Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise to speak in opposition to the nomination of Carlos Muniz to be the general counsel at the Department of Education. One of the most important responsibilities that the Department of Education has is to uphold title IX and fight back against gender discrimination in all its forms. This is an enormous responsibility, but it is also an urgent one.

Thousands of men and women have survived sexual assaults on college campuses, and they are demanding that the Education Department and their universities take these crimes seriously. But over the last year, we have heard over and over again that Secretary DeVos has let down these survivors. Instead of working to uphold and even strengthen title IX, she has used her position to weaken title IX. We should not be arming her with more staff who are determined to carry out that plan, but that is what Mr. Muniz will do if he is confirmed.

Mr. Muniz's nomination sends a cynical message to survivors of campus sexual assault all over our country--that the Education Department is not taking survivors seriously and that they are not interested in protecting a law that is supposed to keep our students safe.

If this nominee is confirmed, I have no doubt that he is going to accelerate Secretary DeVos's attack on title IX. This is an insult to the thousands of students who have suffered through sexual assaults on their college campuses. Mr. Muniz has spent his career on the wrong side of this issue, and he has made it clear through his actions that he does not respect the important role title IX actually plays in protecting our students and keeping our campuses safe.

The general counsel of the Education Department should work to uphold and strengthen our anti-discrimination laws, but I fear this nominee is going to do the exact opposite. I urge all of my colleagues to do what is best for our students and join me in opposing this nomination.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise to speak about the mass murder in Florida this month, and I rise to ask a simple question that millions of Americans in every part of this country are asking at their kitchen tables right now: Is Congress finally going to do anything meaningful about gun violence? When will enough be enough? What will it take for this body to move beyond the same talking points that we hear after every mass shooting and actually do something to prevent more deaths? Will Congress finally see what the vast majority of Americans see--gun owners and non-gun owners alike--that America's gun problem isn't going away unless Congress musters up the courage to take it head-on, or will Congress continue to give the lipservice of thoughts and prayers and then do absolutely nothing?

We have to act because once again there was a massacre on American soil. Once again it was inside a school. Once again American children were gunned down. We keep living through a nightmare of gun violence that repeats itself in schools, movie theaters, churches, nightclubs, concerts, and every single day on the streets of cities in every State around this country--Sandy Hook, Aurora, Charleston, San Bernardino, Orlando, Las Vegas, Sutherland Springs, and most recently, Parkland,

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

Mr. President, we just marked the 25th anniversary of the Family and Medical Leave Act, known to most as FMLA.

When FMLA passed 25 years ago, it was an incredible step forward for millions of working families. They finally had the legal right to step away from their jobs to take care of their families without the risk of being fired. But we now know that the law just has not kept up with the times.

FMLA doesn't apply to 40 percent of the workforce, and it doesn't guarantee any pay during the time the worker is away. In fact, 25 years after FMLA was signed into law, we are still the only industrialized country in the world that doesn't guarantee access to some form of paid leave. That means that workers all over the country are losing wages and retirement savings when they take time off. The economy is losing tens of millions of dollars. We have to change this because FMLA is not good enough anymore.

We need an actual national paid leave program, and I am pleased to see that paid leave has now clearly become a bipartisan issue. Both parties agree that paid leave is something that our country desperately needs and urgently wants to have.

Earlier today, a group of Republican colleagues announced a proposal they claim would solve this problem, but it is clear that their proposal will not help the vast majority of working Americans. In fact, it would not create a real paid leave program that covers all workers.

Not only that, this plan will actually rob the Social Security trust fund. This would not strengthen Social Security; it would weaken Social Security. No worker should have to borrow against their own Social Security benefits, which are already too low, to get paid family leave when they need it to take care of a new baby, a sick family member, a dying parent, or themselves. And let's not forget that Social Security already pays women less than men. So this proposal would make that problem even worse.

If you are watching this debate right now and you are wondering whether Congress is finally going to pass a paid leave law that actually helps working Americans, don't be fooled by this Republican proposal.

If your son is diagnosed with cancer and you need time to bring him to his chemotherapy appointments, their plan will do nothing for you. If your elderly mother has dementia and you need time to be by her side, this plan will do nothing for you. If your husband has a heart attack and he needs you there while he recovers, this plan does nothing for you.

Right now, millions of American workers are stuck choosing between earning a paycheck and leaving their jobs to take care of a loved one when some medical emergency happens, and if this bill passes, that would not change.

Listen to what a woman named Shelby went through because she didn't have paid leave.

