October 15, 2019 - Issue: Vol. 165, No. 162 — Daily Edition116th Congress (2019 - 2020) - 1st Session

[Pages S5779-S5785]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           EXECUTIVE SESSION

                                 ______
                                 

                           EXECUTIVE CALENDAR

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the following 
nomination, which the clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read the nomination of Barbara McConnell Barrett, of 
Arizona, to be Secretary of the Air Force.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in 
morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                             Whistleblowers

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, we have heard a lot about 
whistleblowers in the past several weeks. There has been an outpouring 
of concern for whistleblowers ever since word came out that there was a 
whistleblower complaint that implicates the current administration.
  A lot of those on the other side of the aisle, expressing support for 
whistleblowers, to the best of my recollection, haven't expressed the 
same level of concern for whistleblowers in the last administration.
  Well, welcome to the table. I hope you stay at the table quite a 
while.
  I have said for years that it is critical that we protect the 
whistleblower process to incentivize the disclosure of true waste, 
fraud, and abuse of the taxpayer's money. Those processes must be 
carefully followed by all whistleblowers, and that process must be 
respected by our government's institutions. Those legal processes are 
especially important for government employees who work in the 
intelligence field. Whistleblowers who act in good faith, who comply 
with the disclosure process set out by law, and who report their 
concerns through proper channels deserve to be heard and deserve to be 
protected.
  I have also said that first-, second-, and third-hand information 
doesn't make or break a whistleblower. If they follow the procedure, 
that is really most important. However, hearsay is a factor to take 
into account when analyzing the strength of underlying allegations. 
Clearly, first-hand knowledge is much more powerful than second- and 
third-hand knowledge. That is just common sense.
  It is common sense no matter what the allegations are or who the 
subject is, and there needs to be a consistent approach in the way that 
Congress conducts oversight. On April 8 of this year, I spoke on this 
Senate floor about the need for consistent oversight. I pointed out 
clear double standards between what the Democrats are doing to the 
Trump administration and the blind eye that they have used on any fact 
pattern that might damage their political narrative.
  Let me remind the Democrats that I threatened to subpoena the 
President's son and that my staff later deposed that son. In fact, I 
investigated alleged Russian collusion with the Trump campaign and 
interviewed more than 10 people connected to the June 2016 famous Trump 
Tower meeting, many of them Trump campaign officials. By the way, I 
also welcomed Democrats' participation in those interviews. The 
Democrats did participate. But, unfortunately, the same equal access 
and transparency doesn't exist in the House of Representatives these 
days as they do oversight of what has gone on with the famous telephone 
call to the Ukrainian President.
  I have routinely challenged the administration's policies and engaged 
in robust oversight to hold this administration accountable. My 
oversight and investigation units have sent out almost 300 letters to 
the executive branch since President Trump took his oath of office. So 
I think I can declare myself an equal-opportunity overseer because I 
seek facts, irrespective of party and no matter where they lead.
  I don't think many of the Democrats today can say the same thing. 
These folks today, who are suddenly so concerned about congressional 
oversight, are the same ones who had no interest whatsoever in 
defending the institutions of the legislative branch when the Obama 
administration was in office.
  Quite frankly, I find it all too convenient that the Democrats today 
have used allegations of wrongdoing against the President that actually 
apply much more clearly to their own political leaders. Let us begin 
down this road with the now-debunked Russia collusion investigation.
  First, the Clinton campaign hired Fusion GPS to do opposition 
research against candidate Trump. Second, the Democratic National 
Committee did the very same thing. Third, Fusion GPS hired Christopher 
Steele, a former British intelligence officer, to compile the famous 
Steele dossier.
  Even James Comey, a former FBI Director, a man who leaked sensitive 
government records to spark a special counsel investigation, called 
that Steele dossier ``salacious and unverified.'' That same Steele 
dossier factored heavily in the FBI's investigation against Trump.

[[Page S5780]]

  Fourth, Fusion GPS then--would you believe it--used Russian 
Government sources for information for that Steele dossier.
  Now, it is a fact, not merely an allegation, that the Clinton 
campaign and the Democratic Party used a foreign intel officer and 
information from the Russian Government to undermine the Trump campaign 
and later the Trump administration. And that is not Trump. No, Trump 
didn't do any of that. It was the Democrats. The Democrats' action 
literally fit their own definition of collusion. Maybe that is why the 
Democrats have failed to seek documents and information relating to how 
and why the now-debunked FBI investigation into Russian collusion 
started, because the Democrats would be front and center in that 
investigation.
  Special Counsel Mueller's investigation didn't look at the Democrats' 
role in collusion, either. After 2 years, more than 2,800 subpoenas, 
approximately 500 search warrants and witness interviews, and $30 
million in taxpayers' money, that report ignored what the Clinton 
campaign and Democrats did. I can see why President Trump would be so 
frustrated at being incorrectly painted as a Russian agent.

