September 11, 2019 - Issue: Vol. 165, No. 145 — Daily Edition116th Congress (2019 - 2020) - 1st Session

[Pages S5435-S5438]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           EXECUTIVE CALENDAR

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the next nomination.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read the nomination of 
Stephanie A. Gallagher, of Maryland, to be United States District Judge 
for the District of Maryland.
  Thereupon, the Senate proceeded to consider the nomination.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I rise today to urge the Senate to confirm 
the nomination of Stephanie Gallagher of Maryland to be a U.S. District 
Judge for the District of Maryland. This is a noncontroversial 
nomination which the Senate should be able to confirm in short order.
  Judge Stephanie Gallagher brings tremendous experience to the 
courtroom as a sitting U.S. magistrate judge in Baltimore, as well as 
being a former prosecutor, private law firm attorney, and judicial law 
clerk. Her strong roots in the Maryland legal community, tremendous 
understanding and respect for the rule of law, and willingness to 
volunteer her time in service outside the courtroom make her an 
exceptional nominee. I was pleased to recommend Judge Gallagher's 
nomination to President Trump, along with Senator Van Hollen.
  I must note for my colleagues that I originally recommended Judge 
Gallagher's nomination to President Obama along with Senator Mikulski, 
back in 2015, given the impending retirement of Judge William Quarles 
in 2016. Judge Gallagher's nomination has actually been favorably 
recommended by the Judiciary Committee on three separate occasions, in 
2016, 2018, and now in 2019. Most recently, on June 20, 2019, the 
Judiciary Committee favorably recommended Judge Gallagher to the full 
Senate for confirmation by a vote of 21-1.
  I want to thank Senator Van Hollen for working with me to ensure we 
seek out the best attorneys in our State for Federal judicial 
vacancies, which are lifetime appointments and one of the most 
important obligations we have as U.S. Senators. We have recommended 
judicial nominations to the President that have made Marylanders proud 
of our Federal courts.
  Stephanie Gallagher, of Baltimore, MD, has been a U.S. magistrate 
judge in Baltimore since April 2011. As a magistrate judge, Judge 
Gallagher works closely on a daily basis with district court judges, 
the very position she has been nominated for today. In her current 
position as a magistrate judge, Judge Gallagher convenes settlement 
conferences, resolves discovery disputes, and prepares reports and 
recommendations on dispositive motions. With the consent of the 
parties, Judge Gallagher can take jurisdiction over civil cases. In 
consent cases, she becomes the presiding judge, making all rulings in 
the case and overseeing the trial. In this capacity, she has presided 
over civil bench and jury trials. She has served as the criminal duty 
judge on a rotating basis with her colleagues, where she presides over 
preliminary proceedings in felony cases and handles misdemeanor cases, 
including those occurring at Federal military installations in 
Maryland.
  Previously, Judge Gallagher was a partner and cofounder at Levin & 
Gallagher LLC, now Levin & Curlett, for 3 years, served as an Assistant 
U.S. Attorney in Baltimore for 6 years, and was a litigation associate 
at Akin Gump in Washington, DC, for 2 years. She practiced in a wide 
variety of legal issues, including complex civil litigation, employment 
disputes, constitutional issues, criminal defense, and criminal 
prosecution.
  Judge Gallagher began her legal career as a law clerk for then-Chief 
Judge J. Frederick Motz of the U.S. District Court for the District of 
Maryland from 1997 to 1999. She received her J.D. in 1997 from Harvard 
Law School, graduating cum laude, and received her B.S. in government 
from Georgetown University in 1994, graduating magna cum laude.
  The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts has declared this 
Maryland seat as a judicial emergency, based on the length of the 
vacancy and the caseload of the court.
  Judge Gallagher was given the rating of unanimously well qualified by 
the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on the Federal 
Judiciary, which is their highest possible rating.
  Judge Gallagher brings tremendous experience and credentials to the 
courtroom as a sitting U.S. Magistrate Judge in Baltimore, as well as 
being a former prosecutor, private law firm attorney, and judicial law 
clerk. Her strong roots in the Maryland legal community and fantastic 
understanding and respect for the rule of law make her an exceptional 
nominee. I was pleased to recommend Judge Gallagher's nomination to 
both President Obama and President Trump. I am confident that she will 
serve the people of Maryland extremely well once she is finally 
confirmed for this lifetime appointment as a U.S. District Judge for 
the District of Maryland.
  I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this nomination and confirm 
Judge Gallagher.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I rise today in strong support of the 
confirmation of Judge Stephanie Gallagher to serve as a Federal judge 
for the U.S. District Court of Maryland. Judge Gallagher has an 
impressive legal background and has provided years of service to the 
State of Maryland.
  She is currently a U.S. magistrate in Maryland having served in this 
capacity since 2011. Moreover, she has occupied the position of 
Assistant U.S. Attorney office for the State of Maryland. Finally, she 
clerked for the Honorable J. Frederick Motz, a Judge in Maryland's 
Federal district court.
  Judge Gallagher has been lauded repeatedly as a rising star, as one 
of Maryland's Super Lawyers, and has received a number of awards and 
commendations from a number of Federal agencies.
  Moreover, she has strong academic credentials having graduated from 
Harvard Law School, J.D. cum laude. I cannot think of anyone more 
qualified to occupy this critical position at this important time and 
am grateful for her nomination and the Senate's overwhelming support 
for her confirmation to serve as a Judge in Maryland's Federal District 
Court.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, Will the Senate advise and 
consent to the Gallagher nomination?
  The nomination was confirmed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wyoming.


