multiple countries on the way, never requested asylum because they wanted to come to america which i don't blame them. it's the greatest country in the world. but that's not what asylum is. asylum means i have fear in my entire country. there is no safe place in my country so i fled to the next safe place. that's what the international definition of asylum is. mr. tillis: i thank senator lankford through the chair. madam president, i want to spend a few minutes on this subject as well. this is -- we're reaching a milestone that i think is critically important. since president biden has entered office, the number of encounters at the border, eight million, eight million since president biden entered office, that population exceeds the population of 30 u.s. states, the population of 30 individual u.s. states. that's the number we're talking about here. and, ladies and gentlemen, a lot of them are the people that we just described.

of course the united states wants to be a haven for people who are suffering or fearing for their life, suffering from oppression. but the goal of asylum is to get them immediately out of that dangerous situation, not to suddenly decide that i want to go through two or three or four other jurisdictions because what i ultimately want to do is get to the united states. they are demeaning and devaluing the concept of asylum. and the problem is they're getting, those who want to come here, and we should take it as a compliment that they want to come to the united states, but they're elbowing out and sapping the capacity for the united states to make absolutely certain that people who have a legitimate case for asylum are even being heard. i wonder about how many thousands of people who desperately need to get to the united states, their only option, are not getting there because we're focused on this population. ladies and gentlemen, we've got to do something. this is dangerous.

you know, for a time, conservatives were really in the wilderness, being viewed as inhuman, insensitive, saying we have to have an orderly border process. i've been saying that. i've also been somebody who thinks we should probably legally immigrate another 250,000, half million more than we do already. we immigrate about a million. the other problem we have that's inherently unfair, i already talked about people who legitimately should be given asylum, probably not, because we don't know who they are. we're dealing with a flood of 300,000 in the month of december al alone. of course, there's going to be collateral damage in the form of people who want asylum. now the american people are waking up to it. there was a time when it was purely a shirts and skins, blue jersey democrat, red jersey republican argument. not the case anymore. the american people expect this administration to do something.

i'm glad. i'm also glad we have james lankford at the tip of this spear, negotiating on behalf of republicans. he's negotiated, i'm part of the working group, i've seen progress, he's negotiated something that i think is important. we cannot miss this opportunity. the stakes are too high. and the american people agree. nearly half of those who responded to this poll, which was an even distribution ideologically speaking, nearly half think we have an emergency at the border. they're right. i've been there several times. they are right. people are dying. cartels are making nearly a billion dollars a year charging tolls to come across the border. if you try to cross the border without an armband or recognition that you've paid a cartel, you are likely going to die, or you're going to get one more chance before you get beaten up. that happens every day at the border, ladies and gentlemen. i'm not exaggerating. i've been there, i've seen it, i've heard the stories. fortunately now we have a

majority of americans that expect this administration to come to the table and negotiate in good faith with conservatives and people like me who have negotiated several bipartisan deals to solve this problem. if any democrats are concerned with how far the negotiations are going, i don't think they need to. this is not a political loser for people who are concerned with voting on a bipartisan compromise. in fact, it's politically smart. at the end of the day, i hope political advisors and everybody up for election next year know, you know what, you don't even need political courage to do the right thing here, because the good policy of border security is also good politics for the overwhelming majority of people that need to vote for this bill. we're going to have 30, 40 people -- not 30 or 40, i think probably 25 or 30 members in

this body that won't vote for it. some because it didn't go too far, the others it didn't go far enough, some because they're in cycle, it's very difficult to explain. i get that. we need about 70 votes out of this chamber to create the momentum to get it done in the house. i'm going to be one of those 7:00 votes. i also -- one of those 70 votes. i also want the american people to not only wake up to the reality that people are abusing our system, taking our attention from people we should desperately find a path to getting to the united states, and they're also jumping line. that's what i'll leave with you. how angry do you all get? i love going to a good sporting event or a good comedy show, you get there early sometimes, because you want a good seat, if it's general admission. how angry do you get if you're standing in line for hours, all of a sudden somebody jumps in front of you? well, imagine if you've been waiting years, more than a decade to legally follow the process to be one of those million people a year that gets

