Floor Statements

Mr. President, today I want to speak as a Senator and a physician. Many know that I am a doctor, but specifically I am a hepatologist. I studied and treated those with liver disease. One of my colleagues, Dr. Louis Balart, just passed away; a friend who treated many patients with liver disease and made an incredible impact upon the lives of those whom he treated in the State of Louisiana and indeed across the Nation. Dr. Balart has a remarkable story. His family came to the United States from Cuba when he was a child. His father escaped Cuba after his family was sent ahead to the States by drinking blood that he had drained from his own body. He went to the Cuban captors and said, ``I'm bleeding internally, I need to go to Miami to get treated.'' As a doctor himself, he knew that this would happen. With this remarkable story, he was able to rejoin his family that had moved to the United States, fleeing Castro's Cuba. As is the case of many such stories, the family succeeded tremendously, Louis Balart being among them. I mentioned before that he was an influential physician, but he was also a teacher with LSU School of Medicine in New Orleans and Tulane School of Medicine. He also headed the liver transplant unit at the Tulane Medical Center. He passed his gifts down and now his son, Carter Balart, is a gastroenterologist in Baton Rouge, whom I have had the pleasure of working on patients with. Today I honor Dr. Louis Balart, a father, husband, and physician who contributed greatly to his adopted country, the United States of America. He left it richer because of his presence.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, obviously, the news that is dominating Washington, DC, and indeed the Nation is the shutdown.

Yesterday, I joined in a colloquy with other colleagues, both Democrats and Republicans, asking that we find some middle way. The President clearly has moved. He has offered to reopen the government, I am told, if only a downpayment will be made to construct the wall, and has come forward with a good-faith effort. Ms. Pelosi--I would ask that she, as the Speaker, who seems to be the chief negotiating partner, do the same.

I myself have two pieces of legislation that I will be offering today or Monday that will ease the burden on those Federal workers who are still working and not getting paid--and we thank them so much for doing so--as well as come up with an alternative way to perhaps fund the wall.

NFC Championship Controversy

Mr. President, with the seriousness of that, I also want to address one other issue that is particularly serious to folks in Louisiana. I hope it doesn't seem out of place with the shutdown, but I can state that to the folks back home, it is something that continues to disturb them.

I would like to bring up the NFC championship game. The State of Louisiana is outraged because of what happened in the Superdome last Sunday. Televisions were broken, Super Bowl boycott concerts scheduled, billboards were put up in Atlanta, and fans filed lawsuits. My colleague in the House of Representatives is calling for the NFL commissioner, Roger Goodell, to testify in front of Congress on the travesty that occurred 5 days ago.

What happened, in my belief and the belief of many, was the most blatant and consequential blown call in NFL history. For those who missed it, on Sunday night during an NFC championship game, the score was tied with less than 2 minutes to go. It is third and long, and the Saints are in position to score. Drew Brees throws a pass, which is right there. There is the ball, there is the receiver, and there is the defender.

For those not familiar with football--and I know the Presiding Officer played at the University of Arkansas; not a bad school, even though it is not a Louisiana school--the defender is not looking back at the quarterback. He is not looking to intercept. He is only looking to plow through the receiver.

Every drunk sitting on a stool in every bar throughout the Nation looked up at that TV and said: There is interference.

What you don't see from this picture I am showing, though, is there is also helmet-to-helmet contact, which is also a penalty.

It was a twofer. On one play, the Los Angeles Rams defender committed two egregious penalties, and everybody in the Superdome and everybody watching knew it happened--except for him, the referee.

I don't mean to pick on this referee. I am sure he is a nice man, a good family man, et cetera. But he missed a call with less than 2 minutes that everyone agrees would have changed the course of the game. The Saints would have had a first down automatically, they would have drained the clock, they would have then kicked a field goal, and the game would have been over.

LeBron James, Dez Bryant, Melvin Gordon, Richard Sherman, J.J. Watt, and even Hulk Hogan took to Twitter to call out this absurd call.

The defender said: I interfered with him.

He admitted it.

I thought I was going to get called, but I didn't.

