Floor Statements

Madam President, I ask to speak under leaders' time.

Madam President, before I begin, I want to express how glad we all are to hear that Representative Scalise is doing better. Over the weekend, his condition changed from critical to serious. It seems he has a ways to go, but we are all very happy to hear that the signs are more positive and moving in the right direction.

Madam President, I would also like to express my heartfelt condolences to the families of the seven U.S. Navy sailors who were lost in the crash of the USS Fitzgerald. The loss of these seven men in peacetime, in such a bizarre and rare accident, is nothing short of a tragedy. I expect the Navy will conduct a thorough and full investigation to figure out what went wrong and hold all responsible parties accountable. For now, our prayers are with the families of the seven sailors who lost their lives in service to this great country.

Madam President, on healthcare, we are only 2 weeks away from the July 4th recess, and my friends on the other side say we are going to vote on a healthcare bill before the break. Democrats still have not seen the bill. The Republican Health and Human Services Secretary has not seen the bill. The American people have not seen the bill. I am sure many Republican Senators have not seen the bill either. The White House spokesman could not even say if the President has seen the bill.

This is a bill that would likely reorder one-sixth of the American economy and have life-and-death consequences for millions of Americans. It is being discussed in secret, with no committee hearings, no debate, no amendments, no input from the minority. This is the most glaring departure from normal legislative procedure that I have ever seen. My friend the majority leader used to sing the praises of regular order and wax poetic about the wisdom of the committee process and an open amendment process.

Republicans criticized Democrats vehemently for passing the Affordable Care Act with only Democratic votes, and that is after we accepted dozens of Republican amendments during a robust hearing process. Now that the shoe is on the other foot and Republicans are in charge, all of those concerns and criticisms have disappeared. No committee process, no hearings, nothing--quite the opposite of what they called for 5 years ago. What gall.

Why are my Republican friends engaging in this farce of a legislative process? Why are Republicans willing to engage in such blatant hypocrisy, contradicting all of the things they have said about good procedure in the Senate? What are they afraid of? There is only one reason Republicans are doing this: They are ashamed of their bill. The Republicans are writing their healthcare bill under the cover of darkness because they are ashamed of it, plain and simple. They are ashamed that the bill will likely cause millions to lose their healthcare insurance. They are ashamed because it will increase costs for older and sicker Americans--all to pass along a big, fat tax break to the wealthiest among us, the folks who need it the least. No wonder they do not want to show anyone the bill. They are ashamed of it.

This radical departure from normal procedure on a bill of such consequence leaves the Senate minority little choice but to depart from normal procedure as well. Starting this evening, Democrats will begin objecting to all unanimous consent requests in the Senate, save for honorary resolutions. We will seek, in as many ways as we can, as many times as we can, to refer the House-passed healthcare bill to committee, where it can be vetted, debated, and amended in the open for the American people to see, as is their right.

Tonight, Democrats will hold the floor late into the evening in a series of speeches to highlight just how unprecedented this process is. If Republicans are not going to allow debate on their bill on the floor or in committee, Democrats will make opportunities to debate.

These are merely the first steps we are prepared to take in order to shine a light on the shameful TrumpCare bill and reveal to the public the GOP's backroom deal-making.

Of course there is another way. On Friday, I sent a letter to my friend the majority leader requesting that we hold an all-Senators meeting in the Old Senate Chamber to discuss a bipartisan way forward on healthcare. We should all share common goals--improving the healthcare system by lowering costs, raising the quality of care, and stabilizing the marketplaces. Let's sit down together, all 100 of us, and talk about how we can achieve those results together.

That option, I say to the Republican leader, is on the table, and I hope he will not refuse it, but if Republicans will not relent and debate their healthcare bill in the open for the American people to see, they should not expect business as usual in the Senate.