citizenship, when you see millions of them coming across the border every year, breaking line. these people working hard, obeying our laws, respecting it, doing it by the book, they're breaking line. it's actually elongating the time for them to get into this country. it's unfair at every level, and it's unsafe, and the only people who are loving the stalemate we have in this nation today are the cartels who are charging from $5,000 to $50,000 a person to get you across the border. not everybody has $5,000, though. you know what they do? they say you don't have to pay, but once you get across the border you're going to participate in criminal enterprises until we think your debt is done. that's not an exaggeration either. talk to law enforcement, talk to people in these communities. these cartels are like a cancer

metastasizing through illegally present communities, exploiting them, causing some people who may not have had a criminal record in the country of their origin to become criminals here. there are a million different reasons why we need to get this border compromise done, and madam president, i hope this congress is the congress where people set aside politics, do the right thing, make this country safer and show respect for people trying to come to this country legally, by making sure that their place in line is reserved. thank you, madam president. mr. kennedy: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from louisiana. mr. kennedy: two points, madam president. number one, imagine that if you're a typical louisiana middle-class family, a mom making, let's say, $40,000 a year, dad's making $40,000 a

year, you got two children, you got a house note, you've got a car note, probably two car notes, because both mom and dad have to get to work, you've got to pay for health insurance, you've got to eat, you're trying to save a little bit for retirement, and you try to save for your children's college education. but basically, you're living on $80,000 a year for a family of four. and all of a sudden prices start rising, as they have. since president biden has been president, we've experienced 17% inflation. that's how much prices have gone up on average. what does that mean? we cite that number a lot.

by the way, i know prices, inflation is coming down, and that's a great, good thing, and i'm glad, i hope it stays down, but all that means is that prices are rising less quickly. it doesn't mean prices are dro dropping. these high prices caused by the president's inflation are going to be permanent. they are. i wish i didn't have to report that. and as a result of bidenomics and inflation, in my state the average family making $80,000 a year is going to have to pay an extra $800 a month because of inflation. that's an extra $10,000 a year. see, on a fixed income of $80,000 and you have got to find an extra $10,000, that's happening right now to millions of louisianans and millions of

americans. what are you going to do? well, the first thing you're going to do is ask for a pay raise from your employer, and some of our employers have granted pay raises. i thank them for that. but it's not how much of a pay raise you've been given that's relevant. what's relevant is how much of a pay raise you've been given vis-a-vis the inflation rate. so that's why when we look at wages, we talk about real wages. that's the amount wages have gone up after, after accounting for inflation. well, here's what they look like. since president biden has been president, this chart represents wages after inflation. we started up here. we're down here.

they've been a little bit better lately. so, most americans who have gotten a pay raise after inflation, it doesn't count. it just doesn't count. so, pay raise doesn't work. it's great to have, but inflation eats it up, and then some. well, okay, you still got -- that family still has to find $10,000. of what do you do? well, you're going to borrow the money. that's what's happening. credit card debt, buy now, pay later, other types of loans. don't just take my word for it. on the last numbers in the third quarter of this year, credit card spending was up 9% at chase bank. it was up 15% at wells-fargo.

it's not just putting more money on the card that's relevant. it's also paying down the amount on the card. so, people are not only borrowing more on that credit card, but they're not able to pay the amount on their credit card off as quickly as they were. unpaid loan balances have gone through the roof. 16% at chase bank, up 14% at wells-fargo, up 11% at citigroup. people are using credit cards. they're charging more and more, and they're paying less and less on those credit cards, and they're getting deeper and deeper into the hole. what else are people doing in my state and every other state? they're raiding their savings. if you look at the numbers, personal deposits are down 3% year over year at chase bank. what does that mean? means people are raiding their

savings accounts to deal with this inflation. personal deposits are down 5% at citigroup. personal deposits are down 10% at wells-fargo and 31% in the wealth management division of wells-fargo. my point, madam president, is that these actions that are taking place in washington, d.c. have real-life consequences for average, everyday american families on fixed incomes. as a result of this inflation, which is coming down, but the high prices are permanent, people are having to borrow and people are having to raid their savings, and it is clearly a cancer on the american dream.

