Floor Statements

Madam President, as my colleagues have said, it has now been 26 days since President Trump shut down the government and began holding Federal workers and their families hostage to force funding for an expensive, ineffective, and unpopular border wall.

That is 26 days of working without pay for hundreds of TSA and Customs and Border Patrol officers in my State of Michigan and across the country. That is 26 days of our Federal workers wondering how they will pay their mortgage and keep their lights on. That is 26 days of grocery stores, restaurants, and other local businesses watching their sales dry up.

This shutdown is also hard on Michigan farmers, including Jessica Youngblood, whom I want to take a moment to talk about.

She and her husband David, who is a veteran, are raising their three young children on their farm in Macomb County. Like many farmers, Jessica is also a small business owner; the Youngbloods are launching a winery. For 3 years, they have poured all of their time and they have poured all their money into their 25 acres of wine grapes. I have had the opportunity to walk with Jessica and her children through the rows of grapevines, and I have seen how hard they are working as a family every single day.

This year, they finally had grapes to harvest so that they could launch their small business. They planned to open their winery on their farm and start selling their wine on Memorial Day weekend. Unfortunately, the government shutdown threw a huge roadblock in front of this homegrown Michigan business.

The Tax and Trade Bureau at the Department of the Treasury approves their labels--when they are open. Jessica needs to bottle her wine in March, but that can't happen without labels being approved and printed. As Jessica said:

We are 100% dependent on the grapes we grow on our family

vineyard. . . . We are farmers! We need the government to

open so we can run our business.

It is time to end this shutdown. Let Jessica and her family benefit from all of their hard work. So I say: Leader McConnell, open the government so that the Youngblood family can open their small business.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I am very proud to join with my colleagues tonight. I thank the Senator from Virginia, the Senator from New Hampshire, and other colleagues who are here to speak out and talk about common sense and what is happening and what we believe should be happening for the American people.

In Michigan, we are building a new bridge, and Canada is paying for it. That is the truth. Canada is paying for a bridge in Michigan. Here in Washington, President Trump is demanding walls that he is expecting American taxpayers to pay for--walls that the majority of experts and the majority of people do not believe will be effective in keeping us safe. Meanwhile, in Michigan hundreds of Customs and Border Patrol officers, who keep us safe every day, are working without pay, and that is wrong.

The President says we need more security. I support strong border security, as my colleagues do--strong, effective border security. I also support economic security for hard-working Michigan families.

Some Federal employees in Michigan, as other colleagues have spoken about, are wondering how they are going to support their families, pay their mortgages, and keep the heat on without the paychecks they are supposed to receive on Friday.

President Trump is talking about a humanitarian crisis. Here is a humanitarian crisis: 38 million people who depend on food assistance-- the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program--to keep food on their tables now have to worry that it might suddenly be gone. Most of those Americans are senior citizens, people with disabilities, and children. This shutdown fight should not be about politics, but it is. It should be about people. What is happening here is about people, and the American people are losing.

One issue we should be able to agree on is the border. We all support border security. I can't say that enough, and my colleagues say that as well. I certainly know the importance of border security, as a Member from a border State--in fact, the State with the most active crossings at the northern border. The professionals on our northern border keep us safe every day, and they know what they need to do their jobs. They will say: It is more resources, more staff, more people. Above all, they need more technology. What they don't need is a 1st-century solution to a 21st-century problem. Building a wall on our border is a little like providing the U.S. Army swords and shields and expecting them to defend our Nation today.

Unfortunately, this administration is more focused on the merits of concrete versus steel than actually protecting the American people in a real and effective way. If our border is a national emergency right now, then, why hasn't the President spent the hundreds of millions of dollars that we have already given him in the last year's budget. We have already allocated dollars for border security--the majority of which has not been spent.

We all agree that border security is a high priority, and we should also be able to agree that workers--people working--deserve to be paid, and they should be able to take care of their families.

I have heard from Michigan workers who can't pay their bills and are desperately seeking temporary jobs--families who have been left without health insurance, businesses that contract with the Federal Government, that know that even if Federal workers get paid back at the end of this, they will not. There are also thousands of small businesses that depend on spending by Federal employees to remain open--the dry cleaner, the neighborhood store, the local restaurant.

This shutdown is also hurting American agriculture. My colleagues have talked about the fact that at the end of last year, just a few weeks ago, we passed a strong bipartisan farm bill to help farmers struggling with low prices, with growing trade concerns, and unpredictable weather, to say the least.

During these difficult times, our farmers desperately need the predictability and confidence of a 5-year farm bill. That is what Senator Roberts and I spoke about every day on the floor of the Senate: We need to put in place a 5-year farm bill with predictability for farmers in rural communities and families. However, the President has undermined the certainty that the farm bill provided by continuing this shutdown at the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Every day the USDA is shut down is another day the improvements we made in the 2018 farm bill are delayed. Local farm service offices all across Michigan are closed. Farmers can't apply for the loans they need, as they look to next year. We have dairy farmers in very desperate situations. We dramatically increased support for them in the farm bill--a new dairy program--and they need it now. They needed it yesterday. They needed it last week.

Important crop reports have been halted that farmers need to make decisions about upcoming planting seasons: What is the market? What are the prices? And there are all kinds of technical information they need to plan to move forward. Frankly, the USDA World Development Office is the economic development arm for every small town in every rural community in Michigan. Our rural homeowners cannot receive the housing loans they need to finance their homes and pay their mortgages. There are so many other ways things have stopped.

We can't forget about our families on food assistance. Thirty-eight million people are able to put food on their table thanks to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. While we should certainly do everything we can to ensure that food assistance is available in the near term--and I appreciate the Department working on that--our families deserve long-term certainty, especially considering that nearly 70 percent of those on SNAP are seniors, children, and people with disabilities. It is unconscionable to risk letting those most in need go hungry because of the politics of a government shutdown.

Beyond SNAP, school meals, support for WIC--a very important program for women, infants, and children--and food for seniors are all at risk if this continues to go on. Due to the shutdown, local food banks are no longer receiving funds to distribute and to store food. There are very real consequences going on. We could go through every single Department to speak about what is happening to real people and what will happen if this does not get resolved.

We can disagree about a lot of things. We should be able to agree, though, that people keeping us safe every day should be paid; that Federal workers should be able to pay their bills and take care of their families; that children, seniors, and people with disabilities shouldn't have to worry about where their next meal is coming from because of a government shutdown.

