EXECUTIVE SESSION; Congressional Record Vol. 165, No. 156
(Senate - September 26, 2019)

Text available as:

Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.


[Pages S5727-S5735]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]





                           EXECUTIVE SESSION

                                 ______
                                 

                           EXECUTIVE CALENDAR

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I move to proceed to executive session 
to consider Calendar No. 348.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion.
  The motion was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the nomination.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read the nomination of Rachel 
P. Kovner, of New York, to be United States District Judge for the 
Eastern District of New York.


                             Cloture Motion

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cloture motion having been presented under 
rule XXII, the Chair directs the clerk to read the motion.
  The senior assistant legislative 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 Rachel P. Kovner, of New York, to be United States 
     District Judge for the Eastern District of New York.
         Mitch McConnell, John Boozman, John Cornyn, Mike Crapo, 
           Pat Roberts, Mike Rounds, Thom Tillis, Roger F. Wicker, 
           Cindy Hyde-Smith, Kevin Cramer, John Hoeven, Rob 
           Portman, Dan Sullivan, Chuck Grassley, Richard Burr, 
           John Thune, Roy Blunt.

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
mandatory quorum calls for the cloture motions be waived.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.


                           Government Funding

  Mr. LANKFORD. Mr. President, the Permanent Subcommittee for 
Investigations just finished a major research project.
  I happen to sit on that committee led by Rob Portman. He has done a 
phenomenal job of trying to pull all the information together to study 
government shutdowns.
  Government shutdowns are not new to us. We hear about them a lot 
lately, but in the last 40 years, we have had 21 government shutdowns--
21.
  We have seen this issue over and over again; that when we get to a 
point of contention and argument, we end up shutting the government 
down to be able to resolve it.
  So the point of discussion is not just here in DC; it is all over the 
country. The question is, How does that really affect the country and 
how does that affect the U.S. Government?
  The basic study PSI did to go back and look at this was they found 
that the Federal workforce in the last shutdown lost 57,000 years of 
productivity, if you spread out all the Federal workers who were 
furloughed, the time they were furloughed, and the time that was lost.
  The total economy lost about $11 billion in productivity during that 
time period, and the Federal taxpayer lost right at $4 billion in lost 
money that is just gone. The cost of shutting the government down, the 
cost of reopening, the cost of pay during the furlough time periods 
when there weren't actually people there--$4 billion lost to the 
taxpayer.
  Yet we will probably have another one at some point and probably have 
another one, and it seems they just keep coming--21 of these in the 
last 40 years.
  There is a group of us who have continued to push this. Rob Portman 
has done it for years, several others of us have worked on other 
projects to try to figure out how do we resolve this issue of 
government shutdowns.
  Maggie Hassan, a Democratic colleague from New Hampshire, and I a 
year ago started talking through how we could get to a bipartisan 
solution to end government shutdowns.
  We have a very unique proposal to go with this. It is a proposal that 
is not trying to be novel; it is not trying to be cute. It is trying to 
solve the problem.
  Our issue is that we have very serious differences when we get to 
budget areas. It is $1 trillion in total spending that we are talking 
about when we do the 12 appropriations bills. It is no small argument. 
But we should be able to resolve these things in a way that actually 
works and is effective.
  So here is our basic idea. The process works, supposedly, where you 
do a budget that determines an overarching number that everyone agrees 
to. This is what is called the top-line number.
  Then you take that top-line number in the House and the Senate in 
their Appropriations Committees. It gets broken up into 12 smaller 
bills. Those are called the appropriations bills. Those 12 bills all 
have to be passed by the House, by the Senate, and then they have to 
conference them together and get that finished by the end of the fiscal 
year.
  It sounds like a good theory. That was the plan, at least, that was 
made in 1974, when this was designed. But the plan that I just laid out 
has worked only four times since 1974. So if you think every year that 
the budget process didn't work again, you are correct. It didn't work 
again. It has worked only four times since 1974.
  What Maggie Hassan and I would like to insert into this process is 
the ability to have serious, hard debate on difficult financial issues 
where we have disagreements but contain the fight to Washington, DC, to 
do two things: Make sure that we get to the appropriations process, 
that it is done well, and to hold the Federal workers and Federal 
families and the rest of the country harmless as we argue through this.
  Here is the simple idea: If we get to the end of the fiscal year, if 
we do not have any 1 of those 12 appropriations bills done--and we 
should have all 12 of them done. But if even one is undone when we get 
to the end of the fiscal year, there is a continuation of spending 
exactly as it was the year before. It just continues to run the same as 
it was the year before so that Federal agencies, Federal workers will 
continue to operate as they normally do. But because there is not an 
appropriations bill done for the next year, while Federal workers are 
being held harmless and agencies are being held harmless, Members of 
Congress and our staffs and the Office of Management and Budget of the 
White House would lose all travel ability. We would have no official 
travel ability at all. We couldn't go home and see our families, 
couldn't travel on codels, couldn't do other responsibilities. We would 
be here in Washington and be in session in the House and the Senate 
every day of the week, weekdays and weekends included.
  It is literally the equivalent of when my brother and I would get 
into an argument when we were kids, which clearly didn't happen often. 
But when it did happen, my mom would say to my brother and me: The two 
of you go into one of your rooms. Work this out. When you get it worked 
out, you can come out.
  That would basically put Washington, DC, inside the box. The rest of 
the country is not in it, but Washington, DC, would have to stay here, 
and we would have to work out our differences. When it is worked out, 
then we pass appropriations bills.
  The other feature that is added to it is that we can't move on to 
other things. We couldn't get distracted and say that we are just not 
going to do appropriations bills and then just stay here and do other 
things. We would have to do appropriations bills during that time 
period.
  This is a simple idea, though most people I have talked to have said: 
That is too simple. That would never work.
  As I have talked to my colleagues in the House and the Senate, just 
about all of them have cringed when I have said that we are going to be 
here weekdays and weekends and keep going on one topic until we finish 
that one topic.
  It is our constitutional responsibility to take care of the American 
people's tax dollars and to make sure it is done correctly. We can move 
on to other things when we fulfill our constitutional responsibility on 
that. Just about everyone I have talked to has said: That is an idea 
that I could vote for, that I can support.
  I bring it up to this body to tell people that we are still 
negotiating the final language of this bill. If there is an idea that 
people have to say ``I have one thing to ask about it,'' bring it. If 
you have one thing to suggest to change it, bring it. But in the next 
few

[[Page S5728]]

weeks, before we get to the November 21 deadline, which is the new 
deadline now for spending--before we get to that spot, I want this 
issue resolved. I want government shutdowns off the table. I never want 
to see on any of the news channels ever again the countdown clock to 
when the government shuts down. That hurts the American people; it 
hurts American companies; and it certainly hurts the Federal families 
who go on furlough during that time period.
  Let's stay in the ring, boxing it out, and let's hold everyone else 
harmless as we go through the process.
  I encourage my colleagues to bring their ideas, and let's get this 
resolved in the next few weeks.
  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. BRAUN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Ohio.


