 p.m. tuesday, november 15. following the prayer and pledge, the morning business be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day. i ask that following leader remarks the senate be in a period of morning business until 5:00 p.m., with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. fischer: madam president, if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: without objection. objection.

got underway a short time ago. john king speaking to reporters. >> students were in public service careers and again we want to make sure that students as they graduate and recent graduates know about that option it we're working with the number of partners and with other federal agencies to make sure students have information about both of those options. >> can you speak to the education program -- prisons? is very trajectory or path in terms of those were earning their ged or those who are completing transition programs into society after they get out speak with this is a place where we should be doing a lot more. i appreciate you asking about it. the evidence is overwhelming folks were incarcerated access

to educational programs are much less likely to return. rand did a study that shows 43% reduction in recidivism for folks who participate in any can education program, whether electricity that or not while in prison. we've launched an initiative called second chance where we're using our flexible the higher education act to allow universities to use held dollars for folks were incarcerated. action on a bus tour i visited one of those programs, the limestone correctional facility in alabama, where they're going to second chance dollars to support an expansion of the higher edge hoosier program with calhoun college. what the image to the was the difference than no education makes for the life leave but also the difference for their families, for their kids and for ultimately the community. we've got 69 universities participating in second chance,

going to serve 12,000 students across 28 states. ultimately, we think congress should undo the mistake was made in the mid '90s. in the mid '90s, congressman access to pell grants for folks were incarcerated. that was a mistake. it is consistent with other errors made in the mid-nineties around mass incarceration. our second chance an issue as a way to use our legal authority under the higher edge the act to try to reverse some of the. the president has proposed full restoration in his 2017 budget. we hope congress will act on that and see that education is a central part of criminal justice reform making sure that when folks aren't crushed a have a meaningful chance to gain skills so they can come out of prison and be successful when they return. [inaudible] >> that just launched this year. we announced it last summer. we had universities apply from all of the country.

we saw a lot of demand. we selected 69 universities to participate and they are just launching a. we are confident the evidence will be very clear that those dems will be much less likely to return to prison as a result. >> mr. secretary, i think your time is up. >> thanks. thank you. >> certainly satisfied to see somebody with so much passion and expertise be able to apply their skills to the american people. appreciate him spending sometime with us today. we can go back to our regular scheduled programming. darlene, do you want to get it started? >> the day after overriding the president veto, the 9/11 bill that unintendethey have unintend ramifications. lawmakers will have to discuss fixes. the white house was too slow to warn about the consequences.

do you feel like they're trying to shift the blame you to the white house? >> well, i had a little bit of that impression myself i think. listen, it's hard to know where to start. i think what we've seen in the united states congress is a pretty classic case of rapid onset buyer's remorse. within minutes of casting their vote to put that bill into law, you had members of the united states senate, some 28 of them, write a letter expressing deep concern about the potential impact of the bill that just passed. the suggestion on the part of some members of the senate said he didn't know what they were voting for. they didn't understand the

negative consequences. of the bill. that's a hard suggestion to take you seriously when you have letters from president bush's attorney general and national security advisor warning about the consequences of the bill. you had attorneys from our closest allies in europe expressing their concerns about the impact of the bill. you a letter from some of america's business leaders, could chief executive of ge, jeffrey m-health, warning about potential economic consequences of the bill. you have letters from the director of the say, the chairman o of the joint chiefs f staff, secretary of defense and commander in chief all warning about potential impact of the bill. all of that communication was made public before congress asked the first vote to put this bill into law yesterday.

