Floor Statements

Madam President, what is the parliamentary situation?

I thank the Chair.

Madam President, I listened this week to the distinguished chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, Senator Mikulski, make a compelling case for passing a clean, short-term continuing resolution through November 15 of this year so we can get on with the business of debating and passing appropriations bills.

We have a lot of sound and fury here signifying nothing, to quote Shakespeare, but we ought to vote up or down on something. It is easy to give speeches or phony filibusters or whatever and say: Look what we are accomplishing. No. It is not accomplishing anything.

I agree with everything the chairwoman has said, particularly about the bipartisan way the committee has written and reported bills this year. Any one of those bills could be debated and voted on today. Vote yes, vote no--but vote. Conference them with the House, if they pass, and send them to the President.

Actually, there is some precedent for doing that--a precedent of over 200 years doing it that way.

Instead, we are repeating this all-too-familiar drama where we are again in a high-stakes stalemate over simply keeping the Federal Government functioning. What was once the regular business of Congress has again been replaced by political theater and another artificial made-in-Congress crisis that threatens the economy and, in ways large and small, threatens every single family in America.

Don't come on this floor and say you stand for family values when you are willing to destroy retirement plans of families, savings for their children to go to college, and possibly their jobs. Once again, grandstanding prevails over common sense, comity, and cooperation-- three values that are vital to the effective functioning of a representative government.

Those who travel around our States--and I do all the time--and listen to our constituents, know the costs of a government shutdown and the devastating effects of sequestration.

Vermont is not unique in having fewer children in Head Start programs, medical researchers at our universities who cannot obtain research grants, seniors cut from Meals On Wheels, or young veterans back from Iraq or Afghanistan who can't find jobs, or families living in shelters or on the streets because there is no safety net housing assistance. But some members of the House and the Senate say we have to cut all of this. Is that who we have become as a country?

The decisions we make have real and serious consequences for our economy, for our children, and for our community--ranging from St. Johnsbury, VT, to Houston, TX.

As chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee that funds the Department of State and foreign operations, I want to speak briefly about the consequences of shutting down the government and a full-year continuing resolution for U.S. national security. It should make every Senator think long and hard about the role they want the United States to play in an increasingly competitive and dangerous world.

We hear over and over again on this floor the saying, ``freedom isn't free.'' Well, it is not. And the corollary to that is, neither are U.S. security and U.S. influence.

That is what is at stake: U.S. leadership in the Middle East, at the United Nations, in Africa, in South and Central Asia, and in our own hemisphere. If the government shuts down, the impacts will be felt here at home and by our allies, and exploited by our adversaries.

It is the worst hypocrisy, because those same Senators who are toying with shutting down the government want the United States to respond when war breaks out in Syria, or famine in Ethiopia, or an outbreak of the Ebola virus, or a devastating earthquake in Haiti, a terrorist attack in Kenya, the false imprisonment of a constituent in Nicaragua, or the kidnapping of an American missionary in the Philippines.

They expect the United States to solve the problem or to rally others to help solve it, but they are willing to do away with paying the salaries of our diplomats, or our aid workers, or our dues to the United Nations, or emergency food aid, or our support for NATO or the World Health Organization, or the myriad of other programs and organizations that depend on us and that serve our interests around the world. They think that somehow this is going to be paid for with pixie dust. We are grown-ups and this is the real world. When we pull back, when we don't lead, others are only too happy to fill the vacuum.

A shutdown would mean that the Export-Import Bank, which provides financing to United States companies, would immediately stop processing new applications, and would lose $2 to $4 billion in monthly income for U.S. exporters, jeopardizing approximately 30,000 American jobs, reducing deposits to the U.S. Treasury by $15 to $20 million per month as a result of fees that go uncollected by the Bank.

The Overseas Private Investment Corporation, that provides financing and insurance to American companies that invest overseas, would lose its authority to function. No longer could it make disbursements, it would bring to a screeching halt the activities of hundreds of U.S. businesses that rely on OPIC financing.

The State, Foreign Operations bill that Senator Lindsey Graham and I wrote that was reported by the Appropriations Committee on July 25 by a lopsided bipartisan vote of 23-7, protects U.S. national security interests and responds to compelling humanitarian needs. Americans recognize that we have a moral responsibility as the wealthiest, most powerful nation on earth. This is who we are.