The pass interference was not called, and now the Rams will play in the Super Bowl against the Patriots instead of the Saints, which is kind of a shame. It really is a taint upon the Super Bowl. It won't be the two best teams; it will be the two teams that got there, at least in one case, because someone did not see an obvious call.

Now, I don't just mean to kvetch--and obviously all Saints fans continue to be upset--but it is actually, if you will, about the integrity of the game. If you speak of the NFL, it almost becomes a metaphor for that which is the most competitive, the highest quality, where coaches and athletes dedicate themselves, honing their skills to the absolute highest level. As folks say, if you can win in the NFL, you can win anywhere. It is a metaphor. The Saints--every football team invests heavily in this. Football fans really come to town on this.

So the question is to the NFL. We have a few questions for you.

How are the officials selected for this game? For example, they grade officials after every game. Were the best officials sent to this game, or was it just a rotation? If it is just a rotation, how did the referees who officiated this game grade?

I don't want this to be too personal, but if somebody commits a penalty during a football game, the referee will say: No. 74 was offsides, and the NFL has accountability in the performance of everybody in the game. So I think Saints fans would like to have an accountability for the referees.

Did people look into conflicts of interest? It has been pointed out that the referee who missed the call lives in Los Angeles. Is he a diehard Rams fan?

Again, how did these referees get scored in this game? After every game, the referee is kind of given a grade. Was it an A-plus or a C- minus? And if it is a lower score, what was the comment on this particular play?

Saints coach Sean Payton said the senior vice president of officiating admitted to him in a private phone call that the official messed up, but there is still no official statement from the NFL. Perhaps they can answer these questions in an official statement.

Football is not only a game; it is part of our culture. I would state that the NFL has a responsibility to the millions of fans across the country to ensure the integrity of the game and to answer these questions and perhaps a few others.

With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, If I were sitting at home or in the Gallery right now, I would be incredibly frustrated. I am frustrated, but if I were home, I would be particularly frustrated. Why?

Think about what we have agreed upon in this colloquy from both the Democratic and Republican side of the aisle. We agree that border security is important. We agree that it is one of the primary functions of the Federal Government. We agree that there needs to be more money, and although in legislation we have not agreed, we certainly have statements from Democrats and, of course, as well as Republicans, that barriers are also important.

Collin Peterson, a Democrat on the House side, put it well. On January 22, 2019, he said:

Give Trump the money. I'd give him the whole thing . . .

and put strings on it so you make sure he puts the wall where

it needs to be. Why are we fighting over this? We're going to

build that wall anyway, at some time.

My Democratic Senate colleagues have said something along the same line, maybe not as point-blank but they certainly have said it. We agree there. We agree that the American worker who continues to show up but is not getting paid needs to get paid.

As for those TSA agents and those air traffic controllers whom we use as we go back and forth to our districts, God bless them. More than 51,000 TSA agents are working without pay. There are 10,000 air traffic controller support staff who remain furloughed.

By the way, I and others have introduced legislation to pay those while they are working. I think it is something we, the Senate, should take up. We need a solution that fulfills our national security responsibilities, ends the shutdown, and so that these workers can get paid.

I say it is time to move forward, negotiate, and come to the table, but you may ask: If Democratic and Republican Senators all agree to this, then, why is it not happening?

In fairness to President Trump, whose rhetoric sometimes inflames and sometimes pushes off and, as my colleague from Ohio said, who sometimes describes things in a way that misrepresents his actual intent, it is not a wall from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean. It is a wall in certain places that are high flow with pedestrian traffic. But, nonetheless, clearly, we have come to a point where a personality conflict between the President and the Speaker has put them at loggerheads and, apparently, they are unable to negotiate.

It is clear from our colloquy that Senators on both sides of the aisle would like to come to a solution that secures the southern border, opens the government, and pays the workers.

In fairness to the President, he has put forward an opening offer. He has said he wants that money for the barrier, but he has put other issues on the table that are near and dear to Democrats' hearts that, hopefully, would open the way to a compromise.