Shelby is a mother and a grandmother, and she takes care of her parents. She is a security officer, committed to keeping her community safe. We all know that we can never predict when medical emergencies happen. All of a sudden, Shelby's youngest daughter and parent needed medical attention at the same time. Shelby had to leave work because her family needed her, but all she had was FMLA--unpaid leave--which counted as an employment disciplinary action where she worked.

As Shelby put it, taking unpaid leave was an enormous financial burden for her. She couldn't keep up with her rent or utility costs, and it took her months to catch up on just paying her bills. She was able to keep her job, but she suffered far more than she should have, with an enormous amount of added stress on top of her family's medical issues, because she didn't have paid leave. This Republican proposal would not help her.

We have to fix this. Even President Trump agrees. In his State of the Union Address last week, he said: My response is this: Actions speak louder

than words. Our country needs a real paid leave plan.

If President Trump and Congress really are serious about creating a national paid leave program, then I urge them to support my paid leave bill, which would actually work. It would cover all workers, not just new moms. It is called the FAMILY Act.

The FAMILY Act would finally guarantee paid family and medical leave to every working American. The FAMILY Act is affordable. It is an accessible earned benefit that you and your employer would contribute into together. It would stay with you for your entire career, no matter where you worked. It is universal and comprehensive. It is for women and for men. It is for the young and the elderly. It is for workers in big companies or small companies or even if they are self-employed, it would only cost about the cost of a cup of coffee a week.

This is the kind of paid leave program that our country needs, and anything less is just not enough.

Five States around the country have already stood up for what is right and given their workers access to paid leave. These States, including my home State of New York, are doing a much better job than Congress of meeting the needs of their people on this issue.

California, for example, has had their paid leave program for more than a decade. I know some of my colleagues are worried about whether paid leave is good for business, so I hope they will listen to these numbers.

In a survey, 90 percent of business owners in California said that paid leave had a positive or, at worst, no negative effect on their profit or their productivity and on their retention. Ninety-nine percent of them said that it boosted morale.

Paid leave is good for business and it is good for working families, so we have to pass it. I know there is bipartisan support to do it. Let's start rewarding work again and give people the opportunity to earn a better life for their families, and let's finally give Americans access to paid leave.

I urge my colleagues to join me in this fight and pass the FAMILY Act.

I now wish to yield the floor to my colleague from Illinois, who is also going to speak about why this is good for America.

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

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

Mr. President, I rise to speak about an urgent crisis that Congress must solve now for nearly 800,000 Dreamers in this country. I am proud to represent New York State in the U.S. Senate. One of the things I am most proud of is that my State is home to tens of thousands of Dreamers--tens of thousands of young people who have never known any other country as home but this one.

When President Trump announced that he wanted to end the DACA Program, it was one of the most inhumane actions of his entire Presidency. Let me be clear about what ending DACA will do. Ending DACA will force thousands of Dreamers to lose their jobs. It will force them to go into hiding. It will force them to have to make the unimaginable choice between staying here undocumented or being forced out of the United States.

I ask my colleagues, are you really OK with letting that happen when you personally have the power to prevent it from happening right now? Attacking Dreamers like this goes against our most basic values as Americans, our most basic sense of right versus wrong.

I know this Chamber is divided about how to fix our broken immigration system, but just for a second, forget about ideology and think about what it actually means for these young people who have spent their entire lives here. They are waiting and wondering if Congress actually has the guts to stand up to President Trump and do what is right.

If the President will not lead, then Congress must lead, and we need to lead now. We have to protect our Dreamers, and we need to pass the Dream Act.

Most of all, we should never allow our Dreamers to be used as political pawns. We should simply do what both parties have said is the right thing to do, which is to pass the Dream Act. This is a matter of basic human rights and human dignity. It is about people's lives, and I am not going to compromise on that.

Mr. President, are you willing to compromise on that?

We need to fix this problem, and we don't have a lot of time to do it. Every week that Congress refuses to take action, more Dreamers lose their DACA status. Very soon, we are going to have to pass a long-term spending bill just to keep the government running, but the Republican leadership has not yet committed to including a provision in the bill to protect our Dreamers.

I want to say this very clearly: If my Republican colleagues refuse to do the right thing and protect our Dreamers in the upcoming long- term spending bill, I will vote no. I will ask my colleagues to join me in this fight. I will ask all of them to see that this issue is not a political question. It is a basic question of whether or not we are a country that protects children.

I am never going to compromise when it comes to our Dreamers, not when their lives are literally hanging in the balance. Time is desperately running out. I urge my colleagues to do what is right. We must protect the Dreamers.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise to speak about the tax plan we will be voting on tomorrow, likely in the middle of the night, and definitely without much needed debate, oversight, and transparency, as it should have.

