Volume 160, No. 115 covering the 2nd Session of the 113th Congress (2013 - 2014) was published by the Congressional Record.
The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“NOMINATION OF JOHN W. deGRAVELLES TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA” mentioning the Environmental Protection Agency was published in the Senate section on pages S4673-S4676 on July 22, 2014.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
NOMINATION OF JOHN W. deGRAVELLES TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the nomination.
The bill clerk reported the nomination of John W. deGravelles, of Louisiana, to be United States District Judge for the Middle District of Louisiana.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the time until 12:30 p.m. will be equally divided and controlled in the usual form.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana.
Malaysia Airlines Tragedy
Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I wish to comment on the tragedy of the civilian airliner shot out of the sky by a Russian surface-to-air missile, cutting short the lives of 298 innocent civilians. Parents, children and spouses of victims have expressed deep anguish, and we all feel their grief.
All of us agree the images we are seeing from the crash site are heartbreaking and sickening. President Obama, Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, leaders throughout the world, and many others have expressed their outrage at the vicious, uncivilized act that took place at 33,000 feet over the country of Ukraine. A few days ago, British Prime Minister David Cameron stated firmly:
For too long there has been a reluctance on the part of too many European countries to face up to the implications of what is happening in eastern Ukraine. . . . Elegant forms of words and fine communiques are no substitute for real action. The weapons and fighters being funneled across the border between Russia and eastern Ukraine; the support to the militias; the half-truths, the bluster, the delays. They have to stop.
As the prime minister acknowledged: This is a moment when words of condemnation and expressions of grief are simply not enough. This is a moment when action must follow the outrage and rhetorical condemnation.
The tragedy of Malaysian Airlines 17 will be a defining event in history. It is a defining event for Russia, first and foremost, and for its President, Vladimir Putin. It is no secret that Putin has imperial ambitions, motivated by his pathological insecurities, and a quest to restore lost glory to Mother Russia. These are dangerous delusions. If they are not confronted firmly, they will come to threaten us all.
But it is also a defining event for the United States and its European allies. The festering danger in Ukraine is the result of the civilized world's faltering half-steps as a meager, timid and all too minimal response to Russia's invasion of a neighbor in violation of sovereign borders. This is an opportunity for American leadership, in step with our European allies, to spur the community of nations to act together and be a force for good and be a force for the right change that needs to take place--not later, but now.
It is a defining event for President Obama and German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Today these two leaders, the two who are most able to influence this situation, can stand up and demonstrate leadership that will shape history. So this is a pivotal moment--a pivotal moment for the United States, for Germany, for the European Union and for the world. Given the significance of this event in this moment, what are we to do? I do not have all the answers. I have been suggesting harsh sanctions, sanctions that bite, that hit Russia hard ever since their invasion of Crimea.
As I have said earlier, what has been done is far too short of what needs to be done to punish Russia for the breach of sovereignty and now this brutal and terrible tragic result and consequence of what they are doing in eastern Ukraine. So first we need to ask the entire civilized world to join the United States, our European allies, and everyone in condemning this outrageous act.
Events like this tragedy have no place in the modern world. This unassailable fact needs to be acknowledged globally and more than once. It needs to be acknowledged repeatedly until it becomes so loud that Putin and the Russians can hear it in Moscow and in the Kremlin and see that what has taken place is the direct result of their engagement in eastern Ukraine.
Secondly, I think we need to demand complete cooperation with the ongoing investigation. Positive steps are beginning to take place far too late, but at least they are starting to take place.
Our commitment to the rule of law, rules of evidence, and to the demands of justice require that we go through this investigative process, and we must insist on the access to do so. We must demand full, immediate, unhindered access to the site of the tragedy, including all parts of the aircraft, missile battery, site evidence and, most of all, proper treatment of the remains of the many victims. President Putin by himself can ensure that success and that access, and he absolutely must be required to do so.