.2, madam president -- point number two, madam president, a months or so ago the congress passed a resolution. it passed here in the senate, for us overwhelmingly, 53-43, and we passed that resolution under the congressional review act. what cdid we do? well, the consumer financial protection bureau, we call it the cfpb, it's where common sense is illegal. common sense, i think -- i know, is illegal at the cfpb. cfpb comes up with these nuggets every week. if you ever want to understand why the american people hate the

federal government, just look at the output of the cfpb. i mean it. common sense is illegal there. one of their last nuggets, they put out a resolution, the title of it was called small business lending under the equal credit opportunity act, regulation b. the senate said no to this resolution. we said no, can't do it, 53-43, and the house followed it by saying no to the cfpb 221-202. i'm very proud of the senate. thank you, colleagues. i'm very proud of the house. unfortunately, president biden has vetoed it. if i didn't know better, i would think that the president is auditioning to become the president of an ivy league university. let me tell you what this

resolution will do, unless we override the president's veto. once again, you're a small businesswoman or small busin businessman. you need a loan. maybe you need a loan to grow your business. maybe you need a loan to sustain your business. you go to your community bank. you say i need to borrow some money. you submit your financials. the bank vote. and does accurate underwriting. before the bank can make a decision under this new cfpb rule, where common sense is legal, the small banker has got to turn to that applicant and say, look, i've got to ask you a bunch of questions. i don't want to, but the cfpb says i have to before i can

grant your loan. so please bear with me. now, the small business woman or small business man is sitting there. things have been going pretty well. that small business person is feeling warm and toasty thinking that i will be able to keep my business going and my people employed but it sounds like there's a hitch here because my banker is being very apologetic. i can tell he's upset about this. the banker says, let's get going. i have to ask you 81 questions. and the banker from the -- with the small business starts with this -- first question, are you female? next, are you mail? -- male? are you black?

are you white? are you mixed race? are you another race? are you hispanic? are you a homosexual? are you a lesbian? are you a gay? are you gay? now, remember this is probably a small town in a community bank with a small business woman and a small business man applying for a loan, and the cfpb, our federal government is telling this small banker, you've got to ask these questions. the questions continue. that small banker looks the small business woman in the eye and says, are you bisexual? are you transgender? are you queer? are you intersex? and on and on.

now, that small business woman, it could be a small business man, is going to have a couple of reactions. first, she's going to be thinking, what in god's name has happened to my country? what in god's name has happened to the federal government? and the second thing -- emotion she's probably going to feel is anger. what business is it of the c cfpb -- what business does the cfpb have in knowing what i do in my bedroom? it is none of its business. but the other emotion that small business woman is probably going to have is fear because she needs this loan. and if she looks that small banker in the eye and says, it is none of your business whether

i am gay or straight, it is none of your business what i do in the privacy of my bedroom with a consenting adult. it is none of government's business. that small business woman is going to think, if i do that, he could deny my loan. it's not the fault of the small banker, it's the fault of us in washington, d.c. it's the fault of joe biden because he has vetoed this resolution. he is saying to the world, it's okay for small banks in america to be required -- be required to turn to a small business woman applying for a loan and say, are you a lesbian? are you gay? are you bisexual? are you transgender? and after they answer or don't answer, all of that information

is sent to a federal agency, the cfpb, which has a data breach about every other thursday. this is insanity. and today in about ten minutes, i am going to ask this body to override president biden's veto. if you believe in fairness, if you believe in privacy, if you believe in the freedom of the american people, if you have taken your meds today, if you have any semblance of common sense left, you will see that this -- this proposal by president biden is like a rock only dumber. and i can't think of a better

example why the american people have come to hate the federal gove government. and i can't think of a better example to explain to people why president biden's poll numbers are on a journey to the center of the earth. it's stuff like this. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor.

