Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be recognized as in morning business for such time as I shall consume.

Mr. President, this week, after 3 years of planning and construction, we now will be dedicating tomorrow and officially opening the Museum of the Bible.

This is led by Steve Green of Hobby Lobby. We all remember Hobby Lobby of Oklahoma. Steve has been a friend of mine and his parents have been friends of mine for a long period of time. He is the chairman of the board of directors for this long-awaited museum that will allow visitors from not just this country but from all over the world--they will be coming here to see what it is all about and how this plays a pivotal role in our country's history. There is no better place than Washington, DC, in our Nation's Capitol, to remind us of the scope of the Bible's impact on our history and our narrative. It has been long- awaited.

Indeed, one of our Founding Fathers, Patrick Henry, was renowned for his readings of the Bible. He said at the end of his life: ``This book is worth all the books that ever were printed, and it has been my misfortune that I never found time to read it with the proper attention and feeling till lately.''

He is the one--and not many people are aware that historians are relooking at the history of this country, and they are saying we could not have won that war. I mean you have to sometimes close your eyes and envision the greatest army on the face of this Earth coming down with thundering marches, going through Boston, and going up to Lexington and Concord. There is no way in this world that a handful of trappers and hunters could have won that thing. Yet we know why, and he knew why, when you talk about Patrick Henry. They said: We are not strong enough. It can't be done.

There is one thing they overlooked, and that is the strength that comes from God that we had, and they didn't have. He said:

We are not weak if we make a proper use of those means

which the God of nature hath placed in our power. . . . armed

in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that

which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy

can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our

battles alone. There is a just God who [reigns] over the

destinies of nations; and who will raise up friends to fight

our battles for us.

And he did, and they fired that shot heard around the world.

I think that is really important today to think about because people come to this country and they want to know what makes America work.

I have been privileged to sponsor the African dinner every February, and people come in from all over Africa. They are always surprised when they come and they find out walking through the Capitol what real significance God and the Bible has to the history of this country. We are the largest Christian community in the world. We cannot and should not deny the role our Judeo-Christian values played in the formation of this country.

Our first President, George Washington, was steadfast in his belief of God, His law, and that liberty is God's gift. Washington's leadership was based on the conviction that Americans are entrusted by God to preserve basic freedoms established in the Constitution.

In a letter, Washington wrote, ``We should be very cautious of violating the rights of conscience in others, ever considering that God alone is the judge of the hearts of men and to Him only in this case they are answerable.''

It is clear our Founding Fathers recognized and enshrined the importance of religious liberty, one of our most precious and foundational religious freedoms that allowed them to live their lives according to the teaching of the Bible.

The Bible's role in the founding of America is just one remarkable example of how the Bible has profoundly shaped world history. It has influenced cultures in every corner of the globe, and the Museum of the Bible, which is going to be opening tomorrow, pays tribute to its impact and intersectionality with the world religions.

Whether considering the Bible through a secular or faith-based lens, it is impossible to deny its impact on individuals, countries, and, indeed, all world history. The Museum of the

Bible is the first educational experience I have encountered that truly appreciates the full magnitude of the Bible's role throughout history.

The six exhibits, curated by a panel of faith leaders that span religious and geographic divides, truly bring the Word of God to life in a way that positively educates, informs, and encourages people of all faiths and beliefs to learn more about the Bible

General Washington reminded us in his Farewell Address: ``Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.''

Steve Green's father David founded Hobby Lobby. I remember this so well because I was in the State legislature at the time this happened. They started in their garage making frames for pictures. It turned out to be this giant, worldwide corporation, the largest arts and crafts retailer in the history of America, currently or in the past.

Remember Hobby Lobby, when ObamaCare required that all employers provide free access to the pills that terminate pregnancies, David clearly recognized this as a violation of his faith. That is what America is all about. If you believe in it, you do it, you take a risk. He was risking millions of dollars, but the morality was so significant from the teachings of the Bible that he went ahead and did it. He took the challenge all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court and won in a split decision. He successfully argued the importance to maintain the fundamental freedom of religion to apply his faith convictions to how he operates his private business.