                       Remembering September 11th

  Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, today we mark the 18th anniversary of 
the September 11th attacks. We remember the nearly-3,000 people who 
lost their lives. We pray for all of the 9/11 victims and their 
families. We honor our 9/11 heroes. They were the brightest lights that 
day in the dark sky--our brave firefighters, police, service men and 
women. So many Americans gave their lives to save lives that day, and 
we pay tribute to them today.
  Congress has passed new laws to care for 9/11 first responders. We 
recently

[[Page S5436]]

made the 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund permanent. This ensures that all 
those who responded to the terror attacks and their families have peace 
of mind and first-rate healthcare.


                               Healthcare

  Mr. President, I want to turn to the topic of the overall healthcare 
debate that we are having in this country. For the past several weeks, 
I have been home in Wyoming, as you have been home in North Dakota, and 
I listened to the people I am so privileged to represent, many of whom 
I have been privileged to treat as their doctor. Of course we discussed 
their healthcare. As a doctor, I want to make care better and more 
affordable.
  Folks in Wyoming actually know me first as a doctor, so many of them 
call me Dr. Barrasso or John as opposed to Senator Barrasso. People 
back home think of their doctors as members of the family, as friends, 
neighbors who live down the street, who go to the same church, whose 
kids go to the same schools. The local hospital in Casper is right in 
the center of town. People don't want that to change. They want the 
same people giving them care, but they want it at lower costs.
  This holds true for the rest of the country. People are rightly 
concerned. Americans worry that they won't be able to pay for 
healthcare. Republicans are listening to these concerns, and we are 
focused on lowering the out-of-pocket costs for people's healthcare. 
That is why we ended the unfair Obamacare tax penalty. We ended that. 
We recently banned the costly drug price gag clauses so people could 
know what things actually cost and what the best deal was for them.
  Now we are focused on ending something called surprise medical 
billing. It happens. You get huge medical bills that you don't expect 
and you can't easily pay. We are also moving more measures to lower 
drug prices that people actually have to pay.
  Here is the problem: Democrats are rejecting all of our efforts. They 
are proposing costly healthcare--to me, schemes. The Washington Post 
reports that five of the seven Democratic Senators who are Members of 
this body and who are running for President have backed a one-size-
fits-all approach. It is a government-run plan they call Medicare for 
All. The Washington Post reports that a majority of House Democrats 
also back it. They have actually cosponsored it. They want it to become 
the law.
  The Democrats' proposal would take away on-the-job health insurance 
from 180 million working Americans. Let me repeat that. What the 
Democrats are proposing with their so-called Medicare for All--a one-
size-fits-all proposal for healthcare in this country--would take away 
the healthcare that people get on the job that they earned on the job. 
There are 180 million people who get their insurance that way in 
America. The cost of their proposal is $32 trillion--that is 
``trillion'' with a ``t.'' It is an astronomical amount of money. Of 
course, they have to pay for that, as Senator Sanders has said, by 
raising taxes on the middle class.
  These Democrats clearly aren't focused on helping to lower the costs 
of care. They are too busy, in my opinion, with plans to destroy health 
insurance, to destroy union workers' hard-fought insurance benefits, to 