It is time for the President to end this. It is very easy. The House and the Senate now have both passed the appropriations bills on a bipartisan vote. At the end of last year, we passed it in the Senate. It was just passed last week in the House. We can repass those bills. They should go to the President's desk, and this shutdown should end. He should sign the bipartisan appropriations bills and put the American people first.

We can and will continue to debate what border security looks like and how we can be most effective, doing what we all want to see get done. It is time to stop the shutdown and for the President to sign the appropriations bills that are bipartisan and make sure the American people know he is on their side when it comes to what is happening in the country.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, the 2018 farm bill was a true bipartisan victory, and I am very proud of the historic vote Senator Roberts and I were able to achieve on this bill. It serves as an example of how Congress, on a bipartisan basis, can produce important legislation through debate and compromise. On the Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee, we have a long history of working together to ensure a strong safety net for farmers and for families. This bill continues that long-standing, bipartisan tradition. I know that the chairman did not get everything he wanted in this bill, and neither did I. I would have preferred to make more progress on reforming farm payments, a cause championed by my friend, Senator Grassley, and on improving the adequacy of benefits in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, and our other food assistance programs, but, overall, this is a good bill that protects and advances many critical food and farm policies that deserves the strong bipartisan support it received.

The nutrition title of this bill is no exception. We know that SNAP is largely working, and spending has been declining as more people get back to work and get off SNAP the right way. We also know that it is our job to make sure the program is working as intended and that we address any integrity issues that arise. That is why we included important improvements to SNAP program operations, oversight, and employment and training in this bill. In this conference report, we have protected SNAP, made modest, but important improvements, and excluded the very harmful House provisions that would have cut SNAP by more than $20 billion over 10 years, taken food assistance away from at least 2 million people, and imposed new, unworkable mandates on States.

I wish we also could have made more progress in expanding SNAP eligibility, benefits, and access in ways that would address food insecurity and help low-income Americans who are struggling to make ends meet. That said, we were able to include an important benefit improvement that will provide additional SNAP benefit to certain homeless households that, despite lacking a permanent nighttime address, may still incur expenses for shelter for temporary accommodations or to stay with friends or family. The program's $143 homeless shelter deduction will now be available in all States, including in my home State of Michigan, and will keep pace with inflation each year. If a

household could get more SNAP benefits by claiming the regular shelter deduction, it must continue to be able to do so, but for the many households that have had difficulty proving the amount of their shelter expenses, this change will enhance their SNAP benefits and reduce paperwork for both the household and for State agencies. Specifically, the conference report allows, for example, when a homeless household incurs a cost for shelter, but does not have paperwork available to prove the expense, an eligibility worker to provide the standard homeless shelter deduction based on her or his assessment of the households' claims about the expense. The worker can examine the totality of the household's circumstances and provide an appropriate deduction based on the information that is available.

Another improvement we include in this conference agreement is a requirement that USDA reassess the adequacy of SNAP's Thrifty Food Plan, TFP, by 2022 and every 5 years subsequently. The TFP is the foundation for SNAP benefit levels and is meant to reflect the actual food costs that households face in obtaining a nutritionally adequate diet. In recent years, mounting research evidence has found that the TFP is out of step with actual food purchasing practices and nutritional recommendations and that, for the vast majority of households, SNAP benefits are inadequate when considered in tandem with income that the household is assumed to have available for food. In part, the low SNAP benefits are a result of USDA in the past requiring that revisions not increase the cost of the TFP. Over many years, the factors behind food costs have evolved, i.e., purchasing and consumption patterns, dietary guidelines, women's work patterns, and transportation costs. Our intention for the future is that USDA not be compelled to achieve a cost-neutral revision to the TFP, but that it bring to bear the best scientific evidence about the appropriate cost of a ``thrifty,'' but nutritionally adequate food basket. We recognize that this may mean that SNAP benefits need to be adjusted as a result of the reassessment.

We also recognize that food insecurity is an ongoing issue amongst military families. While the conference report did not include a critical change I support related to the treatment of the Base Allowance for Housing in SNAP, I want to encourage USDA to look for ways to address military hunger. Specifically, I ask that USDA designate an office or liaison within the Office of the Secretary of Agriculture to coordinate with Department of Defense to gather data about currently serving military families experiencing food insecurity. I would ask USDA to gather key information such as estimates of SNAP participation by currently serving military families; estimates of currently serving military families experiencing food insecurity, but not able to qualify for SNAP benefits because the inclusion of their Basic Allowance for Housing allowance as counted income; estimates of currently serving military households with low household incomes--below 200 percent of federal poverty line; below 185 percent; below 130 percent; and estimates of participation in WIC by military households in comparison to SNAP.

Food consumption and buying behaviors are not the only changes affecting SNAP. Technology, both in administration and in the retail landscape, also continue to evolve. The conference report makes several important changes to help USDA to modernize to address consumer preferences and to help States to continue to strengthen their stewardship of SNAP.

First, we expand a pilot from the last farm bill, known as the National Accuracy Clearinghouse, NAC, to be a nationwide program within a few years. The NAC gives States tools to ensure that individuals do not simultaneously receive SNAP benefits in two or more States by conducting cross-State matches of SNAP applicants and participating households and setting up a process for States to resolve instances of apparent dual participation. An evaluation of the NAC pilot found that, although duplicate participation is small--less than 0.02 percent of SNAP participants--it is feasible for States to conduct a match to identify and prevent duplicate participation.

We know that duplicate participation, when it does occur, is rarely intentional fraud, but rather is a result of a household or household member simply moving from one State to another and not successfully disenrolling in their previous home State. This could be caused by households not being able to get through to a call center to report the move or a State not taking the proper subsequent action to close the case or remove the household member. The NAC helps States to address this issue more effectively using technology, saving money within SNAP in the process. As with any error, without evidence of a client's intent to defraud the program, States should assume that dual enrollment discovered through the NAC is unintentional.

Because duplicate participation is so rare and a household's need for food assistance may be urgent, the conference committee expects that USDA's Food and Nutrition Service, FNS, and States will establish procedures for the NAC that will not interfere with current application and enrollment procedures, particularly the speedy processing of applications. Some States are able to process matches in ``real time'' or provide same-day or other fast service to SNAP applicants. Given that only a tiny fraction of applications are expected to result in a positive match via the NAC, we expect that States will often run the match after approving SNAP.