I think everyone in this Chamber agrees we need to fix our tax system so it doesn't create so much difficulty for the working families in our States. If this bill actually did that, it would be real reform, and it would be bipartisan. However, this plan does not seek anything close to the type of relief regular working people need. Instead, what it does is this: It pays back wealthy donors and lobbyists through corporate welfare, and it does this at the expense of the middle class. In other words, this is a blatant attempt to take millions of families' hard- earned money and hand it over to rich corporations on the Fortune 500 list.

If the Senate actually goes ahead and passes this bill, corporations and the wealthiest 1 percent of income earners will get massive and permanent tax cuts, and it will blow a $1.5 trillion hole into our deficit. Make no mistake, 3 months from now, Republican leadership will use that new, massive deficit as the reason to cut Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

Why are Republicans in Congress so determined to provide massive corporate welfare? Listen to this actual quote from one Republican Member of Congress, which will tell you everything you need to know about whom this tax plan is really for. He said: My donors are basically saying, ``Get it done or don't ever call me again.''

This is Washington's culture of soft corruption at its absolute worst. Now, somehow after years of talking about it, a massive tax bill has finally made its way to the Senate floor and, after all that talk, it doesn't even help the middle class. It does the exact opposite.

Here is one very simple example that sums it all up. This bill eliminates the deduction for local and State taxes, known as the SALT deduction, which so many Americans need to help them stay afloat. The SALT deduction prevents hard-working families from being double taxed on their income. It has long been our policy that when workers pay their State and local taxes, the IRS doesn't tax them twice on the same income, but the Republican tax plan now repeals this. In effect, this plan would make it so you are taxed on everything you make and then you will be taxed again. Why? Because corporations need a big tax break and to pay for the tax breaks for the richest Americans.

In many cases, the SALT deduction makes it possible for families to afford to buy a home, which is usually a family's largest asset, and it keeps the value of this investment growing. Eliminating the SALT deduction would hurt New Yorkers, and it would hurt millions of Americans. There is literally no other way to spin it.

When the details of this tax plan were released, we started hearing a lot of dredged up old talk about the supposed virtues of trickle-down economics--the myth that if only corporations had more money, it would help American families. Well, we have heard this one before, and let's not be fooled again.

Let's take a look at the state of things right now. The biggest companies in America are flush with cash, the stock market has never been higher, but cities, towns, and rural areas all over my State have been hit hard over and over again by companies that have packed up and left for cheaper labor and fatter profits abroad. So then why would we reward them by giving them yet another tax cut they don't need and will not go to their workers?

President Trump's top economic adviser recently asked a roomful of CEOs to raise their hands if this extra cash from the tax cut would get them to reinvest in their communities. No more than a handful of CEOs in the room raised their hand. I know a lot of people like to pretend otherwise, but is that really a surprise to anyone here?

In fact, several CEOs have said on the record that instead of hiring more workers or raising their pay, many companies will reward shareholders and not workers by increasing dividends or buying back their own shares.

This plan could not be more misguided because we should be rewarding work, not shareholder value. Let me put it another way. Just yesterday, the Dow broke another record with a new alltime high, and I am sure many CEOs will get a massive bonus for that, but what I want to know is this: When the Dow broke that record, how many workers on factory floors in Pennsylvania or in New York saw their pay increase? How many workers in grocery stores saw their pay increase? How many families in your State were given big pay raises that reflected those historic profits? I think we all know the answer to that question.

In our economy today, even as corporations are earning more money than ever before, there is essentially no benefit for families. The wealth does not trickle down, and this tax plan would make that problem even worse.

This tax plan helps the wrong people. It helps the people and corporations that don't need any extra help right now. It ignores the people who do. We need to start rewarding work in this country again, not doling out lavish tax cuts for giant companies. I can't say this clearly enough to New Yorkers and to hard-working Americans all over this country: If you are not rich, if you are just a regular hard- working family, then there is a very good chance you are going to take a big hit if this bill passes.

I urge every one of my colleagues to do what is right for families and oppose this plan. Tax reform should never be a partisan exercise, and we should all agree that our goal should be to help middle-class workers and their families. So let's pass a bill that actually does that. Huge corporations do not need our help. They are going to be just fine. Instead, let's finally start rewarding work in this country again.

Mr. President, I yield the floor

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

Mr. President, I rise to speak about the mass shooting in Texas yesterday--the latest mass shooting in what seems like never-ending gun violence in our country. My heart breaks for the victims and their families and for the community of Sutherland Springs in Texas.