The way I can imagine it would work is that the Speaker would put forward a counterproposal. I think that is where we need to be, to rise above any personal dislike or any entrenched positions that people have come to but, rather, to come to a point where we recognize that the American people are better served if the folks serving them are getting paid, that it is important to secure our southern border, and that some sort of barrier will be part of that, as Members of both parties have agreed to.

So it is time to move forward. It is time to negotiate. It is time for the two principals to come to some sort of compromise. Clearly, we in the Senate are willing to move forward.

With that, I yield the floor.

Madam President, today I wish to congratulate Ascension Parish Sheriff Jeffrey Wiley on an exceptional career and to thank him for his service to the people of Louisiana. Sheriff Wiley has served Louisiana honorably, putting his life on the line for the protection and safety of his community for many years.

Sheriff Wiley is a Marine Corps veteran and began his law enforcement career while attending advanced military police training at Fort Gordon in Georgia. He joined the Ascension Parish Sheriff's Department in 1974 as a patrol officer and was quickly promoted to the detective division in 1975, where he specialized in juvenile justice.

It was during this time that Sheriff Wiley helped organize several initiatives, including the Junior Deputy Program and the Sheriffs Young Adult League. He would later go on to serve on the Ascension Parish School Board, where he helped establish numerous programs, such as the Substance Abuse Education Program and the placement of substance abuse counselors in the schools.

In 1988, he returned to the Ascension Parish Sheriff's Department and was appointed chief criminal deputy. He spearheaded the department's first full-time narcotics division and the implementation of the D.A.R.E. program. After being elected sheriff, he grew the patrol/ traffic force by 40 percent, increased police salaries, and put more officers on the street. His first term was so successful that he became the first sheriff in the history of Ascension Parish to be reelected without opposition. In 2009, he was inducted into the Louisiana Justice Hall of Fame.

It is because of his long list of accomplishments and good deeds that we honor Sheriff Wiley. We thank him for his commitment to the people of Ascension Parish and to the people of our State. Our communities are safer because of his dedication to the rule of law. Thank you, Sheriff Wiley, for 22 years in office and for a lifetime of service to Ascension Parish and to Louisiana.

Mr. President, I rise to speak in memory of five children from Louisiana, my home State, who were tragically killed in an awful car wreck last Thursday in Florida--Jeremiah Warren, 14; Joel Cloud, 14; Cara Descant, 13; Brieanna Descant, 10; and Cierra Bordelon, 9 years old--all from Marksville, LA, a small town of less than 6,000 people.

All of the children were members of the Avoyelles House of Mercy Church family. They were traveling together in a van with four other children and three women from the House of Mercy Church while on their way to Disney World. A tractor-trailer that was traveling in the opposite direction hit a car that crossed the highway, hit their van and another 18-wheeler, and created a ball of fire. The drivers in the two tractor-trailers died as well--Steve Holland of Florida and Douglas Bolkema of New Mexico. We include them in our prayers.

Losing five children is such a devastating tragedy for the Marksville community. One can hardly imagine the grief and shock that grips everyone who knew them--their neighbors, friends, family, and fellow church members.

Pastor Eric Descant said: ``I cried so much this morning that my tears felt like lava running out of a volcano.'' His granddaughters Brieanna and Cara died in the crash. His wife, Karen, is still hospitalized.

During a Monday night vigil at Marksville High's stadium, Pastor Descant spoke to the crowd over the PA system by phone from Florida. He said: ``I never knew a heart could break so much and still work.''

He also delivered an important reminder that even in the midst of such immense heartache and loss, ``God will get the glory out of it.''

He added: Don't stop. Keep praying.

I know so many around Louisiana and the country are doing just that.

We are also praying for the full recovery of those who were injured and who are still hospitalized: Karen Descant, Robyn Rattay, Amy Joffrion and her 14-year-old son Noah, Ali Laborde and her 11-year-old daughter Chelsea, and two other children, 9-year-old Trinity Woodward and 9-year-old Chance Bernard.

We are sincerely grateful to the people in Florida who assisted the victims and their families--the first responders, law enforcement, everyone at Health Shands Hospital, North Florida Regional Medical Center, and the Pentecostals of Gainesville.

To those around the country who have heard about this tragedy and have donated money through GoFundMe, thank you for your generosity, support, and prayers.