Senator Graham's and my bill includes $8.5 billion for global health programs. A full-year continuing resolution means $389 million less to combat HIV/AIDS and other preventable diseases like malaria, tuberculosis, and pneumonia, and malnutrition. None of us have children or grandchildren that have to worry about these illnesses, but with the relatively small amounts that we spend we can save the lives of countless children in other countries.

A full year continuing resolution would mean tens of thousands of additional deaths from these diseases. It means tens of thousands of additional children orphaned by AIDS. It means millions fewer life- saving immunizations for children resulting in tens of thousands of preventable deaths.

For pennies we can vaccinate millions of children around the world. Are we going to say, instead, that we can't do that because we have a political point to make? We are grown ups. We are not sound-bite aficionados. We should be legislators.

The Senate bill includes $2.5 billion, which is $115 million above a full year continuing resolution, for programs in the poorest countries. These have bipartisan support, with Republicans and Democrats, supporting basic and higher education, food security, energy, and water and sanitation programs.

If you don't agree that we have a moral responsibility, then let's just be pragmatic about our own security. Because if we don't do this, the alternative to development and opportunity is poverty, religious extremism, transnational crime, and violent insurgencies. It is a growing reality across the globe, from Somalia to Mexico, and it threatens our economy, our security, and the security of our allies.

A government shutdown is a complete failure of our responsibility as legislators. We are sent here to make decisions--not slogans--to make government work for the American people and for the good of the Nation, including our national security and our interests around the globe.

Over and over again there are those who want to give speeches, but they don't want to make hard choices. They were elected to serve, yet they make a career of blaming the government.

Funding the government by continuing resolution is irresponsible and it is dangerous. It diminishes our standing in the world. It erodes our leadership. It is unworthy of the Congress. It is a betrayal of the people who sent us here.

Let's have, if not the courage, at least the honesty to bring up the appropriations bills and vote on them. Vote yes or vote no. Stand up and be counted. Stop hiding behind the delaying tactics and partisan sloganeering that have become such a tiresome refrain around here.

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

Mr. President, what is the parliamentary situation?

Mr. President, the nomination of Todd Hughes to fill the judicial vacancy on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which is an extremely important court. It is also an important milestone for the court. If confirmed, Mr. Hughes will be the first openly gay judge to serve on the Federal appellate court in our Nation's history. I am proud that the Senate has finally taken a historic step to break down another barrier to increase diversity on our Federal bench.

Mr. Hughes has extensive experience on issues that come before the Federal Circuit. He joined the Department of

Justice in 1994 and, since 2007, has served as Deputy Director for the Commercial Litigation Branch of the Civil Division. Mr. Hughes earned his B.A. cum laude from Harvard and his J.D. with honors from Duke Law School. Upon graduating law school, he served as a law clerk to the Honorable Robert Krupansky of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.

Mr. Hughes' nomination was reported unanimously by the Judiciary Committee more than 2 months ago and could--and in my view should--have been confirmed within days. At a time when judicial vacancies are once again above 90, this kind of needless delay undermines the serious work we have to do to ensure the ability of our Federal courts to provide justice to Americans around the country. In addition to Mr. Hughes, we have 13 other Federal circuit and district nominees pending on the Executive Calendar. Of those nominees, 11 were reported by voice vote and there is no good reason to not confirm them today.

The delays in confirming noncontroversial consensus nominees have a real life impact on the American people and the economy. It does not benefit anyone if litigants have their cases delayed for months and months because our Federal courts are understaffed. Americans are rightly proud of our legal system and the promise of access to justice and speedy trials that is embedded in our Constitution.

Also critical to the functioning of our courts is doing all we can do to alleviate the harmful impact of sequestration. As we debate the continuing resolution to fund the Federal Government we must look to streamline wherever we can, but we should do so with care and not simply cut indiscriminately across the board. We have the benefit of the greatest justice system in the world for less than 1 percent of our entire Federal budget. Yet, we refuse to provide this coequal branch with the adequate resources it needs. Let us work to reverse the senseless cuts to our legal system from sequestration so we can help our coequal branch meet the Constitution's promise of justice for all Americans.

I congratulate Mr. Hughes on what I expect will be an overwhelming vote in support of his confirmation. And I commend President Obama for his continued commitment to nominating highly qualified and diverse individuals.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 24, 2013, at 10 a.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 24, 2013, at 2:30 p.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be authorized to meet, during the session of the Senate, to conduct a hearing entitled ``U.S. Efforts to Reduce Healthcare-Associated Infections'' on September 24, 2013, at 10 a.m. in room 430 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Rules and Administration be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 24, 2013, at 10 a.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 24, 2013, at 2:30 p.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety of the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 24, 2013, at 10:30 a.m., in room 406 of the Dirksen Senate office building, to conduct a hearing entitled, ``Black Carbon--A Global Health Problem with Low-Cost Solutions.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and the Coast Guard of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 24, 2013, at 10:30 a.m. in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building.

