Floor Statements

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, as we are working through the remaining issues as they relate to the various appropriations bills before us, I wanted to take just a few moments this afternoon to speak about a friend of mine, a friend of Alaska's, a gentleman, and a leader, Alaska's LTG Michael H. Shields, who is retiring from the U.S. Army after 35 years of service. I thank Mike on behalf of my Senate colleagues and the people of Alaska for his outstanding service as he retires from Active Duty.

Mike received his commission through the Army Reserve Officers' Training Corps at Norwich University in 1983. Like so many of Alaska's best and finest citizens, we kind of adopted him. He came to Alaska to serve. He came to love our State, and we just loved him right back.

I first came to know Mike as Colonel Shields when he was commanding the 172nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team--known as the Arctic Wolves--at Fort Wainwright, AK, just outside of Fairbanks. He led the brigade during the height of Operation Iraqi Freedom. It was a very difficult command, probably one of the more difficult commands any colonel could imagine.

The Arctic Wolves had executed their planned 2005 to 2006 deployment in northern Iraq. They had done an exceptional job, and they were ready to come home. They had been there for a full deployment. The plans were laid. The families had all been told. This very successful, yearlong deployment was coming to an end during the early summer of 2006. Again, there was a great deal of excitement about the end of that deployment. The problem, though, was that it was not coming to an end. The unit had performed very well in northern Iraq, and the Pentagon basically said: We need more help. We need you to help out in the vicinity around Baghdad.

As it is with the military, the Pentagon didn't exactly ask the soldiers if

they wanted to extend their deployment; they told the soldiers that the deployment was going to be extended. That is not unusual. This is the military. You go where you are told to go and when you are told to go. Unfortunately, this message was delivered in a messy and very chaotic way. It was very sudden, and it was without warning to their families. Some of the elements of the 172nd had already returned to Fort Wainwright, and ultimately they had to redeploy. They had to go back to Iraq. Other elements were actually in the air on the way home when their planes were turned around.

I was in Fairbanks, at Fort Wainwright, at the time, and I can recall going through the gates, and there were areas where there were chain link fences. Kids had taken papier-mache and stuffed it in the chain link to spell out the words ``Welcome Home Daddy'' and hearts. The messages of love and excitement about their dad or their husband coming home were everywhere. But when the plug is pulled and they are told they are not going to be coming home, it is extraordinarily disappointing not only for those who have been deployed for this yearlong period but also for those families who are literally waiting, who knew exactly what they were going to be wearing when their dad stepped off that airplane, to be told ``He is not coming home now, and we don't know when he is coming home.'' It was very difficult when these families were told to wait. The families were angry. They were upset. They were very angry. They felt they had been misled and with good cause.

Fortunately, the Army and the Fairbanks community just kind of stepped up to wrap their arms around the families during this now- extended deployment, and things calmed down. These are military families. They are tough. They have gone through these separations, and as hard as that had been, they had kind of set their heads right and said: No. We are going to get through this. That may have been the easy part.

Mike, on the other hand, our colonel, had to deal with these problems from a distance. Baghdad is 5,620 miles and 11 time zones away from Fairbanks. So not only did Mike have to manage the challenges of the battlefield in Iraq but also the challenges of maintaining troop morale and focus across all of this time and distance.

Part of the problem--and making matters worse--was that nobody really knew how long this extension would be. When you think about all that goes on in a tense situation like that, only the most outstanding of leaders can really pull something like this off, and Mike proved himself to be the best of the best. He reminded his troops, they needed to stick together in order to survive.

He said: ``The strength of the pack is the wolf, and the strength of the wolf is the pack.'' That is the motto of the Arctic Wolves.

Then-Colonel Shields went on to say:

It means no wolf pack is stronger than its individual

hunter, and no hunter is more important than the pack.

Individually, we accomplish little. As a team, we accomplish

much.

The troops endured what turned out to be a 4-month extension on top of their initial deployment. The unit returned home by Christmas. The American Forces Press Service reported on December 15 of 2006 that the Arctic Wolves earned distinction in Iraq as they took on what then-Army Secretary Francis Harvey called ``the toughest challenge of any unit in Iraq.'' Again, there are many reasons to be very proud of all they have done under the command of Colonel Shields.

Mike moved on to other challenges. He was twice promoted following that deployment. He then went back to Alaska. I was thrilled when Mike returned as a major general to command U.S. Army Alaska, which was headquartered at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage. He returned to Alaska in 2013 to command U.S. Army Alaska. He branded U.S. Army Alaska as the Army's experts in high-altitude, cold-weather ground operations.

