Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding the provisions of rule XXII, all postcloture time on the Azar nomination expire at 2:15 p.m. tomorrow, January 24, and the Senate vote on confirmation of the Azar nomination with no intervening action or debate; finally, that if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding the provisions of rule XXII, following the cloture vote on the Brownback nomination, the Senate proceed to the consideration of the following nomination: Executive Calendar No. 552. I ask consent that the Senate vote on the nomination with no intervening action or debate; that if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action; that no further motions be in order; and that any statements relating to the nomination be printed in the Record, and the Senate resume consideration of the Brownback nomination.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Maj. Patrick J. Heiny, a Marine Corps Fellow in Senator Cornyn's office, be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the 115th Congress.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 214, S. 1395.

I further ask unanimous consent that the bill be read a third time and passed, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 293, S. 2152.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported amendments be agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and 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 consideration of S. Res. 379, submitted earlier today.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 380, submitted earlier today.

Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10 a.m., Wednesday, January 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; finally, that following leader remarks, the Senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the Azar nomination.

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.

Mr. President, before I got involved in politics, I spent 28 years in the private sector--small businesses, medium-sized businesses, a Fortune 25 company. The Fortune 25 company was Proctor & Gamble. I spent 14 years with that company, and one of our assignments took us to mainland China.

I remember when we were offered the assignment and we took the job. At that time, we had a little boy, David, our first child. He was about 18 months old. Our second child, Annie, was just born, a new baby, several weeks old. We moved to Guangzhou. That was in January of 1992.

We were part of leading the team that pioneered the operations for Proctor & Gamble back in the early days of the expansion of the company. Today, that geography, in fact, I think is P&G's second largest geography as it relates to sales in the world.

I remember we spent some time with other American families from around the world. There were American families. There were families from virtually every continent. These expats living over there would spend time going to orphanages.

We would go to these orphanages, usually on a Saturday, and we would hold these babies. Sometimes they had disabilities. Some of these babies never received human touch except for when these families-- oftentimes American families--would go and hold them. On a positive note, it built in a conscience at that orphanage. They knew the Americans were coming on Saturday. Things got cleaned up, the babies were getting a little better fed, and that was a good thing, but we were fighting on behalf of those who had life and weren't being treated very well.

I want to tell a couple of stories about things that happened while we were over there in China. I was running a large organization. I had many Chinese employees who were working for me. I remember one day one of my key managers came and he said: Steve, I need to go to the police station this afternoon.

I said: Oh, my word. Is there something wrong? Do you need some help?

He said: No, not really. My wife is pregnant, and we did not have permission from the authorities to get pregnant.

I said: Well, what does that mean?

He said: Well, that might mean they would terminate the pregnancy, require it.

At that moment, I looked at that employee--one of my key managers-- and I said: I will do all I need to do, all I can, to ensure that we protect that baby, assuming you want to keep that baby.

And he said: My wife and I do want to keep that baby.

I said: What does help look like? How can I help you?

He said: Well, can I get a case of shampoo?

Now, we were making some well-known brands, including Head & Shoulders shampoo, Vidal Sassoon, Pantene. We were making Crest toothpaste then and Tide. We had these world-class brands.

So I gave him a case of shampoo, and he went downtown to see the authorities. That case of shampoo saved the life of that baby, and they now have a beautiful grown daughter.

Another day I was at work and my phone rang. My wife Cindy called me.

She said: Steve, you will not believe it, but we just had twin baby girls dropped off on our doorstep in our apartment in Guangzhou.

I said: Twin baby girls? Really?

At that point, we had three children. We went over to China with two. We had two more, in fact, while we were living over there. At that time, we had three.

She said: They are just infants.

The story behind that is, there was a mother who lived in the countryside who had one baby, a little girl, and she got pregnant with twins. Because of the one-child policy, she was in trouble, and she fled to the countryside. In fact, she was hiding in a remote location, and her mother would come out to feed the mother and the babies to keep them alive.

To make a long story short, we battled for a couple of years because there was no paper trail for these two beautiful Chinese babies. There was an American family who worked for Proctor & Gamble--one of my associates who wanted to adopt those babies.