Madam President, finally, on another matter entirely, I continue to be alarmed by the wave of criticism from the far right of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. It seems obvious that, because Mr. Mueller--one of the most respected and trusted men in Washington--is in charge of investigating Russian interference in our elections and any other issues that arise out of that investigation, the far-right, special interest partisans have set out on a despicable campaign to smear his character and muddy the waters of his investigation.

I just want to remind my colleagues and the American people that there is no one more qualified or more trusted to do this job than Robert Mueller. He spent almost his entire adult life in service to his country. He is a decorated veteran of the Vietnam war and served as U.S. attorney for 12 years. He was appointed by a Republican President, President George Bush, to lead the FBI in 2001 and served his full 10- year term with distinction, and then he was asked to spend an additional 2 years under President Obama. Congress had to pass a special waiver to allow him to continue in his FBI post, and the vote was unanimous. Every Republican--many in this Chamber--voted unanimously to ratify Robert Mueller for another 2 years as FBI Director. What an endorsement--a great endorsement. That vote made Mr. Mueller the longest serving FBI Director since J. Edgar Hoover and the only FBI Director to serve under Presidents of both parties.

Mr. Mueller represents the best of public service. He will pursue this investigation without regard to politics or pressure of any kind, and that is exactly what America needs.

The chorus of extreme commentators and media personalities who seek to curry favor with the President by trying to tear down this man of great integrity is only heaping dishonor on themselves. Worse yet, they are trying to discredit our most important democratic institution--the rule of law. These critics know Mr. Mueller is a straight arrow, and many of them said as much when he was appointed, but because he is in a position to examine the President's actions and perhaps to take action, they are attacking his character.

This is not, my colleagues, a political game. This is a very serious investigation about foreign interference in our elections--something that eats at, that corrodes the roots of our democracy, the very wellspring of our being and pride as a nation.

The man leading this investigation ought to be trusted by the American people, and over the course of his long, distinguished career, he has certainly earned that trust.

Again, I urge that these attacks on Mr. Mueller cease and that my friends on the other side of the aisle join me in defending his reputation. The critics are going much too far.

I yield the floor and ask that the Senator wait 1 minute so that I might have a word with him.

Madam President, we have a number of us gathered here this evening because we are so, so appalled--and that is the word--by the process that is going on with healthcare.

The idea that we could affect one-sixth of the Nation's economy--the life and death, literally, of millions of Americans; the whole structure of our healthcare system, affecting doctors, nurses, and rural hospital workers--and that we could do all of that in such darkness, behind such closed doors is the greatest miscarriage of legislative practice that I have seen since I have been here in the House and Senate.

We heard our colleagues, when the ACA came up, talk about an open process: Read the bill. My good friend the leader will say: Well, we are going to have an amendment process. No, we are not. Unless we change reconciliation, we will have a mere 10 hours of debate on our side and then amendments seriatim for something as important as this? To say that we are having regular order, to say that we are having an amendment process, in all due respect, is a joke.

Let me go over when we were in charge to show the complete contradiction. The Senate Finance Committee held more than 50 hearings--Democrats and Republicans.

How many hearings has the Senate Finance Committee had on this bill, this unknown bill? None. On the House bill--they are using the House bill, as I understand it, as a model. None.

A markup, 8 days--can we get any commitment from our friends on the Republican side that we will have 8 days of markup in the Finance Committee when their bill is ready? I doubt it. Some 130 amendments were considered. Two dozen Republican amendments were agreed to--all in the committee process.

Then, a bill went to the HELP Committee. There were 47 bipartisan hearings, roundtables, and walkthroughs. They considered nearly 300 amendments during the 13-day markup. That was one of the longest in history, as it should have been on such a major bill. There were 160 Republican amendments. Our ranking member on the HELP Committee couldn't be here because of plane delays, but she will augment that when she gets here.

The Senate Finance Committee posted its legislation online for 6 days before the markup. I ask rhetorically of my friend the majority leader: When his bill is ready, is it going to be posted for 6 days prior to debate or markup? Are the American people, our doctors, our nurses, our patients, and the cancer care groups going to get a chance to see it? I doubt it. That is not what it seems like.