One of our really great--I mean truly great--training assets is the Northern Warfare Training Center in Black Rapids, AK. Mike ensured that his troops were trained at Black Rapids for missions that would demand their unique skill sets. He then opened Black Rapids to the allied troops who required those skills. He was really an effective evangelist for the Army's cold-weather mission--a mission of increasing importance as the Arctic has become more strategic.

He has told me numerous times of some of the challenges of training some of these young soldiers how to ski in extremely cold conditions with very interesting Army-issued skis and equipment. One of these days, he will challenge me to a race, but I don't know. In knowing the skills of General Shields, I think I am going to pass on that.

Prior to departing Alaska for his next assignment in 2015, Mike was required to host visiting Army officials who were studying a major downsizing that potentially involved the consolidation of brigades. Both the 172nd, which was then rebranded the 1st of the 25th, and the Airborne Brigade at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson were potentially on the chopping block.

Big Army was looking at a variety of scenarios across its enterprise, and that brought evaluation teams to both Anchorage and Fairbanks. He showed the evaluation teams our remarkable training assets. Even more importantly, he prepared the teams for what they would hear at the community meetings. What they heard was that Alaska was a very special place for our military families and that Alaska communities went above and beyond what was expected in their support of military communities. Whatever else one may say about Alaska's military value, it is a great place for military families.

The evaluation teams left with favorable impressions of what Alaska had to offer. The Stryker Brigade survived this process. Yes, we fought to retain our Airborne Brigade at JBER, but Mike laid very solid groundwork for our ultimate success, and we are very grateful to him for his support of the Alaska mission.

Throughout, Mike distinguished himself through exceptionally meritorious service and achievement in a multitude of assignments of increasing responsibility, culminating as the Director of the Joint Improvised-Threat Defeat Organization, and he has proven to be an exceptional and inspiring leader there.

His selfless service, dedication to duty, and unyielding devotion to soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and coalition partners are in keeping with the finest traditions of military service.

The distinctive accomplishments of Lieutenant General Shields bring great credit upon himself, the U.S. Army, and the Department of Defense. It is with great pride that I reflect upon his outstanding career before the U.S. Senate today.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise to reluctantly reserve the right to object. I will object to amendment No. 3424, which would permanently authorize the revenue collection and deposit functions of the Land and Water Conservation Fund.

I thank my colleague from North Carolina, and I thank my colleague from Colorado. I, too, know, hear, and understand the passion that they have expressed not only at this time but that they have expressed for quite some time in their support for this important conservation program. It is something about which we, as Americans, have much to be proud.

I have expressed some of my concerns about how, historically, certain aspects of the Land and Water Conservation Fund have shifted from there being less for stateside acquisition and more for Federal acquisition. I would like to see some of that reallocated and rebalanced. In concept, what we have designed with the LWCF is something that has brought strong and good benefit to our States and, really, to conservation efforts throughout the country.

When the Senators speak about the merits of the program, I find nothing that I can disagree with in terms of the benefits that we see. Why I rise to express my objection in advancing the amendment is that the issue they have raised is to permanently seek to authorize this program. The collection and deposit provisions within LWCF are currently authorized, and, as they have pointed out, they are authorized through September 30 of this year. The measure they bring before us would be to permanently authorize those expiring provisions. It is, in its very nature, authorizing on an appropriations bill. We have an annual spending bill that basically directs that spending for 1 year. This measure would be significant in the extent of its authorization.

We have sought to advance the 12 appropriations bills through to the floor in a manner that we have not seen in years. I mentioned, when we started this debate on Monday night, that we haven't had an Interior appropriations bill on the Senate floor since 2010. That is not the Senators' fault. That is a failure of our process. One can assign a lot of blame, and one can point a lot of fingers. The fact of the matter is that we had moved from that responsibility of ``What are the annual spending priorities that the appropriating committees are tasked to do every year?'' to, effectively, bringing in a lot of the authorizing that the authorizing committees themselves needed to do, and it was not working. We stalled ourselves out. We had big omnibus bills that nobody liked. So we are trying to get back to a process that we can stand behind, that really defines what the appropriations process is designed to do.

At the direction of Chairman Shelby and Vice Chairman Leahy, we have agreed to really try to come together to work to restore what we fondly refer to as ``regular order'' and what some don't even know to be regular order because they have never really experienced it. Because we made that commitment, we were actually able to move an Interior Appropriations Subcommittee bill through the full committee by 31 to 0--unanimous. I don't know if there has ever been a unanimous vote on an Interior appropriations bill out of the subcommittee, much less being able to bring it to the floor.