To my fellow Louisianans, I remind you of what Scripture says in Psalm 34: ``The Lord is near to the brokenhearted, and saves the crushed in spirit.''

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise to honor two people from my State and yours who served in World War II and are being celebrated in Northwest Louisiana--Charles Davis and Doug Curtis. Both are 92 years old.

Mr. Davis celebrates his 93rd birthday in 2 days, and so on the behalf of the Presiding Officer and certainly on my behalf, I wish him a happy birthday.

These American heroes are part of the ``greatest generation.''

Mr. Davis joined the Navy when he was 16 years old, just after Pearl Harbor was bombed in 1941. Imagine that--16 years old, leaving home, volunteering to face a world of danger to defend our country.

He bravely served 6 years at Iwo Jima, Okinawa, Guadalcanal, Solomon Islands, Cape Esperance, and more. His courage was tested on numerous occasions. One example was when the ship on which he served was destroyed, leaving him and his fellow crew members stranded in the middle of the ocean, with only life vests to keep them alive for 37 hours. Charles said he spent a lot of time talking to God during those painful hours--particularly painful because his brother, serving on the same ship, did not live. Such a trying ordeal, a terrible loss.

When Charles talks about his life, he speaks with humility and gratitude about his life experiences. He says he lived a great life, in no small part due to the great country we live in.

Asked how he remains always so positive, he says: Every morning, you can decide to have a good day or a bad day, and for him, he says, it is not a tough choice.

Mr. Doug Curtis served from January 1944 to August 1946, starting in Little Rock, AR. He deployed overseas to the Philippines and Japan, prepared to do whatever was needed, pledging patriotic duty to protect our country and the people he loved.

A special celebration is being thrown on December 14, tomorrow in Many, LA, to honor Charles and Doug. My office will present them both with American flags which have flown over this Capitol Building. It is a small gesture but meant to honor these two men and to celebrate their service and sacrifice.

I thank these great Louisiana heroes for their service to our country, and, Mr. President, I will convey your thanks as well.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to speak to my friend, Dr. Tommy Middleton, the executive director of the Baptist Association of Greater Baton Rouge, who just opened us in prayer.

Dr. Middleton oversees 100 churches and missions, which include services in 6 languages--Chinese, Burmese, Vietnamese, Filipino, Korean, and Spanish. I should say seven--also English. The ministries include the New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary Extension in Baton Rouge; student work at the Baptist Collegiate Ministries of Louisiana State University and Southern University; camp ministries at the Judson Baptist Retreat Center; prison ministries in four State prisons and six local parish jails; governmental interface on the local, State, and Federal levels; ministry to the seamen through the Seafarers Ministries; church planting regionally; and international missions in 16 different countries in which he has been personally involved. I will add one more: bringing relief to victims of natural disasters across our country.

Overall, Dr. Middleton has spread the good news of the Gospel for nearly 50 years. It was my honor to invite Dr. Middleton to open the U.S. Senate in prayer this morning. We have all been blessed.

I yield back.

Mr. President, I would like to thank the senior Senator from

Utah who is retiring at the end of this session of Congress.

Senator Hatch has faithfully served the public for 40 years in the U.S. Senate, constantly using the interface of public policy and the free market to find the best outcome for the American citizen.

If the responsibility of Congress is to pass legislation that improves the lives of Americans, Senator Hatch has met this responsibility. As two examples, when I was a doctor--before entering politics--treating patients, Senator Hatch helped me take better care of my patients. Let me give these examples: The Hatch-Waxman Act leveraged the free market to increase the availability of generic drugs, which means more affordable medicines. The second example I will give is the 1997 Balanced Budget Act, creating the Children's Health Insurance Program, also known as CHIP, which gave greater access to healthcare for Americans in need. That benefited me as a doctor taking care of my patients. As a Senator, it was an honor to work with him this past year to reauthorize the CHIP program and to continue efforts to make prescription drugs more affordable.

On a personal note, shortly after joining the Finance Committee, Chairman Hatch sent me a letter welcoming me to the committee and making his office available to help in any way his office could.