Third, we need to demand an immediate Russian stand-down in Ukraine. Crimes like Malaysia Airlines flight 17 can only happen in such a lawless wasteland--renegades and desperados with their fingers on the triggers of the world's most advanced weapons. Lawlessness reigns in eastern Ukraine because the government of that nation still does not have sovereign control of its own territory.
The situation is greatly exacerbated as a result of President Putin's outrageous territorial aggression. He has already severed an arm of Ukraine and threatened an entire country's disintegration.
Make no mistake, the Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine have been organized, motivated, trained, equipped, unleashed, guided, and controlled by the forces of the Russian Federation which are controlled themselves--with totalitarian execution--by none other than President Vladimir Putin. Now we see a new tragic result of this aggression, of sponsorship, of ruthless renegades--a blatant act of terrorism inflicted on innocent people. This problem will only get worse unless we demand that Russian behavior change and Putin's aggression stop. It needs to be a voice that resounds from every nation, civilized nation, in the world.
The only solution to the Ukraine problem is doing what is consistent with our national law. The demands of order and civility and the requirements of justice are what Russia must acknowledge and that the Government of Ukraine must have sovereign control over its own territory.
No. 4, the United States and Europe must, at last, act vigorously and in unison if we are to succeed in this effort. Until now, President Obama has sent largely weak signals to Putin about the seriousness of Russia's actions. Our European partners have been reluctant to act, some hypnotized by anxiety about their economic dependency on Russian oil and gas. Let us hope that after this horrific act of terror against 298 innocent passengers on Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, this view is changing and changing quickly.
History will see this event as a watershed moment. Some argue that the Soviet downing of Korean Airlines flight 007 in 1983 was an event that exposed the true nature of the Soviet regime and hastened its decay. Similarly, Malaysia Airlines flight 17 reveals to any remaining doubters the nature of Putin and his brutal ambitions and ruthlessness.
With illusions stripped away, the inadequacy of half measures revealed, we must now act and act together. We can respond to this tragedy by forming and forging a new unity. But only the most robust and concerted actions to impose economic sanctions on Russia have a chance to change Putin's behavior and end Russian support for the separatist militants and, to be effective, we and the Europeans must do this together, imposing these costs.
We need to target the fragile Russian economy through sanctions on Russia's energy sector and State-backed arms exporter. While it may take time for Russia to feel the effects of sanctions on the energy sector, we can take action today that would have an immediate effect.
I have previously introduced legislation that prohibits all government contracts with Putin's arms dealers. Taking steps to meaningfully obstruct this agency's work and the revenue it provides the Russian State is one of the most effective ways we can condemn Putin's aggression. Through these specific sanctions we can demand that Putin end his support for the separatists and accept and work toward a stable Ukraine. If not, I suggest we do whatever is necessary to bring Russia's economy to its knees. We need to see that stock market plummet. We need to see confidence and support for anything Russia makes or exports denied by the civilized nations of the world. We need to put measures there to prevent their manufacturing and shipment of arms to people such as Assad in Syria, to the Iranians, to the groups that are creating havoc around the world. Russia's arms exports are a major source of their revenue. We need to stop them.
The decision is in their hands. Following this horrific, brutal, tragic event, they have the responsibility to the world's nations to step up and address this issue.
This crisis has reached a point of high tension, great tragedy, and escalated consequences. These potential consequences are dangerous for all of us but, most of all, they are dangerous for Putin's Russia.
Russia's President holds in his hands the ability to de-escalate this crisis or to pay a very steep price. We need to define and implement that steep price if he doesn't take this action.
It is Putin's choice to bring this situation back from the brink. It is our obligation, along with our European partners, to make Putin's choice crystal clear.
With that, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Heitkamp). The Senator from Oklahoma.
Mr. INHOFE. What is the general order?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time between now and 12:30 p.m. is equally divided, and the Republicans control 5 minutes.
Mr. INHOFE. I ask unanimous consent that I be recognized for 8 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Global Warming
Mr. INHOFE. Later this week we are going to have the EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy come to our Environment and Public Works Committee to testify about the greenhouse gas rule being developed for existing fleets of powerplants. We know what the rule is for the new powerplants; this is for the existing.
