Floor Statements

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

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

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, today we celebrate one of our democracy's core attributes: the peaceful transfer of power. It is remarkable. I am always amazed how voters, on a cold November evening in my State, come home from work--they would like to serve dinner to their kids or sit in their favorite chair and watch their favorite TV show, but in quiet dignity, they wait in line and wait their turn to cast their vote. Then everyone awaits the decision. And the next morning, we all abide by it. It is an amazing thing about this democracy. There are no riots and tanks in the streets. It is a great thing. And although I regret the outcome of the election obviously--deeply--I still am awed by how the wellspring of democracy continues to work for 225 years after the Founders put together the remarkable document, the Constitution.

Now it falls to us--Senators from both parties--to promote and defend these principles, as we must every day: the rule of law, equal protection for all Americans under it, and freedom of speech, press, and religion. We must also endeavor to expand opportunity and increase prosperity while broadening the circle of Americans who share in it. The peaceful transfer of power occurred, and our work starts now.

President Trump said in his inaugural address this afternoon:

For too long, a small group in our Nation's capital has

reaped the rewards of government while the people have borne

the cost. Washington flourished--but the people did not share

its wealth.

He promised to combat that trend, but in one of his first acts as President, President Trump made it harder for Americans to afford a mortgage. For working-class Americans, struggling Americans, now it is harder for them

to get a mortgage. What did he do? He reversed a recent decision by the Department of Housing and Urban Development to reduce annual insurance premiums that many borrowers pay, saving new homeowners an average of $500 per year. What a terrible thing to do to homeowners. President Trump, with a flick of the pen, ended that new policy, making it harder for Americans of modest means to obtain their piece of the rock, the American dream: their own home. It took only an hour after his positive words on the inaugural platform for his words to ring hollow. And actions speak louder than words. One hour after talking about helping working people and ending the cabal in Washington that hurts people, he signs a regulation that makes it more expensive for new homeowners to buy mortgages--1 hour later.

I ask the American people--because we Democrats are going to do this. We are going to hold the President accountable. Look at what the President said and then an hour later, look at what the President did. Again, actions speak louder than words. The words on that inaugural platform in relation to this new action ring hollow.

Democrats agree with President Trump on this: The working men and women of America do not need more promises, they need policies that give them a leg up, help them succeed, help them afford a home, for instance. We urge President Trump to reverse this decision and give new homeowners across America their $500 back.

Mr. President, on another matter--nominations--Senators on both sides of the aisle have expressed support for the President's key national security nominees. This evening, we expect to be able to vote on General Kelly and General Mattis, and we look forward to beginning the debate on Congressman Pompeo in the hopes that he can also receive a quick vote, but from there, we intend to have a full and rigorous debate on the President-elect's remaining nominees.

My friends on the other side of the aisle did not want to have a full debate on the merits of these nominees in committee, so they should be prepared to do so on the Senate floor. Over the last several weeks, Republicans have made a mockery of the Cabinet hearing process, trying to jam through nominees in truncated hearings--nominees with serious conflicts of interest and ethical issues unresolved--without giving Senators and the American people a fair chance to question and hear from these nominees.

If ever there were a group of Cabinet nominees who cry out for rigorous scrutiny, it is this one. I have never heard such a parade of potential ethical violations. The President-elect's Cabinet is a swamp Cabinet, full of billionaires and bankers, loaded with conflicts of interest and ethical lapses as far as the eye can see.

Congressman Mulvaney failed to pay taxes on a household worker--the exact same issue that has caused past nominees to withdraw.

Congressman Price is facing serious scrutiny for trading stock with one hand and pushing legislation to boost that stock with the other.

Rex Tillerson has refused to recuse himself from matters relating to ExxonMobil for the length of his term.

Just yesterday we learned that Steve Mnuchin tried to hide his holdings in the Cayman Islands from the Senate Finance Committee.

And, of course, at the top of the list is Betsy DeVos. Her ethics paperwork just came in after the hearing was completed. Did she not want to answer any questions on it? It shows that she was invested in multiple education companies, including companies that have millions of dollars of contracts with the Department of Education to collect on student debt. Senators have not been given an opportunity to question her about these investments because we only got the information after the hearing. Sadly, the list goes on and on.