destroy the current Medicare Program for 60 million seniors, and to 
destroy the health coverage that people have earned at work. For what? 
It is all so that government can have complete control over America's 
healthcare system. We can't afford for that to happen. The Democrats 
have admitted that their ObamaCare healthcare law has failed. The 
polling shows that the majority of Americans do not want a one-size-
fits-all healthcare plan for them.
  Now, remember, when it came to the vote on ObamaCare, congressional 
Democrats in the House and the Senate promised that the Obama 
healthcare law would control costs. They actually named it--I think 
completely misnamed it--the Affordable Care Act. It was the 
Unaffordable Care Act. What we have seen is that out-of-pocket costs 
soared and that insurance premiums soared all after the Obama 
healthcare law was signed. For many Americans, health insurance 
premiums have doubled since the signing of the Obama healthcare law. 
Monthly premiums are often more than mortgage payments. This can't 
stand. This simply can't continue. We cannot trust the Democrats to 
roll the dice again with the healthcare of the American people.
  The Republicans are focused on real reforms--reforms that actually 
lower costs and reforms that protect patients with preexisting 
conditions. In July, the Senate's Committee on Health, Education, 
Labor, and Pensions approved a measure to end surprise medical billing. 
It also includes language to bring down the cost of drugs. As a doctor, 
I know patients shouldn't stress over forms. When you are sick, you 
should focus on getting well. Care from an out-of-network provider can 
result in a big bill--called a surprise medical bill--and it can easily 
blow an entire family's budget. Patients should really not be pawns in 
this high-stakes financial chess game, so we are working with President 
Trump to end this unfair practice of surprise medical billing. It is 
the right thing to do for patients and for their families.
  The Republicans are also making progress on lowering drug costs. We 
passed a bill I cosponsored to end the drug price gag rule. As a 
result, patients can always find the lowest priced drug. We are 
continuing to work with the President on this and other issues.
  Still, to make more progress, we need Democratic support and 
cooperation. The choice is clear--to work together to lower costs 
without lowering standards or to follow the Democratic Senators who are 
running for President and follow the House Democrats who are pushing 
for a one-size-fits-all, government-run healthcare for America with the 
loss of choice and the loss of control--all of the concerns that come 
with a one-size-fits-all, government approach.
  It doesn't seem like they are for lowering costs. It seems they are 
for raising your taxes and taking away your control and your choice. 
They are not for improving care. They are for increasing and growing 
the role of government. Remember, the Democrats want to take away 
health insurance from 180 million Americans--working Americans--people 
who go to work every day and have earned their health insurance at 
work.
  At the same time, the Democrats who are running for President are 
promising free healthcare. I was astonished when I heard this from the 
Democrats. They are promising free healthcare for illegal immigrants. 
They want to take insurance away from hard-working Americans and give 
insurance--free--to illegal immigrants.
  What kind of proposal is that? Who is being represented with this 
proposal by these Democratic Senators and other Democrats who are 
running for President? Who do you think is going to pay for all of 
this? Why should we pay more to wait longer for worse care?
  It is not something Americans want or will tolerate. Instead, let's 
give patients the care they need from the doctors they choose and at 
lower costs.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.