The Senate spent 25 consecutive days in session on healthcare reform. Again, I would ask my friend the leader, rhetorically: How many days are we going to spend on it under reconciliation?

So, my friends, this is a travesty. Ask yourself, America: Why are our Republican colleagues rushing through a bill in the dark of night?

I will tell you why. They don't want you, Mr. and Mrs. American, to know about this bill. They don't want you to see that it cuts healthcare for millions. They don't want you to see that it will reduce opioid treatment. They don't want you to see that it will hurt people in nursing homes. They don't want you to see that millions will lose coverage and many more will get such minimal coverage that it will not help them unless, God forbid, they get the most serious of illnesses. That is what they don't want you to see.

They are not going to get away with it because we know one thing: Even if the Senators don't get to see the bill and even if the leader, who is a very good political person, gets 51 votes, the American people will then see the bill, and they will be aghast. They will wonder why they believed President Trump's promises that costs would go down and benefits would go up. They will wonder why they believed the promises that he would not cut Medicaid, Medicare, or Social Security.

It is no conciliation to us, but our Republican friends--House, Senate, White House--will reap the whirlwind. It would be better for them--for them--to debate the bill in open process, even if they keep all their votes, because people will learn about the bill.

When you do a bill in the dark of night, things happen that no one knows about. There are unintended consequences that only a thorough vetting can reveal. When you do things in the dark of night, there are individual accommodations that are made that are going to look ugly when they become public. So the only consolation we will have on this side--small consolation that it is--is the political blunder that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are making that will not serve them well.

I would make one more point. So why are they doing it this way? Why are they being so irrational, hurting people, doing it in the dark of night? One reason. We know who the paymaster is here, we know who the motivator is--the handful of wealthy Americans who will get a huge tax break, benefiting from taking the dollars of healthcare away from millions of average Americans. That is what really runs the other side of the aisle. I had hoped it wouldn't run Donald Trump. He didn't campaign like that, but it is running him too. That is the reason and the only reason.

We will fight hard to prevent this bill from occurring. We will use the procedural means we have, small as they might be. We will. It is a small consolation to us, again, that our Republican colleagues will pay such an awful price to help their wealthy donors.

Maybe it is not too late. Maybe the leader or maybe some of his colleagues on the other side of the aisle will say that as much as they might disagree with the ACA, to have a process in the dark of night is wrong.

We would welcome discussion. That is why we wrote the leader and asked him to have a closed session in the Old Senate Chamber with Democrats and Republicans--without the press, without anything else--to talk to each other. Maybe he will reconsider his rejection of that.

I have a few parliamentary inquiries.

First, is the Chair aware of the number of consecutive days in session and the number of hours the Senate considered H.R. 3590, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act?

Twenty-five days of consecutive session on a bill that was partisan in the sense that Republicans were angry with it, but we still had the courage of our convictions to have a debate on the floor.

The second Parliamentary inquiry: Is the Chair aware that a 25- consecutive-day period of session ranks second in terms of the longest period of consecutive session in the history of the U.S. Senate?

Again, when the shoe was on the other foot, we Democrats, knowing we would take brickbats, knowing there would be criticism, but for the good of the process and the good of the country, we were willing to have debate, hearings, and amendments. Unless there is a dramatic change or I am misreading where my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are going, they are not going there.

Unanimous Consent Requests--H.R. 1628

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that no motion to proceed to Calendar No. 120, H.R. 1628, the American Health Care Act, be in order until the bill has been the subject of a public hearing in the Committee on Finance.

Madam President, I heard what the leader had to say. I think anyone who has observed the reconciliation vote-arama process knows it is not a robust amendment process. There are ways to correct that. Certainly, we have our differences pretty much on partisan lines between repealing ACA and amending it and making it better, but what we ought to be doing is discussing it with one another.