If there is a defining characteristic of Senator Hatch, it is that he listens. Whether it is to fellow Senators, the people of Utah, or the people of the United States, Senator Hatch listens and works to find a mutually beneficial outcome.

This happened when the Federal Government came after the Volks construction company in Prairieville, LA, for a record violation occurring well beyond the government's legal authority. The District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals stepped in and unanimously ruled to stop the government overreach, but the Obama administration issued a rule to permit the practice, despite the DC Circuit Court ruling. Knowing this was an important issue for companies in my State, as well as in the rest of the country, Chairman Hatch worked with me to lead legislation to permanently protect businesses from this kind of government abuse of power--again, using the free market or protecting the free market from government abuse.

Another example I will give is during tax reform, when Senator Hatch listened to colleagues' concerns and ideas about how to improve the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act to give our companies the tools to succeed. The final product was better for it. He worked with me to strengthen and preserve the historic tax credit, which is instrumental in over 780 restoration projects in Louisiana. When you go to New Orleans and see all of these old buildings now shining once again in glory, they were probably helped by the historic tax credit, leveraging $2.5 billion in private investment, creating over 38,000 jobs in Louisiana alone. This is again marrying, if you will, the free market with public policy.

The last issue I will mention, of the many I could, is the following: Since first elected, Senator Hatch has worked to help Americans in their retirement years by increasing access to various types of retirement savings plans to ensure that the widest range of people save for their future. His legislation gave businesses, particularly smaller businesses, the tools needed to offer retirement plans to workers at the lowest possible cost, leveraging the interface of government policy with the market to improve the lives of many in their retirement.

In his tenure, he pushed for sound solutions to the pension issues facing State and local governments. Again, using the interface between government policy and the market to lower the cost of medications. To increase access to healthcare, he promoted the use of sound policy to allow the American economy to thrive. It is this work that those of us who remain in Congress must now pick up and continue.

Scripture says that ``the greatest among you shall be your servant.'' We have been blessed to have had Senator Hatch's wisdom and leadership in the Senate. We have been blessed to have had his wisdom and leadership for our country, and we thank him for his great service to the people of Utah, to the people of Louisiana, and to all Americans.

Thank you.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Madam President, I speak as a Senator who is also a physician. In my medical practice, I have learned that if the patient has the power, then the patient can make the wisest decision both for her health and for her pocketbook.

I am here to support the Patient Right to Know Drug Prices Act, which is legislation that has been put forward by my colleagues Senators Collins and McCaskill and which I am privileged to cosponsor.

Right now, our healthcare system is designed, if you will, to shake as much money as possible out of the patient and out of the taxpayer-- all to the benefit of others but not to the patient and not to the taxpayer. One of the most egregious examples is the pharmacy gag clause. With a pharmacy gag clause, when at the pharmacy, if it will be cheaper for you to pay cash for the drug as opposed to through your insurance deductible, the pharmacist, through his contract, may be restricted from telling you that. If the pharmacist does tell you that, the pharmacist will lose his contract with the pharmacy benefit manager. So you will pay more by paying your insurance deductible instead of less by paying cash for the drug. That money is taken away from you and is given to the pharmacy benefit manager. That is wrong. This bill, the Patient Right to Know Drug Prices Act, gives that power to the pharmacists and to the patients to come up with a solution that will be best for the patients' health and their pocketbooks.

By the way, it does more than that. It also requires that biologic and biosimilar drug manufacturers report potential pay-to-delay agreements to the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice, as is currently done with small molecule grams and generic manufacturers. This will allow biosimilars to get to the market sooner--again, saving the patient money and saving the taxpayer money.

Yet there will be an amendment put forward that will dilute the impact of this bill and will restrict the provisions of this bill to those plans that are self-insured.

I will point out that the three largest pharmacy benefit managers control 72 percent of the market for drug distribution--multibillion- dollar corporations that operate across all States.

It clearly falls within Congress's purview, as it regulates interstate commerce, to pass a bill such as that. In defeating this bill or in watering it down, it is, again, one more way to take power away from patients and money away from patients and from taxpayers to the benefit not of the patient and her health and her pocketbook but of the large PBM.