so it's hard to take at face but the suggestion to some of their work unaware of the consequences of their vote, but even if they were, once true in elementary school is true in the united states congress. ignorance is not an excuse. particularly when it comes to our national security, and the safety and security of our diplomats. i'll also say it's a little hard to take that suggestion seriously when the argument that are being made in this letter and in the public statements from some members of congress are precisely the same arguments that senior administration officials have been making for months. we first discussed it in this room back in april. the president was asked about in a nationally televised interview in april. and the argument that he made in

the context of that interview is exactly the same arguments that members of congress are making no. is that he puts it is? it's a remarkable one if that's what it is. -- is not a coincidence? what it most is as an abject embarrassment, because i think the american people, and certainly our men and women in uniform, some of whom the president had an opportunity to meet with yesterday, expect better service and leadership from the men and women that they elected to represent them in the united states congress. i'll stop there, but i've got more if we want to discuss it further. >> do you see the action around this bill, the voice vote, the override, lawmakers don't come yet and say they did know was in it as another example of what people don't like about washington? >> i think you could describe it faithfully as exhibit a.

in the kind of dysfunction that very poorly serves the country and lease people very dissatisfied with the united states congress. it's not a coincidence that the standing of the united states congress, among members of the voting public, are at or near historic lows. and an episode like this is not going to improve it. >> two questions quickly. does the president have a senior role tomorrow against names of some of the members of the delegation that are coming with the president? >> the president has been invited to speak at the service. those remarks are being written as we speak like a du much of a detailed preview, but i think the personal nature of the presidential statement that we issued on the night of president

shimon peres is that should give you a good indication of the president thinking as he considers history parks at this historic moment. with regard to the delegation that will have the specific things out shortly, but it includes a number of senior white house officials, a number of mayors of congress in both parties, and even some national security officials who don't serve in his administration but serve in the previous administration. i think it's a testament to the bipartisan commitment that exist in this country for the strong relationship that the united states enjoys with israel, strong alliance i should say. and i think it's clear that leaders in both parties here in the united states worked closely with president peres to strengthen that relationship and to strengthen that alliance. and i think that's evident in the individuals who on short notice are rearranging their

schedules so that they can be present and pay tribute in person to the life and legacy of shimon peres. >> back to the 9/11 bill. senator corker said that he tried to find a compromise and wanted to meet with white house officials last weekend before the vote. but that meeting was declined or turn down by the widest i'm just wondering if you can speak to that at all, did that happen -- by was a decline or turn down? what can be done now it is this remorse likes what's the path forward? >> well, i'm not going to get into private conversations but i will make a suggestion to senator corker dedicated storage day. he spent most of last week suggesting had not heard from anybody in the administration and that we suggesting his repeated request to the administration were not given

their due attention. i think it's also curious that a number of members of the united states senate, including senator corker, would suggest that they voted for a bill that they knew had negative consequences for america's national security because they felt snubbed by the white house. i think our men and women in uniform can expect a lot more than that from the united states senate. senate. >> i don't know if that's we suggesting or not. i didn't mean to imply that in my question -- >> i didn't see his comments today. >> did he reach out for a meetinmeeting and was wanted no? >> i'm not going to get into the individual conversations, but for a number of days, senator corker was suggesting that he had never heard from anybody in the administration. that clearly is not true i guess now by his own admission.

so speedy teachers saying no one replied to his request. he wanted -- >> jesus suggesting -- spirit he wanted a meeting but the people here said no, or didn't reply to them. i'm not sure. >> i'm not going to get into the nature of the conversations. what i can tell you is senior white house officials and senior officials in the administration were in touch reckless and record and his office. about the specific legislation. that much is true your i'm not going to get into the nature of those conversations, but again i think he's going to have to explain to his constituents whya piece of legislation that he claims to harbor significant concerns about. >> and what can be done now? do you see a path forward?

>> i don't know what the path forward is another some members who are interested in trying to clean up the terrible mess that they have made. the president has taken a principled position on this issue from the very beginning, and if there are members of congress in either party that want to join in the principled position, the president would welcome them to that kind of discussion. but it's awfully late. i'm sure there's a colorful expression that could be used here, but i believe it to others who may be more colorful. >> just a quick follow-up. one, related what you said on the plane yesterday. can do enough to give it a more interesting that congress has been in 30 years? and -- >> why don't we start there and then we'll get to number two? in the last 24 hours i've been