So much of this objection is due to the fact that the Senator's amendment would seek to permanently authorize on an appropriation's 1- year annual spending bill. I think it is also important to point out to colleagues that while the current authorization does extend through September 30, the authority to collect and deposit revenues in the funds is what expires on September 30. The ability and the authority to appropriate money continues indefinitely.

For those who may be concerned that if we fail to authorize this before September 30 the sky is going to fall on the LWCF and that all the good that is in the works will stop, that is not accurate. Within this year's spending bill, we have authorized the LWCF to the 2018 level of $425 million. Within this amount, the stateside assistance programs are about 50 percent of the funding. There was $124 million in 2015 for NPS stateside and also additional funding for the American Battlefield Protection Program--an increase this year to the highest level ever within this account.

I want to make sure that my colleagues do know that my commitment here and the commitment of many in this body is to work with our colleagues--to work with the Senator from North Carolina, to work with the Senator from Colorado, and with the many others who care deeply and rightly about the future of the Land and Water Conservation Fund--to ensure that it is able to continue the good work that it does.

I remind my friends that it was just about a year and a half ago when we moved an energy bill out of the authorizing committee, the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Included as part of that measure was a permanent authorization of the Land and Water Conservation Fund. This is something that the Senator from Colorado had worked on with us, and Senator Cantwell, the ranking member on the committee, made sure that it was a priority. Now, that measure has not seen floor time this year. We were able to

move it out in the last Congress. We were able to move that bill out by 85 to 12.

When the Senator from North Carolina says that there is good support for the LWCF within this body, we have demonstrated it. We have demonstrated it through votes on the floor, and we have demonstrated it through the support in the authorizing committee.

I do think there is a path forward, but I ask my colleagues to honor the commitment we have made to try to advance our appropriations bills in an order that respects the authority that we have as appropriators, which is to appropriate these dollars to the designated priorities and to stand down when it comes to authorizing on these appropriating bills.

The Senators have my commitment, most certainly, to continue to work on a positive path forward--a path that is not months in delay. I absolutely believe that the Senator from North Carolina is very serious in his commitment and his resolve that we will see this issue before us on every vehicle out there. It is in my best interest--I think it is in our best interests--to figure out how we are able to come to an agreement to support a program that most of us can get behind, to do so in a manner that allows us to do our legislative business, and to do so with the level of comity and civility that this process demands.

With that, again, I reluctantly and respectfully object.

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

Mr. President, we are officially on day No. 2 of the second tranche of an appropriations package. We have before us the Interior Subcommittee's appropriations bill, the Financial Services, the T-HUD--Transportation, Housing and Urban Development--and Agriculture. So it is a good combination. It is a good package. It is a strong package. It is a series of appropriations bills that moved through the full Appropriations Committee several months back. Most of these bills advanced either unanimously, as the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee's bill did, or with a strong bipartisan show of support out of committee.

For those who have followed the appropriations process over the years, you know it is somewhat unprecedented to be able to advance these spending bills through the full committee process, much less to do so in a manner that surely shows the bipartisan approach this committee has taken in this fiscal year.

I acknowledge and recognize the work of Chairman Shelby and his vice chairman, Senator Leahy from Vermont, for the truly collaborative process they have encouraged all of us to work toward.

There was an agreement, an understanding, that our appropriations process had not been the model of good governance, of legislating, that we would have liked it to have been, that we would expect it to be, and that our colleagues--much less the American public--would expect it to be.

With a very determined effort, the group of appropriators who came together earlier made a very strong and firm commitment that we were going to get this process back on track. With the leadership of the chairman and the vice chairman, that is exactly where we are. We were able to move a smaller minibus, if you will, a month ago. That is now moving through that conference process. It is not an easy process, we recognize, but nothing around here is easy. If it is worth doing and doing well, it is going to take a little bit of work. We have done that work, and to be here on the 25th of July--to be at a place at which the Senate is poised to advance seven of the appropriations bills out of the Senate--is really quite unprecedented.

In my remarks on the floor on Monday evening, I noted that this was the first time since 2010 we had seen an Interior Appropriations Subcommittee's bill being brought to the floor of the U.S. Senate. That is a long time. That is too long a time not to have had a fulsome process, a process wherein we not only demonstrate the good work that we as appropriators have done but wherein our colleagues who are not on the committee also view that good work, weigh in, offer their thoughts, offer their amendments, and are a part of the broader, whole process.

How did we get here from there--from a point at which we, effectively, were not legislating as we knew we were capable of doing?

There was an agreement, a commitment, that we were going to stand down on some of the more controversial riders--in other words, those initiatives that were not actual appropriations but were more in line with authorizing within the appropriations bill.