  So what is next? Now that the collusion narrative has been destroyed, 
the Democrats have turned to Ukraine. First, the news reports said 
Trump offered a quid pro quo, and then Trump released not only the call 
transcript with the Ukrainian President but the intelligence community 
complaint. Those were extraordinary acts of transparency, and with 
transparency comes accountability. The call and complaint showed no 
quid pro quo. The call showed that Trump was concerned about whether 
Ukraine had a role in the debunked Russia collusion narrative.
  This is a reasonable concern, and it is a concern that I share. 
Accordingly, since I share that concern, on July 20, 2017, I wrote to 
the Justice Department about reports of brazen efforts by the 
Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton's campaign to use the 
Government of Ukraine for the express purpose of finding negative 
information on then-Candidate Trump in order to undermine the Trump 
campaign.
  Ukrainian officials reportedly ``helped Clinton's allies research 
damaging information on Trump and his advisers.'' Moreover, Nellie Ohr, 
the wife of Justice Department official Bruce Ohr, stated during a 
congressional interview that Fusion GPS used a Ukrainian politician as 
a source for derogatory material against then-Candidate Trump. It is no 
wonder, then, that President Trump is concerned about Ukraine's 
involvement in the debunked Russian collusion narrative.
  The phone call also showed that he was concerned about then-Vice 
President Biden firing a prosecutor who was investigating one of the 
largest natural gas firms in the world. That firm happened to employ 
Biden's son. Years later, Biden bragged about getting the prosecutor 
fired. This has been seen on television a lot:

       We're not going to give you the billion dollars. They said, 
     you have no authority. You're not the president. The 
     president said--I said, call him. I said, I'm telling you, 
     you're not getting the billion dollars. I said, you're not 
     getting the billion. I'm going to be leaving here in, I think 
     it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: I'm 
     leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you're 
     not getting the money. Well--

  Then he used a cuss word.

       He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid 
     at the time.

  The Democrats have argued that Trump has tried to get the Government 
of Ukraine to look into this matter to benefit his political campaign. 
Yet it doesn't sound like there is much concern from many on the other 
side of the aisle about what Biden claimed to have done.
  There is also another call transcript I would like to share. This one 
says the following:

       We put some more ideas down to resolve the airport dispute 
     we have with British Airways, USAir, and American Airlines. 
     Would you take another look at that and see if we can get it 
     done?

  Further quoting:

       It's sort of a big deal here. . . . In a political season, 
     it would be big over here to get this open sore resolved. If 
     you could have somebody take a look at it.

  Well, that was President Bill Clinton asking for a political favor 
during the 2000 Presidential election between Al Gore and George Bush. 
I don't hear any objection whatsoever from the Democrats about the 
substance of that call.
  Now the Democrats have also accused the President of obstructing 
Congress. Here, too, I think they have selective memory.
  The Democrats in the Obama Justice Department didn't bat an eye when 
Clinton's associates deleted records subject to congressional subpoena 
and preservation orders. In March of 2015, Secretary Clinton's 
attorneys had a conference call with Paul Combetta, the man who helped 
manage Clinton's nongovernment server. After that call, he deleted 
Clinton's emails with BleachBit, a software program designed to prevent 
forensic recovery. Combetta admitted he lied to the FBI in his initial 
interviews and got immunity from the FBI in exchange for agreeing to 
tell the truth.
  So the Obama administration gave immunity to the person who deleted 
Clinton's emails after a call with her attorneys. To this very day, the 
FBI has yet to explain why they took that course of action. During the 
course of the FBI's investigation, it recovered thousands of work-
related emails that were not turned over to the State Department by 
Secretary Clinton. The FBI also recovered work-related emails that 
Secretary Clinton and her associates apparently deleted. All of this is 
very clear evidence of alienation of Federal records, which happens to 
be a Federal crime.
  What also troubles me about one aspect of the Clinton investigation 
is that the FBI agreed to limit the scope of their review to her time 
as Secretary of State. That eliminated potentially highly relevant 
emails before and after her tenure that could have shed light on why 
she operated a nongovernment server. It also eliminated emails around 
the time of that conference call that could have shown what exactly was 
intended in deleting those emails. That limitation of scope defies 
reason.
  Lastly, the FBI agreed to destroy records and laptops of Clinton's 
associates after reviewing them. That is an astonishing agreement in 
light of the fact that these records could have been relevant to an 
ongoing congressional inquiry that the FBI knew about.
  So where were the Democrats when all of that happened? Where was 
their outrage at the potential obstruction of justice and obstruction 
of congressional oversight? Seems to me that if the Democrats want to 
be consistent, they will have to address what was done and what was 
totally ignored in the Clinton investigation. Russia. Clinton. Ukraine. 
The Democrats have ignored facts relating to these investigations that 
would destroy their political narrative, but facts matter, and the 
facts are not going to go away.
  It is a shame that they have gone down this road in such a blatant 
attempt to remove a duly-elected President from power simply because 
they can't get over the 2016 election. Instead of coming together to 
work for the American people and to pass trade deals and legislation 
that would lower drug costs for seniors, the Democrats choose to gin up 
false political controversies while ignoring the involvement of their 
own political leaders.
  Get over yourselves. All of us will be footnotes to footnotes in 
history. It is the policies that we leave behind that will matter for 
future generations, not smear campaigns.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.