So I would renew my request to the majority leader. What is the harm in us gathering in the Old Senate Chamber, 100 Senators, Democrats and Republicans, and maybe trying to come together? Is there any harm? I would renew my request that he join us in that because what the American people clamor for is some kind of bipartisan coming together. We have different views on how that should occur.

You say: Repeal. Join us in repeal.

We think that would hurt millions of people.

We say: Make it better.

You say that the ACA is irretrievable. I don't agree. But why can't we join together 100 strong in the Senate Chamber, no press, and just discuss our views with one another? Maybe something bipartisan and helpful could come out of this instead of this dark, hidden process. I would renew my request.

I would just renew my request for one other--the leader said no. I get it.

One more. Will we have time--more than 10 hours since this is a complicated bill--to review the bill? Will it be available to us and the public for more than 10 hours before we have to vote for it, since our Republican leader has said there will be plenty of time for a process where people can make amendments? We need time to prepare those amendments.

Will it be more than 10 hours? That is my question.

I rest my case.

First, I thank my friend and colleague for his outstanding words on DACA. No one has fought more for the DACA kids than he has, not just in the last year but over the last decade. The fact that so many of them are here is, in good part, due to his great work and effort. Thank you.

Thoughts and Prayers for the Victims of the Congressional Baseball

Practice Shooting

Mr. President, we are still all a bit shaken by the horrors of yesterday's shooting. It was a senseless act of violence, made even more chilling by the circumstances at a baseball practice for a bipartisan charity event. I understand that Representative Scalise is still in critical condition following surgery last night. When we hear the word ``critical'' attached to his condition, it sends shivers down our spines. We hope and pray for a quick and full recovery. I know that all of his House colleagues are wishing him well right now, and I want him to know his friends in the Senate do as well.

The same goes for the other four who were injured in the attack, including two members of our Capitol Police Force. Our thoughts and prayers go with them as well. We remain grateful for their service and bravery and for the service and bravery of all of our Capitol police officers. Their presence at the field yesterday--the presence of those two Capitol police officers at the field yesterday prevented a bad situation from getting worse and undoubtedly saved lives. Had the two brave police officers not acted or if they had not been there, it might well have been a massacre.

We would all be wise to reflect on the importance of civility in our Nation's politics this morning. We disagree vehemently at times in Congress and folks out in the country do, too, but the level of nastiness, vitriol, and hate that has seeped into our politics must be excised. Let us all strive at all times--whatever our disagreements--to respect those who disagree with us, to seek a greater understanding of them, to walk in their moccasins--as Native Americans have always said. Let us strive always to conduct our politics with civility.

I was heartened to hear that the congressional baseball game will still be played this evening. Let it be a symbol that hate and violence do not cast too long or too great a shadow, that we can and will come together this evening, and the game will go on. I will be going to the game with the three congressional leaders as a show of solidarity.

Mr. President, last evening, the Senate showed it can come together. Last night, we voted, in an overwhelmingly bipartisan fashion, to strengthen a package of sanctions against Russia. It was the product of diligent weeks of bipartisan negotiations. I saw the Senator from Maryland behind me a few minutes ago. He deserves lots of credit, as do the Senators from Ohio, Tennessee, and Idaho. The final result is a very good one for our country because yesterday the U.S. Senate said to Mr. Putin, in no uncertain terms, that when he violates international norms and interferes with our election, he will not escape reproach.

Not only did we pass a new round of tough sanctions for Russia's meddling in our election, we codified existing sanctions into law, making them harder to lift, and we moved to make the Congress--not the President--the final arbiter of sanctions relief when necessary. Any ideas of the President that he can lift sanctions on his own, for any reason, are dashed by this legislation.

The House of Representatives should take notice that 97 Senators voted in favor of this package. I hope Leader Ryan will move with the same haste to pass this package of sanctions through the House. I hope the President will sign it. The months-long effort to forge bipartisan consensus on Russia sanctions--an issue that gets to the vital interests of our country, the wellspring of our democracy--gives me hope that Democrats and Republicans can come together and work together on a number of big issues this year.