In developing the NAC provision, the members were sensitive to recent problems with data security breaches and the risk that any large data set may be a target for hacking, identity theft, or other ``big data'' goals that are not associated with the administration of SNAP. The Conference Committee intended that the NAC have state-of-the art privacy and security protections and that the information shared across States as part of the NAC be used only for the purpose of identifying and preventing dual participation in SNAP. We expect FNS to exercise strong oversight of any contractors that are engaged in the operation of the NAC to ensure that contractor is not using information about SNAP participants for any other purposes.

Finally, as part of the NAC, we expect that FNS will be developing procedures for standardizing, streamlining, and in some cases automating cross-State communications. We urge FNS to ensure that these processes provide SNAP recipients with services that take into account the difficulty they may have in navigating cross-State communications. For example, we expect FNS's policies to include procedures to help households appeal and resolve decisions across State boundaries. If a noncustodial parent applies for benefits on behalf of a child who lives with the other parent, it may be difficult for the custodial parent to know how to navigate an eligibility decision made in another State where the individual does not reside.

Similarly, when overpayments occur because of duplicate participation, we expect the cross-State claims process to take into account difficulties households may have had in closing their case in their prior State of residence. For example, if a State was delinquent in closing the case after the household reported the change, or the household could not get through on the telephone to report the change because of a major problem in call center operations, this should be considered an agency error, and households should be given consideration in the claims establishment and collection process. If the household did not use the benefits in the State in which they previously resided because they were receiving SNAP where they live now and simply could not close their old case because of a problem with the States' reporting procedures we assume they will not be held responsible for repaying an overpayment.

Another provision of the bill offers States an opportunity to collaborate with FNS to establish longitudinal data sets about SNAP participation. The goal of this provision is in some ways the opposite of the NAC. Where the NAC aims to share very specific identifying information about SNAP applicants and participants to prevent dual participation, the conference agreement specifically prohibits the longitudinal database from collecting or sharing any personal identifying information. Instead, the information in these data sets will be used only for research purposes to study the characteristics of SNAP participants over time

and improve SNAP program operations. Because most data that is available about SNAP participants looks just at 1 particular month, these data sets will fill in a gap in our understanding of SNAP and allow States, FNS, and other researchers to learn about patterns of participation and other factors such as work experience and income volatility.

The SNAP quality control, QC, system, which measures SNAP payment accuracy, has recently been the subject of oversight by USDA's Office of Inspector General. The Senate Agriculture Committee also held a hearing to review problems with the quality control system. This led FNS to conduct a subsequent investigation and revise its guidance and processes. We acknowledge that FNS and States have made substantial progress in addressing the problems these investigations exposed. The conference agreement requires FNS to issue regulations to codify the quality control improvements and other changes in order to ensure the statistical validity of the measures the QC system produces. The conferees are not expecting any major changes in how the QC system measures payment error. We expect that the basic tenets of the quality control measures will remain. For example, a payment error will be determined based on the outcome of the eligibility decision, rather than on the State's procedural compliance, and that the certification and reporting rules under State and Federal policy will be taken into account in assessing payment errors.

The QC system needs to balance the twin goals of payment accuracy and program access. We urge FNS to not include changes to the QC system that would make it harder for individuals to participate in SNAP if they live in unstable conditions as a result of them moving more often, do not have a permanent address, or if they are likely to be more ``error prone'' because they have variable earnings that are more difficult for States to track.

The conferees are aware that the OIG and USDA both identified uneven Federal application and enforcement of quality control rules, as well as State practices, as an underlying cause of the problems identified in the investigations and reviews. We expect that improving quality control reviews will involve a more rigorous Federal rereview and more consistent practices across FNS regions.

The conferees chose not to include a House provision that would eliminate the quality control error tolerance threshold. Currently set at $37, this is the threshold below which error amounts do not count toward the State's error rate. The threshold encourages States to focus their efforts on larger, costlier errors. Minor mistakes in calculating benefit amounts are not a threat to SNAP integrity and are understandable, given the volatility in the lives of many low-income households. If States were encouraged to increase their efforts to drive SNAP errors in every case to zero, some States experience shows they likely would respond by requiring more paperwork, which would be burdensome and inefficient.

Finally, the conference report eliminated SNAP bonus payments to States out of concern that that they may have contributed to State practices that introduced bias into the quality control process. The conferees continue to think that customer service measures, such as measures of timeliness and program access, are important indicators of SNAP's success, and we expect FNS to continue to measure and publish these data for all States and to emphasize their importance in conducting program oversight. The same is true for enforcing clear standards. We are concerned that FNS is not following its own guidance with respect to how it will follow up with states whose timeliness has fallen below established Federal standards. This is important for the agency to address.

Another provision involving program integrity involves when States may follow up with households to seek additional information based on a data match. The provision identifies the circumstances under which such follow up is allowed and when it is prohibited. The conferees intend this provision to codify FNS's recent regulation of January 6, 2017, at 7 C.F.R. 273.12(c)(3). We do not intend for USDA to issue any new regulation beyond simply the addition of the new National Accuracy Clearinghouse to the list of matches that might require action.

Another provision in the program integrity area changes how SNAP benefits are treated when households have not accessed them recently. The provision allows States to move SNAP benefits ``offline'' after 3 months of inactivity instead of 6 months and requires benefits be ``expunged'' or completely taken away after 9 months instead of 12 months. Because inactivity in households' SNAP accounts is often the result of a misunderstanding, the provision requires that households be notified 30 days before benefits are scheduled to be expunged and offer an opportunity for the household to request that any benefits that have been moved offline be swiftly restored. On balance, my expectation is that this provision will improve households' access to benefits because households will be better informed.

In our negotiations on the SNAP provisions of the farm bill, the conferees spent substantial time debating the SNAP employment and training program and proposals to add requirements in SNAP that would take food assistance away from households that fail to meet harsh work requirements. I am proud that this bill does not include the House's proposals to severely restrict waivers from the existing harsh 3-month time limit and the House bill's new requirements that would have taken food assistance away from families with children and older adults who struggle to find work. This was no accident. The conferees rejected these proposals. In fact, the Senate resoundingly rejected on a bipartisan basis an amendment that included many of these harsh changes. The administration should take note of this and follow congressional intent and not attempt to advance an inconsistent agenda through rulemaking that is not supported by the law we just passed.

Rather than harsh new requirements, the conference agreement focused on helping families get back to work the right way. The conference agreement will strengthen State flexibility to design employment and training systems that meet local workforce needs and labor market conditions. We added workforce partnership arrangements, which could involve private employers, trade groups that represent such employers, or nonprofit organizations to the options available to States and individuals for meeting SNAP employment and training and work requirements. We also focus additional funding provided in the bill for employment and training on programs with a proven track record based on the pilots from the 2014 farm bill and on populations that face substantial barriers, such as individuals who were incarcerated in the past, workers age 50 and older, and those at risk of multigenerational poverty.