There has been a history around here of seeing a level of authorization, and sometimes that level of authorization on an appropriations bill has created enough controversy that it has ground the whole process to a halt. So standing down on some of these initiatives, on some of these riders, has been an important part of how we have come to be where we are today.

We talk about the need to keep out the poison pills. We have joked-- it is not really a joke; it is the reality--that one Member's priority is another Member's poison pill. So how do we work our way through that process?

We will have an opportunity to take up, at least for discussion, some of those priorities that may be significant, and Members have a great deal of desire to see them advance. Members on the other side will look at that and say that is too toxic--you can't go there; you can't do that. How we navigate through that will take a little bit of legislating.

I would ask Members--I would urge Members--to please come to us as their bill managers, whether for the Interior appropriations issues or for the Financial Services issues. Senator Lankford is the chairman of that committee. Go to Senator Hoeven on Ag and to Senator Collins on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development--T-HUD. I would urge Members to come to us with their issues, their concerns, their amendments. Let's work through them. Let's get them through the process.

Yesterday, we were able to advance four amendments. Some might say, well, that is not very much, but I would suggest to you that we are getting started. We are getting started in a good way, in a positive way, in an encouraging way, and we want to encourage that good, forward activity.

We all know the most prized commodity around here is time and floor time. We don't have unlimited time on the floor to take up this package of measures. So help us get to the point at which we can work through those issues that we need to in order to bring to the floor that which will require a vote. We will help you and do so in a way that, I think, will do honor to the appropriations process, do honor to the legislative process--again, what we know around here to be regular order.

Unfortunately, I think we have seen that regular order has been less and less regular. It has become extraordinary because we just don't practice it enough. We want to get back to that, and we have the opportunity to do so. We have demonstrated that with one package, and we are in the midst of demonstrating that this week. I look forward to the full cooperation of Members as we advance.

I see my friend and colleague, the vice chairman of the Appropriations Committee, is on the floor. Again, I acknowledge his great leadership in working with the chairman of the full committee, in really getting us back to a place where we can be proud of our process.

With that, I yield to my friend, the Senator from Vermont.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 499, S. 2779.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported amendment be withdrawn, the Flake amendment at the desk be agreed to, and the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time.

Mr. President, I know of no further debate on the bill.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I will just take a few moments as we are waiting for greater discussion about our appropriations package that is on the floor.

Tribute to Marge Mullen

Mr. President, the community of Soldotna, AK, in South Central Alaska--what we call the Kenai Peninsula--is going to be celebrating their Progress Days this weekend. On Friday, we have a homestead community barbecue, where a very special individual will be recognized as the first female homesteader in Soldotna.

Now, when most of us around here think about homesteading, we might go back to when President Lincoln signed the 1862 Homesteading Act. This enabled over 1.6 million people to stake their claim on Federal lands. Perhaps, if you are an Alaskan, you recall that homesteading became legal back in 1898. That was when President McKinley signed legislation to extend homesteading to what at that time was still the District of Alaska. It was not until decades later that we became a State.

What most people do not realize is that while the days of the wild West are certainly over here in the lower 48, the tradition of homesteading is still very, very much alive, and certainly we see that in Alaska.

So I would like to take just a couple of minutes this morning to share the story of an Alaskan homesteading icon, Marge Mullen. Again, it is Marge who will be recognized this weekend at Progress Days in Soldotna. In fact, on July 27, she will be recognized by the mayor of Soldotna, Mayor Anderson. July 27 will be recognized as ``Marge Mullen Appreciation Day.''

Marge was born in Chicago in 1920. According to the Peninsula Clarion, the local newspapers there on the Kenai Peninsula, Marge claims that she remembers seeing an article on Alaskan homesteading in the Chicago Daily News back in 1947. The idea must have seemed really appealing to her because after she read that article, she and her husband Frank, who was a pilot during World War II, bought a small plane, and they headed north to plant their roots. That was quite a trek back in the late 1940s, to fly in a small aircraft.

They landed in Alaska. They walked 65 miles through some pretty tough terrain. They then settled their homestead on Soldotna Creek, making Marge the first woman to live in Soldotna under the Homestead Act.

It wasn't too many years after they arrived in Alaska that, sadly, Marge lost her husband Frank to polio. It certainly would have been easier at the time for her to just pack up and head back to Chicago, but Marge was a pretty independent, strong-headed woman, and she made that brave choice to remain on her homestead.