The Committee will hold a hearing entitled, ``The Role of Certification in Rewarding Sustainable Fishing.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, Safety, and Security Subcommittee Hearing of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to hold a meeting during the session of the Senate on September 24, 2013, at 2:30 p.m. in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building.

The Committee will hold a hearing entitled, ``Rebuilding the Nation's Infrastructure: Leveraging Innovative Financing To Supplement Federal Investment.''

Mr. President, the House of Representatives passed a bipartisan reauthorization of the Missing Children's Assistance Act that ensures the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children can continue.

We cleared it a week ago here on the Democratic side. I understand that now it has cleared the Republican side.

I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to the consideration of H.R. 3092, which was received from the House and is at the desk.

Mr. President, last week, the House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a bipartisan reauthorization of the Missing Children's Assistance Act. This important measure will ensure that the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) can continue its critical and lifesaving work on behalf of some of the most vulnerable children in our communities. I thank Ranking Member Grassley, as well as the Chairman and Ranking Member of the House Education and the Workforce Committee for working with me to develop this bipartisan legislation. The current authorization for NCMEC will expire at the end of the month, so the Senate must take action without delay.

While I would have preferred a straightforward reauthorization of NCMEC and its programs, I agreed to Ranking Member Grassley's request to include several additional auditing provisions, which I had hoped would facilitate the bill's swift passage and enactment. I also agreed to several changes suggested by the House, working in a bipartisan fashion on this bill which overwhelmingly passed the House of Representatives and which is pending before the Senate. Despite working in a bipartisan way, it has already been more than a week since the House sent us the reauthorization bill. The Senate has been unable to pass this measure because of an objection on the Republican side. The Democratic side approved this bill for passage last week.

The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children has served as a vital national resource for law enforcement and families for nearly 30 years, and has assisted law enforcement in the recovery of more than 188,000 missing children. Of the cases reported to NCMEC from 1990- 2012, 97.8 percent have been resolved. If any Senator has a problem or concern with the reauthorization of this important work, then that Senator should come to the floor and voice those concerns publicly. I have heard of no such concerns.

So if there are no substantive concerns with reauthorizing the work of NCMEC, what are we waiting for? I hope that this reauthorization bill is not falling victim to the same political tantrums thrown by some in an effort to remove funding for our citizens' healthcare. Instead of playing politics, the Senate should renew its obligation to do everything we can to quickly locate a missing child and to protect all our children from being victimized by predators by passing this important legislation.

For nearly 30 years, NCMEC has spearheaded efforts to locate and recover missing children and raise public awareness about how to prevent child abduction, molestation, and sexual exploitation. The Senate should pass this legislation immediately and not allow the good work of the National Center to be jeopardized.

The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children addresses the painful reality that hundreds of thousands of people go missing or are abducted each year. Sadly, children account for more than 40 percent of the FBI's active missing persons cases. The exploitation of children is also a growing problem, particularly in the internet age. Between 2004 and 2008, the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Forces reported a 230 percent increase in the number of documented complaints of online enticement of children. Perpetrators utilize new technologies to target, contact, manipulate, and entice children so the dangers facing children and their families are greater than ever.

In passing the Missing Children's Assistance Act in 1984, Congress recognized the need for national leadership to help address the problem of missing and exploited children, and to assist the families of these victims. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children was created shortly after passage of that legislation, and has led a number of efforts to combat child exploitation.

NCMEC has created a nationwide, toll free, 24-hour hotline to take reports about missing children and clues that might lead to their recovery; a National Child Pornography Tipline to gather reports on the sexual exploitation of children through the production and distribution of child pornography; and a CyberTipline to process online leads from individuals reporting the sexual exploitation of children. In addition, NCMEC has circulated millions of photographs of missing children, and serves as a vital resource for law enforcement agencies throughout the Nation in the search for missing children and in the pursuit of adequate child protection.

This legislation before us will allow the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children to continue its important role in protecting our children. We should continue to do everything we can to protect our children. I am proud to support this bill, which will enable NCMEC to continue its critical work. I thank my friends on both sides of the aisle for joining me in this effort, and urge the Senate to take immediate action to pass H.R. 3092, the Missing Children's Assistance Reauthorization Act.