                     25th Anniversary of Americorps

  Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, this fall we celebrate the 25th anniversary 
of AmeriCorps. Since President Kennedy challenged Americans to serve 
our Nation abroad in the Peace Corps in his famous University of 
Michigan speech, generations of Americans have recognized that our 
greatest strength as a nation is our compassion. But it wasn't until 
AmeriCorps was founded about 30 years later, 1994, that we truly 
addressed the need for service here at home.
  When I think about the work AmeriCorps members do, I think about the 
words of a speaker at a Martin Luther King breakfast in my home city of 
Cleveland on a cold January morning, and the speaker said: Your life 
expectancy is connected to your ZIP Code.
  Think about that. Your life expectancy is connected to your ZIP Code. 
Whether you grow up in Appalachia or Ohio, Indiana, whether you grow up 
in a city, an inner-ring city suburb, a small city like I did in 
Mansfield, or a small town, your ZIP Code often determines whether you 
have access to quality healthcare or good education and the social 
support necessary to succeed. Whether it is through City Year or Senior 
Corps or VISTA--all parts of AmeriCorps--America works to fight that 
and ensure that so many Americans, regardless of their ZIP Code, have 
the opportunity not only to succeed but to thrive.
  I have seen firsthand what a difference AmeriCorps makes in people's 
lives. My two daughters had amazing, life-changing experiences, 
teaching for a year through City Year. We all benefit when we invest in 
organizations that serve communities that are too often left behind and 
when these organizations are staffed by young Americans who care about 
those they serve.
  In Ohio, we have a City Year in Cleveland and Columbus. I have met 
many of these City Year volunteers and see the work they do.
  AmeriCorps in my State played a major difference in the Summer 
Feeding Program. Literally tens and tens of thousands of children are 
able to eat well in the summer because of the work that AmeriCorps 
does.
  Since 1994, more than a million Americans have served in communities 
across the country, serving tens of millions of Americans. All of their 
work will have a lasting impact on children and families, and I can't 
wait to see what these good AmeriCorps members will do over the next 
quarter century.


                        Tribute to Jenny Donohue

  Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I rise today not very happily, if I can 
say, as my employee and my friend Jenny Donahue is leaving our office 
to take a really big job in the U.S. House of Representatives, 
especially at a challenging, difficult time, and she will serve there, 
I assume, every bit as well as she served in the U.S. Senate.
  Jenny is a middle-class kid who grew up in small town Idaho. I have 
not hired a lot of people in my office from Idaho, but if the next 
person from Idaho is this good, that will be a great thing. She 
graduated from the University of Montana. Moving east, she went on to 
become a leader in the U.S. Senate. She is a leader among 
communications directors. She is a leader in my office, and she is a 
leader in this entire body. She has left an indelible mark.
  Part of being a good leader is being a good mentor. She nurtures 
young talent. She brings out the best in the people she works with.
  My wife, Connie Schultz, who is one of Jenny's greatest admirers--and 
there are many great admirers of Jenny--loves to say that she is one of 
the most fierce advocates for young women she has ever met in her life. 
She also says, oftentimes, that Jenny carries as she climbs. As she 
moves up in life and moves up into a new position, you can bet that so 
many people are going to benefit from her leadership and her 
mentorship.
  She has earned my wife's respect. That speaks such volumes about our 
friend Jenny. She has earned the respect of many Ohio reporters. She 
understands how important their work is to Ohio communities and to our 
democracy.
  She respects journalism, understanding that journalism is about 
comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable. She knows that 
without journalism--good journalism--you can't have good democracy.
  She has been with me through some of the biggest moments over the 
past 4 years as a friend, as an adviser, and challenging me sometimes 
and telling me when I am wrong oftentimes but always being there in the 
right ways.
  She has been part of the dignity of work rollout. She was part of our 
trip to the border to bear witness to the humanitarian crisis in part 
caused by the President of the United States. She was part of the 
historic 2016 Democratic National Convention.
  She helped put my vision of dignity of work on the road earlier this 
year, including a trip to Selma, AL. Jenny has such courage of her 
convictions. She is not afraid to tell me when I am wrong. She is not 
afraid to challenge others, always coming from a place of integrity and 
honesty--always.
  She never does anything halfway. When she says she will do something, 
when she sets her mind to doing something, she does it, and she does it 
fully. She does it well. She does it better than pretty much anyone 
else could.
  The day after the 2016 election, my staff was pretty stunned that a 
human being like Donald Trump would be in the White House; that someone 
with his lack of character, with his inability to tell the truth, with 
his treatment of women, would be President of the United States. We 
were all pretty stunned.

  I gathered the staff in my office and told them our jobs would become 
that much more important. Jenny took on this charge. Jenny, who was 
already good before the 2016 election, took on this charge of how our 
work mattered, how I was one of the only selected officials in Ohio who 
would challenge the President's dishonesty, who would challenge the 
President's illegal behavior, and who would challenge the President's 
mean-spiritedness at the border, on the overtime rule, cutting food 
stamps--all the things this billionaire has done. Jenny knew how 
important that was. She took on this charge with a sense of 
responsibility and a purpose that made me proud, just like I know her 
parents and her grandparents are.
  As she moves on to her next job in the House of Representatives, a 
leader in the House, as she has been in the Senate, she moves on to 
continue fighting for justice and the dignity of work in her new role.
  Jenny, Godspeed.
  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. SULLIVAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


Tribute to General John Kelly, General James Mattis, and General Joseph 
                                Dunford

  Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. President, this afternoon I would like to honor and 
recognize the important service of three men, three Marine generals who 
have served their country in uniform and who have served their country 
in the civilian world as well, who have served with honor and dignity 
in ways that I think deserve recognition on the floor of the U.S. 
Senate. They have done this service in a manner that is befitting of 
marines, with dignity, class, and honor. I am talking about

[[Page S5729]]

former Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, former Secretary of Homeland 
Security and the President's Chief of Staff at the White House, Gen. 
John Kelly, and, lastly, I would like to recognize Gen. Joe Dunford, 
who, on Monday, will be stepping down as the Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff.
  I intend to be there to honor him and to witness another remarkable 
transition of authority and power when U.S. Army General Milley takes 
over in what is the most important position for a military officer in 
the United States of America.
  It will be the end of an era, a remarkable era, for the Marine 
Corps--the smallest of the military services, where these three Marine 
generals--Kelly, Mattis, and Dunford--served with distinction, not only 
in the Corps as four star generals but at the highest levels of 
government at a critical time in our country's history.
  It is a remarkable story. It is a story of service, sacrifice, and 
friendship. These extraordinary men rose through the levels of command 
together and the ranks of the Marine Corps together. They served 
together all over the world, including in combat in places like 
Fallujah, Al Kut, and Baghdad. They fought together, and they 
sacrificed together for our great Nation as Marine Corps officers. They 
then went on to serve in other ways.
  The three of them have spent their whole lives in service to our 
country, and they have left an indelible mark, certainly, on the Marine 
Corps but, I believe, other institutions.
  Between the three of them, they have 130 years of Active-Duty 
military service to America--130 years. Think about that: 130 years of 
Active military service to the United States of America and the Marine 
Corps.
  They have given their all for us in a way that I think makes most 
Americans proud, emphasizing the ethos of the Marine Corps, which is 
honor, courage, and commitment, and I know they have inspired countless 
numbers of young men and young women across the globe in the Marines 
and beyond.
  I am going to talk a little bit about them today.
  Gen. John Kelly is a straight-talking, blunt, and fierce warrior. 
Before he was 16, he hitchhiked to the west coast and rode the rails 
back. He is then said to have joined the Merchant Marine for a year, 
where he is quoted as saying: ``My first time overseas was taking 
10,000 tons of beer to Vietnam.''
  In 1970, he enlisted in the Marines, where he found purpose and found 
a home.
  Gen. Jim Mattis is a warrior, scholar, appreciator of mavericks, 
known for the reading lists he expects his marines to follow, who as a 
teenager was ``a mediocre student with a partying attitude''--an 
attitude that landed him in jail a few times. But learning called, and 
then the marines called, teaching him and others how to ``think like 
men of action, and to act like men of thought.'' He is a legend in the 
Marine Corps. His motto in Iraq, when he led the forces there, was: 
``No Better Friend, No Worse Enemy than a U.S. Marine.'' He is the 
first and only marine to ever be Secretary of Defense.
  Then there is the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Joe Dunford, who 
has had the Marine Corps flowing through his veins his whole life. His 
father served as a marine in Korea, and three of his uncles were 
marines in World War II. General Dunford had no doubt that he would 
continue that tradition.
  While earning a degree from Saint Michael's College in Vermont, he 
was commissioned as a second lieutenant. During his career, from 
infantry commander to Commandant of the Marine Corps and Chairman of 
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, he has been known for inspiring respect in 
combat and on the field of battle and in the corridors of Washington.
  I had a brief opportunity to meet General Dunford a few times as a 
marine when I was in Afghanistan and he was the ISAF commander. The 
respect that not only marines and American servicemembers but all the 
allied forces there had for him was very, very apparent.
  All three, as I mentioned, served in Iraq. In 2003, General Kelly was 
promoted to brigadier general and was the first known promotion of a 
Marine Corps colonel to brigadier general in an active combat zone 
since Chesty Puller in January of 1951. General Dunford, serving under 
General Mattis during the invasion, earned his own nickname of 
``Fighting Joe,'' which continued to serve him well in Washington.
  So as you just saw from my colleague, the Senator from Ohio--there 
has been much talk today on the floor of the Senate from both sides of 
the aisle about character, integrity, patriotism, or, unfortunately, 
the lack thereof in Washington, DC, in the House and the Senate, 
throwing bombs at each other. But I think sometimes it is important to 
come down and talk about the other things--character, honor, integrity, 
service--because we have a lot of that as well. These three men have 
served our country with great distinction. They have all been succeeded 
by strong leaders who I am sure will carry out a similar tradition of 
service and dignity.
  Last year, I had the great honor of being promoted to colonel in the 
Marine Corps Reserves. I love being in this job. It is a huge privilege 
to serve the people of Alaska as a U.S. Senator. But I have no doubt 
that the biggest honor in my life is earning the title of U.S. marine. 
I knew that I joined a force for good, with cords of memory and valor 
that stretch back to before the founding of our country. The battles 
that the Corps has fought in live in the heart of every marine: 
Montezuma, Tripoli, Belleau Wood, Peleliu, Iwo Jima, the Chosin 
Reservoir, Inchon, Khe Sanh, the Gulf War, Iraq, and Afghanistan. The 
list is very long.
  The greatest lesson I have learned as a marine is what true 
leadership looks like, and we have seen that true leadership in the 
trio of officers of Kelly, Mattis, and Dunford, and I have seen it in 
their lives after the Marine Corps in Washington, DC. Let me talk 
briefly about each of them.
  From his early days commanding a rifle company and serving on two 
aircraft carriers to commanding Task Force Tripoli during the Iraq war 
and leading U.S. Southern Command, General Kelly exemplified the 
warrior ethos of the Marine Corps.
  During the early days of Task Force Tripoli, then-Major General Kelly 
was asked about the ability of his force to handle the Iraqi military. 
His response was, ``Hell, these are marines. Men like them held 
Guadalcanal and took Iwo Jima.'' He had confidence, and he was right.
  General Kelly is a fighter, but he also understands sacrifice. He 
lost troops in the field, and tragically, in 2010, he lost his own son, 
1st Lt. Robert Michael Kelly, when he stepped on an IED while leading a 
platoon in Afghanistan. General Kelly knows sacrifice. He became the 
highest ranking military officer to lose his son or daughter in Iraq or 
Afghanistan.
  After he finished his military service with distinction, he took on 
two of the most challenging jobs here in DC: Secretary of Homeland 
Security and then the Chief of Staff at the White House. He didn't seek 
these jobs; he was asked to serve by the President, and he did. That is 
something unusual in a time where so many are crawling or scheming to 
climb up the ladder. It is refreshing to have leaders who are sought 
out or chosen to lead.
  It should be noted that the jobs that General Kelly took on demanded 
a different skill set after he took off the uniform. However, on a 
daily basis, in these jobs, you still take incoming; it is just not 
with bullets and artillery. In my view, he did an outstanding job in 
these two very important positions at a critical time.
  Then there is General Mattis, who became our Secretary of Defense. He 
also did not seek that job; that job sought him. I know this for a fact 
because, before the election, I had the privilege of sitting down with 
General Mattis when he was a scholar at the Hoover Institution. I 
talked to him about leadership and strategy. It was a big honor for me 
to be able to do that in October 2016.
  After the election in November of 2016, when the rumors began 
swirling about his being the Secretary of Defense, my first phone call 
to the President-elect to congratulate him also mentioned how I thought 
it would be a great pick to pick General Mattis as Secretary of 
Defense.
  I believe he did an excellent job. General Mattis, as the first and 
only marine to ever be Secretary of Defense, played a pivotal role in 
redefining our national security objectives and rebuilding our 
military. General Mattis

[[Page S5730]]

played a leading role in crafting the National Security Strategy with 
National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster in 2017 and then literally 
wrote almost entirely on his own the Pentagon's 2018 National Defense 
Strategy. Together, these two documents have shifted our Nation's 
strategic focus from countering violent extremism, as we needed to do 
after the September 11 terrorist attacks, to recognizing the return of 
great power competition as the leading national security challenge for 
the United States, with China as the pacing threat.
  It is rarely recognized by the media, but these are very bipartisan 
documents in that Senators--Democrats and Republicans--all believe 
these are very, very important. They are almost universally applauded 
and supported in terms of American strategy for the next several 
decades.
  General Mattis recently published a memoir, ``Call Sign Chaos,'' that 
centers on leadership and the need to sharpen the mind and the body. I 
think this book, which I am reading right now, is a great service to 
our country. ``You are part of the world's most feared and trusted 
force,'' he tells his marines. ``Engage your brain before you engage 
your weapon.''

  Indeed, much has been written about General Mattis's keen intellect, 
but, as he makes clear, reading and intellectual pursuits are not an 
end to themselves. They are part of the mission. They are at the heart 
of shaping the world's most fearsome fighting force.
  In his book, he says: ``If you haven't read hundreds of books, 
learning from others who went before you, you are functionally 
illiterate--you can't coach and you can't lead.''
  I also believe that General Mattis/Secretary Mattis did an 
outstanding job as Secretary of Defense. He rebuilt our military 
readiness, which had plummeted when defense spending was cut 25 percent 
from 2010 to 2015. I have walked with General Mattis/Secretary Mattis 
in Alaska with our military forces there, and I can tell you the troops 
loved him and respected him.
  Finally, I want to talk about General Dunford. As I mentioned, Monday 
will be the last day we get to call Dunford America's Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs. He is the second marine to hold this highest leadership 
position in the armed services. Also a student of history, he is known 
to be fearless and an unflappable commander.
  General Mattis told a great story about how when they were serving 
together in Iraq--Dunford and Mattis--General Mattis watched a rocket-
propelled grenade fly over Dunford's humvee and blow up about 100 yards 
behind him. Mattis wrote: ``He [Dunford] barely glanced up and then 
went right back to writing his orders.''
  In his book, General Mattis talks more about General Dunford. He 
said:

       He had a gift of synthesis; he could coolly evaluate the 
     larger picture. Joe reminded me of Emperor Justinian, 
     consistently reaching fair conclusions and able to summarize 
     a complex situation in a few words.