                                Pensions

  Mr. BROWN. Madam President, I thank Senators Manchin and Stabenow for 
joining us today. Senators Baldwin and Casey will come later to shine a 
light on the more than 1 million workers and retirees across this 
country who are on the verge of facing massive cuts to the pensions 
they have earned.
  I want to thank the workers and retirees who are in Washington this 
week. You will see teamsters, sheet metal workers, mine workers, 
carpenters, ironworkers, bakers and confectioners--retirees, mostly--
who have earned this retirement but because of an action in this body, 
simply haven't had that retirement promise fulfilled. They are 
demanding that Congress honor the dignity of their work and honor the 
promise of those pensions.
  The crisis affects thousands in my State of Ohio and affects the 
massive

[[Page S5781]]

Central States pension plan, the United Mine Workers pension plan, the 
Ironworkers Local 17 pension plan, the Southwest Ohio carpenters 
pension plan, the bakers and confectioners pension plan, and others in 
every State in this country. We are talking about our entire 
multiemployer pension system. If it collapses, it won't be just the 
retirees who will feel the pain. Current workers will be stuck paying 
into pensions they will never receive, and small businesses will be 
left drowning in pension liability they cannot afford to pay. It will 
have ripple effects throughout our economy.
  Let's be clear. If we do nothing, this could trigger a recession 
perhaps on par with the housing crisis. And we know what Wall Street 
greed did in the housing crisis, and we know what could happen here if 
Senator McConnell doesn't move on this. We know who gets hurt the most 
every single time. Small businesses that have been in the family for 
generations could face bankruptcy. Workers will lose jobs as businesses 
are forced to close shop. These businesses and employees did everything 
right. They contributed to these pensions, in many cases over decades.
  Too often, people in this town don't understand the whole point of 
collective bargaining, don't understand the collective bargaining 
process. People give up dollars today for the promise of a secure 
retirement with good healthcare and a pension. They give up dollars 
today with a promise of having a pension and healthcare. These workers' 
lives and livelihoods will be devastated if Congress doesn't do its 
job.
  When I think about the responsibility we have, I think about the 
words of worker Larry Ward at a hearing at the statehouse in Columbus 
last year. He said:

       I don't understand how it is that Congress would even 
     consider asking us to take a cut to my pension, or see it go 
     away entirely, when it had no problems sending billions to 
     the Wall Street crooks who caused this problem in the first 
     place.

  Don't forget that what happened on Wall Street had an impact on these 
pensions.
  He went on to say:

       They used that to pay themselves bonuses. We use our 
     pensions to pay for medicine and food and heat.