In light of that, it is important to point out that the Senate has been debating global warming for well over a decade, actually around 14 years. The first cap-and-trade bill the Senate debated was when Republicans were in the majority. I was chairman at that time of the Environment and Public Works Committee.
The first bill was the McCain-Lieberman bill which would have set CO2 limits on all utilities that emit at least 10,000 tons of greenhouse gases per year. That was defeated October 30, 2003, by a vote of 43 to 55. That was when I was all alone. Actually, everyone thought eventually something was going to pass and they were all afraid of the issue.
Now times have dramatically changed. Since that time we have had other bills come up. In 2005 we had the same bill by the same authors. It was defeated even at that time by a wider range.
Then in 2008 the Lieberman-Warner bill came up, and it failed also. That was actually when the Republicans had lost the majority. So even with the Democrats as the majority, they were not able to get it through.
Most recently, we debated the Waxman and Markey bill of 2009 which said emissions to facilities over 25,000 tons a year. That bill passed the House, but it was never brought to the Senate for a vote because they knew it would fail.
Each of these bills had one thing in common: Their cost was enormous. We found out--and there was testimony quite some time ago--that if we were to pass cap-and-trade, the cost would be in the area of $300 billion to $400 billion a year.
I do calculations every time I hear a large number and I go back. In my State of Oklahoma, I calculate the number of families who actually file Federal tax returns and do the math. That would cost each family in Oklahoma about $3,000 a year. We know it doesn't make any difference, because the testimony of the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, the EPA, Lisa Jackson, who was appointed by President Obama, said in response to my question on the public record that even if we were to pass something it would not have the effect of reducing CO2 emissions worldwide, because this isn't where the problem is. The problem is in China and other places.
Since this time--and it is not me saying this--Nature magazine, The Economist, and even the IPCC--the IPCC is the United Nations; they are the ones who started this--they admit for the past 15 years there has been no increase in global temperatures. Meanwhile, the CO2 emissions have increased a lot. So obviously it is not warming and that is going back into a normal cycle.
Unfortunately, this hasn't deterred the President from making global warming a key part of domestic policy. What he could not have accomplished through legislation he is now doing through regulations at the EPA, but the American people don't want anything to do with this.
I can remember when the polls were something like the No. 1 or No. 2 issue. The last Gallup poll, this past week, had it as No. 14 out of 15 issues. The Pew Research Center--53 percent of Americans, when asked about the cause of global warming, said they don't believe there is enough evidence to blame human anthropogenic gases or to believe that it is caused by natural variation.
This problem explains why it is difficult for Tom Steyer. On the floor I showed his picture and read the comments he had made. He is raising $100 million to put into campaigns. He has already put up $50 million and has been unable to raise anything close to the next $50 million. So people are not rallying to pour money into this lost cause.
The international community is starting to give up too. I was with the Secretary of Defense of Australia last night, and he was one of them who was very strongly in opposition to the cap-and-trade they adopted in Australia and they have now, as of 1 month ago, repealed it. If you look at other countries, and not only Australia but others that were believing this at one time, are dropping off. So the Australian people should thank the Prime Minister.
It is my hope we will be able to protect the American people from the senseless global warming policies in the United States.
Tomorrow we are going to have a committee hearing, and the momentum has actually gone from the other side.
I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. THUNE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
THE ECONOMY
Mr. THUNE. Madam President, here we are--another day in the Senate--
facing another political gimmick. That is the way things seem to work in the Democratic Senate, and that is what is happening again this week.
Yesterday Democrats introduced their latest designed-to-fail bill, the Bring Jobs Home Act. It is a bill they know is not going to pass. The reason I say the bill is designed to fail is because it has already failed. It has been voted on here before in the previous Congress, but that is not stopping the Democrats.