The President-elect isn't draining the swamp with his Cabinet picks, he is filling it up. It is no wonder that the American people have expressed discontent with how this transition period is going.

These issues that I mentioned, and many others, deserve to be thoroughly and rigorously reviewed by the Senate. If Senate Republicans will not let that happen in hearings, it will happen right here on the floor.

Thank you, Mr. President.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 17, submitted earlier today.

I further ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

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

Mr. President, we received sad news yesterday. We lost a dear friend to many of us here in the Senate, a wonderful man, Tim Mitchell. He had a long battle with brain cancer. He was a member of the floor staff for many years. He did an amazingly outstanding job.

Every organization has what they call unsung heroes. On the battlefield, they are the soldiers, our infantry men and women. In the automobile plant, they are the assembly line workers. In the hospital, they may be the nurses, the clerical workers, or the folks who clean up the floors late at night. Those organizations can't go on without

these people. They are the heart and soul of these organizations. They do their work quietly but proudly.

If you had to pick someone who personified the unsung hero of this body, it would be Tim. He did his job every day. When you talked to him, you could see the pride and the knowledge he had in doing his job and doing his job well. He will be sorely missed by every Member here today, Democrat and Republican.

Let's take a moment to remember Tim and send our best wishes and prayers to his family and his loved ones.

(Moment of silence.)

Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. President, I wish to address a troubling report about the President-elect's nominee for Secretary of Health and Human Services that came out last night. We learned that Congressman Price bought shares in a medical device manufacturing company just days before introducing legislation in the House that would directly benefit that company.

His legislation wasn't broad legislation. It didn't affect health care in general. It specifically blocked a regulation on medical device companies that do hip and knee implants, including the very business he bought stock in. According to CNN, the company Representative Price bought stock in was one of two companies that would have been hardest hit by this new regulation--one of two--and he puts in legislation to repeal it just after buying stock in it.

Again, this is not someone who has Johnson & Johnson stock and then votes to cut Medicare. This is a narrow company that works on hip and knee implants--narrow legislation that deals with undoing some regulations on them. It is really troubling.

These revelations come on top of the report late last year by CQ and the Wall Street Journal that Congressman Price had traded stocks in dozens of health care companies valued at hundreds of thousands of dollars during his time in the House as chair on the Budget Committee, when he introduced, sponsored, or cosponsored several pieces of legislation that impacted these companies.

Yesterday's report makes it clear that this isn't just a couple of questionable trades but, rather, a clear and troubling pattern of Congressman Price trading stock and using his office to benefit the companies in which he was investing.

Our President-elect claims he wants to drain the swamp, but Congressman Price has spent his career filling it up. I have asked the Office of Congressional Ethics to investigate whether or not Congressman Price violated the STOCK Act during his time in office before his nomination moves forward in any way.

It may well be that this trade was illegal. This isn't a witch hunt. These are serious and disquieting allegations. The American people deserve to know if their potential Secretary of Health and Human Services violated a law against insider trading in Congress.

The facts here are a narrow company with hip and knee implants and legislation with hip and knee implants coming soon thereafter, after he bought stock--whoa. These questions cry out for answers before--let me underline ``before''--Nominee Price goes before the Senate Finance Committee.

When the public faith in government is as low as it is today, when politics and campaigns are saturated by money, as they are today, when folks feel their representatives are beholden to special interests before their constituents, reports like the one that just came out about Congressman Price perpetuate that distrust. They add fuel to the fire.

We need to get to the bottom of these allegations and get to the bottom of them quickly. The only way to restore faith in our government and in our most important democratic institutions is to insist upon transparency and ethical behavior by those in positions of the highest public trust. Until a congressional ethics investigation can be completed, this report and his previous trades cast serious doubt on whether Congressman Price is fit to hold the office of Secretary of Health and Human Services.

Finally, Mr. President, I wish to turn to the CBO report that just came out today. The Congressional Budget Office today released a new report outlining the consequences of the Republican plan to repeal the Affordable Care Act. Remember, the CBO is a nonpartisan entity. The numbers don't lie. Try as they might, our Republican colleagues can't discredit them.