I can tell you, there was another happy ending this time to that story. They are now two beautiful young women who are living in the United States as U.S. citizens.

These stories demonstrate the importance of saving one life at a time.

I share these stories because today is the 45th anniversary of the Supreme Court's decision on Roe v. Wade. I know there is a lot going on at the moment. The Senate just voted to reopen the government. The House will follow shortly. The President will sign that bill. Common sense has prevailed. We have the government open again. In fact, we are reauthorizing the Children's Health Insurance Program for 6 years.

Today, in the midst of all of these important issues we are dealing with, we cannot--we must not--forget that each year in the United States, over 600,000 babies lose their fight for life due to abortion. No case of shampoo is able to save them. They never got the chance to be adopted. That is over 600,000 babies a year; 60 million since the Supreme Court's decision on Roe v. Wade in 1973, 45 years ago today.

I told a little bit about David when I started my remarks, our oldest son of our four children. David was born in the United States before we moved to China. I think, as a parent--and if you

are a parent, you remember that with new babies, when you take them to get their shots, it is much harder on mom and dad than it is on the baby. The baby is screaming and crying from the pain they are feeling, and you as a parent want to take away that pain. It is part of the natural response of any mom or dad.

Tragically, in this Nation, there are over 13,000 babies aborted that are over 20 weeks old. You see, at 20 weeks, that baby can yawn. It can make faces. It can stretch. The science tells us babies at 20 weeks of age can feel pain. So think about the pain a parent feels when a newborn receives a vaccination, and imagine the pain a baby at 20 weeks and beyond feels if it is being aborted. In fact, when they do in utero surgery at 20 weeks and beyond, they administer anesthesia to that baby.

We must continue to fight to protect life at all stages. Certainly, where we can take steps--bipartisan steps--to protect life, we should. I think we might be able to agree that banning elective abortions for babies who are 20 weeks or older--that is 5 months, well past the halfway stage of gestation--we should do that.

At the center of this debate is a tiny child, and that baby can't speak for itself yet. Those babies we fought for in China--whether it was that baby who was saved by a case of shampoo or those twin baby girls who were dropped off on our doorstep--couldn't speak and fight for their lives. The babies in the womb, their cries aren't audible. We at least could hear the cries of the twin baby girls. That is why we must act on their behalf.

Studies have shown that the vast majority of Americans are in favor of prohibiting late-term abortions, of stopping elective abortions after 20 weeks. In fact, if you poll millennials, that number is even higher. Why is that? I am not sure I have the precise answer, but one possibility is technology. If you have a smartphone, take it out. I can't do that because we are prohibited on the floor of the Senate, so I can't demonstrate it here, but if you have a smartphone or your computer or your iPad, go to Google and just type in ``20 weeks.'' That is all. You don't have to type in ``baby.'' Just type in ``20 weeks'' and look at what pops up. What you will see are images of what a baby looks like at 20 weeks. I think technology is now convincing millennials that what goes on in the womb at 20 weeks is a life; it is not just a piece of flesh. That is why we need to pass the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act.

By the way, just last week the Department of Health and Human Services announced a new Conscience and Religious Freedom Division within its Office of Civil Rights. The administration is committed--and I am grateful they are committed--to enforcing existing conscience laws. I don't believe anyone should be forced to participate in an activity like abortion that violates their conscience.

I am grateful for this administration's commitment to protecting life and the rights of conscience, and I stand ready to work with them and anyone here on either side of the aisle to advance the cause for life.

I have always believed that people will believe those things they discover for themselves. As a parent, you know that you can teach your children, and you can say things to your children, but ultimately it is a process of their discovering something for themselves before they really will believe something. I think that is what is going on right now with millennials and the issue of late-term abortions and the issues of life, because technology is showing all of us--with the incredible clarity of ultrasounds and getting visibility of what is going on inside and that amazing miracle of life--that, indeed, it is a life.

Since the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade, 60 million babies have lost their lives to abortion. We can honor their memories by acting to end this atrocity.