  It has been precisely this ability that has allowed General Dunford 
to so effectively navigate the tricky, political, and military worlds 
in both this administration and the last one. He was nominated to be 
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs by President Obama and did such an 
outstanding job that President Trump renominated him.
  These are the kinds of men and leaders I am talking about, and these 
are not easy times. Our country and our military are facing 
unprecedented challenges, and wise counsel from those in these 
positions is paramount--those who understand what it means to fight, 
what it means to be on the frontlines of conflict, and what it means to 
have the wisdom sometimes not to fight. General Dunford has provided 
that wisdom.
  Harlan Ullman, a combat veteran and a U.S. Naval Academy graduate, 
was recently quoted in an article about General Dunford where he said: 
He has been one of the best Joint Chiefs of Staff America has ever had.
  According to Ullman, Dunford has been able to successfully navigate 
difficult times with regard to national security and challenges to our 
Nation in civil and military relations.
  With all the other challenges this country has to face, it is 
important to recognize these kinds of leaders.
  I also want to mention how General Dunford is known not only for his 
keen intellect but also for his compassion. He was known to personally 
write letters to the parents of his marines who were killed in action. 
He was the person who went to General Kelly's home to tell him that his 
own son had been killed in battle in Afghanistan, and later, he wore a 
Team Kelly shirt when he ran the Boston Marathon.
  I have seen that personal compassion in my own life. It is a story I 
will end with with regard to all three of these men, and it involves a 
young lance corporal from Alaska named Grant Fraser.
  Who is Grant Fraser? In high school in Anchorage, he was an actor who 
loved the works of Homer and Shakespeare. He was a mountain biker, a 
skier, a pianist, a scuba diver, a rock climber, a tennis player, a 
lighthearted, mischievous young man, and then he surprised family and 
friends when he joined the Marines. While still in college, because he 
wanted challenges and he knew he would thrive in the Marine Corps--and 
he did thrive in the Marine Corps--he planned on coming back home to 
work as a paramedic with the Anchorage Fire Department.
  On August 3, 2005, in Anbar Province, Iraq, Grant Fraser was on a 
mission--Operation Quick Strike--to avenge the killing of his fellow 
marines when his vehicle was hit by a massive improvised explosive 
device. He was 22 years old when he made the ultimate sacrifice.
  I love our military, but sometimes it can be bureaucratic and very 
boneheaded. It took 11 long years and the tenacious, beautiful spirit 
of Grant Fraser's mom, Sharon Long, for this young marine to get a 
proper burial at Arlington Cemetery.
  Two days before the funeral in 2016, I was sitting next to General 
Dunford at a dinner. I told him about Grant's heroism and Sharon Long's 
heroic perseverance to get her son buried at Arlington.
  On an overcast day, September 30, 2016, as friends, family, and 
fellow marines were gathering to put Grant Fraser to rest at Arlington 
National Cemetery, a marine four-star general in his dress blues 
appeared solemnly on the sidelines. The most important member of the 
U.S. military decided to move his schedule and come to the funeral of 
this lance corporal.
  I had the opportunity to introduce him to Sharon Long. The Chairman 
of the Joint Chiefs told me that he couldn't sleep the night before, 
thinking about how long it took for her to bury her son, and he felt 
that he just had to attend to pay his respects to this marine.
  I have been to a lot of funerals in my Marine Corps career, but this 
was the most moving funeral I ever attended. It was moving because on 
that day, rank didn't matter and medals didn't matter; we were all just 
Americans--with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff--grieving the 
loss of one of our own.
  General Mattis wrote, ``No Marine is ever alone--he carries with him 
the spirit passed on from generations before him. Group spirit--that 
electric force field of emotion--infuses and binds warriors together.''
  These three men--Mattis, Kelly, and Dunford--have brought that 
spirit, that higher calling, not just to the Marine Corps but to 
America and the highest levels of government, and we should all be 
thankful.
  We in the Senate confirm these men and women on a regular basis--
people willing to serve their country--but we rarely thank them on the 
floor. So from one U.S. Senator who has watched the careers of these 
remarkable three men closely and appreciates what they have done, not 
just in uniform but after they have taken off the uniform, I want to 
thank them for their honor, courage, commitment, sacrifice, and example 
to thousands if not millions of Americans and marines and for keeping 
us safe.
  So to Generals Mattis, Kelly, and Dunford, thank you. Semper Fidelis.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I want to start by saluting my friend, 
our colleague, the Senator from Alaska, for his moving and powerful 
statement and for his service as a marine and now a Senator from 
Alaska. It has been a great honor to work with him on many issues, 
including national security issues.

[[Page S5731]]

  I thank you.


                               FUTURE Act

  Mr. President, earlier today on this Senate floor, our colleague, the 
junior Senator from Alabama, Mr. Jones, asked unanimous consent for the 
immediate passage of the FUTURE Act.
  The FUTURE Act is an important bill that is essential to the success 
of minority-serving colleges and universities across the country, 
including historically Black colleges and universities.
  The House bill passed within the last couple weeks. The bill number 
is H.R. 2486, and it is at the Senate desk, meaning we could take it up 
and pass it at any moment if the leader would simply allow us to vote 
on that measure. What it does is it extends an existing mandatory 
funding program that provides essential resources to these 
underresourced schools.
  We, as the Congress, the Senate and House, Republicans and Democrats, 
recognize on a bipartisan basis the value of these institutions of 
higher learning and the importance of this mandatory funding because we 
enacted this program a number of years ago on a bipartisan basis. The 
goal was to make sure that we provided additional resources for 
academic pursuits, to improve management, and to ensure that they had 
the resources for high-demand areas of study in the areas of science, 
technology, engineering, and math--the STEM disciplines.
  In my State of Maryland, we have four terrific HBCUs: Morgan State, 
Bowie State, Coppin State, and the University of Maryland Eastern 
Shore. We also have a number of other schools with a high number of 
students receiving need-based aid, like Allegany College in Western 
Maryland and the College of Southern Maryland. All of these colleges 
and universities need the resources that are provided through the 
FUTURE Act.
  It not only has a bipartisan heritage, but right now in the Senate, 
it has a bipartisan cosponsorship. In fact, Senator Scott is the lead 
Republican on this bill. It passed the House of Representatives 
unanimously on a voice vote.
  The reason I am on the floor now and the reason the Senator from 
Alabama, Senator Jones, asked for unanimous consent to take this up and 
vote on it earlier today is because the current mandatory program 
expires on Monday. It expires at the end of this month. There is no 
reason for delaying action. It is possible that we can buy ourselves a 
little bit more time with respect to the funding, but there is no 
reason that we should put this important program at risk.
  I have a number of letters. In fact, I have 43 letters from 34 
schools and advocacy organizations supporting this bill. I ask 
unanimous consent to have some of them printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

         National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher 
           Education,
                                                September 1, 2019.
     Hon. Mitch McConnell,
     Majority Leader, U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Chuck Schumer,
     Minority Leader, U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Leader McConnell and Leader Schumer: In less than two 
     weeks, congressional authority and vitally needed funding for 
     Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), 
     Predominantly Black Institutions (PBIs), Tribal Colleges and 
     Universities (TCUs) Hispanic-serving Institutions (HSIs), 
     Asian American, Native American, and Pacific Islander-serving 
     Institutions (AANAPISIs), will end, unless Congress acts by 
     September 30, 2019, to extend the authority and funding. 
     Yesterday, the United States House of Representatives moved 
     the Nation toward extending the funding for another two 
     years, when it voted with bipartisan support, to pass the 
     Fostering Undergraduate Talent by Unlocking Resources for 
     Education (FUTURE) Act, a bipartisan measure to preserve 
     funding for the referenced quintessential American equal 
     educational opportunity institutions.
       I am writing as President & CEO of the National 
     Associational for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education 
     (NAFEO). I am writing to respectfully request and urge that 
     you schedule for a vote the Senate companion of the House-
     passed FUTURE Act, introduced by Senators Tim Scott (SC) and 
     Doug Jones (AL), and that you support this measure that has 
     made critical investments in HBCUs and MSIs, enabling them to 
     graduate more excellent and diverse students, 
     disproportionate low-income, first generation and under-
     represented minority students, in growth and high need 
     disciplines. With your support the Senate FUTURE Act will 
     pass.
       The FUTURE Act will be wholly paid for. It preserves and 
     extends vital investments in institutions that collectively 
     enroll more than 4.8 million undergraduate students in the 
     U.S.--one-quarter of all students--and represent over 800 
     richly diverse American universities: 106 Historically Black 
     Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), 50 Predominantly Black 
     Institutions (PBIs); 523 Hispanic-Serving Institutions 
     (HSIs), 37 Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs), and over 
     200 Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-
     Serving Institutions (AANAPISls), including Kentucky State 
     University, and CUNY Medgar Evers College, CUNY York College, 
     CUNY LaGuardia, CUNY New York City College of Technology, 
     Metropolitan College of New York, and Long Island University-
     Brooklyn Campus.
       As you know, HBCUs, PBIs, HSIs, TCUs, and AANAPISIs are an 
     essential part of America's higher education system. For the 
     past decade, Title III, Part F has played a vital role in 
     strengthening their capacity and increasing credentialing and 
     degree attainment, including in important STEM fields. If 
     this critical funding stream is allowed to expire on 
     September 30, 2019, millions of students will be left behind, 
     in the margins of our nation, without the opportunity to earn 
     a college degree or credential. Please do not let this 
     happen. Title III, Part F is the lifeblood for these 
     institutions. The most certain way, the most effective and 
     efficient way of extending the only mandatory congressional 
     funding for HBCUs and MSIs, is to vote for the Senate 
     companion of the House-passed FUTURE Act, introduced by 
     Senators Scott (SC) and Jones (AL). Please lead the United 
     States Senate in making this happen.
           Sincerely,
                                                Lezli Baskerville,
     President & CEO.
                                  ____