The numbers are even worse than experts could have imagined. Repealing the Affordable Care Act will mean tens of millions will lose their health insurance and individuals will see their premiums double. Let me repeat that. If the Republican bill passes--according to CBO, which is nonpartisan--tens of millions will lose their health insurance and individuals will see premiums double. Thirty-two million Americans would lose their health insurance, 18 million within the first year of repeal.

The report makes it crystal clear that the Republican effort to repeal the Affordable Care Act will increase health care costs for millions of Americans and kick millions more off their health insurance. No wonder President-Elect Trump realizes repeal without replace is the real disaster. No wonder he has admonished the Congress not to do plain repeal.

Some Republicans have tried to dismiss the CBO report as meaningless. I would remind my Republican friends of two points. First, this is the CBO Director that Republicans handpicked. This is not some Democratic operative. He is a person who knows numbers, who was chosen by our Republican colleagues. You can't reject his findings.

Second, this is your repeal bill that the CBO is analyzing. They didn't make up the scenario. They took the exact bill we had on the floor and said: What are going to be the consequences? Devastating-- over 30 million losing coverage, premiums doubling. All the things that our colleagues are complaining about with ACA are even worse under their bill. Their complaints on ACA are incorrect. We have gained numbers, and costs have gone down. The rate of costs have gone down-- much lower than they would be under this report.

I say to my colleagues, this is your repeal bill. The CBO didn't make this up. It looked at the bill you sent to the President's desk, the bill you say your repeal bill will be modeled on. It isn't meaningless. It is your plan.

Now that repeal is real and not just a political exercise, the tide is turning. The American people are becoming roused by the prospects of dismantling health reform and leaving chaos in its wake. This is exactly why Republican Members of Congress are getting an earful back home from constituents who want them to turn back from their dangerous plan to make America sick again. I urge my Republican colleagues to listen to the growing outcry before it is too late.

One final issue: As the hearings continue this week on the President-elect's Cabinet nominees, I want to make a few points. As I have mentioned here on the floor several times, we Democrats want the process to be as fair and transparent as possible, abiding by all the ethics requirements demanded of nominees in the past. Yet the HELP Committee today will hold a hearing on Education Secretary nominee Betsy DeVos, who is worth $5 billion and owns an investment company with untold financial entanglements, despite the fact that she doesn't have a signed ethics agreement in place. When somebody has such wealth and such complicated holdings, we have always made them sign an ethics agreement that says ``Here is how I am going to divest so there is no conflict of interest,'' so it is clear that the nominee is doing things for their country, not for their financial holdings. We don't have it, and we are rushing ahead with hearings in the HELP Committee. My dear friend whom I have so much respect for, the chair, the Senator from Tennessee, is just rushing forward, rushing forward. That is not a good way to start. It is not a good way for my Republican colleagues or the President-elect to start.

Then we have Wilbur Ross. He is the nominee for Commerce. He is a billionaire. We have a Cabinet loaded with billionaires, despite how President-Elect Trump campaigned. Mr. Wilbur Ross is a billionaire with vast and complicated holdings. He just delivered his paperwork yesterday. His hearing is scheduled for tomorrow. The paperwork is very complicated. When you have $1 billion, it is not just in U.S. treasuries. But they are rushing forward. The committee needs some time to review those documents before a hearing. I am hopeful we can move it back.

Then there is the fact that tomorrow there are four hearings. We have asked the majority to space out the hearing schedule so that Members who sit on multiple committees can have time to prepare and attend all the hearings. That is going to be very difficult for many Members tomorrow.

We have tried to cooperate with my friend, the majority leader. These are not good signs. They don't bode well.

You can see why the President-elect and Republicans are trying to rush these nominees through. The President-elect promised to change the way America operates, to oppose elites and the rigged system, to clean the swamp, and to pay attention to working families. But now he is rigging the Cabinet with billionaires and bankers. It is exactly the opposite of what the President-elect campaigned on, so they are trying to get it done as quickly as possible--the less scrutiny, the better. They don't want these people exposed for who they are and what they represent. Oh, no, that is not fair to the American people. They deserve the chance to get a good look at these nominees.

