a pretty good stretch of time in both the senate and the house, and this is an area particularly where senator boxer has shown something which i think is going to stand the test of time, the ability to protect special places, the treasures we want our kids and our grandkids to go. scarlet willa wyden, brightest red hair on the planet, she is going to be able to enjoy some special places because of the work that senator boxer has done. and she has protected those special places while at the same time defying most of what the political observers thought was possible by teaming up with senator inhofe on infrastructure projects that have paid off so tremendously in terms of jobs and quality of life. so it's possible to do this

right, but this drought provision doesn't do it. i'm very hopeful that the work my colleagues have done will be supported here in the senate, and i want to thank my colleague for our years and years of friendship, and i yield. mrs. boxer: well, i thank my friend so much. how much time remains for us? the presiding officer: 20 minutes. mrs. boxer: i'm going to speak just a little while, then i will yield time and reserve the balance. i want to say to senator wyden, thank you for your words. i also wanted to explain why i felt it was important to take this time at this late hour, we're all exhausted, because we must make this case. and i'll tell you why. not only for the history books, but for the courthouse. there is no way that this provision is not going to be litigated. that's the tragedy of it. because as my friends know and has been said by all of us, when

it comes to water, you need to have everybody around the table. this provision doesn't do a thing to end the drought. let's be clear. all it does is take water away from the fishermen and give it to agribusiness. you know. that doesn't help add any water. and my colleague from california has worked so hard. he has had some really good language in there about the salinization, about the water recharging, but we have that in the base bill. it's already in the base bill. senator inhofe and i for the first time, and how i will miss him. we made sure we had provisions in this bill that dealt with the drought. we reauthorized the desal program in the united states of america. we have a new program to give funds for new technologies. we have talked about

conservation, water recharging and underground storage that my friend maria talked about. it's in the base bill. so to call this rider about the drought is a misnomer. it's about killing off the fishing industry so that ag can have more water. that -- that's not doing anything to help. you know, i think a lot of what this election was about as we look at it is, you know, which candidate really spoke to the hopes and dreams of people who work every day. and if we really care about the miners, then we vote against the continuing resolution that turns their back on the miners' widows, and a lot of us did. and on this, even it breaks my heart to say this. filibustering against my own

bill. it's ridiculous. it's an out-of-body experience. it's kind of shakespearean. i don't know if it's tragedy, comedy or what, but it's unbelievable. what a situation. my last -- my last moments in the senate i'm spending against a bill that i carry in my heart. it's a beautiful bill. and yet, when are we going to stand up against this kind of blackmail? i don't care whether it comes from a democrat or republican, frankly, and it was not the work of anyone in the united states senate. and i say to my friends on the republican side, i don't blame you for this in any way, shape or form. you did not do this to me and to us and to the salmon fishermen. you did not. it was done by a house member who represents big agriculture. and he did it because he could.

when are we going to stand up and say no? you know, my colleague elizabeth warren was speaking about this, and she said something to this effect. i'm not quoting her exactly right. she said you take a beautiful piece of legislation and you add a pile of dirt on it and then you stick a little maraschino cherry on the top. whether it's flint, you know, whatever it is. and then you put people in a horrible position. so i know this vote may not go the way we want. that i had hoped that it would. but i understand why it might not. but when are we going to stand up and say this is wrong? we have a chance to do it tonight. and send a message to everyone. this isn't the way to legislate. this is why people can't stand congress. 17% approval.

if you ask them, do you think it's right to add an unrelated rider in the middle of the night on a bill that's been worked on for almost two years, and by the way, it's not even in the jurisdiction, senator inhofe of our committee. it's in the jurisdiction of the energy committee of senator murkowski and senator cantwell. it's just awful. and i'd say to everyone who's in a western state -- a western state. not just west coast. western state. between 11 and 17 states, depending on how you look at it. the next president of the united states and the one after will have the ability to say we're building a dam right over here and cut out congress. congress has no authority to stop it. it's just incredible. why would that be done? why that insult to the members of congress to take away.

we already don't do earmarks. that's a whole other issue. we're not supposed to anyway. but this is another way to just say just give it to the executive branch. they'll decide where to put dams. i don't know about your experience, but we have had proposals in our state where people wanted to put dams right on an earthquake fault. it took a series of hearings to bring that point to light. and now there won't be any hearings because president trump and whoever is the next president because this bill lasts five years will say you know what, my business interests think it will be good to build a dam right over here, and who cares about the consequences? look, we know where the people are. the people in my state who really care, every single major newspaper. every fishery organization. they're frightened. and then when they -- when they

run them out, they'll have more water and they won't have to fight with them, big ag. they'll just take the water. that's not right. now, i represent all of the people, and i have said for a long time we must resolve these issues together. it's essential. and i'm going to call on senator murray. but i want to say this. every environmental group in the country opposes this. the league of conservation voters are scoring this. the defenders of wildlife. trout unlimited. that is not a partisan organization. they are recreational fishermen. they're going well, wait a minute, this is a disaster. and environmental entrepreneurs, business people. very, very, very successful business leaders say don't do this.

so i am -- i'm sad. my consolation is if we lose this, my state's going to get a lot of provisions. good for them. i'm happy. i worked hard for it. but you know what? this is wrong. and the reason i wanted to make this record and why i asked my colleagues to please speak, i want this record to show up in court when this -- this definitely is going to wind up in court, and i want them to hear that senator boxer said this was clearly a special interest provision added at the last minute to simply destroy the fishing industry, the jobs so that big ag could get what they wanted. this is not right, and it's a frontal assault on the endangered species act. just overriding every opinion. we all know we stayed under the -- we saved under the

endangered species act, the american bald eagle, the great turtle, sea turtle, the california condor, the most magnificent creatures of god, okay? we never would have been able to save them if we had similar language that said something -- that said regardless of whether the scientists say there is only three or four pairs of those creatures left, we have decided it's a problem for the economy, we are going to just not worry about them. we never would have received any of these god's creatures. and we talk a lot here about god, about our commitment to all of humankind and all of god's creation. this is something, we don't have the right to do this. so that's why i wanted the time. it wasn't just to hear myself talk, because i already gave my farewell speech. that was long enough. i already gave my second speech today. didn't expect to. now this is my last one.

so i'm going to yield to senator murray for -- how much time do we have remaining? the presiding officer: ten minutes. mrs. boxer: for seven minutes. seven minutes. mrs. murray: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: madam president, thank you, and i want to thank my colleagues from the west coast who have done an amazing job pointing out the egregious nature of this poison pill amendment that was added to this really critical bill. we are here tonight after midnight talking about the water resources development act. it is a bill that addresses water resource projects, policies that are very important to our economic development and environmental welfare of communities in my state and across the nation. i was proud to work closely with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to craft this bipartisan wrda bill, and i want to thank the senator from california for her tremendous work listening to all of us, incorporating our ideas and making sure that this reflected

the needs of our -- of our states. i personally fought for critical provisions in this bill important to washington state, making sure our colombian basin basin -- columnian basin descendants have an opportunity to give their loved ones a final resting place. i thank my colleague for putting that in this bill. and our ports in the global maritime economy and making sure our work force is strong. i'm proud that it addresses the needs of flint, michigan. and i see my colleagues from michigan here tonight. communities that have been dealing with lead in their drinking water. so this was a good bill. it was a good bill. but as you have heard, at the last minute, a poison pill rider concerning california water management in the face of a long-running drought turned on another bipartisan bill into a very, as you have heard, contentious, divisive bill.