         United Negro College Fund, Inc.,
                                               September 19, 2019.
     Hon. Mitch McConnell,
     Majority Leader, U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Charles E. Schumer,
     Minority Leader, U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Lamar Alexander,
     Chairman, Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 
         (HELP) Committee,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Patty Murray,
     Ranking Member, Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 
         (HELP) Committee,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Majority Leader McConnell, Minority Leader Schumer, 
     Chairman Alexander, and Ranking Member Murray: UNCF (the 
     United Negro College Fund, Inc.) submits this letter urging 
     you to cosponsor, support, and pass the House-passed H.R. 
     2486, the Fostering Undergraduate Talent by Unlocking 
     Resources for Education (FUTURE) Act. This bipartisan, 
     bicameral bill passed the House Floor on September 17th by 
     voice vote and has now been sent to the Senate for 
     consideration.
       UNCF is a non-profit organization with a mission to build a 
     robust and nationally recognized pipeline of underrepresented 
     students who, because of UNCF support, become highly-
     qualified college graduates and to ensure that our network of 
     37-member, private Historically Black Colleges and 
     Universities (HBCUs) is a respected model of best practice in 
     moving students to and through college.
       The 101 HBCUs that exist today are valuable institutions 
     with a large economic footprint. Despite only representing 3 
     percent of all two-and four-year non-profit colleges and 
     universities, HBCUs (1) enroll 10 percent of all African 
     American undergraduates; (2) produce 17 percent of all 
     African American college graduates with bachelor's degrees; 
     and (3) graduate 21 percent of all African Americans with 
     bachelor's degrees in STEM fields. Moreover, these 
     institutions have a strong economic impact, especially on the 
     regions in which they are located, by creating 134,090 jobs, 
     producing $10.1 billion in terms of gross regional product, 
     and having a total annual economic impact of $14.8 billion.
       Despite the large economic impact of these institutions, 
     they continue to be underresourced and have endowments that 
     lag behind those of non-HBCUs by at least 70 percent. 
     Unfortunately, this is common for HBCUs and Congress has 
     recognized this and sought out ways to find parity between 
     HBCUs and non-HBCUs. One strategic way in attempting to help 
     HBCUs receive adequate resources was initially through the 
     College Cost and Reduction Act of 2007. This bill allowed for 
     HBCUs, Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs), Hispanic-
     Serving Institutions (HSIs), and other Minority-Serving 
     Institutions (MSIs) to receive $255 million annually in 
     mandatory funds for Fiscal Year (FY) 2008 and FY 2009. These 
     mandatory funds were directed in the Higher Education Act of 
     1965 to be used solely for science, technology, education, 
     and mathematics (STEM) education, among other uses largely 
     centered around STEM. Instead of allowing this funding stream 
     to expire, Congress continued to recognize the need of these 
     institutions to offer quality STEM programs on their campuses 
     and continued this funding stream in the Student Aid Fiscal 
     Responsibility Act (SAFRA) of 2009. SAFRA extended funding

[[Page S5732]]

     for these institutions from FY 2009 to FY 2019 at $255 
     million annually and was included in the Health Care 
     Reconciliation Act of 2010 that ultimately passed both the 
     House and Senate to became law. Every vote taken on the 
     mandatory funding stream for these institutions has been 
     bipartisan, and it is our desire to have the same outcome for 
     H.R. 2486.
       It is imperative that the Senate pass the FUTURE Act 
     because funding for HBCUs, TCUs, HSIs, and other MSIs expires 
     September 30, 2019. While we support a permanent extension of 
     mandatory funding, H.R. 2486, due to its passage in the House 
     of Representatives, is the surest way for these institutions 
     to maintain funding for FY 2020 and FY 2021. We strongly 
     believe that passing this bill now will address the immediate 
     funding needs of our institutions and allow Congress to 
     continue to work towards a permanent extension of this 
     funding moving forward.
       Should you have any additional questions regarding this 
     letter, please feel free to reach out to Emmanual Guillory, 
     Director of Public Policy and Government Affairs.
           Sincerely,
                                           Michael L. Lomax, Ph.D.
     President and CEO.
                                  ____



                                   Tennessee State University,

                                               September 25, 2019.
     Hon. Lamar Alexander,
     Chairman Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, 
         Member, U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Alexander: I am writing to you in my official 
     capacity as President of Tennessee State University, and as a 
     member of the Board of Directors of the United Negro College 
     Fund (UNCF). I ask you to join in the effort calling for 
     unanimous consent to vote to pass the Scott-Jones FUTURE Act, 
     the Senate companion bill to the FUTURE Act that passed the 
     House last week by unanimous consent.
       I understand and appreciate the noteworthy components to 
     the bill you are proposing, however my request is for you to 
     consider the timing aspect which presents a challenge that 
     threatens the Title III F provision in the Higher Education 
     Act that will end on September 30th unless it is extended. 
     Again, I am appreciative of the various provisions that you 
     are proposing that will have a positive effect on HBCUs. In 
     fact, I am personally excited that you are advancing HEA 
     reauthorization as a priority, as well as broadening Pell 
     eligibility. Hopefully, that proposal will be debated shortly 
     after the immediate future of HBCUs and MSIs are secured.
       My primary issue at this point is the timing of your 
     legislation which could cause an inordinate delay that would 
     affect Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) 
     and Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs). I am quite 
     concerned that with only a few days remaining before Title 
     III F ends, the only way we can ensure passage of this FUTURE 
     Act is by a unanimous consent by the Senate.
       Based on your long, illustrious and rich record of service 
     to our state as Governor of the State of Tennessee, and to 
     the country as Secretary of the United States Department of 
     Education, I am sure you would agree that it is a priority to 
     continue the Title III F funding for HBCUs, thereby providing 
     much needed assistance to students around the country. Many 
     of this population are low-income, first-generation college 
     students, all with a strong desire to be successful in 
     college. If Title III F sunsets on September 30, 2019, it 
     will cause irreparable harm to the very students you 
     represent in our great State of Tennessee. I urge you to 
     support the FUTURE Act today and engage in further 
     discussions on other aspects of the legislation in the near 
     future.
       Thank you for your consideration of this request. Please 
     feel free to contact me.
           Sincerely,
                                        Dr. Glenda Glover, JD, CPA
     President.
                                  ____