We are still gathering all the facts about this specific crime. We are still learning about what happened, how this murderer was able to purchase a gun, whatever his twisted rationale was for walking into a house of worship in a small town and slaughtering more than 20 people, including young children, with an assault weapon. Our incredible law enforcement officials are working hard to answer all of that, but the most important fact of all is something we already know very well. This was yet another case where someone on American soil who had absolutely no business getting his hands on a weapon of war was able to get one and use it to commit heinous mass murder.

Of the five worst mass shootings in our history, three of them have occurred in just the past 17 months. Think about that. In a small town in America, nearly 7 percent of the town's population was slaughtered just because they went to church that day. The weapon he used was based on a military weapon designed for a war zone, but this was not a war zone. It was a church. People were singing and praying and savoring life.

I reject the notion that it is too soon to act. If not now, then when? We should ban assault weapons and bump stocks today. People who don't want to have an honest conversation say we need to wait. Well, for how long? Because we wait, and we wait, and we will see evil rear its ugly head over and over again, and we are told to wait again.

We have enough information today for Congress to do its job and try to keep our constituents safe from gun violence. We had enough information before yesterday to act, but what Congress does not have is the political will to act. My friends, this must change. Thoughts and prayers are not going to stop the next mass shooting. Merely talking about doing something about the mentally ill obtaining guns isn't going to stop the next deranged person with hate in their soul from committing yet another mass murder. The Second Amendment does not mean that Americans should have to risk getting shot because they walked down the wrong street in a city or decided to go to a music festival in Las Vegas or a night club in Orlando or an elementary school in Newtown or a movie theater in Aurora or a church on Sunday in Texas.

After each of these horrific acts of violence, what happened here in Congress? Nothing. More than a month after Las Vegas, we still can't even tackle the most obvious fixes like banning bump stocks. Plain and simple, Americans are being slaughtered and Congress is refusing to protect them.

I hear my colleagues who rightly say we can't pass laws to stop every instance of a deranged gunman who wants to kill innocent men, women, and children, just like our other criminal laws will not necessarily stop every instance of crime, but there is no excuse for not even trying. Everyone in this Chamber knows that a shooting in a church is something that should never happen in this country. Mr. President, I think you would agree with that. I think everyone who serves in this Chamber would agree with that. So then why aren't we doing anything to stop this violence? Why aren't we making it harder for a crazed, evil person to get their hands on a weapon of war?

It makes me wonder what our colleagues are waiting for. Are they waiting for the NRA to come in and give them cover and tell them it is OK to act? Are they waiting for the NRA to give them permission to stand up and do something? If the NRA said today assault rifles or bump stocks should be banned, it would be done tomorrow. That is the sad truth of this place, but we know the NRA will not say that because they want to keep selling these weapons of war to anyone who is willing to buy them, no matter how unsafe it makes it for the rest of us.

Congress has caved in over and over again to the enormous pressure by the NRA and the gun industry--which just wants to protect their profits--and has ignored the vast majority of Americans. Gun owners and nongun owners alike support commonsense measures to keep their fellow Americans safe.

These mass slaughters continue, and Congress has done nothing-- absolutely nothing. To me, this is a monumental failure of leadership, and it is no wonder that gun violence and mass shootings happen here at a higher rate than any other developed country in the world. This has to change. It is not enough to solve the individual crime after the fact. We have to take meaningful, real action to prevent the next one. This is what has to happen. To those who doubt that Congress can actually get something done, we already know that, depending on the motivation, depending on whom Congress is actually listening to, Congress is fully capable of moving quickly to enact change. Instead of acting like its hands are tied and refusing to do anything--which is what is happening right now--far more often than not, Congress listens to the special interests instead of the people who actually elect them to keep them safe.

Look at the shameful state of our gun laws now and tell me if you think these laws came about because families in our States demanded them or was it because the NRA demanded them? Congress has turned a collective back on strengthening and expanding our national background check system. We should be fixing the holes in the system--whatever is necessary--not just

shrugging our shoulders and saying there is nothing that can be done. Who do you think demanded that we don't fix the background check system? Was it families in your State or was it the NRA? Congress refuses to ban high-capacity magazines, which are literally made for war, and let killers fire dozens of rounds without having to stop and reload. Who do you think demanded that, families or the NRA?

Congress still refuses to ban assault weapons, which are designed for war--designed to kill as many people as possible as rapidly as possible but are given different names so they can be sold in the civilian world. Who do you think demanded that, our families or the NRA?

Congress is on the verge of passing legislation to make it easier right now for killers to buy suppressers, known by many of us as silencers, to attach to their weapons and make it harder for the police to do their jobs and catch violent criminals. Who do you think demanded that? Certainly not the police and not our families--the NRA.