There are several issues coming before this body soon where we can come together: another budget--passing another budget; reauthorizing flood insurance and children's health insurance; raising the debt ceiling. Each of those issues will, by definition, demand bipartisan effort.

A lesson that all of us have learned here in the Senate is that legislation is made better and much more likely to pass when both parties are involved in crafting it.

I have noticed the media has been questioning all morning why Congress isn't more bipartisan. We should be. But when the Russia sanctions agreement passes and the budget deal passes, both major bipartisan efforts, they are proof that we can get things done together. If those agreements were given a little more recognition by the media--the fact that we can at times, at least, work in a bipartisan way--that would help. For too many of us on both sides of the aisle, it seems as though when there is divisiveness, it gets far more attention in the media than when there is comity between the parties.

Healthcare Legislation

Mr. President, finally, I would suggest to my colleagues that the most immediate place where we can translate the rhetoric calling for us to come together into reality is on healthcare. A goal many of us share on both sides of the aisle is to improve the law, bring costs down for consumers, stabilize the marketplace, and make it easier for older Americans to afford the ever-rising out-of-pocket costs of prescription drugs.

I would conclude by stating that we can make the rhetoric of bipartisanship not empty by both parties coming together and working together on healthcare. We have shown thus far in this Congress with the passage of the budget and Russia sanctions that significant legislation can best be served by bipartisanship. Opening up the process and having us all come together on healthcare would be a very good, concrete reaffirmation of bipartisanship and would translate the rhetoric--not bad at all--that we have heard here today into reality.

In conclusion, the rhetoric about bipartisanship can be strengthened. Hopefully healthcare is a place where we can strengthen it, by opening up the process, having hearings, and having open discussion.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the time during the quorum calls on S. 722 be charged equally to both sides.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I join with the majority leader in offering our prayers for those who are injured.

I was absolutely shaken by the news of a shooting early this morning at the baseball field in Alexandria where many of my friends and colleagues were practicing for the annual Congressional Baseball Game, an event that brings us together each year.

It has been reported that Representative Scalise, the House whip, was shot during the attack, as were two brave members of the Capitol Police Force and others, including a staffer. Let us pray that they and any others who were injured are able to recover quickly.

This morning is the most sobering reminder of how thankful we should be for the service of the Capitol Police Force, who put their lives on the line day in and day out for us to be safe. I could not be more grateful that Capitol Police was there at a time to prevent this attack from being any worse than it was. I was in the gym with Senator Paul, who had been there, and he had told me that, had these two Capitol police officers, who were part of Congressman Scalise's detail, not been there, it might have been a massacre because there would have been no one to respond. But their bravery is exemplary of all the Capitol Police Force, and we thank them.

The entire Senate family sends its thoughts and prayers to those who were wounded and our gratitude to the police officers and first responders who were at the scene.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from Ohio speak next for 2 minutes, the Senator from Idaho speak after that for 5, and I will conclude with 5 minutes. The vote will be held thereafter.

Mr. President, in a few minutes, we will vote on an amendment that consists of a package of Russia sanctions. I would like to endorse the amendment in the strongest possible terms and hope we can get all of our colleagues to vote for it.

It was negotiated by a bipartisan group of Senators who did a great job: Senators Corker and Cardin, Crapo and Brown, with a great deal of help from Senators Shaheen, Durbin, Menendez. Leader McConnell and I worked extremely well on this issue together, which I hope portends future things we can do together in a bipartisan way. This amendment is as bipartisan as it gets, and rightly so because this is an issue that should unite Members of both parties and concern Americans of all political stripes.

Over the past several years, President Putin and his allies and the Russian oligarchy have committed several sanctionable offenses. President Putin has violated the sovereignty of its neighbor, Ukraine, by annexing Crimea. He is guilty of human rights abuses, including propping up the brutal Assad regime in Syria, and stifling political dissent and the human rights of his own people. In Mr. Putin's Russia, elections are neither fair nor free. The media is controlled by the state, and the political opposition is hardly tolerated.