Thank you, Mr. President.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I have just been told that the hearing for Ms. DeVos, nominee for Secretary of Education, which began at 5 p.m., much to our chagrin, is now going to be--the chairman of the committee, Senator Alexander, my dear friend, has stated that there will be only one round of questions, 5 minutes each.

I tell my friend the majority leader, who just left, and my colleagues that this is not the way for comity: a hearing on a nominee with only one round of questioning, 5 minutes each, for a controversial nominee who has $5 billion of investments, who has not filed her papers yet. We feel very strongly that there ought to be another hearing, and this will affect how the rest of the nominees will go forward because we need time on them.

I have never heard of anything like this--a major nominee with major controversy, not having filed her papers, and then the hearing only beginning at 5 p.m. today because my friend Senator Alexander wouldn't switch the hearing to a different day, even though there is no rush. Now Senator Alexander has just decreed as the hearing convened that there will be only one round of questioning, 5 minutes each.

I understand why my Republican colleagues are rushing through these nominees--and this one in particular. They are afraid of what the public will hear. They are afraid of what these nominees represent. President-Elect Trump has said he is going to drain the swamp. What does he have? A rigged Cabinet of billionaires and not the blue-collar people he has appealed to. How do we know they will represent the interests of the country, of the President-elect himself--at least what he said in his campaign? How do we know they are free of conflicts of interest? There is no way to know.

Tonight's hearing is an indication that the swamp is not close to getting cleaned up; in fact, it is getting worse. I have not heard of any hearing like this.

I would respectfully urge my colleague, the chairman of the HELP Committee, which covers education, to have another hearing because this hearing is not close to being adequate; it is a mockery of the process.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I came to the floor yesterday to voice my serious concerns with some of the remarks made by the Secretary of State nominee, Rex Tillerson, in his hearing.

I was worried that his milquetoast posture toward Russia, especially his failure to support strong U.S. sanctions--existing or proposed-- bespoke a fundamental misreading of the geopolitical climate and the true nature of our international security challenges.

I was worried that, as Secretary of State, he only promised to recuse himself from matters involving Exxon for a

period of 12 months. Exxon's interests overseas aren't going away after 1 year. That is not good enough to resolve what is, potentially, a massive conflict of interest.

I am worried that Mr. Tillerson, as CEO and chairman of ExxonMobil, conducted business with all three foreign state sponsors of terrorism through a foreign subsidiary in a way that allowed Exxon to evade U.S. sanctions. As the head of Exxon, Mr. Tillerson did business with the terrorism trifecta: Iran, Syria, and Sudan. This raises serious questions that the man who is nominated to be the face of the United States to the world has so much experience doing business with our most prominent and concerning adversaries.

At the hearing, under questions from the senior Senator from New Jersey and the Senator from Oregon, Mr. Tillerson denied having knowledge of these dealings and directed the Senators to seek more information from ExxonMobil itself. Three times he told the committee that he ``did not recall'' any of the details. Throughout the afternoon, it sounded like he was following the dodgeball rules for confirmation hearings: Dodge, dip, duck, dive, and dodge. In fact, he basically admitted it to the junior Senator from Virginia.

I just read in the Washington Post that, on three separate occasions, the SEC, or the Securities and Exchange Commission, wrote letters directed to Mr. Tillerson himself seeking more information on these undisclosed dealings during his tenure as CEO and chairman--once on January 6, 2006, once on May 4, 2006, and again on December 1, 2010.

In general, I like to give people the benefit of the doubt. But it gives me great concern that Mr. Tillerson says he has zero recollection of an SEC inquiry into his company's business dealings with foreign state sponsors of terrorism--real concern. He got three letters from the SEC on a matter of major, major importance that would concern the whole corporation--the giant ExxonMobil--and he says he doesn't recall. This is the kind of matter that should be handled and approved by an organization's most senior leader.

Mr. Tillerson presents himself as a hands-on manager. It defies credibility to believe he doesn't recall. This is extraordinarily troubling because either one of two things is true. Either Mr. Tillerson was aware of these SEC letters and was familiar with these dealings but didn't want to answer the questions honestly, or, indeed, he had no knowledge of consequential financial disclosures made by his own company. If we consider that, in concert with all the other things he claimed to have ``no knowledge of''--including the widely reported extrajudicial killings in the Philippines, whether or not Saudi Arabia was a human rights violator--imagine, he had no knowledge of whether Saudi Arabia was a human rights violator; people in a fifth grade world history class would know that--whether or not his company was engaged in lobbying against, or perhaps for, energy sanctions--then maybe Mr. Tillerson does not have the necessary management skills or knowledge base to be the chief diplomat of the United States of America, running a Department that is obviously worldwide, farflung, and with thousands and thousands and thousands of employees.