Congress is dragging its feet on banning bump stocks, the inexpensive piece of equipment the killer in Las Vegas used to turn its already- powerful firearm into an automatic weapon capable of firing hundreds of rounds per minute. Who do you think demanded that, families or the NRA?

Just this February, Congress overturned a rule that had prevented people who were so incapacitated that they could no longer handle their own finances from getting their hands on a gun. Who do you think demanded that, families or the NRA?

Congress even went so far as to pass a law that blocked the Centers for Disease Control from studying the issue of gun deaths the way they are allowed to study any other cause of death in this country. Why? Because it is an attempt to hide the overwhelming data showing that keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people would decrease gun crime. Who do you think demanded that? Who do you think demanded that Congress suppress the facts and the alarming data about gun violence? Do you think it was families or the NRA?

This really has to change. Congress needs to start protecting the people we were elected to represent. Their voices matter, and it really does matter whom you are listening to. Their voices matter, and they must be heard. We must listen and enact change that would actually help to keep our States safer from gun violence. We are the ones who need to act. We can't ignore our responsibility to keep our country safe from this kind of violence.

To all the people who are watching us right now, I would say this: After all these massacres, pay attention to what your elected leaders are saying. Pay attention to what they are actually doing. Watch how they react. Look closely at how they use their time here. Listen to what they say or don't say. After these mass shootings, did they tell you we were going to bow our heads for a moment of silence and leave it there or did they tell you we were going to fight with every bit of energy to actually fix these broken gun laws and protect our American citizens?

Democracy only works when regular people stand up and demand action. I urge everyone listening today to demand that action and to hold elected leaders accountable and to ask them to pass meaningful gun reform now.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise to speak about the disaster supplemental that the Trump administration is expected to send to Congress as early as tomorrow. While Congress has passed two supplemental aid bills since this year's hurricanes, I want to make it very clear that what we have already passed is not even close to what we will need to help Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands fully recover and rebuild.

Hurricane Maria destroyed their power grids and has significantly damaged their water infrastructure so as to make clean drinking water dangerously scarce. Three of Puerto Rico's biggest industries-- manufacturing, finance, and tourism, which drive their already struggling economy--remain severely damaged because the hurricane wiped out so many factories, buildings, and hotels. Many Puerto Ricans who had jobs the day before Maria struck no longer have anywhere to go to work. In other words, in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, this is not just a natural disaster; it is also an economic disaster that these local governments cannot dig out of on their own. Our fellow citizens desperately need our help.

Listen to what one New Yorker told me about how dangerous things are right now, especially for the sick and elderly.

My constituent was trying to help someone in Puerto Rico who was autistic and bedridden and under the care of his 93-year-old father. He needed surgery. He was taken to at least three separate medical facilities, and he spent countless hours in an ambulance with his elderly father. He was transported from one location to the next, but the medical facilities were finding it extremely difficult to communicate with each other. After all of that, his doctor could not find any facility on the island that would accept him into its care. He was finally able to get his treatment, but how many more people are still waiting for help?

Another of my constituents is struggling to help her father, who is in a rural area of Puerto Rico. She has only been able to speak to him briefly and exchange limited text messages. Her father suffers from heart issues and glaucoma, and he may need a prescription refill very soon if not right now. There are countless more stories just like these throughout my State and, no doubt, in many of my colleagues' States as well.

The $36 billion that is for all of Texas, Florida, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands is just not enough. After Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, it cost the Federal Government $120 billion to rebuild the Gulf Coast. That is the amount of funding that we need to be thinking about for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands right now.

It will take at least $5 billion just to rebuild Puerto Rico's power grid, and that will not even cover improvements to make the system more resilient and more efficient than it was before the storm. Right now, two-thirds of Puerto Rico still does not have power. That means no refrigeration so that people can have food to eat or can keep medicine from spoiling. It means no electricity for oxygen tanks in nursing homes and no lights at night to keep people safe. It will take additional funding to restore roads so that whatever supplies do make it to Puerto Rico can actually be delivered, and people can get to their loved ones in need.

The Small Business Administration will need billions of dollars to help people rebuild their businesses, which are vital to their basic economic recovery. The Army Corps of Engineers will need funding and the authority to rebuild the dams and the ports that were damaged so that commerce can actually go on, and FEMA will likely need $8 billion more just to respond to all of the households that have requested assistance to repair and rebuild their homes through its Individual Assistance Program.

In other words, the recovery effort must be massive. There is no way around it, because we can never turn our backs on fellow citizens, whether they are in New York or Texas or Florida or the U.S. Virgin Islands or Puerto Rico. What we need right now is a Marshall Plan. That is the only way that Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands are ever going to really fully recover. A new Marshall Plan would help Puerto Rico greatly reduce its crushing debt owned by hedge funds, and a new Marshall plan would also completely modernize infrastructure in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, by rebuilding their energy grid, hospitals, roads and bridges, reservoirs, schools, dams, and the thousands of buildings and homes that were destroyed by these hurricanes.