  It is bad enough that Wall Street squandered workers' money; it is 
worse that the government that is supposed to look out for these folks 
ignores the promise that was made to these workers. The President--who 
essentially stood by and did nothing--would say it is disgraceful.
  That is why these workers are fighting back. We have kept this on the 
agenda because of them, because they refuse to give up. Workers 
rallied, called, and wrote letters. We all have seen the camo UMWA t-
shirts. These workers have rallied in the name of Butch Lewis, a great 
Cincinnatian who helped lead this fight and passed away far too soon 
while fighting for his fellow workers. His wife, Rita, has continued 
this fight and has become a leader and an inspiration to me and so many 
others. She once told me that the workers in this crisis feel like they 
are invisible. They are not invisible to Senator Manchin, Senator 
Stabenow, or to me. I know they are not invisible to my colleague 
Senator Portman, who has put in months of work in good faith on this 
issue on the committee and continues this year. I know he is committed 
and I am committed, and my colleagues on the floor today--again, 
Senators Manchin, Stabenow, Casey, and Baldwin will be joining us. We 
are committed to these miners, teamsters, these retirees and workers 
and small businesses. We will not give up. We are continuing to work on 
a bipartisan solution.
  It comes back to the dignity of work. When work has dignity, we honor 
the retirement security that people earned. We respect collective 
bargaining. We know collective bargaining created the middle class. I 
urge my colleagues in this body--colleagues with a good pension and 
good healthcare paid for by taxpayers--I urge my colleagues in this 
body to think about those retired workers and the stress they are 
facing.
  Join us. Let's pass a solution that honors their work and keeps our 
promise. If you love this country, you fight for the people who make it 
work.
  I yield to Senator Manchin.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
  Mr. MANCHIN. Madam President, I want to thank my colleague from Ohio, 
Senator Brown, and also Senator Stabenow, Senator Casey, and all those 
who feel as strongly as we do and have constituents in our States who 
really helped build this country and deserve the respect we give them 
and also the hard fight to make sure we do the right thing for them.
  We are here today to bring attention to the issue of American 
workers' pensions. I thank you for allowing me to speak to the ever-
present issue that our retired workers face, which is the security of 
their pensions. My colleagues and I have come to the floor to speak on 
behalf of some of America's hardest workers.
  It has been 285 days since I introduced the American Miners Act, 
which would protect miners' pensions from becoming collateral during 
coal mine bankruptcies. This is something that should have been done. 
It has been on Leader McConnell's desk for quite some time. We could 
have taken care of this a few years ago. We got the healthcare part 
done, but they split it apart, and we weren't able to get the pensions.
  Miners rely on their hard-earned pensions in retirement. They should 
be secured even if the coal companies file bankruptcy. We must act, and 
this cannot happen without bipartisan support. The coal miners, 
autoworkers, Teamsters, steelworkers, and every other worker that 
invest in their pension funds deserve to have stability and security in 
their retirement. The multiemployer pension system in the United States 
is in crisis.
  Approximately 130 multiemployer pension plans, including the United 
Mine Workers of America 1974 Pension Fund, are expected to become 
insolvent in the next few years. The miners' pension fund alone, a 
critical plan that covers 82,000 retired miners--25,000 of those in 
West Virginia and 20,000 fully vested current workers--is projected to 
become insolvent by 2022. Remember that date, 2022. But there is a 
catch to that. We have one major coal company in the United States on 
the fringe of bankruptcy as I speak to you today. If they fall into 
bankruptcy, this whole pension plan for the miners goes into turmoil. 
By September 2020--within a year from now--the coal miners could see 
drastic cuts to their benefits if we don't act. If the UMWA Pension 
Fund becomes insolvent, there will be a snowball effect for the central 
pensions.
  It has been said that the recession of 2007 and 2008 will be a blip 
on the radar screen compared to what this will do to our economy 
nationwide. The companies are going to walk away scot-free. It is 
unacceptable that some of our hardest workers have to beg for the money 
that they put into the pension fund over years and years of hard work.
  Yet this is not only coal miners' pensions. It is bringing attention 
to all the pension plans in America. Everyone deserves to have 
stability in their retirement, especially those who have paid into 
pension plans for decades. This fight is for each and every one of 
them. To be clear, a pension is not just given to these employees. You 
don't just go to work and they say: We are going to give you a pension. 
It is going to be figured into your pay, and it will be deducted from 
your pay for you as the employee to pay part and an employer is 
supposed to match it. Someone is putting in money, someone is taking 
money from someone's paycheck, and they are hopefully putting it into a 
safe place or safe investment.
  How can it be that when they go bankrupt they lose everything? Who 
gets it? Who walks away with their money? That is what we are talking 
about. This funding is set aside from the employee's paycheck 
throughout their career and matched by their employer. Workers invest 
in their pensions. They take a cut in pay over time to ensure that they 
have security in retirement. Rather than taking money home to their 
family, they say: This will be fine. In 20 years from now, 25 years 
from now, 30 years from now, I will have something I can rely on that 
will basically provide stability for my family. It is truly their money 
that we are talking about.

  The law of the land--the law of this great country--allows companies 
to not pay their former employees' hard-earned pensions when they go 
bankrupt. They don't say: Okay, if you are