The Patient Right to Know Drug Prices Act is a key step in our fight to lower drug costs for patients. I ask my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation, which will give patients the power to save money on their prescriptions, and to support the bill as is.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise to speak about Judge Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court.

Let me begin by saying the Senate has been hard at work vetting and confirming good judges to the bench. So far, the Senate has confirmed 60 of President Trump's judicial nominees--a historic pace that includes 26 circuit judges, 33 district court judges, and Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court. This week, we will confirm even more, as the confirmation process continues for President Trump's second Supreme Court nominee, Judge Brett Kavanaugh.

I would also like to point out, the last week or two, the Democratic minority has been very cooperative with this, appointing good, conservative Republicans to the district and circuit courts, but let me continue about Judge Kavanaugh.

First, let's just say he is well regarded by his peers. He is a mainstream, independent jurist who is extremely well regarded across the political spectrum. All you have to do is look at Judge Kavanaugh's professional career to see why. His record at the Supreme Court as a clerk is stellar. The Supreme Court has adopted positions advanced by his opinions at least 13 times and overruled him only once.

On the DC Circuit Court, Democratic-appointed judges were just as likely to join Judge Kavanaugh's published majority opinions in full as his Republican-appointed colleagues, about 88 percent of the time.

Two of President Obama's Solicitors General praised Judge Kavanaugh, saying he is an ``incredibly brilliant, careful person'' who is ``very gracious . . . on the bench and off.'' One said: ``He carries out all phases of his responsibilities as a judge in the way you'd want, in an exemplary way.''

That said, Judge Kavanaugh is acknowledged as being highly qualified, and even though they are on opposite sides of the aisle, these legal figures respect Judge Kavanaugh's qualifications and depth of experience.

Lisa Blatt, who worked in the Solicitor General's Office for 13 years during the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations, said:

Sometimes a superstar is just a superstar. This is the case

with Judge Brett Kavanaugh, who had long been considered the

most qualified nominee for the Supreme Court if Republicans

secured the White House. The Senate should confirm him.

She also said:

I expect my friends on the left will criticize me for

speaking up for Kavanaugh. But we all benefit from having

smart, qualified and engaged judges on our highest court,

regardless of the administration that nominates them.

I have to say, on a personal level, when I met Judge Kavanaugh in my office, I was incredibly impressed. We talked about his views on the role of the judiciary, original intent, and the importance of interpreting the Constitution as written. It was clear he had a deep and thorough grasp of the law, but you don't have to take my word for it, and you don't have to take Lisa Blatt's word. She is not the only one who has attested that Judge Kavanaugh is a legal ``superstar.''

Recently, over 100 students, alumni, and faculty at Yale College wrote that Judge Kavanaugh is a ``distinguished jurist'' with ``deep conviction and integrity.''

The American Bar Association, which Democratic leaders have called

their gold standard of judicial evaluations, unanimously rated Judge Kavanaugh as ``well qualified.''

Last week, 144 law professors from around the country wrote to the Judiciary Committee in support of Judge Kavanaugh, saying they ``all agree'' he ``displays outstanding scholarly and academic virtues and that he would bring to the Court an exceptional record of distinction in judicial service.'' These 144 law professors also stated that they are ``impressed by Judge Kavanaugh's long record of teaching and mentoring students of diverse backgrounds.''

As an example, perhaps, members of the Harvard Law School chapter of the Black Law Students Association have been vocal in their support for Judge Kavanaugh, citing the positive impact he has had on their chapter. They know his character. It is the same humility and generosity we all saw just a couple days after he was nominated in July, when he was spotted serving hot meals to the needy alongside other volunteers with Catholic Charities, a ministry he has been a part of for a long time.

I will also say, he is one of the most transparent nominees in history. This is the nominee Senate Democrats labeled ``extreme''? Please. We know most of them announced their opposition to Judge Kavanaugh before his confirmation hearing even started. We also know many of them announced their opposition before he was even named. We know they did so because they want a Supreme Court full of liberal activists who will help them create law instead of following the law.