Just to kind of paint a picture of what we are talking about back in the early 1950s, to make sure everybody understands the significance of a decision like that, you can either stay out there in some pretty open and still very wild areas or you can go back to Chicago. Homesteading has always been a lifestyle that is based on self-sufficiency. You have to be able to handle things on your own. It is a difficult task anywhere. It was difficult, as we saw, for the initial homesteaders around the lower 48 States, but there are some additional challenges, perhaps, in Alaska. There are some pretty tough winters that people go through. Temperatures are somewhat unforgiving in the winter months, as we know.

Marge faced a cost of living that was three to four times higher than she knew down in the lower 48. When you are out there, you live every day knowing that wildlife is just right outside your door, and that if something goes wrong, there is not a lot of help. There is no aid in the event of an emergency. So whether it is a bear that has threatened you and your family or whether it is just the rigors of living on your own with no assistance and no help, it can be a lonely life, but it can be a very life-building experience, and Marge certainly developed that.

Marge learned to hunt on her own, to chop wood, carry water, and grow food to safeguard the health, the warmth, and the safety of herself and her four children.

Trust me when I say that Marge overcame challenges that many of us-- even some hearty Alaskans--could not imagine. But she overcame those challenges in an Alaska that was far less modern than the Alaska our visitors see today.

While Marge is widely known as a pioneer homesteader, she is also known throughout the community of Soldotna for many other contributions. She began the town's first roadside litter pickup program. She was involved at a lot of different levels. She served as the chair of the local planning commission. She helped to establish the Kenai Peninsula Conservation Society. She eventually became its president. In 2010, Marge was honored for her accomplishments when she was rightly inducted into the Alaska Women's Hall of Fame.

Marge's contributions continue today. She is 98 years old. She is revered as Soldotna's unofficial historian. She acts as the chair of the local historical society. You have to figure that she knows everything that went on in the region. She was part of everything that went on in the region. She is really history in the flesh, bringing the early days of Soldotna to life through her teachings and digital lessons.

Again, as I mentioned, the Soldotna city mayor has proclaimed July 27 as ``Marge Mullen Appreciation Day.'' As the community of Soldotna comes together to celebrate Marge's legacy, I think it is only appropriate that we in the Senate should come to know a little bit of her history as well and join in the recognition.

I offer my thanks and my best wishes to Marge Mullen as she continues influencing her community and the State of Alaska.

I thank my colleagues for letting me share this tribute this morning.

I see that no Members are on the floor yet. Again, I would encourage folks to take a look at the bills that we have in front of us--the Interior, the Financial Services, the Agriculture, and the T-HUD. Let's have an opportunity to consider the amendments that we can take up and allow for the process to go forward in a fulsome and a constructive way.

With that, I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following amendments be called up en bloc and reported by number: Schatz amendment No. 3407; Kennedy amendment No. 3430. I further ask consent that following the remarks of Senators Baldwin, Durbin, Schatz, and Kennedy, the Senate vote in relation to the Schatz and Kennedy amendments in the order listed and that there be no second-degree amendments in order to the amendments prior to the votes.

Mr. President, for the information of all Senators, we expect these votes to occur shortly after 6 p.m.

Mr. President, the Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport is buzzing with activity all year long. It connects our military posted in Alaska with their families in the Lower 48, welcomes business visitors from around the world, and takes Alaskans to the Lower 48 for a weekend of cheering the Seahawks in Seattle, a shopping trip, or simply a break from the Alaskan winter.

The Anchorage airport is the truly a crossroads for our friends in rural Alaska coming and going from meetings and medical appointments in Anchorage. Its gates are places where Alaskans congregate--catching up with old friends or connecting with State legislators and an occasional U.S. Senator.

Look to the left as your plane pulls into the gate, and you see cargo planes from around the world. The Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport is our State's premier transportation hub, a cargo hub of global renown.

For most of my adult life, the Anchorage airport was a pretty utilitarian place. The walls were tan, the gate and baggage claim signs had white lettering on a blue background. If you were picking up a rental car, you rolled your bag through the snow because most were parked outside. The return lot was outside too. But it worked. It was a place to come and go, not a place to linger.

Mort Plumb had another vision. He foresaw the boom in tourism that would come to Alaska and believed that our State needed a gateway airport as beautiful and inspiring as the State itself. Mort was the father of today's Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport. A showplace for Native arts and crafts with huge picture windows and vistas of the Chugach mountain range that cause our visitors to wonder whether they really want to leave this unique place, a portal to the Great Land.

Mort's vision has paid off; 2018 could be a record year for tourism in Alaska, and seat capacity on out-of-state flights this year is up 5.6 percent. That translates into the opportunity for an additional 43,000 visitors to enjoy what Alaska has to offer.