David won his case, but his family understood we needed to do more. So he started the Museum of the Bible. I actually was there last June, when it was under construction at the time, as we walked through and visualized what it was going to look like later on. It is magnificent.

They have a stage, and you live on the stage. He is going to have performances there. I am so anxious to be there tonight, the night before the official opening, to see now what it looks like.

I am so grateful David's son Steve and his entire family are leading this effort to make the Bible and its impact more accessible to the whole world. I am especially honored that the museum will open on my birthday tomorrow. I am not sure they really knew that when they made the decision, but somebody knew it.

Mr. President, let me turn to another topic that I think is very important right now; that is, our energy independence. It is a huge issue. People are not aware, while we may have talked about the importance of the budget reconciliation process to set up and to pass the historic and much needed tax cuts for our individuals and small businesses, the process also allowed the Senate to use reconciliation for something equally as valuable--to allow energy exploration in Alaska.

Yesterday the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee met to consider legislation to open up a very small part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for responsible energy development. This bill was successfully passed by the committee, and I look forward to helping it continue to move through Congress.

I have long been an advocate for this to happen. It is interesting, the people in Alaska all want it. The polling is something like 96 percent of the people really want this to happen. They know the benefits that will come to Alaska, the money that will be there. People talk about the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as if it is this great big thing. It is the size of South Carolina. It is a very small thing. Right now, we are going to be able to go up there to create jobs and opportunities and authorize the leases in Alaska. We will also increase revenue to the United States.

It is estimated that the energy production in Alaska could lead to over $1 trillion in revenue. Responsible management will have a positive impact on reducing our national debt and most significantly opening ANWR is allowing Alaska to do what they want to do.

We are so good in this body thinking that we know more about what is good for Alaska and what is good for Oklahoma and what is good for Georgia than they do in their own States. One of few things we do right around this place is how we do our highway bill. In the highway bill, we get the priorities from the States when they come in, and they decide what it is they want to do in their States.

Remember the issue about the ``bridge to nowhere.'' Everybody was concerned about this. All the talk shows jumped on it without realizing, until it was too late, it had already gotten committed.

Here was something that happened right for a change. I was chairman of the committee at that time. The ``bridge to nowhere'' in Alaska didn't go ``nowhere,'' it went somewhere. The problem was, there weren't any people there once you got there, and the reason is you couldn't get there. On their list of 100 priorities, No. 4 was to build that bridge, but we, in our infinite wisdom here, said: No, you can't do that. Somehow the public didn't know what they were talking about. Well, that is kind of the same situation we have right now. We have something in Alaska that was their No. 1 priority to develop, and for years and years we have stopped them from being able to do with their land what they wanted to do with their land. The Federal Government has been keeping Alaskans from acting in their own best interest.

Finally, increasing energy production in Alaska is a key part of making the United States not only energy independent but energy dominant. We are on the verge of doing just that. Earlier this week, the Executive Director of the International Energy Agency, Fatih Birol, said the United States ``will become the undisputed global oil and gas leader for decades to come'' and that ``the growth in production is unprecedented, exceeding all historical levels.'' ANWR could be and should be a part of that story.

Energy independence is vital to our national security. How many of these countries over there that have been part of the old Soviet Union want their allegiance to us, and yet they are forced to buy their oil and gas from Russia and from Iran and they don't want to do it. Now we are taking them off the hook.

I had a great experience not long ago. I was invited by the President of Lithuania to come and open up their first terminal. Now we are changing all that.

We have a guy named Harold Hamm, an Oklahoman who is the chairman and CEO of Continental Resources in Oklahoma. He announced they would begin exporting oil to China. Exporting to China is kind of a big deal. He talks about how we are going to become undeniably a leader in exporting energy that will have an impact on the rest of the world.

President Trump has been clear that he intends to make the United States a net energy exporter, something we haven't been since 1953. Opening up the National Wildlife Refuge, which just took place this last week, will be a big step toward this initiative, and I applaud the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee for helping the administration make this happen.

Mr. President, I am not the first guy to stand up here and make this observation, but I have serious concerns with how the nominee confirmation process has been going in this Congress.