                       Remembering September 11th

  Ms. HASSAN. Mr. President, I start my remarks tonight by thanking my 
colleague from Wyoming for his remarks concerning the anniversary of 
the horror that was September 11, 2001. I join him and all of my 
colleagues here in recognizing that in the midst of that horror, the 
American people came together, and we demonstrated the strength, 
kindness, bravery, and resilience that we have throughout our history.
  I, too, remember the victims, their loved ones, as well as all of the 
brave first responders. I thank all of the men and women of our 
military who continue to fight against terrorism and who keep us safe, 
and I remember the lives lost on the battlefield.


                            Opioid Epidemic

  Mr. President, I also want to take a minute tonight to talk about the 
importance of there being the continued funding to address our Nation's 
opioid crisis. As the Senate Appropriations Committee prepares its 
markup of the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and 
Related Agencies' fiscal year 2020 budget, I rise to discuss the urgent 
need for additional funding to combat the fentanyl, heroin, and opioid 
crisis.
  The substance misuse crisis continues to ravage communities in my 
home State of New Hampshire and all

[[Page S5437]]

across our country. People in New Hampshire are doing vital work to 
address this crisis and get those who are struggling the support they 
need to get and stay healthy.
  Just last month, I visited Moms in Recovery in Lebanon, which is an 
addiction services program through Dartmouth-Hitchcock that is 
providing comprehensive care to get pregnant and parenting women the 
services they need to address substance misuse. In Lebanon, NH, Moms in 
Recovery offers everything from medication-assisted treatment to group 
therapy, counseling, outpatient therapy, parenting classes, and more. 
Providers said that what started as a program for 5 women is now 
serving 60. It has transformed from a program that just served pregnant 
women to one that is now serving women after they give birth. It works 
to help them stabilize their lives and to reengage in our workforce and 
in our communities.
  People in my State are implementing innovative approaches to help 
their friends and neighbors, and Congress needs to give them the 
support they need to help save lives.
  I have been proud to work with Senator Shaheen and my colleagues on 
both sides of the aisle to strengthen support for treatment, recovery, 
prevention, and law enforcement efforts. This includes having worked to 
secure more than $6 billion in the 2018 budget agreement for 
governmentwide efforts to combat this crisis and to ensure that as the 
appropriations process progressed, hardest hit States, including the 
Granite State, were prioritized.
  Last year, we also passed the SUPPORT for Patients and Communities 
Act, which the President signed into law. It included, among many 
critical priorities, the following: establishing comprehensive opioid 
recovery centers, expanding access to medication-assisted treatment, 
and supporting law enforcement in its efforts to curb the shipment of 
fentanyl through the Postal Service.
  Yet nobody in this body should think that our work is anywhere near 
complete. As the Appropriations Committee considers funding bills for 
the next fiscal year, I urge my colleagues on the committee to ensure 
that State opioid response grants, which have been a vital tool in 
increasing access to treatment, recovery, and prevention, are fully 
funded. While these grants should be increased, they must, at the very 
least, be fully funded at the fiscal year 2019 levels.
  It is also imperative to continue prioritizing hardest hit States and 
to give communities additional flexibility to use this funding to 
address other substances that are being used in conjunction with or 
instead of opioids. While the vast majority of overdose deaths in New 
Hampshire still involve opioids, specifically fentanyl, we are seeing 
substances like crystal methamphetamine emerge as a growing issue. 
Additional flexibility in funding can help communities respond to this 
challenge in realtime.
  This crisis didn't begin overnight, and it will not be solved 
overnight. What we need at the Federal level is a long-term solution 
and additional certainty so States and communities know they will have 
stable and consistent Federal funding as they implement strategies and 
treatment programs that will help save lives.
  One important next step would be to pass Senator Shaheen's Turn the 
Tide Act, which is legislation I have cosponsored that would invest $63 
billion in flexible funding over 10 years, support treatment and 
prevention efforts, and address workforce challenges in the treatment 
field. This is the kind of long-term, comprehensive approach we should 
be taking, and I will continue to join with Senator Shaheen to push for 
this bill.
  The fentanyl, heroin, and opioid crisis remains the most pressing 
public health and public safety challenge facing New Hampshire and many 
other communities across our country, and the biggest mistake anyone 
could make is in thinking our efforts to address this crisis are close 
to being done.
  I am going to continue to push to ensure that those on the frontlines 
of this crisis have the support they need. I urge my colleagues to join 
me so we can make our families, communities, and country healthier and 
safer so we can help save lives.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.