I very much look forward to seeing the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act come to the floor of the Senate. We may have disagreements about when life begins, but let's all agree that we should stop late-term abortions. At 20 weeks is when that little baby can feel pain. I think that is a reasonable place to draw the line to get bipartisan support going forward. Only seven countries in the world allow late-term abortions--seven countries. The United States is on the same list as North Korea.

I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this most important legislation.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I am here to make one point crystal clear

for those Montanans who are wondering what is going on with their government. There have been a lot of speeches given today and last night, and there have been a lot of interviews going on. Let me try to sum it up as succinctly as possible.

The reason the government has shut down is because of a controversial illegal immigration policy that was not included in a bill that funds the government. If you don't know that, you are missing the facts.

We should not hold the country hostage for a controversial immigration policy that impacts only .0007 percent of Montanans, but a minority of the U.S. Senators want to shut down the government, and now their leader is filibustering the U.S. Senate.

This is a huge mistake. We need to get the government back up and running so the least amount of pain is felt by Montanans and the American people.

Madam President, midnight is approaching and a government shutdown is looming in front of us. I would say--as we can tell in this city--there are not a lot of things Senators will agree on, but I think there is one thing that just about every Senator I have spoken with does agree on; that is, we have a budgeting and spending process that is broken.

In fact, the first bill I introduced in Congress was a bill that simply said: If Members of Congress can't pass a balanced budget, they shouldn't get paid. Nobody here likes to see CR after CR. CR stands for continuing resolution.

Think about it. We have a government that starts its fiscal year every year on October 1. I spent 28 years in the private sector, and 13 of those years were with Procter & Gamble, a Fortune 500 company. I spent time in a small family business, and I spent time as part of a cloud computing startup that grew over 1,000 jobs. We took the company public. So I have had a lot of experience in budgets, management spending, and ensuring that you actually take in more money than you spend because that is all profit in business.

Here in Washington, DC, we are now--October, November, December, middle of January--we are 3\1/2\ months into the fiscal year without having nailed down the spending plan. It is broken. That needs to be reformed.

On a more optimistic note, there is a group of Republican and Democratic Senators who are having discussions about how to change the way the budgeting and spending works in Washington, DC, to deliver a better outcome for the American people.

Here we are at this moment, just hours away from a looming government shutdown. So whether we are in business or dealing with issues in personal life, we have a choice to make right here in front of us--a choice we have to make in less than 7 hours. We can either keep the Federal Government open and fund health insurance for 24,000 Montana children--it is about 9 million American children. The idea was, let's put something in play that ought to be agreeable to both sides-- something pretty clean, not a tax with a bunch of political, divisive kind of issues. No, we are going to extend the funding of the government, avoid a government shutdown, and let's permanently reauthorize, for 6 years, the Children's Health Insurance Program. It is very popular with the American people. Either we do that or we shut the government down.

Here is where we are. There will be a lot of folks spinning a lot of different messages, but let me try to articulate exactly where we are in as simple terms as possible. The House has passed an agreement to keep the lights on and to fund Children's Health Insurance. They passed it. The President has said he will sign that agreement to keep the lights on and to fund Children's Health Insurance. The House has passed it, the President says he will sign it, and now it is up to this body.

Will we get 60 Senators--it will take Republicans and Democrats-- because there are only 51 Republican Senators, and the rules of the Senate require 60. Will we get 60 Senators--a good bipartisan vote--to keep the lights on and fund Children's Health Insurance? That is the question. We have less than 7 hours to figure that out.

I implore my Democratic colleagues not to follow their leader, who insists that DACA and illegal immigration get fixed today, in the next 7 hours. We all know illegal immigration is a very important issue for our Nation. It has to be addressed. We must secure our borders, and we must resolve this issue, but let's keep it all in perspective.

In my home State of Montana, there are less than 100 DACA residents versus 1 million Montanans who would be hurt by a government shutdown. A shutdown hurts our men and women who wear the uniform. To say it another way, the choice is between 100 DACA recipients--less than 100 in Montana--or the 24,000 children who depend on the Children's Health Insurance Program.