There is a blatant lack of respect for the Senate nomination process and an unprecedented level of obstructionism. I have been here for a number of years, so I know what to compare it with. I have never seen so many people being delayed in their confirmations, knowing that they are, ultimately, going to be confirmed and that they are well-qualified civil servants.

The Democrats are forcing cloture votes on nominees who have well over 60 votes in support. Last week, we held a cloture vote on Scott Palk. Scott Palk is from Oklahoma. He is a guy who everybody likes. He doesn't have

any enemies out there. In fact, he was actually nominated by President Obama. He was not even nominated by this President. He ended up getting 79 votes. Still, the stall was there, and we had to wait and wait and wait. Meanwhile, things are not getting done that should be getting done. Furthermore, the agency positions that we have hardly ever held rollcall votes on are being forced to occupy floor time. There is no reason for these votes except to delay the work of the courts and our agencies.

I am very supportive of the leader's commitment to our courts and how he has prioritized judicial nominees. These nominations are extremely important and will ensure that the rule of law is upheld for, possibly, decades to come, benefiting all Americans.

However, there is an Agency that is doing work that is also important to all Americans and needs appointments, and that Agency is the Environmental Protection Agency. If there has been one Agency over the last 8 years that has run around and expanded its authority beyond congressional intent, it is the EPA. Putting confirmed appointees in place at the EPA will allow the President and Scott Pruitt to be successful in their efforts to rightsize that Agency. He has talked about that quite a bit. It is a bloated Agency that needs to be rightsized, and he needs help to do that.

Last week, I highlighted the great things that Scott Pruitt is doing as Administrator. I was able to visit with him yesterday at the EPA and witness firsthand the implementation of new policies that will bring about positive changes in an Agency that has run roughshod over the American people. With the repeal of WOTUS and the Clean Power Plan, with the implementation of TSCA, in reforming the Agency by ending sue- and-settle processes, and by creating greater transparency on the EPA's Science Advisory Committee, he is really doing a great job.

By the way, yesterday, we had this event over there which had to do with the scientists. There are three Scientific Advisory Boards in the EPA. These are supposed to be made up of scientists who advise the policymakers as to what they are supposed to be doing. During the last administration, we discovered in just one of these that six out of seven of the appointees were actually recipients of grants from the EPA. In fact, I was over there, and I gave a little talk about those six. They actually received $119 million, and they are supposed to be unbiased in making policy. Obviously, this is one of the many things that he is going to make sure will no longer exist.

He is making it impossible for anyone who serves on a scientific advisory board to receive any grants from the EPA. How reasonable is that? Yet that is still a practice they use and one of the many things he is cleaning up there.

There is a lot of work still to do. The Agency needs its Assistant Administrators, who will work to implement many of the initiatives I have worked toward for years. The Environment and Public Works Committee has now voted out five Assistant Administrators and General Counsel nominees, and I hope we can move swiftly to get these well qualified nominees over to the EPA to bring their expertise to an Agency that desperately needs them. Unfortunately, Democrats have targeted two of these nominees and have disparaged them, their work, and their backgrounds.

Dr. Michael Dourson will be an excellent Assistant Administrator for the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention and will bring much needed expertise and experience to the office in charge of the TSCA reauthorization law. The TSCA bill was a huge success last year. It was done on a bipartisan basis. It is the first major reform bill in 40 years, and we were able to get that through. Yet we need to have a person as the Assistant Administrator to make sure it is done right.

Dr. Dourson has endured a coordinated campaign against him that misrepresents who he is and his record. There are groups working to paint Dr. Dourson as an ``industry scientist.''

What you will not hear from these groups is that much of his career experience comes from the EPA itself, where he worked for 15 years. During his years at the EPA, Dr. Dourson helped establish the Integrated Risk Information System, which helps identify and document the potential dangers of chemicals found in the environment. He also has the honor of having received four bronze medals from the EPA for this commendable work. Dr. Dourson also served on EPA's Scientific Advisory Board for 6 years and has held leadership roles with a number of relevant toxicology organizations, receiving several awards from his peers.