                                  American Indian Higher Education


                                                   Consortium,

                                               September 19, 2019.
     Hon. Mitch McConnell,
     Majority Leader, U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Chuck Schumer,
     Minority Leader, U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Lamar Alexander,
     Chairman, Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
         Pensions,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Patty Murray,
     Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 
         and Pensions,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Majority Leader McConnell, Minority Leader Schumer, 
     Chairman Alexander, and Ranking Member Murray: On behalf of 
     the nation's 37 Tribal Colleges and Universities, which are 
     the American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC), we 
     respectfully request that you to support swift Senate passage 
     of the Fostering Undergraduate Talent by Unlocking Resources 
     for Education (FUTURE) Act, H.R. 2486, as passed by the House 
     with strong bipartisan support, while working to secure a 
     permanent extension of Title III Part F of the Higher 
     Education Act 1965.
       Since FY2010, the Strengthening Institutions--Tribal 
     Colleges and Universities program (HEA Title III Part F) has 
     provided $30 million per year to help TCUs address the higher 
     education needs of American Indian and Alaska Native 
     students, TCUs use this funding for vitally needed student 
     support services, faculty development, curriculum and program 
     development to strengthen tribal nations, library services, 
     facility modernization and construction and other important 
     education activities. Without these funds, TCUs will be 
     forced to reduce services, jeopardizing student completion 
     and success, and some of our smaller institutions may face 
     closure.
       Tribal Colleges and Universities truly are developing 
     institutions--the oldest TCU recently reached its 50th year; 
     we are located in some of the most rural, remote, and 
     economically challenged regions of the country; we are 
     severely under-resourced; and yet, we are committed to 
     affordable, high quality, place-based and culturally grounded 
     higher education. Our ability to achieve our collective 
     vision--strong sovereign Tribal nations through excellence in 
     Tribal higher education--would be impossible without the 
     Title III Part F program.
       We have always supported and worked for permanent 
     reauthorization of the Title III Part F program for Tribal 
     Colleges and Universities, Historically Black Colleges and 
     Universities, Hispanic Serving Institutions, and other 
     minority serving institutions. We are not wavering from this 
     critical goal. However, the House-passed FUTURE Act, H.R. 
     2486, is the best path forward at this time. Indeed, the 
     House-passed FUTURE Act is the only tangible strategy before 
     us, and time is running out.
       Thank you for your attention to this request and for your 
     support of our institutions and the students we serve.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Carrie L. Billy,
                                                  President & CEO.
                                            David E. Yarlott, Jr.,
     Chair, AIHEC Board of Directors.
                                  ____



                               Thurgood Marshall College Fund,

                                               September 18, 2019.
     RE: Title III Part-F Funding to HBCUs and MSIs

     Hon. Mitch McConnell,
     Majority Leader, U.S. Senate.
     Hon. Chuck Schumer,
     Minority Leader, U.S. Senate.
     Hon. Lamar Alexander,
     Chair, U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education Labor and 
         Pensions.
     Hon. Patty Murray,
     Ranking Member, U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education 
         Labor and Pensions.
       Dear Senators:
       The Thurgood Marshall College Fund (TMCF) is incredibly 
     pleased and grateful that the Title III, Part F funding that 
     is currently slated to expire on September 30th has garnered 
     considerable interest from and corresponding action this week 
     in Congress. As you may be aware, his critical stream of 
     funding helps eligible colleges and universities enhance 
     their fiscal stability, improve their institutional 
     management, and strengthen their academic programming, 
     including, in particular, programming focused on high-demand 
     careers, like careers in STEM fields.
       As you may know, on Tuesday, September 17th, the House of 
     Representatives passed the Fostering Undergraduate Talent by 
     Unlocking Resources for Education (FUTURE) Act by voice vote. 
     If passed by both houses of Congress and signed into law by 
     President Trump, the FUTURE Act will renew Title III, Part F 
     (a/k/a SAFRA) funding for an additional two years, and 
     thereby preserving critical funds upon which our HBCUs and 
     other MSIs rely to improve the lives of our students.
       TMCF strongly encourages the Senate to take-up the FUTURE 
     Act immediately and pass the bill before the opportunity 
     slips away. While we appreciate the prospects of a longer-
     term or ``permanent'' solution to Title III, Part F, we are 
     skeptical that such a proposal would receive the requisite 
     approval by Congress before September 30th. Therefore, it is 
     imperative that the Senate to act with all deliberate speed 
     on the bi-partisan and bi-cameral FUTURE Act. Following the 
     Senate's passage of FUTURE Act, TMCF is willing to work with 
     leaders on both sides of the aisle to develop a longer-term 
     solution for Title III, Part F and for other HEA-related 
     issues.
       We greatly appreciate your attention to this matter, and 
     thank you for your historic and, we anticipate, continued 
     commitment to our Nation's HBCUs, other MSIs and our 
     students.
           Sincerely,
                                            Dr. Harry L. Williams,
                                                  President & CEO.

[[Page S5733]]

     
                                  ____
                                  Hispanic Association of Colleges


                                             and Universities,

                                               September 19, 2019.
     Hon. Mitch McConnell,
     Majority Leader, U.S. Senate.
     Hon. Lamar Alexander,
     Chairman, Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and 
         Pensions.
     Hon. Charles Schumer,
     Minority Leader, U.S. Senate.
     Hon. Patty Murray,
     Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 
         and Pensions.
       Dear Leader McConnell, Leader Schumer, Chairman Alexander, 
     and Ranking Member Murray: In just 10 days, on September 30, 
     2019, Title III, Part F of the Higher Education Act of 1965 
     will expire unless the Senate acts before then to extend it. 
     I strongly urge you and your Senate colleagues to act swiftly 
     in passing the FUTURE Act (H.R. 2486), which was passed by 
     the House two days ago, to ensure that critical funding is 
     uninterrupted for the more than 4.5 million undergraduate 
     students enrolled at Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs) 
     alone. In addition, hundreds of thousands of students at 
     Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Tribal 
     Colleges and Universities (TCUs), and other Minority-Serving 
     Institutions (MSIs) would be impacted.
       The House-passed FUTURE Act represents the best path to 
     ensure the above institutions don't lose critical funding on 
     September 30, 2019.
       HSIs, HBCUs, TCUs, and other MSIs are an essential part of 
     America's higher education system and workforce development. 
     For the past decade, Title III, Part F has played a vital 
     role in strengthening the STEM pipeline at these institutions 
     and increasing their capacity for credentialing and degree 
     attainment.
       The mandatory funding for Title III, Part F was initially 
     included in the 2008 College Cost Reduction and Access Act 
     for two years and was extended until FY 2019 in the Health 
     Care Education and Reconciliation Act of 2010. Title III, 
     Part F of the legislation has always had bipartisan and 
     bicameral support because of its important role in increasing 
     student persistence and graduation rates, particularly in 
     STEM fields, at HSIs, HBCUs, TCUs, and other MSIs. Thus, it 
     is imperative that Congress extends Title III, Part F via the 
     FUTURE Act since it is a lifeline for these institutions.
       HSIs alone account for 15 percent of all non-profit 
     colleges and universities, and yet enroll 66 percent of all 
     Hispanic students and nearly one-fourth of all U.S. students. 
     Despite having access to fewer resources compared to other 
     institutions, HSIs impressively produce 40 percent of the 
     STEM bachelor's degrees earned by Latino students. Their 
     future is in the balance.
       As our nation becomes increasingly diverse and the number 
     of HSIs continues to grow, Title III, Part F funding is more 
     essential than ever to ensure that we can prepare today's 
     students for tomorrow's jobs and reduce our nation's 
     dependence on foreign talent.
       With time running out, we appeal to you to use the power 
     and influence of your leadership positions to pass the House-
     passed FUTURE Act before September 30, 2019. We look forward 
     to continuing our shared efforts to find a permanent 
     extension of Title III, Part F.
       If you have any questions please feel free to contact 
     Alicia Diaz, HACU's Interim Chief Advocacy Officer.
       We thank you in advance for your time and look forward to a 
     timely passage of the FUTURE Act.
           Sincerely,
                                                Antonio R. Flores,
                                                  President & CEO.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I am going to read from just two of 
those letters that expressed the urgency of Senate action on this.
  This is a letter from the Thurgood Marshall College Fund, from the 
president and CEO, stating that the Thurgood Marshall College Fund 
``strongly encourages the Senate to take-up the FUTURE Act immediately 
and pass the bill before the opportunity slips away. While we 
appreciate the prospects of a longer-term or `permanent' solution to 
Title III, Part F, we are skeptical that such a proposal would receive 
the requisite approval by Congress before September 30th.''
  I think we can understand their skepticism given the fact that the 
30th is Monday and the Senate is going to be out this afternoon.
  They go on to say:

       Therefore, it is imperative that the Senate act with all 
     deliberate speed on the bi-partisan, bi-cameral FUTURE Act.