The Bring Jobs Home Act would supposedly encourage American companies to bring jobs back home to the United States and to discourage companies from sending jobs overseas. But the bill completely ignores the real problem and the reason American companies are sending jobs overseas: America's broken Tax Code and our sky-high tax rate on business. America has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the developed world and many companies simply can't afford to pay it and stay profitable.
If Democrats were truly serious about solving the problem of American jobs going overseas, they would be sitting down with Republicans to hammer out reform of our Tax Code. We should be substantially lowering overall tax rates to allow American businesses to keep jobs here at home while remaining competitive in the global marketplace. Instead of serious reform, however, Democrats have chosen to take up a bill that would do nothing to address the real problem we are dealing with. Democrats are not bringing up this bill in the hopes of actually fixing problems. They are bringing it up in hopes of winning a few votes in the November election. This is not a secret.
When Democrats first brought this bill up 2 years ago ahead of the 2012 election, Reuters described it as an example of Members of Congress ``offering up measures they know will not pass but can be used to fire up their respective supporters in the run-up to November's elections.'' That was from 2 years ago, the last time this was brought up. That has been the Democrats' preferred method of operating in the Senate.
Back in March the New York Times reported that Democrats planned to spend the spring and summer on messaging votes ``timed to coincide with campaign-style trips by President Obama.'' Again, that is from the New York Times earlier this year.
The ``Democrats concede,'' the Times continued, ``that making new laws is not really the point.'' ``Rather, they are trying to force Republicans to vote against them.'' That is also a quote which was in the New York Times story a few months ago. Making new laws is not really the point. What we are talking about here is not fixing problems; it is just creating political opportunities.
So 5\1/2\ years of Democratic policies have left American families hurting. Unemployment, which the President's advisers predicted would fall below 6 percent in 2012, is still above 6 percent 2 years later. Almost 10 million Americans are unemployed, and 3.1 million have been unemployed for 6 months or longer. Those numbers would be even worse if so many Americans had not given up on finding work and dropped out of the labor force all together.
Our current labor force participation rate is at lows we have not seen since the 1970s during the Presidency of Jimmy Carter. In fact, if the labor participation rate were today what it was when the President took office, the unemployment rate would not be a little over 6 percent, it would be 10.2 percent. That is how many people have entirely quit looking for work.
Household income has plummeted by more than $3,300 on the President's watch. At the same time, prices have risen. Food prices have increased. The price of gas has nearly doubled, college costs continue to soar, and family health insurance premiums have skyrocketed by almost $3,000, despite the President's promise they would fall. And what do you get when you combine high prices, fewer opportunities for employment and advancement and reduced income? You get a lot of struggling middle-
class families.
Instead of spending this year taking up serious legislation to help those families, Democrats--by their own admission--have spent this year on political show votes they hope will win them a few votes in the November election.
Last week the Congressional Budget Office issued its yearly long-term budget outlet. The news on that front was grim. The Congressional Budget Office recorded that as early as 2039, under its baseline scenario, the Nation could see public debt reach 106 percent of GDP, which would be a level of debt seen only once before in our Nation's history.
By 2039, under an alternative fiscal scenario, the debt-to-GDP ratio could rise to more than 180 percent of GDP. By comparison, Greece's current debt-to-GDP ratio is 175 percent. In other words, our economy could go the way of Greece's in just a few short years if nothing is done.
We have to take up significant budget reform and reduce the size of government. We need to look for ways we can make government work more effectively and more efficiently by reforming programs that need to be reformed. Chipping away around the edges is not going to get the job done. It is not going to cut it.
Even before the President came into office, our national debt presented a serious and pressing problem. But over the last 5\1/2\ years of the current administration, the problem has gotten exponentially worse. If you look at our total debt--which includes the public and intergovernmental debt--when President Obama came into office, our national debt was $10.6 trillion. Today, just 5\1/2\ years later, our national total debt stands at $17.6 trillion. That is a 66-
percent increase on the President's watch. That is horrifying. Yet President Obama and his party continue to act as if our country is not hurdling toward a fiscal crisis.