[[Page S5782]]

going to declare bankruptcy, the first thing you have to do is pay the 
employees. You must pay the people who put their money in. Make sure 
they get their money. That is all. And then we can work out the rest.
  But, no, we don't do it that way. Their CEOs receive bonuses. At the 
bankruptcy hearing, they will get a bonus. All the financial 
institutions get taken care of first. There is nothing left for the 
employee. The person's money is gone. Somebody else got it. It just 
doesn't make any sense at all. It is not who we are as a great country. 
It makes no sense, whatsoever, how the laws evolved into that, unless 
there is pure, unadulterated American greed that allowed this to 
happen.
  We have to reverse it. It is the law of the land. Guess what? We are 
the lawmakers of the land. We are the ones who can change this. This is 
permitted because the courts and our bankruptcy laws continue to allow 
the companies to break their promises to the workers and shed their 
obligations to pay the hard-earned pension benefits. They are able to 
reemerge from bankruptcy in good financial shape. They are able to 
shirk all their responsibilities and take all of somebody else's money 
and come out of this OK. They are ready to do business again.
  I am sorry. The same old-same old is not going to happen. Then the 
Federal Government is left with the burden to provide a percentage of 
the pensions owed to these employees. This comes because we have 
Federal guarantees. That is about ready to go bankrupt, too. We are 
going to break it because of people not taking care of the people who 
did the work. It comes straight out of the pockets of everyday 
Americans from their taxes instead of from the companies who walk away 
without managing their obligations to their employees and families. 
That is why my colleagues and I have come together today to bring to 
light these issues that affects 10.6 million Americans.
  In West Virginia, every time a mine closes, the miners get the rug 
pulled out from under them. It has been happening far too long. Many 
lose their jobs and livelihoods, and many others lost their healthcare 
and pensions. This year alone, 1,200 coal miners, their widows, and 
family members could also lose their healthcare coverage.
  For those of you who think this is just another Big Government 
program, let me share a little history with you. In 1946, due to the 
horrendous working conditions our miners faced every day, there was a 
nationwide strike coming right out of World War II. It brought our 
Nation's economy to its knees. President Truman knew this could not 
continue. He dispatched the Secretary of Interior Julius Krug to meet 
with the president of the United Mine Workers of America, John L. 
Lewis. They ended that strike by signing the Krug-Lewis agreement which 
created a retirement fund and healthcare benefits for our Nation's coal 
miners and their families that had the full backing of the United 
States Government. What we are saying is it was so important that we 
continue to work and produce the energy this country needed--basically, 
it wasn't the government giving them anything. They were saying that, 
for every ton of coal that was sold, a portion of that revenue from the 
coal that was sold would have to go towards the miners' pension and the 
miners' retirement.
  Over 70 years ago, President Harry Truman recognized the importance 
of coal that our miners produced for this country and promised that the 
government would guarantee our coal miners' benefits in return of their 
services. He was guaranteeing that money would be there for them. In 
turn, our coal miners propelled the American economy, ushered in 
decades of economic growth, started an energy boom that made the U.S. a 
superpower, and helped our Nation to victory in two world wars. This 
agreement was a sacred promise between workers and our country, and it 
captured the very best of America.
  Unfortunately, over 70 years later, we are still fighting to make 
good on that promise. After securing healthcare benefits for retired 
coal miners, we proved that Congress can work together and put partisan 
politics aside. It is a philosophy that I have followed throughout my 
life in public service--in the West Virginia State Legislature, as a 
former Governor of the State of West Virginia, and now as a Senator 
representing the State of West Virginia.
  I know that my fellow colleagues here today are fighting for 
solutions with me. I am asking all of our colleagues here in the Senate 
and in the House to join us in this fight. To be successful, we must 
address this in a bipartisan way. It is not who we are to be divided as 
we have been. It is not who we are as a country to have this toxic 
atmosphere that we come to. I tell people that I go to work in a 
hostile work environment every day. People don't want to work together. 
They are not expected to work together anymore. It is the norm to 
fight.
  That is not true where I come from. We never got anything 
accomplished by fighting in West Virginia. I hope that, together, we 
can work out a solution to this terrible issue facing our Nation and 
our workers so that they can retire peacefully without a constant worry 
of losing their hard-earned pensions.
  Let me tell you what the average pension paid to a miner is when they 
retire--and most of this goes to the widows because the miners have 
passed away. It is around $600 a month. They worked 20 and 30 years in 
the mines. This is not a windfall for anybody. It is a sustenance that 
just absolutely keeps them alive so that they can retire and live 
peacefully. That is all they are asking for.
  I am proud to stand here today with my fellow colleagues, and we are 
going to fight to keep our commitment to our citizens of our respective 
States in this great country.
  I am glad to yield to my dear friend and my colleague from Michigan, 
Senator Stabenow.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cassidy). The Senator from Michigan.
  Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I want to thank my colleague. I think he 
stepped to the back. No one has been a better champion for our miners 
and their families than Senator Joe Manchin. Every single day, he 
brings to us the needs of our coal miners and people who have literally 
fueled a generation beyond our economy. I want to thank Senator Manchin 
for his leadership, and also thank Senator Brown for his leadership as 
well. The two of them together are leading our efforts.
  I am proud to be joining with them to focus on an issue that is 
hurting working men and women across Michigan and across the country. 
It is an issue that, quite frankly, I can't believe that, in the 
Senate, we are having to actually talk about why people should get the 
pension that they have paid into their whole life. I can't believe that 
we even have to have this as an issue or the fact that we are having to 
fight to get the attention of the majority leader and the majority in 
the Senate who actually bring up legislation to help people get the 
pension they have paid into their whole working life. This ought to be 
a given. We used to think it was. It is wrong that it is not today.
  For generations, millions of working people built better lives for 
themselves and their families with jobs that provided more than just a 
paycheck. Folks worked really hard, and in exchange for a job well 
done, they could count on basic benefits, including healthcare and a 
secure retirement, coming through a pension that they paid into while 
they were working. These workers didn't just build their own families. 
They literally built the middle class.
  I can tell you, coming from Michigan, that is exactly what happened. 
They built our economy. They built our American way of life, and they 
just assumed that America would keep its promises, that the companies 
would keep their promises, that our laws would be set up in a way that 
they could trust would work, and that the money they were putting into 
a pension and retirement security would be there for themselves and 
their families. I don't think that is too much to ask.
  Many of these coal miners, truck drivers, construction workers, 
autoworkers, and others gave up raises--as my colleagues already talked 
about--in exchange for retirement security. They would negotiate, and 
they would say that, rather than get that money in my paycheck now, I 
want to put it into my retirement so that I know it is there for myself 
and my family going forward.
  They held up their end of the bargain. Unfortunately, that bargain is