I urge all of my colleagues to join me in this effort. We must never stop fighting for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands to get the funding they need to fully recover and fully rebuild.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise to speak about the horrific mass murders last night. My heart is obviously with the victims and their families, and I thank all of our brave first responders who acted so quickly.

These senseless mass shootings must end. We cannot allow this to be the new normal, where tragedy after tragedy happens, and we do absolutely nothing to address it. It is not good enough to just send thoughts and prayers and extend our condolences when people are losing their lives to gun violence every day.

We still have to learn the details about what happened, but what we do know is this: This violence, this mass murder, is one of the worst massacres we have ever seen in this country. It is yet another reminder of Congress' failure to act to protect Americans from gun violence. It is another disturbing and painful example of how Congress is too weak and too cowardly to stand up to the gun industry.

The news reports are saying that the gun was shooting in rapid-fire bursts, a military-style weapon specifically designed to kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time, a weapon of war.

We have to pass laws that protect the American people from this kind of horrific violence. It should not be legal for a civilian on American soil to own and use a weapon of war like an assault weapon. Our military is highly trained to use such weapons. It should not be easy for any person to buy a suppressor--known by many people as a silencer--to attach to their guns, which makes it harder for police to do their jobs and catch violent criminals.

The people of Nevada voted in November to require background checks on all weapons, but the politicians in that State are refusing to implement the will of the people. The violence in Las Vegas is only the latest tragedy like this. Mass shootings get all the news, but every single day in my home State, gun violence on a much smaller scale is destroying more and more lives.

We really need to act. We must take gun violence as seriously as we take the threat of terrorism, wherever it is happening.

We will get to the facts and the bottom of this. And when we do, let's honor the lives of those we have lost by doing something about it, doing everything we can to make sure this never happens again.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, I rise to speak about the humanitarian crisis in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. This is one of the worst disasters our country has ever seen.

The men, women, and children who live on these islands are American citizens. Do not forget that. They are suffering, and they need our help. They have no food to eat, no water to drink, no power, and no refrigeration. If we don't give them help now, then many more people there will die--far more than those who were killed during the hurricane itself.

I urge my colleagues to think about our fellow American citizens in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands and what they are suffering through right now. Listen to their cries for help. Listen to what one of my constituents said to me:

We need help getting my grandparents to come to New York.

Their house is damaged and not safe. My grandfather is 93

with Alzheimer's. He is bed bound. He has not been able to

walk for over 18 months. My grandmother is 92 and diabetic

with a heart problem. My aunt is 68, and we think had a brain

aneurism and needs medical care. Please help them. Help get

them to New York. We can pay for the plane ticket. We need

help getting them to the airport and putting them on the

plane.

Another New Yorker told me that her father is a veteran of Vietnam and is a retired police department lieutenant who now lives in Puerto Rico. This veteran of the U.S. military told his daughter that he suffered from head trauma because he slipped and fell while clearing water from his house. He told his daughter that Puerto Rico is devastated and looks like an atomic bomb has struck the island. He is without power, cell phone use, and water. He told her that Mother Nature had unleashed a monster on them.

He said, ``God have mercy on us,'' and then told his daughter that he loved her.

This man is a veteran. He served in our military alongside so many other Americans from Puerto Rico. He protected our country when we needed him, so we need to protect him now.

How would you respond if this humanitarian crisis happened in your State or in my State or any other State around the country?

Can the Presiding Officer imagine what this would be like if it were Ohio? Can you imagine what this would be like if it were New York? We would act as quickly as we could. We would give people there every resource they need to recover. We wouldn't hesitate even

for a moment. This is urgent and serious, and we have to help our fellow citizens now.

Congress must provide the funding necessary to send every resource available. Help them clean up. Help them recover without further delay. That includes providing disaster community block grant funding, just as we did for the people of Texas and Florida. We cannot turn our backs on our fellow citizens.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I object. I was next in line.

Madam President, I rise to urge my colleagues to vote for a bipartisan amendment, No. 1051, to protect transgender servicemembers in our military.

I want to thank my dear friend and colleague, Senator McCain, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee and his staff, for working with us on this bipartisan amendment to protect transgender servicemembers and for agreeing to support it here on the floor today.

The amendment, which I was so proud to write with my Republican colleague from Maine, Senator Susan Collins, would prohibit the Department of Defense from discharging members of the military or denying them reenlistment opportunities because of their gender identity. It is essential that this Congress does not break faith with these brave servicemembers who have served their country honorably and with great sacrifice.