Don't let these issues get confused by smoke and mirrors. That is the fundamental issue right now that Chuck Schumer and the leaders of our friends across the aisle are talking about shutting down the government over.

The right thing to do here is to vote yes today. Let's continue to fund the government while we work to address these issues related to illegal immigration and border security.

Senator Lankford was here earlier. There are good bipartisan discussions going on as we speak. These are difficult issues to get sorted out. They are divisive issues, but I think there is a path forward. To me, to say they have to get resolved tonight or shut down the government is the wrong position to take.

A shutdown means no long-term certainty for Montana's children. A shutdown hurts our military. A shutdown hurts our veterans.

I don't like another CR. I would rather not have another CR. But guess what. You get paid to come here and make a choice. Sometimes it is between two options; neither one is very appealing. I don't like the idea of having another CR. It is just an example of a broken budgeting process. But the choice is that either we buy some more time to resolve these issues of illegal immigration or we shut down the government, harming our military, our veterans, our seniors, and compromising national security. I believe a government shutdown is a mistake.

Mr. President, I thank Senator Lankford for leading this very important conversation. I thank Senator Blunt, Senator Ernst, and Senator Sasse for joining us today as well in this discussion.

Mr. President, 28 years ago, I became a first-time dad. By the grace of God, we got to see three more children born after our first child David was born. I can tell you, my wife Cindy and I were excited and a little bit terrified when we welcomed David into the world.

As a parent, one of the toughest things is to see your child in pain. I remember when David cried, I would have given an arm and a leg to stop that pain. I remember when he was just a little baby taking David to the pediatrician to get that shot and so forth, and the pain David felt and the screams and the crying I think were much harder on the parents than on the baby.

I think we all recognize the pain a child feels after they are born. As I have gone on and researched this issue of pain and babies and so forth, science tells us that a baby feels pain before they are born. Senator Sasse mentioned earlier that we are one of four nations that allows elective abortion at any time during a pregnancy. The question is, if we were 1 hour before delivery--the baby is 1 hour from being delivered--as a nation, can we at least agree that we should have a law that says abortions should not be allowed because it is pretty clear that the baby is going to feel pain? The question is, at what point do we know they feel pain during the pregnancy?

It is shocking to think our Nation loses 13,000 children a year to late-term abortions. We can have the debate about all abortions, but today we are focused on late-term abortions. Thirteen thousand children a year die from late-term abortions. At 20 weeks, these babies can suck their thumb, they can yawn, they can stretch, they can make faces, and science shows these babies are also capable of feeling pain.

Our ears may be deaf to their cries, but we don't have to live in ignorance, not when research and even common sense tells us these unborn children feel pain. In fact, there is a reason unborn babies are oftentimes given anesthesia during fetal surgery. That is why we must pass the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. It is unconscionable that we are allowing unborn children as old as 20 weeks--that is 5 months--to be killed when they can feel pain. In fact, do a Google search. If you have a smartphone, are sitting in front of a computer, type in ``20 weeks.'' You don't even have to type in ``baby.'' Just type in ``20 weeks.'' Then, take a look at the pictures, the images that come up after you complete that search. This is one of them. In fact, I had my smartphone last night. I said to my staff: I typed in ``20 weeks'' in the Google search, and this is the image that comes up.

How can we say that is not a baby? While much of the media turned a blind eye to the atrocious acts of Kermit Gosnell, and they didn't watch the horrific videos taken undercover at Planned Parenthood clinics, many of us did. We did watch, and we cannot sit in silence. Most of us would not wish that treatment on even our most hated of enemies, let alone a child of any age.

The United States is just one of seven countries that allows elective abortions after 20 weeks. It is not a good list to be on. It is the same list we share that has China and North Korea on it. As an American citizen, I believe in our founding principle that all men and women are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, and among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

As a person of faith, I am called--we are called--to help the most vulnerable in our society. As a U.S. Senator, it is my honor to support this legislation, the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, and I urge its swift passage.