  Mr. President, I have another letter from the UNCF, which is another 
organization dedicated to supporting these important institutions.
  Quoting from the letter from their president and CEO:

       It is imperative that the Senate pass the FUTURE Act 
     because funding for HBCUs, TCUs, HSIs, and other [minority-
     serving institutions] expires September 30, 2019. While we 
     support a permanent extension of mandatory funding, H.R. 
     2846, due to its passage in the House of Representatives, is 
     the surest way for these institutions to maintain funding for 
     FY 2020 and FY 2021. We strongly believe that passing this 
     bill now will address the immediate funding needs of our 
     institutions.

  This is a bill that has broad support. This is a bill where--the 
program expires on Monday, just a few days from now. There is really no 
excuse for not taking this up and voting on it now. I hope, since that 
is obviously not going to happen--my colleague tried to get unanimous 
consent earlier today to take up and vote on this bill--I hope we will 
move with all deliberate speed as soon as the Senate reconvenes so that 
we can get this important work done.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri.


                      The Working Class in America

  Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, earlier this week, the Missouri Department 
of Health issued a new report that shows that life expectancy actually 
declined in the State of Missouri last year. Worse than that, the 
report shows that life expectancy has been falling in my State for 
almost a decade. Death rates for Missourians between 15 and 34 years 
old rose by almost 30 percent between 2012 and 2018. The death rate for 
Missourians who are between 25 and 34 is at its highest levels since 
the 1950s. We know what is causing it. It is an epidemic of drug 
overdoses and suicides, along with a spike in crime, in our cities.
  Here are the facts. Opioid-related deaths in Missouri have more than 
doubled in the last decade. The number of suicides is up by over 50 
percent, and there is no end in sight. And it is not just Missouri. New 
data shows that deaths from suicides and drug overdoses are exploding 
nationwide. Suicides in this country haven't been so common since 1938. 
Alcohol-related deaths haven't been so high since the 1910s. Meanwhile, 
the surge in deaths from drug overdoses in this country is completely 
unprecedented.
  These numbers are tragic, but they are more than that--they are the 
signs of a crisis. We are witnessing the slow-motion collapse of the 
working class in America.
  All Americans suffer from the depths of despair, but we know from the 
evidence that it is working people and working families who are hit the 
hardest. So now the working middle of this Nation is facing a struggle 
to survive. You don't have to look far to see it.
  I have seen it in the small towns of my State, in the places where TV 
cameras never go, where town squares sit half empty, where businesses 
stand shuttered, where you can buy fentanyl with the snap of a finger 
on any street corner.
  I have seen it in country places where meth is so common, they tell 
me that dealers hang bags of drugs from tree branches for their buyers 
to retrieve--a literal landscape of despair and addiction.
  I have seen it in the faces of young farmers who put a crop in and 
pray for rain and pray for Sun and pray for fair prices and then wonder 
if generations of family farming are going to end with them.
  I have seen it from young mothers raising kids alone, working a job 
and trying to go to school at night, trying to shield their children 
from drugs and from the pathologies online.
  I have heard it in the words of young men who graduated high school 
only to find no jobs, no place to learn a trade, and no hope for 
anything that is better.
  This is the struggle of working life today. In my State, it is a 
struggle shared by White and Black alike, by everybody of every race, 
because of the breakdown of family and neighborhood, the loss of good 
work, and the epidemic of addictive drugs, which don't know racial 
boundaries.
  This is a struggle we are in together. It is a struggle that brings 
us together. It is a struggle for the things we love together--for 
home, family, and country--and the future of this country will be 
defined by how we meet this challenge.
  You can see all of this if you will look. The problem is this town 
will not look. This town is obsessed with partisan theatrics. This town 
is obsessed with money and influence and status. This town wants to 
keep its own good

[[Page S5734]]

times going. The political elite here live in a world where the 
struggle of working Americans is just a human interest story that you 
read about right along with the gossip page.
  But it is time for this town to take some responsibility. It is time 
for the governing class to admit that the policies it has pursued for 
decades on trade, on immigration, and on finance have helped to drive 
working people to this crisis. And it is time to acknowledge that a 
crisis for working America is a crisis for all of America. It is not 
enough for wealthy people in Silicon Valley to do well. By the way, 
those people don't need any more advocates in this city. They have lots 
of them already. It is working people who need advocates here, and it 
is working families who need a voice.
  You know, working folks don't ask for much. They work hard. They love 
their families, they love God, they love the place where they live, and 
they want the opportunity to build a home there and a way of life that 
is prosperous and that is secure and that is meaningful and that they 
can pass on to their children. That is not too much to ask. In the 
America of the 21st century, that is not too much to expect. It is not 
too much to stand for and to fight for because it is the working people 
of this country who built this Nation. They are the ones who keep it 
going now, and they are the ones where this country's strength is 
found. It is the working people of this country--their future and their 
families--who are going to define the future of our country.
  I would just say that this is what we should be debating. This 
challenge is what we should be confronting. This crisis is what we 
should be looking to and addressing because this is what is going to 
define our time.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.


                          Trump Administration

  Mr. JONES. Mr. President, I have to admit that I haven't had a heck 
of a lot of sleep the last few nights, and I don't think anyone has. If 
anyone has rested well the last few nights, it is because they are 
either not paying attention or they are here for the wrong reason.
  We are in some troubled times. Events of the past 2 weeks have been 
nothing short of stunning. They have been stunning in the speed in 
which they have unfolded. They have been stunning and disturbing in the 
allegations that have been made regarding the conduct of the President 
of the United States. These are allegations that go to the heart of 
national security and allegations that go to the heart of whether or 
not the President is upholding his oath to the Constitution of the 
United States or abusing the power of the Presidency.
  We have to remember in this body, and we have to remind our 
colleagues, we have to remind the media, and we have to remind the 
public that we are just now beginning this process. The facts have not 
come out. We are just now beginning to see facts and determining what 
happened over the course of this past summer--where things were, what 
happened, what was said, and who said it. We have to determine the 
allegations and whether or not they have merit based on the facts that 
come out, not just reports in the media or even the allegations in a 
complaint. I am a lawyer. Allegations in a complaint are just simply 
allegations made, but they have to be proven.
  The reason I rise today is that already we are seeing this becoming 
political. People are going to their political corners. The partisan 
tribalism is taking over already, and that is unfortunate. It is a sad 
commentary when a process that is so rooted in the Constitution of the 
United States--something so fundamental to our democracy--is almost 
immediately cast in political terms. My colleague and friend, Senator 
Sasse from Nebraska, used the term ``partisan tribalism'' in today's 
world that is ``insta-certain.'' No matter what you see, no matter what 
you read, it doesn't matter because you are going to take a side, and 
when we take sides, the American public immediately take sides and no 
one listens to the facts.
  We are called as Senators, we are called as Members of the House, and 
we are called as Members of this body to a much higher duty than that--
a much higher duty. Our duty is to carefully analyze and review the 
facts--facts, not mere allegations; facts, not reports or leaks; facts, 
not what some political talking head on the television says their 
opinion might be. Our duty is so much higher than that.
  We have seen already some of what appear to be very disturbing facts. 
We have seen a summary of a telephone call between the President of the 
United States and the President of Ukraine. Ukraine is a country 
dependent on countries like the United States. The balance of power 
between the United States and Ukraine is not balanced at all. We have 
so much more power, and in the summary of that call, the President of 
the United States noted that to the President of Ukraine. He said, 
essentially: You are dependent on us. No one else helps you, but you 
can count on the United States of America. And, by the way, I need a 
favor. I need you to do me a personal political favor.
  In that conversation, he talked about not only having his personal 
lawyer but also utilizing the Attorney General of the United States to 
help benefit them politically. Those are initially the facts, and they 
are very disturbing. For anyone to say that they are not is shirking 
their responsibility to their constituents, to the public, to the 
Constitution, and to the very oath that we took when we came into this 
body.
  But again, it is but one piece of a puzzle. We have now also seen the 
contents of the so-called whistleblower complaint. ``Whistleblower'' is 
a term of art. A whistleblower is just simply somebody who has come 
forward, but they are given the name whistleblower because they are 
given legal protections. These people who come forward are concerned 
citizens of the United States. It is a concerned citizen of the United 
States who saw something happening that disturbed him so much that he 
felt compelled to bring it to someone's attention. They are documented 
fairly well, but again, these facts have not come out. They are just 
statements in an allegation in a complaint that have to be determined.