As Members of the Senate, one of our most serious responsibilities is to stand up for the men and women who serve in our armed services. We have an obligation to represent their interests, to value and respect their service, and to give them the tools and resources they need to defend our country. Kicking out thousands of servicemembers simply because of their gender identity doesn't make our military stronger, it makes our military weaker. It doesn't save taxpayer money, it wastes taxpayer money. We have spent millions recruiting and training these highly skilled servicemembers.

I want to be clear to those who misunderstand our U.S. military members, to those who somehow think our military cannot handle diversity among its servicemembers: Do not underestimate the men and women who serve in uniform. They represent the best and strongest among us.

An argument against diversity in the military is wrong. We heard this argument during the fight to end racial segregation. We heard it during the fight to allow women to serve. We heard it during the fight to end don't ask, don't tell, which I was proud to work on with the Republican Senator from Maine once again. And here, once again, this argument is wrong. Our military is strongest when it represents the Nation it serves.

Rather than shrinking the talent pool and telling patriotic Americans that they cannot serve, we should be doing everything we can to encourage and support them. We should thank them for their devotion to service, for their willingness to leave their families for months at a time and risk their own lives and safety to protect us.

This transgender ban affects individuals who were brave enough to join the military, men and women who were tough enough to make it through rigorous military training, men and women who love our country enough to risk their lives for it, to fight for it and even die for it. To suggest these brave, tough, and selfless transgender Americans somehow don't belong in our military is harmful to our military readiness, and it is deeply insulting to our troops.

Don't tell me that U.S. Air Force SSgt Logan Ireland, who deployed to Afghanistan and has earned numerous

commendations since the ban on transgender service was lifted, should be kicked out of our military. Don't tell me a young recruit like U.S. Marine Aaron Wixson, who left college to enlist in the field artillery and worked diligently with his chain of command during his gender transition to meet every requirement asked of him, should be kicked out of the military. Do not tell me that Navy LCDR Blake Dremann, who identified as transgender while serving in Afghanistan and has deployed 11 times and won the Navy's highest logistics award and now shapes our military policy at the Pentagon--don't tell me he should be kicked out of the military. Any individual serving in our military today who meets the standards should be allowed to serve, period.

I urge my colleagues to join me, the Republican Senator from Maine, and Senator John McCain, on our bipartisan amendment to allow transgender men and women to stay in the military and continue to serve our country and keep us safe.

Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I am very worried about people who have preexisting conditions. I have watched two of my best friends survive cancer this year. They have both had intensive treatments, surgeries, and chemotherapy. They both have young daughters. I cannot imagine how worried they are right now because they do not know what is in this healthcare bill, and they do not know whether or not they will actually be able to afford any insurance coverage. I am worried about millions of Americans who may not have access to affordable insurance under this bill because we have not read it.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it not be in order to proceed to Calendar No. 120, otherwise known as the American Health Care Act, until the full text of the bill is available to the public for review and comment for a minimum of 30 days--that is the same amount of time we give everyday regulations that come out of our agencies--because this bill could have such a negative effect on millions of Americans.

Mr. President, I thank the senior Senator from Louisiana for working with me on the flood insurance bill that we are introducing today. This issue is so important to both of our States because both of our States have experienced enormous levels of flooding every year due to extreme weather.

In New York, after Superstorm Sandy hit our State, millions of homes and businesses were damaged by flooding that occurred. My colleague from Louisiana could go on and on and will tell you about flood damage his own constituents have had to endure, so it should be clear to everyone here that it is not a partisan issue.

Flooding can happen anywhere, in any State, from the Northeast to the gulf coast and everywhere else. Protecting our communities from the devastation that comes from flooding should be one of our highest priorities in this Chamber.

Unfortunately, the National Flood Insurance Program has not been doing its job very well. Too many families who have had their properties damaged in a flood or even destroyed in a flood have paid their flood insurance premiums year after year only to find out there was some loophole that prevented them from getting the coverage they need. We cannot turn our backs and allow this to keep happening.

The bipartisan bill I have written with the Senator from Louisiana would ensure that flood insurance is more affordable for homeowners. It would make sure the Flood Insurance Program is no longer riddled with loopholes that leave our homeowners stranded and fighting with insurance companies on their own, all while trying to recover and rebuild from the flood damage. It would finally give homeowners the peace of mind that flood insurance rates will actually be affordable so that low- and moderate-income homeowners are not priced out of their homes because of extreme rate increases.