Since his time at EPA, Dr. Dourson has devoted his career to protecting public health by founding his own nonprofit that works to develop, review, and share risk assessments on various chemicals. His nonprofit work is mostly on behalf of government, with a minority of the work done at the request of various industries--many of these industries are very pro-environmental industries--as well as providing pro bono assistance to those in need of help. In other words, he used his expertise to help people who needed help and were not able to get it in any other way.

Naturally, the industry work is the part that environmental activists have focused on to prove their claims that his research is a rubberstamp for dangerous chemicals. They hold the perspective--which is a myth--that working at the request of industry must mean that you are evil.

As always, the reality is much different. On many occasions the nonprofit has developed risk assessments that did not support the industry sponsor and were the same or lower than the safe levels set by government. Furthermore, he has provided expert testimony against industry on several occasions. Unfortunately, the coordinated attack on Dr. Dourson will persist and a good man's reputation will continue to be put at risk.

I ask that the leader find floor time for Dr. Dourson as soon as possible so he can get back to work at an agency that he served commendably for many years and ensure that those who seek to tear him down do not win.

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

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

Mr. President, we have a very significant couple of votes coming up. One is the nomination of Scott Palk to be a district judge for the Western District of Oklahoma. We have been working on this for about 2 years now. He is one of the highest qualified individuals.

I thank the leader for moving forward on his nomination this week. I know judicial nominations are a priority of the leader's, and I share his belief in the importance of filling the many vacancies we have with judges who will uphold the rule of law, not predetermine outcomes and not legislate from the bench. Scott Palk fulfills and embodies this philosophy, and I have full confidence that he will be a judge whom Oklahoma and the Nation will be proud of.

This nomination is of great need to the Western District, located in Oklahoma City, which has a very heavy caseload. In fact, we have three vacancies on the bench there. One vacancy goes back over 4 years and another over 3 years, so this nomination is desperately needed.

Mr. Palk was nominated in the last Congress--so it was not this Congress--during the previous administration. He made it through the Judiciary Committee by voice vote before we ran out of time at the end of the 114th Congress. We would have had this done, but we just flat ran out of time. He had bipartisan support in the last Congress and has in this Congress, with there having been a 17-to-3 vote in the Judiciary Committee. It is not very often that happens.

He also has bipartisan support back home in Oklahoma. He comes highly recommended by David Boren. Everyone here knows who David Boren is. The Presiding Officer remembers David Boren. He was my predecessor in this seat. He was the president of the University of Oklahoma but is retired now. He is a Democrat. Actually, he and I were elected to the House of Representatives in Oklahoma on the same day, so we go back a long way. David Boren knows Mr. Palk very well because Scott Palk has worked at the University of Oklahoma College of Law for about 15 years now after his having left a successful career in both the U.S. attorney's office and as a county district attorney.

David Boren said of Palk--now, this is a Democrat talking about Scott Palk--``He would make an excellent judge,'' would be ``balanced and fair in his approach,'' and has ``an excellent reputation for complete honesty and integrity.'' I don't know what more you could want in a judge.

That is David Boren talking, my predecessor in the Senate.

Again, I thank the leader for his commitment to fulfilling our judicial vacancies, and I ask that my colleagues support the nomination, as I am sure they will, with a ``yes'' vote for Mr. Palk.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I am pleased to recognize the Schwan's Company on the 75th anniversary of their Stilwell food production facility. This is a significant milestone for Schwan's and its employees, but also for Adair County and the entire State of Oklahoma. Throughout their 75 years, Schwan's has been a committed community partner, hiring over 300 residents and supporting hunger relief and youth activities.

The food production facility in Stilwell, originally called the Stilwell Canning Company, first opened in 1942 when World War II drove up the demand for canned items. The company has demonstrated a strong commitment to excellence, first expanding in 1999, when it became the largest frozen dessert production plant in the country. After being acquired by Schwan's Company in 2003, they have continued to invest in the plant and its employees, putting the facility on the leading edge of pie production in the country. Today the plant is a 610,000-square- foot state-of-of-the-art facility that employs about 300 people.

Congratulations on your 75th anniversary, and I look forward to seeing Schwan's continue to make a positive impact in Stilwell.