In order to help employment and training participants succeed in their placements, we now expect States to include case management as a component in all States' employment and training programs. We envision that States will continue to have wide latitude in what counts as case management, and we intend that case management be a resource to employment and training participants, not an extra hoop for participants to comply with to satisfy their employment and training obligation. Not every participant will need case management, and not every component of a State's employment and training program must offer case management. We also revise the job search component under employment and training to add a supervision requirement, but anticipate that States will be creative in developing innovative models for supervision that are not burdensome on participants, for example, by using technology to include online job search, or other automated and remote options. We recognize that States will need time to update their employment and training plans and build capacity to roll out new approaches, so we expect FNS will provide adequate time for States to transition to compliance with the new requirements. I should note that, while self-initiated job search may no longer be a standalone component within employment and training, it is not disallowed as a part of another component. For example, if a job training program offers 12 hours of job training and 8 hours of job search, this should

still be allowable under this change. The conference report also does not preclude self-initiated job search that is not specifically managed within the SNAP employment and training.

The Agriculture Committee has a long history of bipartisan oversight of SNAP, and every farm bill includes provisions that strengthen SNAP by taking advantage of new technologies and other advancements in other areas of the human services field. This farm bill is no exception. For example, we include provisions to adjust SNAP's electronic benefit transfer, EBT, program to account for new technologies like mobile and online payments and to add flexibility for farmers' markets. While we recognize the need for SNAP to evolve to survive in the modern marketplace, it is equally important that we continue to maintain program integrity. The Secretary must maintain the ability to monitor retailers and ensure they are not engaging in fraudulent activities. Retailers without a physical storefront may require new approaches to oversight, and FNS should continue to work with retailers and Congress to ensure appropriate controls are in place.

EBT is a critical link in the SNAP program for delivering benefits to eligible families and our retailers, and EBT contractors are important partners. The Senate-passed farm bill included requirements on USDA and GAO to conduct broad reviews of SNAP EBT, including transfer-related fees, equipment issues, data security, and customer service, especially the unfortunate increased frequency of systems outages. We also required USDA to issue regulations and guidance on these issues based on the findings from the studies. Although we were not able to include these provisions in the final conference agreement, both USDA and GAO have the authority to engage in these activities without specific statutory direction, and I urge them to do so.

Child support collections is another area where we determined that the proper course of action is for the Secretary to obtain more information. The House included a sweeping provision to require States to mandate cooperation with child support enforcement as a condition of SNAP eligibility. While we strongly support custodial and noncustodial parents financially supporting their children, we rejected the mandate out of concern that taking away food assistance would do more harm than good for children and that the mandate would be costly for States and the Federal Government. Instead, we direct the Secretary to collect evidence on the impact on families and children and the cost for States and the Federal Government. We also want information on the experiences in States that have adopted the mandate, those that rejected it, and on some of the practical issues such as how States guarantee a robust determination of good cause for noncompliance. It is key that the Secretary in carrying out this study collect information on those who would be dissuaded from participating in SNAP as a result of the mandate. Research on those who do not receive SNAP as a result of a policy change can be difficult to obtain, but because our concern about the provision relates to the impact on children whose parents are afraid to participate in SNAP because of a fear of domestic violence or out of other concerns about their relationship with another parent--for example, when grandparents care for grandchildren--the Secretary must seek to paint a full picture of the impact such a change would have on children. We also instruct the Secretary to examine what alternative options are available in this area that would achieve similar goals but without putting food assistance for children at risk.

In addition to these critical issues within SNAP, I also want to note that we made some critical improvements to programs to support beginning and socially disadvantaged farmers, organic producers and local food systems, including providing permanent mandatory baseline funding. This important step will ensure these programs continue to support the next generation of sustainable farmers. The conference report also directs Secretary to have the Agriculture Marketing Service and Rural Business Cooperative Service work together to implement the Local Agriculture Market Program, using the agencies' respective structures and expertise to deliver an effective program. One important aspect of the Local Agriculture Market Program is food safety assistance, an area where the primary expertise at USDA resides with-in the Agriculture Marketing Service. I would ask USDA to ensure food safety components of the Local Agriculture Market Program be coordinated between the agencies, but be led by Agriculture Marketing Service, who has the most expertise.

This farm bill was truly historic, both in its broad level of bipartisan support and also in its steps toward supporting the great diversity of American agriculture. I also believe it was noteworthy that we were able to overcome strong partisan attacks on food assistance to produce a bill in the bipartisan tradition this committee maintains continues to protect the family safety net in a bipartisan way. I hope the administration follows our lead and rejects harmful attacks on food assistance for families needing short term support.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I rise to discuss a true bipartisan victory along with my friend and colleague, the leader of our Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee. I hear a lot of people say that bipartisanship is all too rare these days, but in our committee, it is our bread and butter.

Specifically, I thank my partner and friend, Chairman Pat Roberts. He is the only person to have written a farm bill as both the chair of the House and Senate Agriculture Committees. Kansas is fortunate to have such a champion, and all of American agriculture owes him a debt of gratitude for his persistence, doggedness, and tenacity. Maybe it is his Marine training, but he never gave up on this bill even when negotiations got tough. Maybe I could be an honorary marine. He also knows that to do anything big, it takes a team approach. Thanks to his commitment to bipartisanship, we were able to achieve a real historic victory.

This summer, Chairman Roberts and I made history by passing our Senate farm bill by 86 votes, and I am pleased to say we beat that record this week by passing the final bill by 87 votes--the most ever.

One of the reasons I love my work on the Agriculture Committee is that the work we do truly affects everyone. From the well-being of our children to the viability of rural America, to the health of our lakes, rivers, and streams, to our access to the most abundant, most affordable, safest food supply in the world, the farm bill impacts all of us.

I like to say it is our rural economic development plan for the country, and that has been true since the very first one in the 1930s. In the wake of the Great Depression, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt signed the first farm bill to get agriculture and our economy back on track.

Over the past 80 years, the role of the farm bill has evolved alongside our agricultural and rural economy. In the 1970s, nutrition assistance was linked to the farm bill for the first time, marking a major step in strengthening the connection between our farms and food. In the 1980s, we saw the first ever conservation title, demonstrating the critical role of preserving land, water, and wildlife while supporting working farms. In the 1990s, thanks to the leadership of my friend Senator Patrick Leahy, we recognized evolving consumer preferences through the creation of the National Organic Program. There is, of course, the landmark 1996 farm bill, in which then-House Chairman Roberts first left his mark, tackling one of the biggest challenges in farm policy--reducing the incentive for farmers to plant for payments rather than for markets.