Simply put, we need answers. What did Mr. Tillerson know and when did he know it? The American people expect their Secretary of State to be straightforward and honest with them--not coy, not dissembling. Most importantly, they expect him or her to have the interests of the American people and our friends and allies around the world at the forefront of their mind.

Unfortunately for Mr. Tillerson, and for this country, yesterday's hearings and today's reports raise more questions than answers. The American people deserve answers.

I yield the floor.

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

Madam President, I rise today to speak on a matter of great importance to the foreign policy of this country: our relationship with Russia and the efficacy of international sanctions to achieve our international security goals.

The reports of the past 24 hours are extremely troubling. But one thing we now all agree on is that Russia is behind the hacking of our election, as even the President-elect has now just said. This makes it even more important that we not only keep the existing sanctions in place but that we institute a new, tough sanctions regime in response so Russia can't get away with what they did and other countries will know as well that they will suffer penalty if they try to interfere with our elections.

Unfortunately, this morning's Cabinet hearing on Mr. Tillerson's nomination is a very troubling sign of things to come. In one breath, Mr. Tillerson said that the invasion of Crimea is a violation of international law, and in the next, amazingly enough, he declined to commit to maintaining the existing sanctions regime against Russia. He said he wants to get classified briefings first and then consult with the President-elect. But I remind the

country, as my friend the Senator from Florida, Mr. Rubio, from across the aisle, did, that these sanctions are a result of past crimes.

We don't need a classified briefing to know what Russia has done in the past. To duck the question and to refuse to commit to continuing these sanctions is tantamount to sweeping Russia's flouting of international laws under the rug. It sort of says: Go ahead, interfere in our elections again; nothing will happen to you. It says the same to China and Iran or to any other country that might try to hack.

Secretary Nominee Tillerson has also not committed to new sanctions. Just yesterday, a bipartisan group of Senators, including the Senators from South Carolina, Maryland, Florida, California, Nebraska, introduced a tough, new sanctions-on-Russia bill for their interference in our elections. I support this effort. I believe the Senate should act soon upon it. I am very concerned that thus far the President- elect, Mr. Tillerson, and Senator Sessions have not endorsed these tough new sanctions.

The Senator from Florida--not from my party--also pressed Mr. Tillerson on a series of war crimes committed by the Assad regime and the Russian military in Syria. These crimes have been reported in the press and detailed extensively by people on the ground and discussed at length by my friend, the Republican Senator from Arizona, Mr. McCain. Mr. Tillerson will not even acknowledge these violations of human rights and war crimes.

Finally, I am very concerned that despite the fact that we have registered lobbying disclosures from ExxonMobil itself, documenting their involvement in lobbying against Iran sanctions, Mr. Tillerson said this morning that Exxon did not lobby on sanctions, to his knowledge.

This comes on top of recent reports that Exxon avoided Iran's sanctions by dealing with Iran and other state sponsors of terrorism through a European subsidiary. This, too, is very concerning. It raises real questions as to whether the President-elect and his Cabinet are prepared to stand up to Putin, stand up to Iran, and represent the interests of the American people and defend our democratic allies around the world.

My friends on the other side of the aisle have nearly universally criticized this President, Mr. Obama, for his policy on Syria and for not being tough enough on Vladimir Putin. Republicans have always called themselves the party of Reagan. I don't need to remind any of them of his famous speech in West Berlin. Now, it seems, this fundamental tenet of Republican foreign policy, and indeed our national policy for the last few decades, is eroding before our very eyes. Now, it seems, the President-elect and his Cabinet may never address the international security policy challenges posed by Russia and state sponsors of terrorism like Iran and Syria. If Mr. Tillerson cannot even say that he will support the existing sanctions, what kind of Secretary of State will he be? I am worried.

Madam President, I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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