I ask unanimous consent the bill be read a third time and passed; and the motion to reconsider be

laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, I appreciate the fact that it now has passed.

I thank the Republican leader and others.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 23, 2013, at 2:30 p.m. in order to conduct a hearing entitled ``Combating Human Trafficking: Federal, State, and Local Perspectives.''

Madam President, are we in morning business?

Madam President, as many of my current and even former staff can tell you, I am fond of saying that I, like other Senators, am merely a constitutional impediment to my staff. But I don't mind being just a constitutional impediment. Mine is one of the finest staffs on Capitol Hill.

Tomorrow my office will say goodbye to Will Goodman, one of the finest. He is going to be leaving for a challenging new opportunity. Will joined my staff in January of 2010 as a legislative fellow from the Office of the Secretary of Defense. We barely got him to his desk and he had to jump right in with both feet and hit the ground running. He was a valuable member of my legislative team, working on that year's debate over the repeal of ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell,'' and the ratification of the New START treaty. Importantly, Will was a trusted staffer, a willing ear, and a source of support as the Vermont National Guard prepared to deploy for Afghanistan.

When his fellowship ended, I was pleased when Will accepted my offer to become my senior defense adviser. In that role, he was instrumental in helping to pass the National Guard Empowerment Act, one of my longtime legislative priorities. Will has been a go-to aid for many Members and their staffs, particularly for the more than 80 Members of both parties of the Senate National Guard Caucus, which I am proud to cochair.

I know that Vermonters appreciate Will's steadfast commitment to the State, to the many veterans who live there, to the Vermont National Guard, and to our State's economic development. He has always been eager to help and has always been a fierce advocate for Vermonters.

After nearly four decades in the Senate, I have had dozens of staffers come

and go, but we like to think they always remain part of what we call the Leahy Family.

Will's own family is growing. He and his wife Marisha and their wonderful son Mark await the arrival of their newest member early next year, though Marcus--as we call him--will be the Big Brother. As his family grows, he is always going to be part of ours.

Marcelle and I wish Will the best.

I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I applaud the senior Senator from Michigan for his persistence on this matter. He has brought the attention of the Senate to it time and time again, as well as that of the American public. Let us hope he is listened to. He should be.

Mr. President, I applaud the senior Senator from Michigan for his persistence on this matter. He has brought the attention of the Senate to it time and time again, as well as that of the American public. Let us hope he is listened to. He should be.

Mr. President, on September 12 I made a statement in this Chamber about the vote earlier that day by the board of directors of the Millennium Challenge Corporation to approve a second compact for El Salvador.

As I said then, that vote was expected, and it began the final phase of discussions between the United States and El Salvador on a compact which, if funded, could result in investments totaling $277 million from the United States and $85 million from El Salvador.

I share the view of the MCC board that the compact, if implemented fully, would improve the lives of the Salvadoran people, but I also noted that when the MCC was established a decade ago it was not intended to be just another foreign aid program. Rather, an MCC compact provides a kind of stamp of approval by the United States indicating that the government of the compact country has demonstrated a commitment to integrity, to good governance and respect for the rule of law, and to addressing the needs of its people. I said this should be doubly so for a second compact.

While El Salvador can point to some success in these areas, it remains a country of weak democratic institutions where the independence of the judiciary has been attacked, corruption

is widespread, and transnational criminal organizations and money laundering have flourished. Nobody knows this better than the Salvadoran people.

I urged the MCC, the Department of State, and the Government of El Salvador, prior to a final decision to provide the funds for a second compact, to do more to address these problems which is necessary for the rule of law and economic growth in that country. Regrettably, rather than acknowledge the need to address these problems more convincingly, the reaction of top Salvadoran officials was to accuse me of being ``misinformed'' about their country and of meddling in their affairs. They reacted similarly when U.S. Ambassador Aponte expressed some of the same concerns.

For over 20 years, I have been a friend of El Salvador. I actively supported the negotiations that ended the civil war. I worked to help El Salvador recover from that war, and I supported the first MCC compact which was financed with $461 million from the Appropriations subcommittee that I chair. I obtained emergency funding to help that country rebuild after devastating floods. And over the past decade I have watched as the Salvadoran people were victimized by increasing levels of crime and violence, a corrupt police force, and some individuals in positions of authority who cared more about enriching themselves or protecting their privileges than improving the lives of the people. So it is disappointing that Salvadoran officials reacted as they did to my remarks last week.