[[Page S5783]]

now crumbling for too many. Imagine what it would be like to have to 
cut your family budget 50 percent or 60 percent or even 70 percent and 
still get the bills paid and keep food on the table.
  I talked to a gentleman from Michigan named John who lives in Monroe. 
He doesn't have to imagine that because he and his family are living 
that every day. John is a retired diesel mechanic whose pension 
benefits were slashed 72 percent. For any one of us, imagine if our 
incomes were slashed 72 percent. That started for him in January 2018.

  As you can only imagine, the past 2 years have been a tremendous 
hardship for him and for his family. They have been using their 
savings, as he said to me, to pay the bills for the past 2 years. They 
have cut everything nonessential and are now cutting even the 
essentials from their budget. John and Kathy, his wife, used to be able 
to help out their children, including a son who is disabled, but they 
no longer have the means to do that, which is something that is really 
devastating for them.
  John said: ``The mental strain and anxiety we are enduring because of 
the loss of a guaranteed income has become increasingly difficult.''
  Kathy added that it is hard for people to understand what it is like 
to live on just one-quarter of the income that one used to have.
  Kathy and John aren't alone. That is why we are on the floor. That is 
why we are asking--demanding--that action be taken on their behalf. 
Between 1 million and 1.5 million American workers and retirees are in 
pension plans that are at serious risk of becoming insolvent within the 
next 20 years. As well, by the end of this year, as Senator Manchin 
said, more than 1,200 coal miners and their family members could lose 
their healthcare coverage.
  These hard-working Americans deserve better than this. Right now, 
they are just waiting and waiting and waiting for the U.S. Senate to 
act--for the Senate majority leader and the Republican majority to 
decide it is important to act on their behalf. It has now been 83 days 
since the House of Representatives passed the Rehabilitation for 
Multiemployer Pensions Act--83 days. We have plenty of time to take 
this up on the Senate floor. We have plenty of time to take it up. 
There needs to be a sense of urgency about doing it because John and 
Kathy certainly feel that sense of urgency as they are trying to pay 
the bills and do what they can to support their children. They feel 
that every day.
  This bill is the companion legislation to what we have called the 
Butch Lewis Act. Thanks to Senator Brown for introducing this important 
legislation, I am proud to be a cosponsor along with many of my 
colleagues. It has also been 285 days, as Senator Manchin said, since 
Senators Manchin, Kaine, Warner, Brown, Jones, and Casey introduced the 
American Miners Act. So we have two bills in front of us--one that has 
been held up now for 285 days and one that has been held up for 83 
days. We need to have action.
  The American Miners Act secures retired miners' pensions and saves 
their healthcare benefits. It is past time for Senate Majority Leader 
McConnell to stop stalling and to take action on behalf of the folks 
who did nothing more than work their whole lives, created the middle 
class of this country, and believed their country and believed the 
companies when they said, if they paid into pensions, they would be 
there. Hard-working American families have been waiting way too long.
  I have always believed that a pension was a promise. It is just plain 
and simple. It is a promise, and it is a promise that deserves to be 
kept. People like John, who have worked hard to earn their retirement 
benefits, shouldn't have to worry about paying their power bills, 
putting food on their tables, or keeping their homes. They should know 
that their pensions will be there for them--the pensions they paid into 
all the time they were working. They have earned them over a lifetime 
of work, and those pensions are promises that need to be kept.
  I urge my Republican colleagues to join us in helping to keep that 
promise for John and for the hard-working Americans like him. We could 
do this very quickly this week if we would come together and have a 
sense of urgency about what is affecting folks who have worked hard all 
of their lives, who are now retired, and who just need to know that 
those pensions are going to be there for themselves and their families.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.