Sadly, in February, Mort passed away at the age of 74. Born in Pennsylvania, he came to Alaska like many of our finest do: in the service of our country. He served 27 years in the Air Force, and we are indeed grateful that the Air Force chose to send Mort and his family to Elmendorf Air Force Base in Anchorage. As a colonel, Mort served as director of operations for the Alaskan Command, chief of staff for the 11th Air Force, and vice commander for the 11th Air Force. He retired from the Air Force in 1994.

Mort's retirement didn't last long, as he was quickly recruited by Governor Tony Knowles to direct the Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport. He took that job in 1995 and remained until 2008. All told, he served under three Governors: Democrat Knowles and Republicans Frank Murkowski and Sarah Palin. Mort Plumb served with great distinction.

After retiring from the airport, Mort was hardly done with his career. He took on new responsibilities as chief operating officer of the First National Bank of Alaska and continued to serve on a host of nonprofit boards. One of his favorites was the Fisher House of Alaska, which cares for military family caregivers and veterans in town for medical appointments. Mort was active in the civilian and military community and was also an avid runner, golfer, and skier. He was a devoted husband, attending most every community event with his wife, Ann, by his side. He was also a loving father and doting grandfather.

To his family and friends, know that the legacy and service of Mort Plumb will long be remembered. We appreciate our friend Mort, and we miss him.

Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 3400.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. President, I am most pleased to be here today to manage consideration of this appropriations bill package. This includes the fiscal year 2019 bills for the Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies; Financial Services and General Government; Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies; as well as Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies.

To distill it down, this evening we are taking up Interior, Financial Services, Ag, and THUD--or Transportation Housing Development. The opportunity to move forward with a package of appropriations bills, all of which have moved through our committee with strong support, is a good place to be.

I have long believed that a return to regular order, where we vote these appropriations bills out of committee with bipartisan support, and then bring them to the floor, as we are doing this evening, is important for our process.

I think all Members of the Senate should have an opportunity to debate appropriations bills and offer amendments. We haven't had this opportunity for some years prior to this. The occupant of the Chair, a member of the Appropriations Committee, knows we have been without process when it comes to our appropriations bills. It is now time for us not only to return to regular order but to allow other Members of this body who do not sit on the Appropriations Committee the opportunity to weigh in on these priorities.

I am particularly pleased, as chairman of the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee, to be on the floor today. This is actually the first time the Interior bill has been before the full Senate since fiscal year 2010. Fiscal year 2010 was the last time we saw an interior bill on the floor, so this is kind of a significant day for us. If this weren't such a dignified setting, I would say that deserves a round of applause. But we don't want to get ahead of ourselves.

It is an important example of the commitment both sides have made to create an environment where we can work through the tough issues on a bipartisan basis. That was exactly what we saw within the full committee--working through the subcommittee, working through the full committee, and now being able to bring these measures to the floor.

I will defer to the chairmen of the relevant subcommittees to discuss the specifics of each of their bills as we move through consideration of this appropriations package. But I wanted to take a little bit of time this evening to share some information about the Interior appropriations bill for my colleagues.

I also want to thank and acknowledge the good work of my ranking member on the committee, Senator Udall. He has been a good partner to work with. Both of us recognize this is not everything we would have wanted it to be, but it was a good, collaborative, well-worked process.

Within Interior, we have a very broad scope of responsibilities. We have the oversight for all of the major Federal land management agencies. We have the National Park Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Forest Service, the Environmental Protection Agency--all very significant accounts. We also have a side in Interior that many of my colleagues forget but that rests within Interior, and that is the oversight for our budget for our Native peoples, our American Indians, and Alaskan Natives. We provide funding in this measure for essential Indian health, education, and resource management programs through the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Indian Health Service.

There is funding for cultural institutions. Again, this is an area that people don't necessarily think that Interior has our role here, but we have oversight of the budgets for the Smithsonian Institution, the National Gallery of Art, the National Endowment for the Arts, and the National Endowment for the Humanities. It is a pretty broad spectrum here.

The Interior appropriations bill provides $35.85 billion for fiscal year 2019. This is $600 million more than last year. I wish to thank Chairman Shelby and Vice Chairman Leahy. The increased allocation that we saw for the Interior bill was really important as we assembled this bipartisan bill. This additional funding allowed us to provide program increases that were necessary. In fact, they were absolutely necessary.

There are fire suppression accounts. We know we are in the midst of fire season. It is bad and most likely getting worse. We have been able to provide an additional $500 million for fire suppression.

We also provide an additional $109 million for contract support costs in Indian Country. These are obligated expenses from the Federal Government to those who provide for those services in Indian Country.