This is a regime that has routinely flouted international norms and agreements; that severely and brutishly pursues its own self-interest without regard to legitimate rights of other nations and peoples. For that, the U.S. Congress passed a series of economic sanctions to squeeze Putin and his allies and show them that the United States strongly condemns these actions, and that was before Russia conducted a high-level campaign to interfere in the American election.

The Russia sanctions legislation we are about to vote on would address these two critical issues. By codifying existing sanctions and creating a process for congressional review of any decision to weaken or lift them, we are ensuring that the United States continues to punish Putin for his reckless and destabilizing actions. It is particularly significant that a bipartisan coalition is seeking to reestablish Congress, not the President, as the final arbiter of sanctions relief, considering that this administration has been too eager--far too eager in my mind--to put sanctions relief on the table. These additional sanctions will send a powerful bipartisan statement that Russia and any other nation that might try to interfere with our elections will be punished.

There is no process more sacred in our democracy than the guarantee of free and fair elections, no principle more enshrined in our system of government than the people participating in our noble democratic experiment at the ballot box. That bedrock principle, the fundamental right was attacked by Mr. Putin. If we did nothing--or we reduce sanctions, as the President sometimes has talked about--we would eat at the wellspring of our democracy. Foreign powers influencing whom we elect is something the Founding Fathers feared, and we are doing everything we can in this body to try and stop.

With the upcoming vote, the U.S. Senate is saying to President Putin: You will be held accountable for your actions. Foreign interference in our democracy has been a concern since the founding of the Republic. It is the origin of the emoluments clause in the Constitution. In Federalist 68, Alexander Hamilton writes that ``these most deadly adversaries of the republican government [come] chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain improper ascendant in our councils.'' Every ``practical obstacle,'' Hamilton

said, ``should be opposed to [such] cabal, intrigue, and corruption.''

We cannot let Russia's meddling in our elections go unpunished, lest they ever consider such interference again, nor any other nation in the world. They must know that if any future attempts are made to degrade our democracy, the retribution of the U.S. Congress will be sure and will be swift.

I urge a ``yes'' vote on the amendment.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, last night Senators reached a bipartisan agreement on a package of Russia sanctions for the Senate to vote on as an amendment to the pending Iran sanctions.

It was the result of several days of negotiations and hard work. The Republican leader and I spent a lot of time on this, and I thank him for that, as did Senators Crapo, Brown, Cardin, Corker, Shaheen, Durbin, and Menendez. I thank each of them for their efforts and their expertise in getting this done.

In particular, I thank Senator Cardin, ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee, who is one of the most trusted voices in our caucus on this issue. He did an excellent job of forging a bipartisan consensus on this committee with little regard for the credit he would receive. I also want to thank Senator Brown, our ranking member on Banking, who has been steadfast in making sure we would get a good, effective sanctions bill done. We wouldn't have done this also without Senators Shaheen, Durbin, Menendez, and their staffs. I thank all of them.

The final result of these negotiations is a good result for our country. By codifying the existing sanctions and requiring congressional review of any decision to weaken or lift them, we are ensuring that the United States continues to punish President Putin for his reckless and destabilizing actions. I believe it is particularly significant that a bipartisan coalition is seeking to reestablish Congress as a final arbiter of sanctions relief, no matter what the administration does, particularly, considering that this administration has been too eager to put sanctions relief on the table. These additional sanctions will also send a powerful and bipartisan statement to Russia and any other country that might try to interfere in our elections that they will be punished, and Congress will stand firm in making sure they are punished, Democrats and Republicans.

Again, I thank my Republican and Democratic colleagues for putting party aside, for doing what is best for the country. I hope this agreement quickly passes both the House and Senate, and we hope the President will sign this legislation as well, even though it cedes the power to Congress.