reminded of a variety of very embarrassing things that congress has engaged in the last couple of years even. we can go through a few of them if you'd like. it's got a nice stroll down memory lane. we've got the tortilla coast gambit. i won't go through all the public at the tortilla coast again which is a real highlight. you've got the leading investigator in the house of representatives into secretary clinton's private e-mail system passing out business cards with a private e-mail address on it. you've got the all but annoyed house speaker disclosing on live national television that the benghazi investigation is motivated to drive in secretary clinton's poll ratings. you've got republicans bringing the united states to the brink of the fault -- people for the first of energy. so close to default in fact that the credit of the united states was downgraded for the first time. separate from that you have one

republican innocents and injured a government shutdown that lasted for two half weeks that didn't result in any change in government policy. you've got republicans are foursquare against even considering the nomination the president has put forward, of a candidate that they described as a consensus nominee to the supreme court. you've got an individual who is a financial expert who served in democratic and republican administrations alike who's been waiting for more than a year to be confirmed by the senate to serve at the treasury department added mr. the tough financial sanctions the united states imposes on countries around the world. i can go on but i will stop there. all of these are also embarrassing, but you've got to bet that the situation that took place yesterday on the floor of the senate stands out, to vote for a bill that members of the senate know would have a negative impact on national

security, and before they've even left the well of united states senate, they circulated a letter to their colleagues urging them to go the way to fix the problem they have just made. that's deeply embarrassing. >> clearly you are ready for that one. this is a follow-up to that, which is the mighty people that wouldn't understand the desire or the impulse to promote and to call members of congress kindergartners and the like and all of the stuff you done in the last 24 hours, but given that you had them express a desire to fix this in a direction that you guys would like to go, do you think the kind of rhetoric that you offered in the last day has been helpful in some future for your time, actually getting people to come together and to fix this the way you want it to be fixed?

in other words, that seems like the language that you been using is counterproductive to the extent that you actually would like to take him up on the opposite okay, if you're having second thoughts and let sit down and try to fix it. >> i don't think it's fair to say i've been coding i in the ie situation at a think of it typically you gloat after a win. >> but -- >> below, the american people have been dealt a setback by the congress despite the president's unsolicited to try to prevent that from happening. that is deeply disappointing to the president of the united states. at these deeply this one to the american people, and based on the reaction in the westwood for us to members of congress i think they find their own conduct deeply embarrassing. they should. >> but you don't want to offer any outreach and say let's come and talk about and maybe we can kind of do it? >> we've been trying to persuade them to do that since april. >> do you think the language used in the last day will help

of? >> mike, i think it is hard to persuade a member of congress who is the one to vote their conscience. members of congress say and not publicly admit that they are deeply concerned about the impact that this bill have on our national security. but yet they voted for it. i don't really know what sort of legislative strategy or set of negotiations is going to persuade a member of congress who's going to put the nationall interests of the united states first. and that's unfortunate. if there are members of congress, to be clear, it's our mbs of congress that had a change of heart, are not prepared to take a principled position, we would welcome a conversation about that. we would welcome action to solve the problem that they have created. i guess this is the other perspective.

there are plenty of problems that we believe that congress should be taking up right now. second taking with you talking about how additional funding for college and financial aid or for early childhood education would address the problems we see our education system. there are a variety of things we can do to strengthen our national security or strengthen our economy, invest in infrastructure, make our tax code more fun. -- more fair. but yesterday this account of what they did, and for a congress, a republican congress that has refused to do its job, it's ironic that they're only adding to their to-do list. justin? >> at the risk of -- [inaudible] i can't go to try to refine what his point was, try to get your reaction to it. i think it would republicans on capitol hill have described as is they want to take action on

behalf of the 9/11 families. the bill was sort of championed by senator schumer, have broader implications of which is why they wanted to sit down with senator schumer, the democratic leader of the white house and cannot some sort of compromise that could have attended to the 9/11 families and also satisfy only some of the foreign policy concerns that you or others have raised. i think when you say, i'm not going to read the conversation. the question here, it into the core of it is, why wasn't the white house negotiating in a way the senate seemed open to on a version of this bill? they are depicting you, saying this is a bad idea am a put our headhands up, don't do it, you'e jumping off the cliff. >> well, that's wrong. and again, there were extensive negotiations, extensive consultations and senior administration officials at the