We also provide $115 million for staffing costs that are associated with new healthcare facilities that are operated by IHS or by Tribes. Again, it is under compact agreements.

Some would look and say that this is a significant bump, but I would direct colleagues' attention to how we allocated that. Again, it is in accounts where we are obligated either by compact or, in the instance of fire suppression funding, it recognizes that we are dealing with the inherent unpredictability and the dangers of fire.

The fiscal year 2019 Interior bill adopts a similar approach to the enacted fiscal year 2018 Interior bill. We rejected what we felt were unwarranted decreases that had been proposed in the budget, and we make investments. We make investments in the highest priorities, particularly infrastructure improvements and investments for our land management agencies and within Indian Country and also infrastructure investments in wastewater and drinking water improvements.

We have recently celebrated the 100th anniversary of our National Park Service. Last year, we provided a significant increase for our national parks construction program. It was the largest percentage increase ever, but we build on that in this measure, recognizing the significant work, the significant maintenance, and the backlog that our National Park Service faces. We have an obligation. So addressing it has been a priority in this bill.

In the two main agencies that deliver services for the Indian community--this is the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Indian Health Service--we restored proposed cuts in critical program funding. We increase funding for the IHS facilities program for construction, maintenance, and sanitation facilities improvement. We provide substantial funding for the BIA to help with the construction of Indian schools, irrigation systems, and public safety facilities.

For both accounts, we provide fully estimated levels of contract support costs, and we maintain an indefinite appropriations account structure so that if the costs are higher than estimated, we are not in a situation where we are robbing Peter to pay Paul--taking from one account within IHS to fund the other. We are addressing that bad practice that we have seen previously.

Also, within Indian Health Service, we provide additional resources for grants to Tribes for combating the opioid crisis. We know full well that we are facing a crisis throughout the country, but in so many of our Native communities on our reservations, the situation is particularly dire.

We had a lot of conversation on this floor about wildland fire management and how we end the practice of what we call ``wildfire borrowing,'' which is, effectively, waiting to see how much fire suppression costs are going to impact us. If it was a particularly bad year, you would take funding from other accounts within the Forest Service, whether it was prescriptive management programs or whether it was recreational permits. We know that we needed to end this practice of fire borrowing, and we have worked to do that previously.

Within our appropriations bill, on the wildfire management programs, we provided a total of $4.35 billion for the Department of Interior and the Forest Service. We fully fund the 10-year average for firefighting costs, and we provide $900 million in additional suppression funds above the 10-year average, based on the recent catastrophic seasons and our latest forecasting models. You hope to get that number right, but this new path that we are on for how we deal with wildfire suppression cost is an important one.

A big priority in this body is for conservation and making sure that we are doing right by our lands, and we have included $425 million for the Land and Water Conservation Fund. This is equal to the enacted level.

Within that account, we are generous to the stateside program. We have, in my view, tended toward greater acquisition on the Federal side over the years. I think that is a direction that was not what LWCF was intended to do. We have been working to make sure that we don't have the inequity and the disparity between the State side and Federal side.

We also provide additional funding for recreational access and the American Battlefield Protection Program. I think we took a very commonsense approach to the EPA's budget. We focused resources on programs that do very specific and concrete things to help with that mission set, if you will, of the EPA, and that is, basically, to improve the quality of the environment for the public--clean water and clean water.

The bill does provide additional funding to States that have delegated responsibility for environmental programs through State- specific grants. It provides an increase above last year's level for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund and the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. These are the SRF funds. They help to facilitate the critical water infrastructure in communities across the country. I think there is great recognition that this is an area where we can always do more.

The WIFIA Program, which leverages Federal funds for water infrastructure projects, receives $63 million. When you take the WIFIA funds and you combine this with the SRS, the bill really does give the EPA a very strong suite of tools to improve the quality of life for people around the country.

We provide for additional funding for PILT funding, and $500 million is the fully estimated amount needed for this program in 2019. We maintain the subcommittee's commitment to help local communities improve county roads, maintain public safety, and provide funding for schools using funding from the PILT Program.

As I mentioned at the beginning of my comments, when we think about all of the things that are under the purview of Interior appropriations, we also did right by our ``Smithsonians'' by ensuring that our arts are appropriately funded as well.

I will stand before you and tell you that there are a lot of things that I wish we could have included in this measure, but we have stood down, if you will, as appropriators, working with my colleague and friend the ranking member. We do not include new policy provisions that were not in the fiscal year 2018 enacted bill. We didn't do it. Members know that because they came to us asking if we could include things, but we said it is important to our process going forward.