Mr. President, I am frankly disturbed by the new strategy on the hard right to discredit Special Counsel Mueller and sully his reputation. Their strategy is clear. They know or suspect that facts might not be good for the President so they are trying to vilify the man who is in charge of finding them, but they have chosen the wrong man. Anyone who engages in these baseless attacks about Mr. Mueller's character is only heaping dishonor upon themselves.

Mr. Mueller is known for his service to America and for his integrity. He is a straight arrow. He is a Republican. Only a few weeks ago, these same hard-right commentators and pundits were praising Mr. Mueller. They were lauding his qualities. Even Attorney General Jeff Sessions has unequivocally praised Mr. Mueller in the past for his service and credibility. Sessions said, Mueller's ``integrity is undoubted . . . his experience and love of country is undoubted.''

To these hard-right commentators who are attacking this honorable man who is trying to do a job for our country and see that the rule of law is obeyed, read what Attorney General Sessions has said.

Now, because Director Comey's testimony has made President Trump's actions less and less defendable, these hard-right commentators have turned tail. They have started an ad hominem, nasty assault on a career public servant and a very fine man.

A close associate of the President, Mr. Christopher Ruddy, has even insinuated that the President might fire Special Counsel Mueller. I can't think of a worse move for the President at this time. I would have him look back in history and see what happened to a President who tried to do the same thing.

I have one question. What are these people who are attacking Mueller afraid of? Are they afraid of what Mr. Mueller is going to find? Is the White House afraid of what Mr. Mueller is going to uncover?

It seems pretty obvious that if they were not worried, they would let Mueller proceed because they would be confident he would find nothing. I find no other legitimate reason why the critics would flip so quickly to attack a man of integrity unless they were worried about what he might find. Again, if the White House truly has nothing to hide, they ought to encourage Special Counsel Mueller to investigate. They should let him do his job.

When people say ``where there is smoke, there is fire,'' they are pointing to actions like this, and it makes the American people distrustful of the White House and their allies.

I know these attacks probably don't bother Mr. Mueller. He has a very strong spine, and he will go after the facts regardless of the noise around him, but they are bothersome, they are wrong, and they are nasty.

One of the most important things in our democracy is a bedrock faith in the rule of law; that no person is above the rule of law. The President's allies are going to attack every single law enforcement agent involved in the Russia investigation. If the White House ever joins in those attacks, it will greatly erode the American people's faith in the rule of law and do significant damage to our democracy at a time when it seems somewhat more fragile than it has in the past. This is not a game. This is not fun.

This is a very serious investigation that is headed by one of the most trusted men in Washington. It is about foreign interference in our elections, something that eats at--that corrodes the very roots of our democracy, the very wellspring of our being, and pride as a nation. I would urge that these attacks on Mr. Mueller be ceased and that my friends on the other side join me in defending his reputation. They have gone a little too far.

Mr. President, finally on healthcare, there are only 11 calendar days of Senate business left before the July 4th recess, and yet Republicans are looking to vote on a final healthcare bill before the deadline, and not a soul outside the Republican caucus has seen the bill. I am not sure that every Member of the Republican caucus inside has seen it.

To everyone in America, this should be a red alert. This should be a red alert for doctors, hospital administrators, and patient groups, groups that represent older Americans, groups that fight for children's healthcare, groups that fight for better treatment for substance abuse and mental health. This should be a red alert for working families across this country whose lives depend on affordable healthcare and yet have no earthly idea what their representatives in Congress might pass in just 2 short weeks.

They might never know. The Republicans have not scheduled a single committee hearing--not one--not a single committee hearing on a bill that would reorganize one-sixth of the American economy, touch the lives of millions of Americans--a life-and-death issue for some--not a single committee hearing or public debate on a bill that would potentially change drastically the way Medicaid is funded, the way women are treated in our healthcare system, the way we treat older Americans and those with preexisting conditions.

Why on Earth haven't we had a single committee hearing on a bill of this magnitude? Why on Earth is this bill being hidden from public view?

