mr. heller: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from nevada. mr. heller: mr. president, i rise today to reiterate my strong opposition to the house of representatives' effort to restart licensing activities at yucca mountain and in particular the nuclear waste policy amendment act, which passed the house just a few hours ago. this bill, which is a complete and total waste of taxpayers' dollars, is dead on arrival in the united states senate. not only will i place a hold on the bill now that has passed the house, i will also object to the motion to proceed to the bill. and this vote today proves my point -- that i am the only

person in washington, d.c., standing between a pristine, beautiful nevada or a nevada dripping with nuclear waste. just as i've said? the past, i'll continue -- just as i've said in the past, i'll continue to serve sasse a roadblock to make -- serve as a roadblock to make nevada a dump. despite the house's repeated attempts to revive the failed project, i have been able to ensure that not a single dollar has been appropriated to restart licensing activities at yucca mountain. this vote is nothing but a failed exercise because as long as as i'm in the senate, yucca mountain is dead. it's as simple as that. as i've previously said to you, mr. president, under my watch, i will not let one more hard-earned taxpayer dollar go towards the failed yucca mountain project p. my state fails to serve as our nation's nuclear west dump. that's why i'm proud to say that because of my leadership, the

senate has repeatedly refused to pass a law funding the high-level nuclear waste repository, a position that has most recently been confirmed in the most -- was confirmed in the most recent omnibus spending measure. because of my current work as nevada's senior senator and my bipartisan work with the former senate majority leader, yucca mountain remains dead -- and i repeat, it's as simple as that. but despite yucca's clear and unquestionable death long ago, some of our friends on the other side of the capitol continue to waste their time attempting to bring back life to this ill-conceived and fiscally irresponsible plan. their efforts keep alive a long-standing fight over states' rights, and distracts us from the real task at hand which is finding a viable, long-term nuclear west storage solution that meets the needs of all americans. i'll be the first person to recognize the important role nuclear power plays in a stable

and secure all-the-above energy strategy and with nuclear energy comes the need to properly store spent nuclear fuel. but i firmly believe that our nation cannot progress towards achieving viable and sustainable storage solutions for spent nuclear fuel and defense high-level waste without further abandoning yucca mountain. i'm not saying that we shouldn't come to the table to discuss our nation's nuclear waste storage needs. we should. and i would. but i also believe the states should have a say in the matter. that's why in my opinion, consent presents the only viable way forward. it is a way of addressing our nation's high-level waste problem while at the same time respecting the sovereignty of states to object to becoming nuclear waste dumps. the yucca mountain proposal, however, represents the exact opposite of consent. it is a unilaterally imposed

federal mandate that goes against the will of the people that it directly affects. you've heard me, mr. president, raise this question many times and many nevadans are thinking this. why should a state without a single nuclear power plant of its own be forced against its will to house all of our nuclear -- nation's nuclear waste? let me repeat that. why should a state without a single nuclear power plant of its own be forced against its will to house all of our nation's nuclear waste? this is a question that has never been answered. not from your seat, mr. president. not from the speaker of the house, nor from the author of this bill. and i think if you want an intellectually honest answer, it should be that it shouldn't -- it shouldn't have to. beyond the violations of state sovereignty and the disregard of the will of the local population, yucca mountain poses safety risks and potentially

catastrophic financial risks that must be addressed before and not after the proposal moves forward, should it move forward at all. so, yes, what are these risks? well, for one, yucca mountain is located just 90 miles from the world's most premier tourist and convention entertainment destination, las vegas. last year las vegas welcomed nearly 43 million visitors. over the past decade, the greater las vegas area has been one of the fastest-growing in the u.s. with a population that now exceeds 2.1 million people, according to the latest u.s. census bureau numbers. any issues with the transportation of nuclear waste to that site or issues with storage there would bring devastating consequences to the las vegas, nevada, and national economies. issues that would inevitably result from shifting -- shipping 9,500 rail casts in 2,800 trains

and 2,850 tax reduction hauling one cask each to yucca mountain over the next 50 years. these shipments would use 22,000 miles of railways, 7,000 miles of highways, and cross over 44 states. to date, however, nevadans have not received sufficient assurance from the department of energy or the nuclear regulatory commission that their concerns will receive the procedural due process, thoughtful consideration they are owed under existing law. in fact, in my recent correspondence with the nuclear regulatory commission, i continued to stress to the commission the importance of procedural safeguards like local hearings and local adjudication to ensure parties directly affected by the proposal have the opportunity to air their concerns and have them considered in an open and reasonably close forum.