                    Unanimous Consent Request--S. 27

  Mr. MANCHIN. Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I ask 
unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be discharged from the 
further consideration of S. 27, the American Miners Act of 2019; that 
the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; that the bill be 
considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to 
reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no 
intervening action or debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there an objection?
  The Senator from Iowa.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, in reserving the right to object, let me 
give a short explanation.
  The issues facing miners' pension plans are of critical importance, 
but I have to tell my colleagues that so are the issues that face a 
large number of multiemployer plans, and one of the biggest that is of 
concern is the Central States Pension Plan.
  Since last year, the Committee on Finance has been working on a 
bipartisan basis to address the issues that face the multiemployer 
system. We are nearing the completion of a comprehensive proposal that 
will include financial assistance to the critical and declining 
multiemployer pension plans and will provide long-term solvency to 
these plans and to the longer term solvency of the Pension Benefit 
Guaranty Corporation, or, as we know it around here, the PBGC. That 
proposal will include financial relief for miners and mining companies 
because the situation with the miners' pensions should be handled in 
the context of these broader, multiemployer plan reforms.
  The Senator from West Virginia is a person with whom I work very 
often and like personally, but I must object to this and take the 
course of action of dealing with this in a larger context rather than 
just for miners' pensions, so I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from West Virginia.
  Mr. MANCHIN. Mr. President, if I could respond briefly to the Senator 
from Iowa, the reason for my request, as far as its being urgent, is 
that we are on the cusp of having one major coal company go bankrupt. 
As we speak right now, it is out there trying to restructure, but if it 
declares bankruptcy, our timetable on our miners' pensions moves from 
2022 to 2020. If the miners go down first, it will create a whole 
tumbling effect with the others. This one can keep us from going into 
insolvency with the PBGC. All we are trying to do is to prevent that 
from happening because this is going to move very quickly, 
unfortunately, if this one large coal company goes bankrupt.
  That is why I brought it to the floor today, sir, with all due 
respect.
  I hope the Senator and I will talk some more about this and that he 
will understand the gravity of what we are dealing with because it is 
really concerning to me right now.
  I thank the Senator.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I heard what my friend said. I still 
stick by what I told him, which is that we are working on a plan to 
deal with multiemployers in many different situations of which the 
Senator's is a very important part.
  Mr. MANCHIN. I respect that, sir.
  I look forward to working with the Senator.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wisconsin.


                                Pensions

  Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I rise on behalf of nearly 25,000 workers 
and retirees in Wisconsin who have paid into the Central States Pension 
Fund.
  It has been 3\1/2\ years since the Treasury Department denied an 
application by the Central States Pension Fund to slash pensions that 
had already been earned by thousands of plan members. In that time, 
retirees have organized at home. They have called on their Members of 
Congress. They have also come to Washington countless times--all to 
remind us of the promises they were made when they earned their 
pensions and to fight for a solution to this looming crisis.

[[Page S5784]]