There is only one reason. The Republican majority is afraid of the American people learning what is in their healthcare bill. They don't want the American people to know how much they cut and destroy Medicaid or how fat of a tax break they give to the wealthiest few because they know the backlash would be severe. In short, by their actions, it seems our Republican colleagues are ashamed of this bill, and they know their chances of passing the Republican healthcare bill would plummet if they release a bill that looks anything like the House healthcare bill, which only a tiny sliver of Americans support--17 percent in the last poll. The majority of Republicans and the majority of Trump voters are opposed to TrumpCare.

So our Republican colleagues have made a calculation, which is ultimately self-defeating, to keep their healthcare bill hidden from view under lock and key until the last possible moment. Maybe this is the only strategy to pass a bill as unpopular as this

bill is going to be. Maybe it will shield their bill from criticism in the short term, but make no mistake, there will be a reckoning if this bill is passed.

Passing a bill of this scale, with so many consequences for the American people, without telling them what is in it, without telling them how they would fare, the political retribution will be swift. It will be a catastrophe for the Republican Party. I am afraid, worse, this bill will be a catastrophe for the American people.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, before we recess for the caucus lunches, I wish to comment on the upcoming vote on a resolution of disapproval regarding a portion of President Trump's recent arms sales to Saudi Arabia. I have announced that I am in favor of the resolution of disapproval for several reasons.

First, the human rights and humanitarian concerns have been well documented with respect to Yemen. Yemen's story in the Middle East is a tragic one. Yemen's previous President ruled the country for decades with an iron fist and fleeced the country of its resources for his personal gain. He also allowed terrorist groups to enjoy safe haven in Yemen in the days after 9/11.

Today, Yemen remains a country in dire straits. It is on the verge of a famine, and there have been over 100,000 cases of cholera.

To make matters worse, the current conflict in Yemen, which includes the Saudi military, has worsened the humanitarian situation. Selling the kingdom precision weapons in this deal could further exacerbate the crisis.

Second, and of equal concern to me, is an area that hasn't been talked about much in this debate; that is, that the Saudi Government continues to aid and abet terrorism via its support and funding of schools that spread extremist Wahhabi propaganda. Saudi Arabia's support for these Wahhabi madrassas goes back decades. It is responsible for much of the radicalization of Muslim youth in the Middle East and North Africa.

In the past several months, we have witnessed lone-wolf attacks in London and in Tehran and elsewhere around the globe. Though the nature of terrorism has changed, many of the sources are the same. The propagation of Wahhabism, an extreme ideology, continues to fuel radicalism and terrorism around the globe. So if we want to get serious about cracking down on terrorism, the United States should focus--one of the focuses should be--on countering the spread of Wahhabism.

The White House has not clearly articulated how the United States will put pressure on Saudi Arabia to end their support of Wahhabi schools, even as it claims that President Trump's recent visit to Riyadh was focused on curtailing terrorism. Furthermore, the administration has not sufficiently assured Congress that these weapons will not fall into the wrong hands.

Look at Pakistan. It has become a radical place--it wasn't 15 years ago--in good part because of Saudi funding--Saudi individuals who are a good part of the government, some who are friends with the government-- of these madrassas, which taught radicalism to the Pakistani people.

Look at Indonesia, one of the largest countries in the world. It had usually practiced a form of Islam that was mild and tolerant. The Wahhabi schools are now flourishing in Indonesia, and it is becoming a radical place of danger to us.

We have to send a message to Saudi Arabia.

They do some good things. I support their putting pressure, for instance, on the Palestinian Authority to finally make peace with Israel. But they do a lot of bad things. It seems there has almost been a rotten deal between the Saudi monarchy and the Wahhabi clerics to work together. It has to end.

My vote for this resolution of disapproval hopefully can send a message to the Saudis that their behavior in regard to Wahhabism must change. It is hurting the world and eventually will hurt them.

I yield the floor.