In 2008, I was proud to author the creation of the first-ever specialty crop title, recognizing fruit and vegetable growers and local food systems for the first time.

In 2014, we made major reforms to commodity programs, streamlined our conservation title, and made specialty crop research and clean energy programs a permanent part of the farm bill. Each of these changes represented a leap forward in farm and food policy and progress to broaden the farm bill to support every corner of America and American agriculture.

The momentum toward recognizing the diversity of our farm and food economy has truly accelerated over the past 15 years. Now, in every title of the farm bill, you can find policies that reflect the wide variety of things we grow and how we grow them.

I am proud to say that this farm bill has continued the trajectory of progress to diversify American agriculture. From expanded crop insurance to historic assurance for urban farmers and improved coverage options for our dairy farmers, this bill helps all types of farms, all sizes of farms, and farmers in every region of the country.

In order to cultivate the next generation of agriculture, we made permanent investments to support veterans, socially disadvantaged and beginning farmers, and we expanded agricultural market opportunities so that our farmers can make a living.

Historic investments in organic farming help producers tap into one of the fastest growing sectors of agriculture. New, permanent support for international trade promotion will help our farmers sell their products abroad. Streamlined, permanent investments for farmers markets, food hubs, and local food processing will help our farmers sell to their neighbors.

While we know the farm bill supports our farmers, it also supports our families. We protected access to food assistance and said no to partisan changes that would take away food from those who need it most, while still working to improve access to healthy food and improving the program's integrity. I hope the administration takes note of this and does not try to push forward with regulations that conflict with the farm bill's bipartisan approach to protecting food assistance.

We continue the farm bill's legacy as one of the largest investments in land and water conservation. This bill maintains conservation investments and rejects harmful provisions that would jeopardize drinking water and public lands.

Instead, we focused on successful conservation partnerships that will actually grow funding by leveraging nearly $3 billion in new private investment over the next decade.

We also lift up our small towns and rural communities and celebrate what makes them great places to live and raise a family. By making strong investments in rural water infrastructure and high-speed internet, we help revitalize rural America and grow opportunities.

These important priorities have been 80 years in the making, and there are a number of people I would like to thank for working hard to continue the legacy of this farm bill.

Of course, I want to thank my leader, our Democratic leader, for his leadership and support throughout this process; the majority leader, who made sure this bill moved quickly on the Senate floor and was an active participant in the Agriculture Committee, as well; and, of course, my partner, Senator Roberts, who stayed true to our commitment to deliver a bipartisan bill.

I want to thank our counterparts in the House, Chairman Conaway and Ranking Member Peterson, for their hard work throughout this process, and all of our colleagues in the House and Senate who supported this bill with historic votes in the House and the Senate.

I also want to thank my incredible staff, who have worked so hard for almost 2 years to bring this farm bill to the finish line: my committee staff director, Joe Shultz and deputy staff director and policy director, Jacqlyn Schneider, who both led this process; our legal team, led by our chief counsel, Mary Beth Schultz, and our fellow, Ward Griffin; our amazing commodities and livestock team, Mike Schmidt and Kyle Varner, for supporting our farmers, with the help of farm bill veteran, Susan Keith, and our fellow, Riya Mehta; on team conservation, Ashley McKeon and Rosalyn Brumette, who protected our land and water, with the help of USDA detailee, Lindsay White; our forestry and environmental expert, Sean Babington, who preserved wildlife habitat and public lands; Katie Naessens, for her work to support the innovative future of agriculture, with the help of Dominique Warren; our rural development and energy expert, Kevin Bailey, for creating opportunities for our small towns; Katie Bergh, who led our work on trade and food aid to help our farmers feed the world.

I would like to thank, as well, my staff in my personal office: my chief of staff, Mike VanKuiken; legislative director, Emily Carwell; deputy chief of staff, Anne Stanski; my senior aide, Krystal Lattany; my communications director, Matt Williams; ag press secretary, Jess McCarron; and the rest of the communications team, Miranda Margowsky, Nirmeen Fahmy, and Amy Phillips Bursch; my State team, led by Teresa Plachetka, and our Michigan ag expert, Kali Fox.

I want to thank everyone on Senator Robert's team, especially James Glueck and DaNita Murray, true professionals who exemplified how to lead a farm bill conference.

We spent a lot of time together, and I say to the Senator: I know you spent a lot of time with Joe and Jacqlyn on our team. I think at the end, we were working as one team, and that is something I am very, very grateful for.

I also thank Jessie Williams--as the chairman has said--Amanda Kelly, Bobby Mehta, and everyone who worked behind the scenes on the Ag Committee.

I also appreciate our floor staff, those in the leadership staff office who are so important, and CBO. Of course, I say thank you to all of the members of the Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee and their staffs.

With a lot of hard work by a long list of very talented people, this Congress has passed a strong bill that supports the 16 million jobs in America that depend on agriculture and our food economy.

I look forward to the President of the United States signing this bill into law as soon as possible.

Thank you.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, today I wish to pay tribute to someone whose passion for service is literally out of this world.

As a payload specialist, Bill Nelson spent 6 days orbiting our planet aboard the Space Shuttle Columbia.

When he looked down on Earth, he didn't see blue States or red States.

Instead, he saw green land, blue oceans and lakes, including some big ones in Michigan, and a whole wide world worth protecting.

A decade and a half later, Bill Nelson was sworn in as U.S. Senator for Florida.

His previous experiences in space, as a U.S. Army captain, as a State legislator, and in the U.S. House of Representatives have shaped every decision he has made since then.

I remember Senator Nelson's swearing-in, because it was my first day, too, and we have been serving together ever since.

Senator Nelson has been such a forceful advocate for technology--no surprise given his time at NASA--and for protecting consumers.

He has fought every day to do right by our seniors, keeping Medicare and Social Security strong, working to eliminate the Medicare Part D ``donut hole,'' and expanding access to home healthcare.

He has been a strong voice for protecting our environment, particularly from oil drilling, an issue close to the hearts of people in both Florida and Michigan.

One of my favorite memories of Senator Nelson actually took place in Michigan, during a 2016 codel.

Senator Nelson came to Michigan to tour our Coast Guard installations as ranking member on Commerce.