white house and throughout the president came with memories of congress in both houses and both parties. that's a fact. those conversations were substantive and we were trying to prevent doctors from creating a significant problem by their own assessment your if they don't is this isn't about the. we were interested in having a conversation. again, senator corker started out this week by saying he and other from anybody in the white house. that's just not true. it was interesting. it's not true now. but let me give you another example. we also have a conversation back in the spring, i will acknowledge i didn't remember this, so there was a conversation about one tweet that had been made to the bill. at the request of the administration. the request, or the tweet to the bill was one that we welcomed

that was based on conversations with the administration but was not sufficient to satisfy the significant concerns that have been raised by white house lawyers, that had been raised by republican national to the experts, that would be raised by european officials, that had been raised by american business leaders about the potential unintended consequences of this bill. so the fact that there were some changes that were made early on is evidence of the kind of ongoing consultation has been taking place. by the changes that were made, as i said back in the spring, were insufficient. so i think that is pretty good evidence that it was a good faith effort on the part of the administration to bring about these changes. but they were insufficient to address the concerns that were raised by experts in both parties, and some of the closest

allies of the united states. >> maybe that's the crux of it, you know, you guys have said may be your sensitive issues with congress, and it's hard to say, -- [inaudible] will the reason i think at least -- the notion that there were these negotiations is not that republican leadership -- [inaudible] didn't hear from you guys the entire week. there's a number of other democrats have been really frustrated and vocal about the white house outreach on that. >> so the response is to vote for the bill they don't support? >> they're making you want to do something to the 9/11 families. you guys became unwilling to negotiate and so this was a bill that was in front of them. >> well listen, we talked at great length and i'm happy to do

it again about what the president has done to show strong support for 9/11 families. the president is somebody that justice for the 9/11, ordering the mission to take osama bin laden off the battlefield. president obama is enormously proud of our men and women in uniform and in the intelligence community of october set mission and demonstrated tremendous bravery and courage in getting the 10. the president was a champion of ensuring that our first responders and others are working at ground zero working at ground zero have helped a bit but they deserved. the president is also some you spoken eloquently and powerfully about how nine 9/11 families serve as a personal inspiration to him. so when it comes to doing something for the 9/11 families, the president has already done a lot, and the president believes that we should continue to show support for them. so i think the other factor that

has gone unmentioned so far is we're six weeks before an election. i suspect that that's what a lot more influence over members of cars than anything else. i guess, to go back to question, after the election passes maybe we will see some more principle on display in the united states congress. >> last one. i mean, this is a campaign you've been undertaking, as you said, since april. this is actually got into 1983 question yesterday. what does the site either about your legislative affairs office or the power of the president at this point that members of congress were unwilling or unable or didn't see the long litany of sort of consequences? >> well, first of all, justin, they feigned ignorance of so that's under the ignorance is not an excuse.

the concerns that have been cited after passing the bill are exactly the same ones that we have cited. i think that's a real to argument for them to make a they can either say they were ignorant of the consequences of the bill because they didn't read it, that they were essentially unaware of what they were voting on, or they can say they carefully considered the opinions of mike mukasey and steve hadley at our closest allies in europe, and jeffrey immelt and john brennan and joe dunford and ash carter and barack obama, and overrule the considered, it relied more on their own judgment ended it on all those, that bipartisan group of national security experts. but they have to get their story straight. and i think when you see this kind of thrashing around that we've seen in congress, i think it's an indication that they're pretty and helpful with a

position to their in. and i don't blame them. if i were them i would be deeply embarrassed. >> i just want to ask, -- [inaudible] has requested $14 billion. that's almost the entire market value of the bank. is creating ripples through the financial markets but also for angela merkel back in to me, a close ally of the president. [inaudible] is there anything the u.s. can do to i guess -- provide greater clarity to investors? >> well, justin, i don't have much i'm going to be in a position to say about any sort of justice department action or