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

Mr. President, I came back just a week ago from visiting our troops stationed all around the world, in all the commands-- AFRICOM, EUCOM, CENTCOM--and talked to them about the threats in all these regions.

At a time when I hear colleagues across the aisle and political pundits ask the question, Why do we have troops in various places like Africa, it is important to remember the strategic importance of Africa.

I remember 10 years ago we didn't have a command for Africa. It was part of three commands: Pacific Command, Central Command, and European Command. Now we have AFRICOM. It is its own command. It seemed a little unreasonable that we were treating Africa as somewhat of a stepchild when that is the breeding ground out there for a lot of the things happening in terms of terrorism.

Despite our military's reach and influence, our Nation's shrinking defense budget has put AFRICOM at risk during a time when commanders are saying we face the most dangerous world we have ever faced, and we have.

I have often said that I look wistfully back at the days of the Cold War, when we had two superpowers and they were predictable. We knew what they had. They knew what we had. You have people from all over the world who are putting together equipment that we never dreamed they would have.

We have just gone through 8 years of another administration. I don't say this critically of him, but one thing about President Obama was that he was a committed, sincere liberal. Liberals generally don't pay a lot of attention to the military. Now we find ourselves in a situation where we are hurting. A lot of people assume that we don't have any problems militarily.

Sometimes I remind people that up until about 1962, we spent more than half--52 percent in 1962--of all of our revenues on defending America. What is it today? It is 15 percent. When I tell people that, they are in shock that we are in the situation we are in. We have terrorist groups in Africa--such as ISIS, al-Shabaab, and Boko Haram-- and they are all growing in capability and have expanded their areas throughout Africa. This year we have seen horrific events occurring at the hands of these extremists. On October 14, a truck bombing killed 300 people in Somalia's capital. In Niger--it just happened--we had four of our U.S. soldiers who were killed in action on October 4 by an ISIS group.

We know that we have serious problems. I think it is a great disservice for people to say that we must have known that we had the threat that was out there in Niger, when in fact we didn't know it. They even compare it sometimes with Benghazi. I remember Benghazi. I was there at the time. I remember Chris Stevens. Chris Stevens was the Ambassador who went there. He was in my office right before he left, talking about the threats that were there, talking about the Taliban, his training there, and talking about organized terrorist activity.

I have to remind people that the persons who are responsible for advising the Secretary of State, who at that time was Hillary Clinton, and the President, who was President Obama at that time, are the DNI-- that was James Clapper at that time--the Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. When the Benghazi event happened, the annex was blown up. They all said at that time--they advised us, the President, and the Secretary of State--that they were forewarned by more than a month that on the anniversary of 9/11 things would blow up, and it was going to be an organized attack.

Right now there is an investigation going on to determine whether or not there is any way that we could have anticipated that in Niger this would be happening, and so far, that hasn't come up.

Despite the best of intentions, many of our partners in the region lack the capacity and the effectiveness to adequately defend themselves. People say: What do we have to gain there? This is exactly the same situation that we saw in Afghanistan prior to the war there. The terrorists have to have a safe harbor to train in, and that is what has happened.

During my travel, I had the opportunity to meet Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. I have to say this about him. I have never seen him so ecstatic. A lot of us were looking back at what they were trying to do during the Obama administration. It was disheartening to think that they put together this Iran deal, and our Secretary of State at that time, John Kerry, talked about how great it was and all of these concessions that were made when, in fact, that wasn't the case. Nonetheless, when our President came out and said that he was not going to recertify the Iran deal, that was kind of neat because people don't realize that it takes a recertification every 30 days by the President in order to keep the Iran deal together. He has not done that.

Shortly after that, I happened to be talking to Prime Minister Netanyahu. It was an incredible relief to him that we were going to be looking at this. Still today, I think we all understand that Iran is the one that is financing terrorism all around the world. We discussed the shortcomings and looked forward to working with my colleagues in the future so that Iran does not become a nuclear nation, not now or ever.

What is perhaps the most encouraging is the message that this approach sends to the rest of the world, specifically to North Korea. President Trump's approach shows me--and, more importantly, shows Kim Jong Un--that an America-first foreign policy means that we refuse to take a single-minded approach to global threats.