He got the full tour: Station Grand Haven, Air Station Detroit, Station St.

lgnace, Air Station Traverse City, and even the CGC Mackinaw.

That is a heavy icebreaker that helps keep Great Lakes channels and harbors open during the cold winter months.

It is something he doesn't get a chance to see very often in Florida.

Well, I don't remember exactly how it happened, but Senator Nelson decided to challenge a member of the Coast Guard, who was in his 20s, to a pull-up contest.

If you guess that the young guy lost, you would be right.

That is when I decided never to settle disagreements with Senator Nelson by challenging him to an arm-wrestling contest.

I think I speak for many of us when I say that I will miss working with Bill.

Bill has always believed that there is more that unites us than divides us.

Perhaps that is the perspective he gained looking down from space.

His passion for public service shines through in everything he does.

On a personal note, I would like to thank him for taking such good care of my snowbird constituents during the winter months.

Bill: Thank you for your hard work, leadership, and lifetime of serving Florida and our country.

Mr. President, today I wish to pay tribute to someone who has spent her entire career making life better for the people of Missouri and the people of this country.

If I had to describe Senator Claire McCaskill using one word, I think I would choose ``fighter.''

I think most Members, on both sides of the aisle, would agree with me.

As the first woman elected Jackson County prosecutor, she fought for crime victims and created some of the first drug courts and domestic violence units in the country.

As State auditor, she fought to ensure that the State of Missouri spent taxpayer dollars wisely.

During her 12 years representing Missouri in the Senate, she has fought every day to keep government accountable, protect consumers, strengthen our national security, and expand access to healthcare.

I have been especially honored to partner with her on this last goal.

We worked together to make sure that pharmacists can tell their patients the lowest price at the pharmacy counter and to protect Americans from junk insurance plans.

We have fought to keep American manufacturers competitive and to end unfair trade practices that hurt our companies and our workers.

I have been inspired by her work to end sexual violence, particularly in our military, and to ensure that families affected by the opioid crisis get the help they need to recover.

I will always remember the trip we took together to the Middle East.

In Jordan, we saw firsthand the challenge of responding to the Syrian refugee crisis and spoke with refugees themselves.

That is classic Claire: ensuring that the government is doing its job while also watching out for the most vulnerable.

Perhaps that skill has been on display best during oversight hearings, when Claire has made great use of her skills as a former prosecutor.

I know that I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of her questioning.

I am going to miss working with her. However, I am glad we haven't heard the last of Claire.

Just follow her Twitter account, and you will see what I mean.

Senator McCaskill: Thank you for keeping government honest, protecting the most vulnerable, and always putting the people of Missouri first.

Most of all, thank you for always, always being a fighter.

Mr. President, today I rise to pay tribute to someone who has made a really big impression from the day she set foot in the Senate.

It might be her infectious laugh; I dare you not to smile when you hear it. It might be her hugs, which I know many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will miss. Or it might be her ever-present iced coffee, no matter how cold it is outside. I might be biased, but I think it is the hair.

Saying goodbye to Senator Heidi Heitkamp is hard for many of us, especially the members of the Senate Redhead Caucus. After all, we are losing a third of our membership.

In all seriousness, I will miss Heidi, and I know I am not alone. I have had the chance to get to know her from the very beginning, back when she was first running for the Senate. I campaigned with her in North Dakota, and the thing that really struck me was her passion for the people of her State and for agriculture.

We have had the opportunity to work closely together during our time on the Agriculture Committee and especially as members of the farm bill conference committee. I can tell you that Heidi has been instrumental in getting this deal done and in making sure that North Dakota's farmers and ranchers are well-represented.

Thanks to Heidi, we have taken huge steps forward in trade with Cuba; it is her language in the farm bill.

She wasn't afraid to go her own way in order to stand up for North Dakota. Even when we didn't agree on issues like conservation easements, Heidi fought for her farmers and got it done.

I would like to think her passion comes from her red hair, but in reality, I think it is her oversized heart. Whether she was listening to the struggles of women farmers during our women's agriculture CODEL in Africa, or shining a light on the epidemic of missing and murdered Native American women, or sharing her own story of surviving breast cancer and the need to protect people with preexisting conditions, in a city where spreadsheets rule, Heidi threw her heart into this job, and her State and our Nation are better for it.

Heidi, thank you for your friendship, your leadership, and for putting your whole heart into fighting for North Dakota.

I join my great friend Senator Roberts, first of all, in indicating what a huge difference you have made on the Agriculture Committee. From the day you walked in, you hit the ground running and have made an incredible difference.

As you were talking today about some parts--and we could go through every single chapter--you made a difference. The Tribal provisions are in there. But you mentioned Cuba, and this is very historic. It took work on the Senate floor to be able to move it through. It took work for us in the conference committee. It is because of you that it is in there and opportunities for farmers are in there.

I also greatly appreciate that when we had differences--like conservation and easements--you pushed hard and were successful in getting changes for North Dakota that needed to happen. It was you who did that. Others took credit, but you did that.

When I think about our traveling together to Africa and think about the impact you have had on women and children--whether it is Native women and children, whether it was what we were doing overseas, whether it was what you have done every day for all of our children--I am so grateful.

Most importantly, I am grateful for your friendship. I am going to miss you greatly. I wish you Godspeed while you determine the future. I know it will be bright, and hopefully in some way we will all be benefiting from it.

God bless you.

Mr. President, I wish to lend my voice and talk for a moment about a very special friend, Senator Joe Donnelly.

One of the things we know about the Midwest and Great Lakes is that we do care about our neighbors. Someone with a really good snowblower might clean off his neighbor's driveway, too, since he was out there anyway. That reminds me of Joe Donnelly.

We know that Joe is the senior Senator from Indiana. It is a wonderful neighboring State. We may compete now and again, but I have been so grateful to be Senator Donnelly's neighbor and his friend.

Over the past 6 years, I have had the good fortune to partner with Senator Donnelly on many issues that affect our States and the country.

We are both passionate about fighting for workers and stopping the exporting of American jobs. We want to export our products, not our jobs. Joe has been at the front of the line fighting for American workers.

Making things and growing things--that is what Michigan does, that is what Indiana does, that is what we are all about, and Joe has been at the front of the line to make sure that jobs are there making things and growing things.

We have had the opportunity to work together on the Senate Agriculture Committee, and in just a moment, we are going to hopefully be passing a 5-year farm bill. Joe has been an important voice in that. It is something that we relish because, as a committee, we work together on a bipartisan basis and get things done. Senator Donnelly has been a very important part of that, including getting important wins for Indiana. It includes his legislation that targets the opioid crisis by expanding USDA rural development investments in community treatment facilities and telemedicine--no small thing.