That is not just Kavanaugh. He is a mainstream, independent jurist who respects the Constitution. He doesn't try to rewrite it for political reasons, to fit his own opinions about the way it should be. That is apparently why Democrats are concocting a new reason every day to explain why they wish to block him. Their latest excuse is they want more time to see documents.

Let's be absolutely clear. Judge Kavanaugh's professional record is the most transparent record the Senate has ever had for a Supreme Court nominee, and it is not even close.

The Senate Judiciary Committee has received more pages of executive branch records for Judge Kavanaugh's nomination than for the last five confirmed Supreme Court nominees combined. The committee has reviewed more than 440,000 pages of documents submitted from Judge Kavanaugh's time in the executive branch--the largest volume of records for any Supreme Court nominee ever.

During his time on the bench, Judge Kavanaugh has authored more than 300 opinions and heard more than 2,000 cases. No less than nine Senate Democrats cited their review of his opinions when they announced weeks ago that they would oppose him. They said they had seen enough of his record. Now we are supposed to believe they want to see more of his record. It is obvious this argument is not in good faith.

Indeed, I think it is fair to say that the Democratic Senators' disruptions show desperation. We see this desperation in some of the most shameful political theatrics we have seen, and those are from the Senate Democrats in the committee hearing today. It is clear they are increasingly desperate to resist this incredibly qualified nominee. They are throwing everything and anything against the wall, but nothing is sticking.

Today, we learned that the Democratic minority leader plotted a coordinated protest strategy over the weekend with his Members, and they all agreed to disrupt and protest the hearing. They would like to think it was a spontaneous outburst of righteousness anger, but indeed it was a planned strategy in order to draw attention to themselves.

I would remind my colleagues across the aisle that this is the United States of America, not a third-world legislative body where they toss decorum out the window, scream, shout, and throw chairs and punches in order to thwart the legislative process.

Those who are interested in preserving and protecting our democratic process and institutions should shun the chaos Senate Democrats appear intent upon creating. In this country, we debate ideas and nominees on the merits. I urge my colleagues to do just that. If they do, I am confident they will understand the broad support, the justified support Brett Kavanaugh has for his nomination to the Supreme Court.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise to speak about John McCain.

As one of those rising to pay tribute, I am perhaps one of the least qualified to do so. I say that because although John McCain and I served together, it was only for the last 4 years of his storied Senate career, and we were not on any common committees.

But let me say why I am qualified. In that brief period, I saw firsthand that of which others with many more years of acquaintance rise and speak. I speak of 2014, when I was running for Senate for the first time, and John McCain came to Louisiana to campaign on my behalf. It was remarkable to see how veterans responded to him. We would go-- oh, my gosh, it was the sort of schedule that is legendary for John McCain. We started off in Covington, LA, then went to New Orleans, then went to Baton Rouge, to Lafayette, drove up the length of the State to Shreveport, and then came back to New Orleans--all in 1 day. Others would have been tired. He was energized.

He taught me about social media. Folks would come up to him and wish to have their picture taken. He would take a selfie, and say: Post it on Facebook.

Sure enough, they did. In that way, his contact with people went from just a group meeting--always incredibly well attended--to the individual meeting, to everybody those folks were reaching out to through Facebook.

But even that is not the story I wish to tell.

We had an incredibly intense schedule in which we were meeting one person after another. In Shreveport, as we were walking out, a fellow handed John McCain a note. He said: Senator, this is a fellow who is a fellow Vietnam vet, and he is in the hospital now and cannot come. He would love to hear from you. Here is his phone number.

So we get in the car, and John picks up his phone and he calls. He says: Hello, my friend, this is John McCain. I am sorry you are under the weather. Tell me about it.

He spoke to the man as one Vietnam veteran to another, reaching through the wire, letting that man know he was deeply cared for and honored for his service to our country and his sacrifice for our country.

That tells me a measure of John McCain--in this incredibly intense schedule, finding that moment to reach out to an individual to let him know how much he was valued as an American.