it's because of these and other unresolved concerns that i continue to stand with the state of nevada in its strong opposition to restarting licensing activities at the yucca mountain repository. rather than forcing the state of nevada to accept nuclear waste as a scientificically unsound site, taxpayers would be better off to spend -- identifying their time viable alternatives for the long-term storage of nuclear waste in areas that are willing to house it. finding alternatives in this commonsense path forward as well as the fiscally responsible decision. now, the federal government should not waste another taxpayer dollar on yucca mountain. waste also amounts to $15 billion. an additional $82 billion would be needed to license, construct, and operate yucca mountain through closure, bringing the total system life cycle costs

for the project around $100 billion, an amount that would be probably 15% to 20% higher in today's dollars. so it's clear -- it's clear, mr. president, instead of throwing more taxpayer dollars at a failed proposal, which is exactly what the house of representatives nuclear waste policy amendment does, we should be working on a real long-term solution rooted in consent-based siting. so, with that, mr. president, i urge my colleagues, as we continue the budget and appropriation process for the 2019 fiscal year, to focus on further implementation of the department of energy's consent-based siting process. and i stand ready to partner with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle on this issue and am confident that together we can find a solution to this problem once and for all. c-span, theend on

national rifle association leadership forum in dallas. speakers include ted cruz and richard hudson. 6:30, starbucks chair howard schultz on the responsibility of global companies. eastern,night at 9:00 former secretary of state condoleezza rice on the future of american diplomacy. on american history tv on c-span3 on the presidency, hillary clinton and linda ross johnson talk about the white house years of first lady betty ford. eastern, the2:00 supreme court case hustler magazine versus falwell.

watch this weekend on the c-span networks. >> c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979 c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies. continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events in washington dc and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. >> our guest on this week's newsmakers is mark meadows. he discusses the robert mueller investigation.

>> can you start out by explaining broadly what is your issue with the way the doj has conducted itself? and where do those issues stand at this moment? >> i think probably the issue to answer your question correctly is that we get more rhetoric and beget action. for us it is all about getting the documents and making sure we get the documents that we have a constitutional right

to have. we have been requesting many of these documents since last november. so here we are six or seven and a into the process little over 12,000 documents have been delivered to our office out of 1.2 million. at this rate we will be well into president trump's second term before we get the majority of the documents. the investigations into the hillary scandal, the investigations they were doing at that time with candidate trump.

that there is at least some bias that was going on. some improper activity going on. thoseonewalling of documents coming into congress highlights even further the fact that there is something to hide. it has been reported a number of times that information starts to troublesin trips and dribbles.d the department knew all along that mr. comey's professor friend was a government employee.

the department knew all along that comey shared his classified memos with people other than that particular friend. digging in finding out new information that has not been voluntarily given to congress, that makes us dig deeper. i support chairman nunez's , somes to get information of which i am not privy to because i'm not on the intel committee. i do not need to see it. it is his committee. is that there is nothing in statute that would suggest that the actions the department of justice is taking are appropriate. so, and you make it a counter narrative.

let's make a little news here on the newsmakers. that i am really ready to come back and suggest that me and john rosenstein said together. i am so sure of the evidence we , and the manner in which we have gone about this, that there is no good excuse for the department of justice to continue the delay. >> you have spoken directly to theyttorney general and have concerns about an intelligent source of theirs that could be compromised. has that objection been presented to you and what is your response to it? i have not spoken to the

deputy attorney general on that particular manner. but that is a common recurring theme. these are it is national security secrets emanate to protect our assets. you know what? they are right. that is exactly the reason we have an intel committee. it is the whole reason why we set that committee up, so they could see those types of documents. we have given that authority to some of our colleagues. reason for possible the doj to not share it with the intel committee. newsmakers, with congressman mark meadows, errors this sunday here on c-span. it is also available to stream out on c-span.org. human services

secretary alex cesar discusses the 2019 at a subcommittee hearing. he took questions about efforts to reduce opioid addiction, prescription drug costs, and access to care for rural patients. this a two-hour hearing. >> the appropriations subcommittee on labor health and human services education and related agencies will come to order. i'm certainly pleased secretary azar to have you here this morning and i'm sure we will have a number of questions about your budget. i preface that by saying that we understand the final congressional action and administrator of -- administration action on fy18 occurred after you were asked to submit your budget. still, they are things we need to talk about. the actual budget i think