That will save lives. It provides peace of mind for farmers to use crops and participate in crop insurance. It creates a broadband grant program, which will connect underserved communities. As Senators from the Great Lakes States, we have fought together to protect our water-- our most precious resource.

I will never forget the event Senator Donnelly and I did to celebrate the Regional Conservation Partnership Program when we announced nearly $14 million in public and private investment improving water quality and wildlife and fish habitat in the St. Joseph watershed--a watershed that we share. We held that at Pier 33 in St. Joseph, MI, just up the road from South Bend. If you have ever been to Pier 33, you have probably seen their showroom and the amazing collection of beautiful boats. In fact, I am not sure ``boats'' is the word for these amazing boats. I know Senator Donnelly was impressed, as was I. After the press conference, I asked him how he thought it went, and he said it was good, but he was disappointed that he wasn't going to get to take home one of the boats. I shared that as well.

If you ask anyone in the Senate, they are likely to say the same thing: Senator Joe Donnelly--Joe--is one of the nicest guys you will ever meet.

He is also very funny. Both of those qualities have made him a real joy to work with. I know I speak for everyone on both sides of the aisle; he will be missed.

Senator Donnelly--Joe, thank you for your hard work, your leadership. Thank you for being a wonderful and great neighbor. Let me know the next time you are up North, and we will grab lunch and check out some of those boats.

Mr. President, I want to first thank our majority leader and the Democratic leader for their support in bringing this bill to the Senate floor for consideration. Thanks to all of our Agriculture Committee members, including the Presiding Officer and conferees on both sides of the aisle, for working to put this bipartisan farm bill together. Most importantly, I want to thank our distinguished chairman of the committee--my partner, my friend--for working so hard.

We have worked together from the very beginning. We promised each other we would deliver a strong, bipartisan farm bill. Despite many obstacles along the way, we kept that promise.

The final farm bill reflects a hard-fought bipartisan agreement on a 5-year bill to strengthen the diversity of American agriculture and the 16 million jobs it supports. We know something about that in Michigan, where agriculture and the food industry support one out of four jobs. That is a lot of jobs. We also grow a wider variety of crops than any other State but one--a small State called California.

Now more than ever, we need to be broadening the diversity of American agriculture, and that is exactly what the farm bill does. Our farm bill continues to support the wide variety of farms all across America--big farms, small farms, ranchers, urban, rural. We provide new permanent support to keep this progress going, which I think is really important.

We invest in the bright future of agriculture by helping new and beginning farmers, including young people and our returning veterans, who are playing a greater role in agriculture in Michigan, as well as across the country.

New investments in international trade promotion will help farmers sell their products abroad. This couldn't come at a more important time. Streamlined, permanent support for farmers markets, food hubs, and local food processing will help our farmers sell their products to their neighbors. We need to sell around the world, and we need to be able to sell in our own communities.

By protecting and expanding crop insurance and improving support for our dairy farmers--in fact, strengthening the support for our dairy farmers, who were hit so hard with price drops and other issues--we maintain a strong safety net for farmers. Importantly, we maintain a strong safety net for our families.

We said no to harmful changes that would take away food from families. Instead, we will increase program integrity and job training to be able to make sure that things are working as they should and that every dollar is used as it should be. Instead, we will connect participants with healthy food through strong investments in farmers markets and nutrition incentives.

This bill also continues the farm bill's legacy as one of the largest investments in our land and our water. It is so important to Michigan. By focusing on successful conservation partnerships, we will actually grow funding by leveraging nearly $3 billion in new private investment over the next decade.

This bill also supports our small towns and rural communities, such as Clare, where I grew up. New investments in high-speed internet will support communities most in need. There are new opioid treatment resources to help those struggling with addiction.

The bill also helps ensure that small town water systems are providing clean and reliable tapwater. All of these things create opportunities for young people to stay in their homes and their hometowns and raise their families, which is what we want. That is what this bill is all about--growing opportunity.

I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this bill. I want to thank all of my incredibly talented staff for their hard work, as well as the chairman's staff. I know we will have another opportunity to speak more at length about the provisions of the 12 titles of the farm bill and be able to speak more about the hard work of our staff, but today we are ready for a vote, to be able to get this done so that we can send it to the House for their support, as well, and then on to the President.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Riya Mehta, a fellow, and Lindsay White, a detailee, on the minority staff on the Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee be granted floor privileges for the duration of the Congress.

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

Madam President, representing Michigan in the U.S. Senate is such an honor, and one of the best parts of this job is the work I am able to do on behalf of Michigan's over 600,000 veterans.

Our veterans have always been first in line to defend our democracy. That is why they should never be at the back of any line--for a job, for healthcare, for housing, or for education.

Our government has made our veterans promises--important promises-- and those promises must be kept. That is true of the Trump administration, as well as every other administration. Unfortunately, many of our veterans are now finding that promises the government made to them regarding their education are being broken.

For weeks now, student veterans have spoken out about their GI bill benefits being delayed or incorrect. One of those veterans is Brendan. He serves his country in the Michigan National Guard, and he is a student at Lake Superior State University in the beautiful Upper Peninsula of Michigan.

A few months ago, Brendan's GI bill benefits didn't go through even though he had done everything he was supposed to do. Brendan told his local station, WWTV:

I got emails saying, you need to pay your tuition. It

stresses you out because you are wondering if you are going

to get paid, and if I can't pay tuition, then I can't enroll

in the next semester.

Bill, another student at Lake Superior State University, is a veteran of the U.S. Marine Corps. His housing stipend was 36 days late. ``It upsets me,'' he told WWTV. He added: ``When I was active duty, you are expected to be anywhere in the world within 24 hours, boots on the ground, ready to complete a mission. . . . When it comes time to pay veterans back for their service, it takes me 35 days to get a check in the mail.''

That is simply outrageous.

What is even more outrageous is that this week, the Department of Veterans Affairs said it does not intend to reimburse veterans who were paid less than they were owed. That is after the Trump administration promised a House committee earlier this month that it would make sure veterans are reimbursed. The Department blames computer issues and says that going back to fix the mistakes would only delay further claims. That is completely unacceptable. You can bet that if Brendan or Bill or any other veteran tried to blame computer glitches for not paying their phone bill or failing to complete an assignment, it wouldn't work.