So I rise to speak briefly. I started by saying that I am probably among the least qualified, but, perhaps, because of my brief interaction and the quality of the interaction and the intensity of how John McCain presented himself, not just to me, not just to his fellow Americans, but to all of the voters of Louisiana, I might be the best qualified--the best qualified because, even in that glimpse, you see that which made John McCain a great American: bringing it all, all the time, for everybody who lives in this country, to represent this country as best as possible to the rest of the world, and in so doing serving not just our country but the rest of the world.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I, too, want to emphasize the importance of introducing young students to computer science and coding courses as part of their education. I thank my colleague and friend, Senator Cantwell, for working with me on this issue. The answer is yes. Our legislation, the High School CODES Act, will incentivize states to allow coding and computer science classes to satisfy an advanced math, science, or foreign language graduation credit.

Now, this is not to replace the basic math, science, and foreign language classes all students need, but to allow students who do not need to take Calculus II or III to instead take a computer science or coding course. The CODES Act does not mandate curriculum on States; it gives them the flexibility to provide students with the type of education that best fits their needs. It gives students more opportunity to succeed in our rapidly changing economy.

According to code.org, computing occupations are the No. 1 source of all new wages in America and make up over half of all projected new jobs in STEM fields; yet, computer science is marginalized throughout our education system, with fewer than half of U.S. schools offering any computer science course, and only 8 percent of STEM graduates studying it.

In my home State of Louisiana, there are currently more than 2,300 open computing jobs. The average salary for a computing occupation in Louisiana is approximately $67,600, about $26,000 higher than the average salary in my State.

I applaud the State legislature for creating the LaSTEM Advisory Council to oversee the creation and delivery of STEM programs in Louisiana and for the LA Board of Elementary and Secondary Education for approving new STEM pathways for students allowing new, industry- based courses to count towards math and sciences for graduation.

In addition to thanking Senator Cantwell, I want to thank education committee Chairman Alexander for his support for including provisions in the reauthorization of the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act that effectively captures the original intent of our bipartisan bill. We are also pleased the chairman agreed to report language and a letter to Education Secretary DeVos expressing the intent of the provisions. Lastly, I am pleased that Senator Cantwell and my amendment is included in the minibus appropriations bill highlighting the importance of funding for coding courses in K-12 education.

These are positive steps that will give more students the opportunity to take computer science and coding classes.

Mr. President, last week, the House voted overwhelmingly, by a vote of 366 to 52, to extend the National Flood Insurance Program for 4 months, until November 30, 2018. The purpose is to allow for the continued reform efforts of this program so as to make it more accountable, more affordable, and more sustainable. Two weeks ago, the Senate demonstrated almost unanimous support for a 6-month extension of the National Flood Insurance Program, by a vote of 94 to 5.

The NFIP, as the Flood Insurance Program is called, insures properties in every State--approximately 6 million homes and businesses and over $1.2 trillion in assets. The current law has it set to expire at 11:59 p.m. tomorrow, on July 31. If the NFIP is not extended, people will not be able to renew their flood insurance policies or purchase new ones. That means more will be uninsured during the peak of hurricane season. That is not acceptable. According to the National Association of Realtors, letting the NFIP expire would cost up to 40,000 property sales per month, or about 1,330 home sales per day.

Last week, the Senate tried to pass the short-term extension that the House had passed by unanimous consent, but we were unable to. So, on Friday, cloture was filed in the Senate on the 4-month extension that the House passed. The problem is that the cloture vote will not occur until Wednesday, setting up the final passage of the extension on Thursday. That means that the NFIP would lapse for 2 days.

This is totally avoidable. Its delay does nothing to advance reforms within the NFIP, many of which I proposed a year ago in a long-term reauthorization bill that I had introduced with colleagues from New York and West Virginia. A lapse does disrupt real estate transactions for the 2,600 Americans who are trying to close on their homes--perhaps on their first homes--over the next couple of days. By the way, these are not million-dollar properties, for 98.5 percent of NFIP properties are in parishes or counties with median household incomes of below $100,000, and 62 percent are in parishes or counties with median household incomes below the national average of $54,000.

Congress has always honored the flood insurance policies that NFIP policyholders have had. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to expedite the consideration of the National Flood Insurance Program's 4-month extension and pass it by unanimous consent.

I yield the floor.