As I said then, I appreciate that MCC CEO Yohannes, U.S. Ambassador Aponte, and other State Department officials have echoed some of the concerns I have raised.

The budget of the Millennium Challenge Corporation, which I have long supported, and the funds for a second compact for El Salvador--for those who may not be aware or have forgotten--comes from the Congress. It should not be taken for granted.

I hope President Funes and his government will reconsider their response to these concerns--for the good of the Salvadoran people and if they want a second MCC compact to be funded.

Mr. President, I would like to take a moment to pay tribute to retired BG Douglas Kinnard, a former University of Vermont professor and retired general officer who passed away on July 29 of this year at the age of 91.

Long before I came to know General Kinnard, he had built a reputation as a wise and thoughtful soldier. Respected for his leadership and integrity on and off the battlefield, he honorably served our country in three wars, including two tours in Vietnam, despite his misgivings about American strategy and involvement in the conflict. Having graduated from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point on D-day during World War II, Douglas Kinnard rose to the rank of brigadier general before retiring from the Army to pursue his doctor of philosophy at Princeton University.

It is no surprise given his intellect and objectivity that when he went searching for his first faculty job, he found a home at the University of Vermont. Those who have worked with General Kinnard have praised him as an imposing figure that was ``always open and fair'' and an ``enjoyable colleague'' who taught his students about real patriotism from his own experience.

I am grateful that the University of Vermont was able to benefit from the many gifts General Kinnard brought with him to his work in Burlington and throughout the country. Marcelle and I send our condolences to his wife Wade and son Frederick. I will miss his steady counsel, which he provided me throughout my Senate career. The many soldiers, students, and colleagues who were fortunate to have known him throughout his long and industrious life will not soon forget his impact.

The Burlington Free Press recently paid tribute to General Kinnard and his many contributions. I ask unanimous consent that a recent Free Press article entitled ``Remembering UVM prof., ex-Army general Douglas Kinnard'' be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I want to take a moment to speak about troubling actions by the Government of Bangladesh against the Grameen Bank.

Founded in 1983 by Professor Mohammed Yunus, the Grameen Bank has been a model of the immense potential of microfinance for economic development. By providing small loans to the world's poorest people who possess the skills but not the financing needed to start a small business, microcredit institutions have shown to be successful in promoting the most effective means of poverty reduction, the empowerment of women. The Grameen Bank, about which volumes have been written, has been a leading example of these successful borrower-owned banks, and the model has spread from Bangladesh throughout Southeast Asia and beyond.

The proposal of the Government of Bangladesh to dissolve the Grameen Bank into 19 separate entities would curtail one of the best mechanisms for reducing poverty in Bangladesh. This radical restructuring would fragment Grameeen's governance structure, essentially rendering it powerless. It would move ownership of the bank from the people with a vested interest in its success to an assortment of agencies with no legal relationships with the public.

The force behind the efforts to weaken the Grameen Bank is none other than Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, who has clashed with Professor Yunus since the latter won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2006 and expressed interest in running for public office himself. Threatened by Professor Yunus' popularity, the Prime Minister has tried for years to undermine his authority and influence.

The Grameen Bank has been targeted by the government-created Grameen Bank Commission, and Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina was instrumental in Yunus' removal from his position as Grameen's managing director through an age mandated retirement although no such mandate exists for the country's private banks. Most recently, the government has accused several microcredit companies founded by Professor Yunus of failing to pay taxes, which he has denied as baseless. The Prime Minister's vendetta against Professor Yunus seems to have no limit.

I want to echo the sentiments of my friend Senator Durbin who has spoken about this, as well as 17 Senators, who sent a letter to Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina last year. I join them and leaders of goodwill around the world in supporting the Grameen Bank and Professor Yunus. They have been bright spots in one of the world's poorest countries whose own nationalized banks are failing.

Millions of Bangladesh's poorest people, particularly women, need access to the credit the Grameen Bank provides. Rather than continue to persecute Professor Yunus, the Prime Minister and her government should learn from his example and redirect their efforts to helping improve the lives of the people they have a responsibility to serve.

Mr. President, I would like to bring to the attention of the Senate a notable family whose work has made a unique and meaningful contribution to the Vermont newspaper community and to our State. The Lynn family runs several Vermont newspapers, reporting local news and serving general commerce in these communities.