These veterans have done everything--everything--we have asked of them. It is our government's responsibility to provide them with everything they have been promised, and I am committed to doing everything in my power to make sure that happens. That is why earlier this month I called on the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to address this issue with the urgency it deserves--in other words, now. This isn't the first time the VA has faced backlogs, either, but it should be the last time--the very last time--our veterans are affected by them.

I heard about some of these issues during a series of 13 veterans roundtables I held around Michigan this year. I do this on a periodic basis to find out how things are going and what more I can do to help-- as well as, of course, working with individual veterans who call our office every week.

In response to these roundtables, which I very much appreciate people from around the State participating in, I introduced the Student Veterans Housing Act, which would help ensure that student veterans have a place to live as they are pursuing their education.

Currently, the end of the semester can mean the loss of housing benefits--when you are in between semesters and not in school--because the VA can't pay for housing in between semesters. My legislation would help ensure that student veterans don't have to reach into their own pockets to pay for a benefit they have already earned and would make sure they are not losing their housing between semesters. Our veterans should be able to focus on their studies, not worry about keeping a roof over their heads.

These veterans need to know their tuition payments will be there on time, just as they were promised. It is not enough to praise our veterans. We do that all the time, but praise doesn't pay the tuition bills or housing costs for student veterans. Instead, we must uphold each and every promise our country has made to them, including their GI bill benefits.

I was very pleased when we were able to strengthen the GI bill and was excited about the opportunities for new support for our veterans. Now we are hearing about technical issues and glitches that make no sense and undermine the ability of our veterans to fully benefit from the improved GI bill.

The Trump administration must address these technical issues immediately. The Senate must pass legislation, including my Student Veterans Housing Act, which will ensure that veterans are receiving all of the benefits they have earned. The VA must repay each and every dollar our veterans are owed, period. Veterans like Brendan and Bill and so many others have always been first in line to defend us. It is time for us to stand up for them and get this issue fixed.

Madam President, I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, today I wish to pay special tribute to the nearly 600,000 Michigan residents who have proudly served in our Nation's Armed Forces.

Today's veterans have served on many fronts, from the beaches of Normandy and Iwo Jima, to the rice fields of Korea, to the jungles of Vietnam, to the Cold War, to the deserts of the Persian Gulf, to the fight against terrorism in Afghanistan and Iraq, and right here at home.

This spirit of service lives on in so many different ways across our State. Whether they are supporting military families, providing help for fellow veterans, giving back through religious organizations and community nonprofits, or inspiring the next generation while coaching Little League or the local softball team, these patriots show us that service is more than something you do once. Instead, it is a way of life all of us should strive for.

Our veterans have done so much for us. It is our solemn duty to keep the promises we have made to them.

We must also ensure that our veterans receive each and every military honor they have earned while defending our country. I have been so fortunate to get to know Jim McCloughan of South Haven, who was awarded the Medal of Honor earlier this year for saving the lives of 10 of his fellow soldiers during the Vietnam war. Like so many of our veterans, Jim has spent the decades since then continuing to serve his community.

I know the sacrifices our veterans made because I have seen it firsthand. My own father served in the Navy during World War II, and he always said that veterans shouldn't stand in the back of any line, not for healthcare, education, housing, the chance at a good job, or the military honors, they have earned. He was absolutely right, and I have made it my mission to ensure that every promise made to our veterans is a promise kept.

Michigan's veterans are the best of us. On this Veterans Day--and every day--we salute them, we honor them, and we thank them for their service.

Thank you.

Mr. President, today I wish to pay special tribute to Wayne State University, which this year is celebrating 150 years.

Michigan is home to many world-class colleges and universities. However, what has set Wayne State apart from the very beginning is its unique role in serving the people of Michigan from the heart of Detroit.

Wayne State traces its roots to 1868, when five physicians who had witnessed the very worst of human suffering on Civil War battlefields vowed to change medicine for the better. They founded Detroit Medical College. Its motto: Salus Populi--Suprema Lex.

The Welfare of the People is the Highest Law.

A lot has changed since those early days. Today more than 27,000 Warriors from 80 countries are earning degrees in everything from accounting to manufacturing engineering, orchestral studies to urban planning, but one thing has not changed at all: Wayne State's dedication to people's welfare. For 150 years, Wayne State has been making Detroit and our State stronger and creating true leaders.

It is doing that at the Integrative Biosciences Center, a 127,000- square-foot, $90 million facility dedicated to studying and eliminating health disparities, and the National Institutes of Health's Perinatology Research Branch, which has helped more than 20,000 at-risk mothers and babies.

It is doing that at the brand-new Mike Illitch School of Business, which is creating the next generation of business leaders while helping revitalize the corridor between downtown and midtown.

It is doing that through its Wayne Advantage-Macomb program, which allows students to begin to earn their degree at Macomb Community College, and the Warrior Way Back program, which helps students who didn't receive their degrees get back into class while easing their student debt burden.

It counts among its alumni people who have excelled in nearly every field: Dr. Joseph Ferguson, class of 1869, the first African-American medical school graduate in Michigan; Helen Thomas, class of 1942, dean of the White House Press Corps; Emmett Leith, class of 1949, recipient of the National Medal of Science; Philip Levine, class of 1950, Poet Laureate of the United States and winner of the Pulitzer Prize; Damon Keith, Wayne State University Law School class of 1967, U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals; Garth Fagan, class of 1969, winner of the Tony Award for Best Choreography for ``The Lion King''; Mark Fritz, class of 1978, winner of the Pulitzer Prize for international reporting; Dr. Carmen McIntyre, class of 1990, creator of the Mental Health First Aid Training program; and Dr. Mona Hanna-Attisha, class of 2006, whose careful research helped discover elevated lead levels in the children of Flint.

Hundreds of thousands more alumni, famous or not, can credit Wayne State in part for their success, but so too can hundreds of thousands of people who have been educated, inspired, represented, protected, entertained, and treated by those graduates. I think those original five physicians would be extremely pleased with the impact their school has had not just on Detroit but on our Nation.

Since 1868, Wayne State University has been building leaders. Congratulations to students, faculty, staff, and alumni on 150 years of putting the welfare of the people of Michigan first.

Thank you.

Mr. President, before my friend from Washington State leaves, I want to thank her for her advocacy on water infrastructure, and I agree with her that this is a great bipartisan bill. The distinguished Senator from Washington State mentioned Flint, MI, and I just want to thank her one more time. No one stood stronger with me and Senator Peters in trying to help the people in Flint, and I greatly appreciate her help, support, and advocacy.