a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. cardin: i ask consent that the vote at 2:30 start immediately. the presiding officer: without objection. the question occurs on the crews nomination. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote: the clerk: ms. baldwin. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mrs. blackburn. mr. blumenthal. mr. booker. mr. boozman. mr. braun. mrs. britt.

mr. brown. mr. budd. ms. butler. ms. cantwell. mrs. capito. mr. cardin. mr. carper. mr. casey. mr. cassidy. ms. collins. mr. coons. mr. cornyn.

ms. cortez masto. mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo. mr. cruz. mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst. mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty. ms. hassan.

mr. hawley. mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. mr. hoeven. mrs. hyde-smith. mr. johnson. mr. kaine. mr. kelly.

mr. kennedy. mr. king. ms. klobuchar. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan. ms. lummis. mr. manchin. mr. markey. mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. menendez.

mr. merkley. mr. moran. mr. mullin. ms. murkowski. mr. murphy. mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. mr. ricketts. mr. risch. mr. romney. ms. rosen. mr. rounds.

mr. rubio. mr. sanders. mr. schatz. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer. mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen. ms. sinema. ms. smith. ms. stabenow. mr. sullivan.

mr. tester. mr. thune. mr. tillis. mr. tuberville. mr. van hollen. mr. vance. mr. warner. mr. warnock. ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden.

mr. young.

the clerk: senators voting in the affirmative -- bennet, butler, cardin, casey, collins, durbin, gillibrand, heinrich, king, markey, murray, ossoff, peters, reed, rosen, shaheen, stabenow, tester,

warner, and warnock. senators voting in the negative -- boozman. cornyn, cotton, cramer, graham, kennedy, lummis, paul, rounds, rubio, and sullivan.

the clerk: ms. murkowski, aye. the clerk: mr. fetterman, aye. mr. kelly, aye.

the clerk: mr. johnson, no.

mr. grassley, no. mr. carper, aye.

the clerk: mr. moran, no.

the clerk: mr. daines, no.

the clerk: mr. whitehouse, aye. mr. van hollen, aye.

the clerk: mr. risch, no.

the clerk: mr. kaine, aye. the clerk: mr. tuberville, no.

the clerk: mr. murphy, aye. mrs. capito, no.

the clerk: mrs. britt, no.

the clerk: mr. young, no. the clerk: mr. lujan, aye.

the clerk: ms. baldwin, aye. mr. welch, aye.

the clerk: mr. crapo, no. the clerk: mr. marshall, no.

mr. wyden, aye. mr. cassidy, no.

the clerk: mr. lee, no.

the clerk: mr. schatz, aye. mr. hoeven, no.

the clerk: mr. brown, aye.

the clerk: ms. hirono, aye.

ms. sinema, no. mr. lankford, no. mr. tillis, no. mr. sanders, aye.

plaintiff cruz, no. -- mr. cruz, no. mrs. hyde-smith, no. ms. hassan, ayly

vote: the clerk: mr. braun, no.

the clerk: mr. scott of florida, no.

the clerk: ms. ernst, no.

the clerk: mr. merkley, aye.

the clerk: mr. scott of south carolina, no. mr. hickenlooper, aye.

the clerk: mr. mullin, no. the clerk: mr. blumenthal, aye. mr. thune, no.

the clerk: ms. warren, aye.

the clerk: mr. hagerty, no. the clerk: ms. cortez masto, aye. mrs. fischer, no.

the clerk: mr. wicker, no. mr. barrasso, no.

the clerk: ms. duckworth, aye.

the clerk: ms. smith, aye. ms. klobuchar, aye. mr. schmitt, no.

the clerk: mr. booker, aye.

vote:

the clerk: mr. mcconnell, no. the clerk: mrs. blackburn, no.

the clerk: mr. ricketts, no.

the clerk: mr. budd, no. mr. vance, no.

the clerk: mr. manchin, aye.

the clerk: mr. romney, no.