Mr. President, access to healthcare is on the line today for 24,000 Montana children. The House of Representatives is working to pass legislation that will reauthorize a program called the Children's Health Insurance Program, better known as CHIP, for 6 years and will keep the government open. If passed, it will then come to us for a vote.

Why don't we take the opportunity before us to come together on issues we agree on instead of always fighting on what divides us? I think we can all agree on keeping Montana kids healthy.

Let me tell you a story about a family from Helena, MT, the A-Gee family.

Jaxon was a normal baby--a happy, healthy baby--until October of 2016, when he was just 8 months old. That is when he was first flown from Helena to Missoula's Community Medical Center's Pediatric Intensive Care Unit. He was deathly ill with a respiratory infection.

At that time, it was not clear why Jaxon had gotten so sick, but his parents soon learned that he had Leigh syndrome, a disease in which the body is not able to process energy properly, which leads to muscle weakness, swallowing problems, and severe illnesses with just a simple or a common cold. His parents quickly learned to manage his new feeding tube, to suction his mouth and his throat, and to put him on oxygen monitors at night.

Unfortunately, Jaxon has had five more serious infections. Each time, he has become ill. It has happened so quickly that he has had to be flown to Missoula even though he has a team of pediatricians, nurses, dietitians, speech therapists, and physical therapists who are trying to help keep him from getting ill.

As Jaxon's mom would say, when Jaxon gets ill, the only way to keep him from having to be flown to Missoula is to get him seen by his pediatrician as soon as possible so that if he does get sick, it is relatively minor.

I can tell you that this family in Montana is grateful for Healthy Montana Kids, which is Montana's CHIP program. They are thankful for its providing Jaxon's insurance and the copay for his care and his medical supplies. His mom says that the insurance is what makes it possible to manage Jaxon's condition and possible to afford well-baby checks instead of their just going to the doctor's on an emergency basis.

To add more background to the story, Jaxon's dad was disabled in a workplace accident, so he is home, caring for Jaxon and the family's other two children. Jaxon's mom works, and her employer has been phenomenal to her--those are her words--as they have faced Jaxon's hospitalizations, but the family of five couldn't afford Jaxon's care without Healthy Montana Kids. A helicopter bill for the ride from Helena to Missoula alone can be as much as $34,000, and Jaxon has taken that flight six times.

This family doesn't know what it will do if the funding for CHIP runs out, but the family is committed to caring for its son no matter what. That is why I support a 6-year reauthorization of CHIP.

Let me provide another reason.

This is Danielle. She is 9 years old, and she lives in Deer Lodge, MT. When she was just 18 months old, she suddenly lost the ability to walk.

Cindy and I are the parents of four children. I cannot imagine a more frightening moment as a parent if one has an 18-month-old child, and he suddenly loses his ability to walk.

Danielle was diagnosed with a form of juvenile arthritis. You don't think about arthritis affecting an 18-month-old child. This is a disease that causes pain, swelling, a stiffness of joints, as well as vision problems.

Thankfully, Danielle was started on a medication--a twice-a-month injection that controls the swelling and inflammation. Because of that, she can walk and even run again. Yet these injections are expensive. To pay outright for just 1 month, it costs over $6,000. Last summer, for 3 months, Danielle was unable to get the injections. She stopped walking, and she no longer could go to school. Her mom had to carry her through the house.

When Danielle was approved for Montana's CHIP program, she was able to go to the doctor's and get on another medication--an infusion this time. She is now back at school and running around--to quote Mom-- ``like a kid who doesn't have any problems.'' Danielle loves to study math and science, and when she grows up, of all things, her dream is to be a doctor for kids. Without CHIP, Danielle's family would be unable to afford the medication she needs. Without CHIP, Danielle wouldn't be walking.

Danielle and Jaxon and the thousands of other Montana kids and their families need us to work for them. So I am saddened that partisan politics would get in the way of access to healthcare for these children. We have the opportunity today to reauthorize CHIP for 6 years and avert a government shutdown at the same time.

I urge my colleagues to do the right thing here, to do the right thing for the 24,000 Montana kids who use this important program. I urge them to support a 6-year reauthorization of CHIP and to keep the government open.

I yield the floor.