  I have been asked over and over by the media in the last 2 days: Do 
you support the House doing this? Do you support impeachment? Do you 
support this or that?
  My comment is always the same: I want to know the facts. It doesn't 
matter to me what the House of Representatives, in their prerogative, 
calls their processes. I want to know the facts. The American people 
deserve to know the facts. This body deserves to know the facts, 
whether or not anything comes over from the House of Representatives. 
We deserve to know whether or not the President is abusing his office. 
We deserve to know whether or not he is placing our national security 
at risk because, remember, Ukraine is under threat from Russia every 
day. Every day they are looking over their shoulder. Every day they are 
looking over their shoulder. That puts us at risk, as well. We have to 
make sure that we are deliberate, that we move forward with a process 
that is deliberate. We owe it to the American people to be deliberate, 
to be somber, to be making sure that we know the facts before we make 
our judgments.
  It doesn't matter what side of the aisle you are on. This is not a 
Republican process. This is not a Democratic process. And for God's 
sake, it is not a socialist agenda. That is about the dumbest thing 
that I have heard people say over the last two days. Good Lord, we are 
talking about a process that is rooted in the Constitution of the 
United States. It is rooted in the Constitution of the United States 
for a purpose--part of the checks and balances that seem to be going 
out the window these days in our society and in our government and here 
in Washington, DC. This is an American agenda to make sure that we know 
the facts and that we understand those facts so people who are around 
here watching this today know and can be secure in the fact that their 
Congress is doing their job, that the President is doing his job, that 
the courts are doing their job.
  This is not the time to circle the wagons around the President, but, 
likewise, it is not the time to make a judgment already that this 
President should be removed from office or even for articles of 
impeachment voted on by the House. This is not the time to do that. We 
are beginning a process

[[Page S5735]]

that we have to take our time on. I say that knowing that when we say 
``take our time,'' we just need to be deliberate, but we need to move. 
This is not something that needs to drag on. This is not something 
through which the American public needs to be dragged over the course 
of too long a period of time. This can be determined.
  If you look at that whistleblower complaint that was filed, this is 
something that should easily be able to be done in a relatively short 
period of time if the administration will cooperate and if we get that 
instead of the stonewalling that we have seen in the past.
  Cooperate with us. Do your job. Do your duty and let us do ours. That 
is all that we ask. That is all that anybody should ever ask of anyone 
in this body or anyone in the House of Representatives. Let us do our 
job.
  We are about to leave this place for a couple of weeks. The House is 
leaving, though they may still do a little work. We are going to be 
leaving for 2 weeks. We are going back home to our States. We are going 
to be talking to the media. We are going to be talking to constituents. 
I guarantee you that when I go back to Alabama, a lot of people will 
have already made up their minds. When I go to a townhall or whatever, 
they will have made up their minds without any facts. They make up 
their mind based on the media.
  My friends in the media need to pay attention too. Don't ask me 
whether or not this is going to affect my election in 2020. Don't ask 
me if it is going to affect Joe Biden or Donald Trump, or ask me if it 
is going to affect the Presidential race. Ask me about what is going to 
happen to the Constitution and what is going to happen to the rule of 
law. Let's talk about the seriousness of what we have and not the 
politics of it, for goodness' sake.
  But every time I turn around, when I walk out of these doors, the 
first thing they are going to ask me is this: How do you think this is 
going to affect your race?
  That is not my job. That is not my oath. That is not my duty. If we 
put our fingers to the political winds with everything we do in this 
body, we may as well not be here. We should not be able to live with 
ourselves. Unfortunately, I think so many people do that. I am hoping 
that in this day, in this time, in these troubled waters we are about 
to embark on, people will see that higher calling and that they will 
once again return to that time and that place when this Senate was a 
deliberative body and not a knee-jerk reaction to a particular program 
or nomination or whatever that comes before it. We will return to the 
days of yesteryear where we actually deliberate and we talk amongst 
ourselves and we have a civil discussion about the important issues 
that we are faced with. I remember those days. I was here. I was 
sitting back there as a Senate staffer, watching those great debates 
and watching people change their minds on the floor of the Senate 
because of the debate that someone gave and someone persuaded him. We 
don't have those any more. Look around right now. We are all gone, 
except those people around here listening to me, and I have staff here. 
But we don't have those debates any more. We don't have those 
deliberations any more. We are going to have to now. We are going to 
have to because the Republic depends on it. The fate of this country 
will depend on it. We are so divided in this country right now. We are 
living in what Arthur Brooks has called that ``culture of contempt,'' 
where we don't necessarily just disagree with each other. We hold each 
other in contempt if we disagree with each other.
  We have to change that, folks. We have to get back. We have to change 
that. We have to make sure people understand their roles and their 
duties. We have to make sure that for this country to progress and for 
this country to survive, we have to work together.
  We have to be one America. We can't be so divided. That is exactly 
what our enemies have been trying to do to us for centuries. For two 
centuries or more, they have wanted to divide us, and they came close 
during the Civil War. They are going to come close now if we are not 
careful. If we don't stop folks on both sides of the aisle from 
continuing to pull us into our corners but rather start pulling people 
back to where we can have these discussions, we will be in trouble.
  As we go forward and as we go into this recess, I hope all of my 
colleagues will remember their oaths. I hope people will remember what 
they said when they stood right over there and the Vice President of 
the United States asked them to raise their right hands and say: ``I do 
solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the 
United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.''
  We took an oath to support the Constitution. We didn't take an oath 
to support the President of the United States. We didn't take an oath 
to support the Republican Party. We didn't take an oath to support the 
Democratic Party. We took an oath to defend the Constitution of the 
United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. That is an 
important part that our Framers put in the Constitution, ``foreign and 
domestic.''
  We said we would take this obligation freely without any mental 
reservation or purpose of evasion. We cannot evade. We took an oath not 
to evade while we were here--that is not what we do--and to well and 
faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which we entered.
  Our duties to this office are to be fair, to be impartial, and to be 
deliberative, not political. Our duties to this office are to our 
constituents and to do the very best we can to make sure we analyze 
whatever is in front of us because history will judge us. It will 
determine whether or not we acted with courage and conviction or 
whether we just simply tested the political winds as some people are 
already doing.
  Often in my talks around the country and in some even here, I like to 
quote one of my favorite characters from literature, Atticus Finch. 
Atticus Finch gave an impassioned closing argument to a jury he knew 
was not likely to give him the verdict he sought. He laid out a case in 
defense of Tom Robinson, a Black man who was accused of raping a White 
woman. In that defense, he went through the facts. Everybody who has 
ever read the book and everybody who has ever watched the movie knows 
Tom Robinson was innocent, but Atticus Finch knew that the likelihood 
of the jury's finding that man innocent was slim and none.
  At the end of that closing argument, he talked about the solemn duty, 
the solemn obligation, that the jurors had to the system. He talked 
about the justice system and the courts and the jurors being the great 
levelers of society, where the pauper and the rich man were the same in 
the eyes of the law. He talked about the duty they had to fairly and 
impartially judge the facts.
  Just before he sat down--and you could see it and feel it, and if you 
were to read the book, you could feel that Atticus knew what was going 
to happen--he looked that jury in the eye and said: ``[Gentlemen], in 
the name of God, do your duty.''
  Ladies and gentlemen and colleagues, in the name of God, we have to 
do our duty. We have to do our duty. We have to make sure we fulfill 
our oaths and not be concerned about how many votes it might get us or 
how many votes we might lose. Whether we know the outcome or not, 
whether we get pressure from Assad or not, whether or not there are 
millions of dollars spent on TV and in radio so as to tell us to vote a 
certain way, we have to fulfill that solemn obligation. In the name of 
God, we should do our duty and nothing less.
  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. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________