                       Remembering September 11th

  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. President, I so enjoy listening to my colleagues 
as they talk about the issues that are important to them and to the 
States they represent. It is, indeed, one of those privileges that we 
in this body enjoy, and many times we take it for granted. Yet today is 
a day of remembrance. It is a day that we look back and say we ought 
not take it for granted because there are many in this world who would 
threaten our freedoms and our liberties.
  Earlier this week, I was talking with some of the members of our 
team, and we were trading stories about where we were on the morning of 
September 11 and how it affected the way we viewed their place in the 
world, and their memories, and what their recollections were. Those of 
us who vividly remember that day still recall an unsettling cascade of 
emotions. There was shock, confusion, and, finally, dread as we 
realized we were not, as initially thought, seeing a senseless 
accident, but that, indeed, we were under attack. As the morning wore 
on, dread really gave way to fear and panic and, finally, to absolute 
terror that our loved ones who were in New York, Washington, and 
Pennsylvania and who were in the air, maybe flying home, were among 
those who were experiencing firsthand what was happening. It was the 
perfect storm of conflicting media reports and jammed cell service that 
made it almost impossible to reach out to people and to ask that 
question, ``Are you OK?'' and to hear their voices.
  Through the smoke and the blood came a moment of awful clarity. Life 
would never be the same because we would never again experience life 
without feeling as if we were a target. The events of September 11 
introduced a new generation of Americans to the reality that our 
country is not and will never be immune to the threat of terror.
  Those who were teetering on the edge of adulthood may not have 
immediately made the connection between global politics and the 
disaster that was playing out on TV in real time. Yet, by the time 
terrorists struck that second tower, I think a lot of people really had 
begun to understand what was happening. Later, they learned that a half 
a world away, a group of men who referred to themselves as al-Qaida had 
made it their life's mission to murder Americans. They were doing it to 
prove a point. Yes, it did leave a mark on this Nation and on our 
citizens. Younger Americans' memories of that day really are fuzzier, 
but almost without exception, my staff members remember what they now 
describe as a sense of national unity rising up in the days following 
the attacks.
  They remember that every house on the street flew an American flag 
and that every adult they knew stood in a line to give blood. They saw 
small town first responders load up those firetrucks and emergency 
vehicles and head to New York.
  At the time, they really didn't understand geopolitics, but they did 
understand fear and suffering because they saw that fear in the eyes of 
their teachers and in the eyes of the adults who surrounded them; but 
they also saw the shift that the attacks and the aftermath caused in 
our country. For a time, partisanship and bitterness was washed away. 
What you saw was unity, and waving flags.
  Now, almost 20 years later, memories are growing fuzzy. Sometimes 
they are nonexistent. Calls for unity have been replaced by heated 
debate. Too often, the loudest voices look back at 9/11 as an event in 
the collective memory, and they don't look at it as an occurrence that 
changed lives and lifestyles forever.
  They consider in passing the remnants of the attacks in debates over 
foreign policy and defense spending, but ignore why we remain so 
focused on national security. This is why every year, without 
exception, we remind ourselves that the kind of hatred it takes to 
bring an entire country to its knees gives no quarter.
  We acknowledge the actions of 19 terrorists whose twisted beliefs led 
to the violent murder of nearly 3,000 innocent people because even 
though the panic of that awful morning has faded, our enemies' desire 
to make an example of us has not. But America, with all her

[[Page S5438]]

imperfections, still thrives in utter defiance of hatred, divisiveness, 
and destruction.
  Today, we remember those who died, and we keep their memory as a 
beacon against the void that allowed violence and terror.
  We remember the heroes who defied fear and reason and ran toward the 
flames, putting love of country and countrymen above all else.
  And we remember and remind ourselves that by simply standing back up, 
America made herself the world's best example of what it looks like 
when love, hope, and valor triumph over the forces of darkness.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.

                          ____________________