Working with Chairman Shelby and Vice Chairman Leahy and, again, my ranking member, Senator Udall, we assembled a package that advanced unanimously out of the committee. I think that is also historic. To have an Interior appropriations bill move unanimously through the full committee is pretty significant. I suggest to you all that this package that we have assembled warrants the support of the full Senate.

I wish to express again my appreciation for the good working relationship that I have with Senator Udall. He has a great team. Rachael, Ryan, and Melissa have been great. We have fabulous folks on my side, with Leif, Nona, Emy, and Chris. They work hard. They work very hard. I think they have done a good job in helping to shape this bill so that it reflects priorities of Members on both sides of the aisle.

Again, I am very pleased to be on the floor to consider these important bills. I look forward to working through this process with all of my colleagues. I think the leader has made it clear that he wants to complete action on this package expeditiously. So I ask colleagues to review the bills that we have in front of us, not just the Interior bill but the full package as well. Get on it, and get us your amendments. The quicker we can process amendments, the quicker we can clear them on both sides and arrange for the votes that they may require.

Confirmation of Robert Wilkie

Mr. President, if I may, I know my colleague and my ranking member is here to say just a few words. He can say as many words as he would like, and I welcome that. But if I may beg the Senator's indulgence and ask for just a few more moments, I wish to comment on the nomination of Robert Wilkie, if I may.

About an hour ago or half an hour ago, the Senate confirmed Robert Wilkie of North Carolina as our Nation's 10th Secretary of Veterans Affairs. He comes to this position after having served with great distinction as a Senate staffer. He was on the National Security Council and was Assistant Secretary of Defense, as well as Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and interim Secretary of the VA. His father, who passed away last year, was a U.S. Army veteran, and Mr. Wilkie has served as a U.S. Naval Reserve intelligence officer. He has great qualifications and strong qualifications for the position that Mr. Wilkie will soon assume.

I am sure that he has no illusions about it. We certainly don't. This is a hard job that he has in front of him--a very hard job. The VA has yet to fully recover from the series of events that are collectively known as the Phoenix scandal. The Choice Program has been a mess from its very inception, in my view. It continues to frustrate so many veterans.

Yes, we all acknowledge that there have been improvements in the Veterans Benefits Administration, but claims processing still takes way too long, and proving a claim remains a sore point. Then, to make matters worse, our veterans and the field staff are stressed by persistent reports of fatigue and infighting within the VA central office. Some of these reports are as current, as fresh as last week.

You think about the folks out there. When you are in the field, really nothing good comes out of dysfunction from the central office. The media accounts that are out there are suggesting that the dysfunction is, unfortunately, reaching new heights.

This is a tough time for our new Secretary to enter. He comes into this position with a mess of old baggage to deal with, and that is before he even begins to implement new initiatives like the VA MISSION Act and the modernization of VA's IT infrastructure.

I am sure it is fair to say we want this Secretary to succeed. Alaskan veterans certainly want the Secretary to succeed. I imagine we all want the new VA Secretary to succeed.

I think success at the VA means one thing, and that is how we serve our veterans. We know the sacrifices they have made to our Nation. They deserve timely, high-quality, caring service.

They do not deserve to fall victim to the kind of internal infighting that has plagued the VA, and, by all accounts, continues to plague the

Mr. President, I thank my colleague, the ranking member on the Appropriations Committee again. We don't get to the place where we are today or to a level of consensus without getting a lot of good, hard work done. I appreciate his commitment in working through it and the relationship we have built. So thank you. Thank you very much.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that privileges of the floor be granted to my second session summer interns Max Varela, Nathaniel Baring, Tanner Dey, Jode Sparks, Sydney Cox, Janet Taylor, Hannah Villanueva, Piper Cooper, Bridget Nalam, Brynn Morse, Denae Benson, Sterling Gingerich, Kaiwi Eisenhour, Michael McCambridge, Alexandra Bender, Selia Butler, and Johnathan Slife for the remainder of their session in July.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 405, H.R. 589.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Murkowski amendment at the desk be agreed to and the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time.

I know of no further debate on the bill.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 404, S. 2503.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Murkowski amendment at the desk be agreed to and the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time.

Mr. President, I know of no further debate on the bill.

I ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 2353 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

I ask unanimous consent that the Alexander substitute amendment at the desk be agreed to and the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time.

I know of no further debate on the bill.

I ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10 a.m., Tuesday, July 24; further, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed; further, that following leader remarks, the Senate resume consideration of H.R. 6147; finally, that the Senate recess from 12:30 p.m. until 2:15 p.m. to allow for the weekly conference meetings.

Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order.