In 1984, Angelo Lynn bought the Addison County Independent, marking the beginning of a family newspaper operation based out of Middlebury, VT. Today, Angelo's three daughters have joined a five-generation newspaper tradition, each taking on a different Vermont town newspaper. With Elsie running the Colchester Sun and the Essex Reporter, Polly running the Mountain Times in Killington, and Christy working side by side with her father overseeing the advertising sales team of the Addison County Independent, the Lynn family reports stories Vermonters depend on.

While some of the biggest newspapers struggle, local papers are thriving, and the Lynn family has embraced the opportunity to influence the future of the newspaper industry. Focusing on local government, events, schools, sports and businesses, the Addison County Independent is a vital piece of the community it serves. It is personal and caring, and it reflects what matters to the residents of the community.

I congratulate Angelo Lynn on the success of his family-run newspaper operation. Mr. Lynn, his daughters, and his brother Emerson have harnessed local newspapers to strengthen our Vermont communities. I have included the New York Times article ``Vermont Sisters with Roots in News Embrace Small-Town Papers'' that covers each Lynn family member's individual story. I ask that the text of this article, dated August 15, 2013, be printed in the Record.

Madam President, today, the Nation celebrates the 226th anniversary of the Constitution's signing. That moment was a decision to create a Federal Government with the power to address national problems. During the Constitutional Convention, the delegates debated hundreds of issues and proposals before crafting the original version of the Constitution. Even then, though, the true genius of their charter was article V, which provided for later amendments--because the Founding generation knew that they did not have all the answers and they had faith in future generations to perfect their charter and ``form a more perfect Union.'' And so, step by step, we have. ``We the People'' have shown a continuing concern for the sacred right to vote. And we have amended the Constitution six times to expand that right.

For over 2 centuries, the Constitution has allowed America to flourish and adapt to new challenges. Since the inclusion of the Bill of Rights in 1791, the Constitution has been amended 17 times. Our current version of the Constitution reflects not just the Founders original crafting, but also the need for subsequent amendments. Today is a good day to remind the American people that when we pledge to support the Constitution, we must pledge our support for the whole Constitution, and not just those specific provisions and amendments that we favor or find convenient to uphold.

Too often, I have heard people who profess to support the original meaning of the Constitution, ignore the subsequent amendments that inform and alter that original meaning. Some even express strong support for specific amendments, but then ignore others. That is not how our charter functions. It is not a menu that you can pick and choose from. The whole Constitution is what we celebrate today.

This past June, when the Supreme Court issued its decision on the Voting Rights Act, I noticed that there was surprisingly little discussion of the fundamental importance of the Reconstruction Amendments. After the Civil War, we transformed our founding charter into one that embraced equal rights and human dignity by abolishing slavery, guaranteeing equal protection of the law for all Americans, and prohibiting racial barriers to the right to vote. I find it alarming that many who claim to support and honor the Constitution conveniently ignore these critical amendments that made our Nation a more perfect one after the Civil War.

There are perhaps no two amendments that have played a larger role in securing liberty and equality for all Americans than the 14th and 15th Amendments. Without the 14th Amendment we would still have ``separate but equal'' treatment of Americans and State-sanctioned gender discrimination. Without the 15th Amendment, minorities would continue to be excluded from fully participating in our democracy.

The importance of these amendments was clear upon passage. President Ulysses S. Grant in 1870 signed a bill into law that created the United States Department of Justice to help facilitate the enforcement of the 14th and 15th Amendments. But the Justice Department does not have sole responsibility for supporting and upholding the 14th and 15th Amendments. Congress, as provided by the text of the Amendments, has an even greater role in enforcing the mandates of those Amendments.

Section 5 of the 14th Amendment states that: ``The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.'' Section 2 of the 15th Amendment states that: ``The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.'' It is clear that the Constitution has placed the burden on Congress to ensure that all Americans are entitled to the freedoms and rights guaranteed by these two amendments.

It is for this reason that Congress must respond to the recent Supreme Court decision severely undercutting the Voting Rights Act by passing legislation that protects against racial discrimination in voting. It is our duty and constitutional obligation to not waver from the path of greater political inclusion that we have set for the Nation through our bipartisan support of the Voting Rights Act. I hope that Congress will work with me so that we can provide the protections guaranteed by these two amendments for all Americans.

On this day, as we commemorate the signing of the Constitution of the United States of America 226 years ago, I hope that Congress will be reminded of its obligation not only to periodically read the words of our founding charter, but to act and to give meaning to those words. I look forward to working with fellow Senators to reinvigorate the Voting Rights Act this fall to uphold our constitutional values and ensure that every American enjoys the right to vote.