Our bill would also fund more projects to protect homes and communities from flood risk in the first place. Our bill would more than double the amount of funding a homeowner can receive for raising the elevation of their home, which is a proven way to protect against floods in certain areas, and it would provide more funding for FEMA's flood mitigation program. Those funds are used by States and local communities to plan and carry out projects that help manage flood risk to homes and other structures.

After Superstorm Sandy hit New York, too many families in my State experienced what amounted to a disaster after that disaster. They encountered engineering fraud. They had to deal with excessive delays and widespread underpayment of claims. This was shameful and totally unacceptable, especially for a program specifically designed to help people in their greatest time of need. So I am particularly pleased that this bill would fix some of the fundamental flaws in the National Flood Insurance Program's claims and appeals process that harmed so many of my constituents.

Our bill would prohibit engineering reports from being altered by anyone other than the person who inspected the home. That was one of the main causes of fraud for many homeowners in my State. It would require FEMA to have more direct oversight over the litigation costs and engineering costs that are billed to the government. It would repeal the onerous earth movement exemption, which too often has been used to deny flood claims to families who desperately need the payments after a flood.

Our bill also would ensure that engineers and insurance companies are not shielded from legal liability when they do commit fraud, which, unfortunately, was much more common than anyone would even think.

The Flood Insurance Program expires on September 30 of this year, and it is absolutely vital that we reauthorize it with strong reforms that protect homeowners. We need to do everything we can to ensure that the Flood Insurance Program is affordable, sustainable, transparent, and accountable. This is our chance to do that now.

This is a good bipartisan bill, and I urge all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join us in making these important reforms to the National Flood Insurance Program.

I yield the floor now to my colleague from Louisiana.

Mr. President, I thank the senior Senator from Louisiana for working with me on the flood insurance bill that we are introducing today. This issue is so important to both of our States because both of our States have experienced enormous levels of flooding every year due to extreme weather.

In New York, after Superstorm Sandy hit our State, millions of homes and businesses were damaged by flooding that occurred. My colleague from Louisiana could go on and on and will tell you about flood damage his own constituents have had to endure, so it should be clear to everyone here that it is not a partisan issue.

Flooding can happen anywhere, in any State, from the Northeast to the gulf coast and everywhere else. Protecting our communities from the devastation that comes from flooding should be one of our highest priorities in this Chamber.

Unfortunately, the National Flood Insurance Program has not been doing its job very well. Too many families who have had their properties damaged in a flood or even destroyed in a flood have paid their flood insurance premiums year after year only to find out there was some loophole that prevented them from getting the coverage they need. We cannot turn our backs and allow this to keep happening.

The bipartisan bill I have written with the Senator from Louisiana would ensure that flood insurance is more affordable for homeowners. It would make sure the Flood Insurance Program is no longer riddled with loopholes that leave our homeowners stranded and fighting with insurance companies on their own, all while trying to recover and rebuild from the flood damage. It would finally give homeowners the peace of mind that flood insurance rates will actually be affordable so that low- and moderate-income homeowners are not priced out of their homes because of extreme rate increases.

Our bill would also fund more projects to protect homes and communities from flood risk in the first place. Our bill would more than double the amount of funding a homeowner can receive for raising the elevation of their home, which is a proven way to protect against floods in certain areas, and it would provide more funding for FEMA's flood mitigation program. Those funds are used by States and local communities to plan and carry out projects that help manage flood risk to homes and other structures.

After Superstorm Sandy hit New York, too many families in my State experienced what amounted to a disaster after that disaster. They encountered engineering fraud. They had to deal with excessive delays and widespread underpayment of claims. This was shameful and totally unacceptable, especially for a program specifically designed to help people in their greatest time of need. So I am particularly pleased that this bill would fix some of the fundamental flaws in the National Flood Insurance Program's claims and appeals process that harmed so many of my constituents.

Our bill would prohibit engineering reports from being altered by anyone other than the person who inspected the home. That was one of the main causes of fraud for many homeowners in my State. It would require FEMA to have more direct oversight over the litigation costs and engineering costs that are billed to the government. It would repeal the onerous earth movement exemption, which too often has been used to deny flood claims to families who desperately need the payments after a flood.

Our bill also would ensure that engineers and insurance companies are not shielded from legal liability when they do commit fraud, which, unfortunately, was much more common than anyone would even think.

The Flood Insurance Program expires on September 30 of this year, and it is absolutely vital that we reauthorize it with strong reforms that protect homeowners. We need to do everything we can to ensure that the Flood Insurance Program is affordable, sustainable, transparent, and accountable. This is our chance to do that now.

This is a good bipartisan bill, and I urge all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join us in making these important reforms to the National Flood Insurance Program.

I yield the floor now to my colleague from Louisiana.