  I have been proud to work side by side with Wisconsin workers and 
retirees and with Senator Brown to introduce the Butch Lewis Act. This 
legislation will put failing multiemployer pension plans, including 
Central States, back on solid ground, and it does so without cutting 
the pensions retirees have earned.
  (The remarks of Ms. Baldwin pertaining to the introduction of S. 2598 
are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills 
and Joint Resolutions.'')
  Ms. BALDWIN. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I rise today as well to talk about 
pensions, as so many of my colleagues have been--and not just talking 
about but acting to advance legislation with regard to pensions.
  As we have heard today--and we will keep saying this because it bears 
repeating--pensions are a promise. They are a promise of a secure 
retirement. When a worker enters into that promise with a company, when 
the Federal Government is involved, we have to make sure we keep the 
promise to workers, just as we did a couple of years ago, after a lot 
of hard work, to make sure healthcare was there for coal miners who 
were retired.
  Pensions are an issue that both Houses of Congress have a 
responsibility to act on.
  The House passed the Butch Lewis Act 3 months ago, but like a lot of 
legislation that has come from the House, it is sitting in the Senate 
day after day, week after week and in this case 3 months--3 months--
since passage in the House. It is time for the U.S. Senate to have a 
vote on the Butch Lewis Act.
  In Pennsylvania, and I know this is true of several other States, we 
are talking about coal miners, teamsters, bakery and confectionary 
workers who, through no fault of their own, are seeing their hard-
earned pensions threatened. Failure to act could result in devastating 
economic consequences across the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and 
across our Nation.
  Just think about it this way, in terms of Pennsylvania: One estimate 
has it that over 60,000 pensions--60,000--including 11,831 coal miners, 
21,460 teamsters as part of that larger number--could be at risk.
  Despite the challenges ahead, the good news is, we have bipartisan 
legislation that I mentioned a moment ago, the Butch Lewis Act, which 
passed the House 3 months ago.
  Senator Brown of Ohio and others have worked hard to make sure this 
effort on pensions is in front of the agenda in the Senate.
  The Butch Lewis Act will create a loan program for troubled pensions. 
It is a commonsense solution that brings the public sector and the 
private sector together to address this looming crisis for workers.
  We must also pass legislation so we can address the coal miners' 
healthcare and coal miners' pension crises. Senator Manchin from West 
Virginia has shown great leadership in this process over many years.
  We also owe thanks to the Members of the U.S. Senate Democratic 
caucus. Few, if any, have coal miners in their States, but because of a 
concerted effort in the Democratic caucus, we have made coal miners and 
their healthcare and retirements and their pensions a priority. Those 
Democratic Senators stood with Senators like me from States that have a 
large number of retired coal miners because it is the right thing to 
do. Those Democratic Senators know it is the right thing to do. Some 
Republican Senators do as well.
  It is the right thing to do because, as I started with, pensions are 
a promise, and we have to make sure we keep our promise to those 
workers.
  Thousands of Pennsylvania families are counting on us, and many more 
thousands of American families across the board outside of Pennsylvania 
are counting on us to keep our promise on pensions and to make sure we 
continue to fight until that promise is kept to our workers and to 
their families.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. CASSIDY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. McSally). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.


                             Cloture Motion

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before 
the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

                             Cloture Motion

       We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the 
     provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, 
     do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination 
     of Barbara McConnell Barrett, of Arizona, to be Secretary of 
     the Air Force.
         Mitch McConnell, Martha McSally, Rick Scott, John Thune, 
           Mike Crapo, Lamar Alexander, Johnny Isakson, John 
           Cornyn, Roy Blunt, Roger F. Wicker, John Hoeven, Mike 
           Rounds, Kevin Cramer, Steve Daines, John Boozman, Cindy 
           Hyde-Smith, James E. Risch.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum 
call has been waived.
  The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that the nomination of 
Barbara McConnell Barrett, of Arizona, to be Secretary of the Air 
Force, shall be brought to a close?
  The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Tennessee (Mr. Alexander).
  Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. 
Alexander) would have voted ``yea.''
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Colorado (Mr. Bennet), 
the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker), the Senator from Delaware 
(Mr. Coons), the Senator from California (Ms. Harris), the Senator from 
Minnesota (Ms. Klobuchar), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the 
Senator from Massachusetts (Ms. Warner), and the Senator from Hawaii 
(Ms. Hirono), are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 84, nays 7, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 314 Ex.]

                                YEAS--84

     Baldwin
     Barrasso
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Braun
     Brown
     Burr
     Cantwell
     Capito
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Cortez Masto
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Durbin
     Enzi
     Ernst
     Feinstein
     Fischer
     Gardner
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hassan
     Hawley
     Heinrich
     Hoeven
     Hyde-Smith
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johnson
     Jones
     Kaine
     Kennedy
     King
     Lankford
     Leahy
     Lee
     Manchin
     McConnell
     McSally
     Menendez
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Paul
     Perdue
     Peters
     Portman
     Reed
     Risch
     Roberts
     Romney
     Rosen
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Sasse
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Sinema
     Stabenow
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Udall
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Young

                                NAYS--7

     Blumenthal
     Duckworth
     Gillibrand
     Markey
     Merkley
     Smith
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--9

     Alexander
     Bennet
     Booker
     Coons
     Harris
     Hirono
     Klobuchar
     Sanders
     Warren
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 84, and the nays 
are 7.
  The motion is agreed to.
  The majority leader.


                           Order of Procedure

  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that 
notwithstanding rule XXII, the cloture motions for the Volk, Eskridge, 
Novak, and Kovner nominations ripen at 11 a.m. on Wednesday, October 
16; I further ask that notwithstanding rule XXII, that at 4:15 p.m. 
tomorrow, all postcloture time on the Barrett, Volk, Eskridge, Novak, 
and Kovner nominations be considered expired; finally, I ask that if 
any of the nominations are confirmed, the motions to reconsider be 
considered made and laid upon the table and the President be 
immediately notified of the Senate's actions.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

[[Page S5785]]

  

                          ____________________