I recall the changes taking place 8 years ago when our new President, President Obama, started his appeasing tour by going over and talking about

how America hadn't been doing the right thing. Now, all of a sudden, we have changed that around. That is what is taking place now. At that time we didn't have the threats that are out there today.

We look at North Korea. North Korea is run by a questionable person, totally unpredictable, according to our own military leaders. He is rapidly getting the capability not just of an ICBM--he has already proven he has an ICBM--but with a range not just of Alaska and some of those areas but of the entire continental United States.

On July 4 he launched his first successful ICBM. If that were fired on a standard trajectory, that missile could have reached Alaska. Some experts think it could have reached even further, into the continental United States. In light of that test, the Defense Intelligence Agency updated their assessment of the timeline by which North Korea would have the capability of hitting an American city. Instead of being 2 years out and 3 years out, it is now down to 1 year out. Some people say they have it right now. We have that threat that is out there. It is the greatest threat, in my opinion, that we are facing now or that we have ever faced.

Following this, on September 3, North Korea tested what is believed to be a hydrogen bomb. That would be seven times the power of what was dropped on Hiroshima. Even if delivered by a relatively inaccurate ICBM, there would be horrible damage imposed on our continent.

It is important to remember that all of this power is being wielded by an erratic despot, Kim Jong Un. North Korean officials have stated that they are not interested in diplomacy until they have an ICBM capable of reaching the east coast of the United States.

What does that tell you? It tells you that they are on their way. This stresses the need for the United States to enhance and accelerate our ballistic missile defense systems and to continue to put pressure on North Korea through every other means we can, diplomatic and otherwise.

My recent travels enforced again what I have been saying for some time; that is, that this is the most dangerous situation we have had, certainly in my lifetime. We have an opportunity to counter that threat right now. We are in the midst of our NDAA. One thing about the National Defense Authorization Act is that this act is going to pass. It has passed for 55 consecutive years so we know it is going to pass now. But we need to go ahead and get it done. It is important because the primary constitutional responsibility that we have is to provide for the common defense of our great Nation.

We have serious readiness issues that are going to have to be addressed, and they are being addressed in this bill. I am the chairman of the Readiness Subcommittee, and we have fought hard to ensure that this year's NDAA takes care of these shortfalls we have had. Our forces are smaller now. We actually had a Readiness Subcommittee hearing, and we had the Vice Chiefs of all of the services there. They came in and said that right now we are in the same situation we were in when we had the hollow force following the Carter administration in the 1970s.

In January of this year, the Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, General Daniel Allyn, said: What it comes down to is that we are going to be too late. Our soldiers arrived too late. Our soldiers required too much time to close the manning, the training, and the equipment we have, and the end result is extensive casualties to civilians and to our forces.

We are talking about death. That is what is at stake right here. Just last week, I met with the Secretary of the Air Force, Heather Wilson, to discuss aviation readiness. Right now we are 1,500 pilots short, and 1,300 of those are fighter pilots. Only 50 percent of the Air Force's squadrons are actually trained and ready to conduct all of their assigned missions. One-third of our ground brigades don't work. They are not ready for combat. As to the aviation brigades, it is the same thing.

Right now, as we know, the Marines use our fleet of F-18s. Sixty-two percent of them don't work. They don't have the parts for combat. We have this situation. That is going to have to be direct. This year's bill will increase the troop levels. We will do what is necessary to correct these problems. We need to get moving on that and make people aware that help is on the way.

By the way, here is one of my concerns in this bill. A lot of people are interested in the BRAC process. We do prohibit base realignment closings to take place for another year. The reason for that is not that there may be excess capacity right now or excess resources out there, but when we are in a rebuilding mode, we would rather be able to use those resources that aren't being used now rather than build new ones. One thing is true about a BRAC; it always loses money the first 3 years. Right now we can't afford to lose any of the money that goes to defending America.

Anyway, of the additional funding, there is going to be $8.5 billion for the missile defense that has been suffering, and we are going to be doing some good things. As we continue the conference process, which started today--we had our first conference meeting today--we need to focus on where we are.