Among the President's many fiscally irresponsible policies, ObamaCare stands out as one of the worst offenders. Former Congressional Budget Office Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin has estimated that the President's health care law will increase the deficit by hundreds of billions of dollars in its first 10 years alone and by more than $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years.
Politico reports that the Congressional Budget Office attributes the coming growth of the debt to--among other things--``rising health care costs'' and ``the expansion of subsidies offered through ObamaCare.'' So much for the President's claim that the health care law would be
``the largest deficit reduction plan in over a decade.'' But that is par for the course for the Affordable Care Act.
The President also promised that the law would reduce Americans' health insurance premiums by $2,500. Instead, as I mentioned, they have already risen by almost $3,000, and they are still going up.
I have a few headlines from this past week that I will read into the Record. Yesterday's Kaiser Health News reported: ``Florida's Biggest Health Insurer Signals Rate Hikes Ahead.''
The Nebraska Radio Network had an expert who said: ``Nebraskans' premiums may bounce 30 percent under ObamaCare.''
Last Wednesday, the Nashville Business Journal reported, ``Here come higher premiums: Tennessee's insurance providers request rate increases.''
Last Tuesday, the Associated Press reported: ``Delawareans Could Face Higher Rates Under ACA.''
The New Orleans Times-Picayune reported: ``Some insurance carriers looking for double-digit increases for Affordable Care Act policies.''
Those are just a few of the most recent headlines from newspapers around this country last week. I could go on about the health care law's broken promises. I could also talk about the fact that the President promised that Americans would be able to keep their doctors and hospitals, but Americans are now finding the new health plans exclude doctors and hospitals they have literally been using for years or the fact that the health care bill was supposed to give more Americans access to health care but that many Americans are struggling to find doctors who will take their ObamaCare insurance.
One doctor reporting on her patient's experience with the ObamaCare plan said: ``We are running into problems with coverage in the same way we were when they were uninsured.'' Let me repeat that. This is from a doctor talking about one of her patient's experiences with the ObamaCare plan: ``We are running into problems with coverage in the same way we were when they were uninsured.'' If that doesn't sum up the law's failure, I don't know what does.
Then there was the President's promise that shopping for health care on the exchange would be like buying a TV on Amazon or a plane ticket on Kayak. As Americans quickly found out or are still finding out almost 10 months later, shopping on the exchanges is a lot more like the world's most nightmarish experience with the DMV.
ObamaCare is failing Americans, and so is the Obama economy. Instead of focusing on making things better, Democrats are focused on trying to get reelected in November.
Republicans have solutions to the challenges facing the American people--solutions such as approving the Keystone Pipeline and the tens of thousands of jobs it would support; repealing the ObamaCare 30-hour workweek provision, which is slashing employees' hours and wages; stopping the job-killing national energy tax which will eliminate hundreds of thousands of jobs and drive up Americans' energy bills; enacting trade promotion authority to open new markets to American farmers, workers, and businesses; repealing the medical device tax which is costing American jobs and increasing the cost of health care; and passing real health care reform--the kind that will lower costs, increase choice, and put Americans back in charge of their health care. If Democrats were serious about helping American families, they would be working with us on these priorities instead of tying up the Senate with partisan legislation, and they would be taking up the 40 House-
passed jobs bills currently gathering dust on the majority leader's desk.
Every day the Senate spends on designed-to-fail bills, designed-to-
fail legislation--bills we know aren't going anywhere--is a day the Senate is not spending on bills to provide real relief to the American people.
It is high time for Democrats to stop wasting time on partisan legislation and start working with Republicans on real reform. Middle-
class, middle-income families around this country have been squeezed for long enough. The American people have been waiting long enough. There are 40 House-passed jobs bills waiting for action here in the Senate. Instead, we are spending week after week of the Senate's time voting on bills designed to fail and designed to do nothing more than score political points heading into an election. That is wrong on so many levels. Most of all, it is wrong for the American people, and it has to change.
I yield the floor.
____________________
Alerts Sign-up