Again, I repeat, the threat is there. We understand that. We know what is happening in Africa. By the way, the number of troops we have over there--you have to quit using this number of about 6,000--is really 1,300 troops for the entire continent who are not committed or working in some of the Embassies. We need to get busy on that.

Mr. President, today I would like to honor and pay tribute to my former staffer Jeremy Shull. Jeremy came to my office in 2004 as a fellow. He quickly advanced and became the deputy military legislative assistant in a short period of time. Jeremy was full of life, always had a big smile on his face, and brought a lot of joy into my office. I would like to share a bit about Jeremy's life and family and then about his time in my office.

At the age of only 35, Jeremy fell into the arms of Jesus, doing what he loved: climbing Capitol Peak in Aspen, CO, on August 6. He was the loving husband of 7 years to Jamie and the proud father of 2-month-old, Jack. Jeremy was born in Cincinnati, OH, on March 9, 1982, to his parents, Bob and Linda Shull, and was raised alongside his two brothers, Ben and Josh. From an early age, Jeremy's love of the outdoors and his leadership skills were apparent to all. He went on to graduate from Perrysburg High School, in Ohio, and Grove City College, in Pennsylvania, where he discovered his love of rugby and international travel.

After college, he made his way to Washington, DC, where he was involved in the Falls Church Fellows Program and worked on Capitol Hill in my office. During this time he met the love of his life, Jamie, at Summer's Best Two Weeks, a Christian sports camp in Boswell, PA, and the two were married in 2010. As a couple, Jeremy and Jamie lived and worked in Washington, DC, Uganda, and went to graduate school at Geneva College in Pennsylvania. In 2014, Jeremy earned his master's degree in counseling and eventually went on to earn his LAC and LPC licenses with concentrations in trauma and addictions.

Shortly after earning their degrees, Jeremy and Jamie moved out west to Parker, CO, to pursue their adventurous dreams. Jeremy worked at a crisis stabilization unit and in other settings where he counseled clients in their worst moments, helping them to create vision and hope for their futures. To quote Jeremy, he served others, ``to sustain the weary and help clients overcome internal walls between them and a thriving life.'' This past May, they welcomed their beautiful son, Jack Ellis, into their family.

Jeremy is remembered by his wife, Jamie, and their 2-month-old son, Jack. He is survived by Bob and Linda Shull of Fairlawn, OH, brother Ben and his wife Emily Shull, and nieces Piper and Scout Shull of Cincinnati, OH, brother Josh Shull of Washington, DC, grandparents Norma Hissong of Bath, OH, Ken and Meg Shull of Seneca, South Carolina, numerous aunts, uncles, and cousins in Ohio and South Carolina, mother and father-in-law Mike and Teri Maurer and brother-in-law Justin Maurer of Washington, DC.

In 2007, Jeremy traveled with me on a CODEL to Ireland, Ethiopia, Djibouti, Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, France, and Italy. The CODEL was en route to Africa when we had a required crew stop. The stop happened to be only about 45 miles away from where my daughter Molly was teaching and staying with her family. We only had about 24 hours on the ground, and it was meant for a time for us to adjust from jet lag, but Jeremy and I, along with my son-in-law and grandson, drove to the base of Mt. Grappa, which is close to sea level. Four hours later, we reached the top, which was 5,800 feet in elevation. We walked to the World War I monuments at the top of Mt. Grappa and hiked back down.

Later in the trip, when we had a break from our meetings, the delegation divided up and some of my staff decided to do a little sightseeing in Venice but Jeremy chose to stay back and play soccer with my daughter's kids. In doing so, he gave the rest of the delegation a real gift. Jeremy had been to Venice a few years before

I object.

Will the Senator yield?

I ask unanimous consent that at the conclusion of the remarks from my friend from Oregon, Senator Wyden, that I be recognized for such time as I shall consume.

Mr. President, first of all, let me say to the Senator from Oregon that help is on its way. It is a very difficult thing because we don't have any idea how long this is going to last. When you stop to think about a land that is in the tropics not having electricity, it is something that is hard to imagination and to get arms around the devastation that takes place. I appreciate the fact that he has brought that up.