the clerk: mr. schumer, aye.

the clerk: mr. coons, aye.

mr. menendez, aye.

the clerk: mr. padilla, aye.

the clerk: mr. hawley, no.

the presiding officer: have all senators voted? does any senator wish to change his or her vote? if not, the ayes are 51, the nays are 48 and the nominee is compelled. mr. schumer: -- is -- the presiding officer: is confirmed. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be considered mained and laid -- made and laid upon the table and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: thank you, madam president. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate will resume legislative session and proceed to the consideration of the veto message with respect to s.j. res. 32, which the clerk will report. the clerk: fiftyo message to accompany -- veto message to accompany s.j. res. 32 providing for congressional disapproval under chandar -- chapter 8, title 5, relating to small business lending understand the

equal credit opportunity act, read lation b -- regulation b. the presiding officer: the question is, shall the joint resolution pass, the objections of the president of the united states to the contrary notwithstanding. the yeas and nays are required under the constitution, and the clerk will call the roll. vote: vote: the clerk: ms. baldwin. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mrs. blackburn. mr. blumenthal. mr. booker. mr. boozman.

mr. braun. mrs. britt. mr. brown. mr. budd. ms. butler. ms. cantwell. mrs. capito. mr. cardin. mr. carper. mr. casey. mr. cassidy. ms. collins. mr. coons. mr. cornyn.

ms. cortez masto. mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo. mr. cruz. mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst. mr. fetterman.

mrs. fischer. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty. ms. hassan. mr. hawley. mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. mr. hoeven. mrs. hyde-smith. mr. johnson. mr. kaine.

mr. kelly. mr. kennedy. mr. king. ms. klobuchar. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan. ms. lummis. mr. manchin. mr. markey. mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. menendez. mr. merkley. mr. moran. mr. mullin. ms. murkowski. mr. murphy.

mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. mr. ricketts. mr. risch. mr. romney. ms. rosen. mr. rounds. mr. rubio. mr. sanders. mr. schatz. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer. mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen. ms. sinema. ms. smith. ms. stabenow.

mr. sullivan. mr. tester. mr. thune. mr. tillis. mr. tuberville. mr. van hollen. mr. vance. mr. warner. mr. warnock. ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden. mr. young. senators voting in the affirmative -- barasso, blackburn, britt budd, capito, cassidy, cornyn, cotton, crapo, ernst, fischer, grassley, hyde-smith, johnson, kennedy,

lankford, lee, lummis, monomaniacal -- mcconnell ricketts, risch, rubio, scott of florida, scott of south carolina, sullivan, thune vance and wicker. senators voting in the negative -- baldwin, booker, casey, coons, durbin, lujan, menendez, merkley, murray, sanders, schatz and schumer ms. sinema, aye.

ms. warren, no. mr. schmitt, aye. mr. fetterman, no. mr. markey, no.

the clerk: mr. cramer, aye.

the clerk: mr. graham, aye. mr. tillis, aye.

the clerk: mr. brown, aye. mr. young, aye.

mr. brown, no. ms. hirono, no. the clerk: mr. daines, aye. ms. rosen, no.

the clerk: mr. heinrich, no. mr. murphy -- mr. van hollen, no. mr. reed, no. ms. cortez masto -- ms. klobuchar, no. mrs. shaheen, no.

mr. murphy, no. ms. cortez masto, no.

vote:

the clerk: mr. tester, aye.

the clerk: mr. paul, aye. the clerk: mr. cruz, aye.

the clerk: mr. welch, no. mr. whitehouse, no.

the clerk: mr. hoeven, aye.

the clerk: ms. stabenow, no. mr. hagerty, aye.

the clerk: ms. smith, no. the clerk: mr. kaine, no.

the clerk: mr. wyden, no.

the clerk: mr. carper, no.

the clerk: mr. blumenthal, no. ms. murkowski, aye. the clerk: ms. butler, no.

the clerk: mr. peters, no.

the clerk: ms. duckworth, no.

vote:

the clerk: mr. bennet, no.

the clerk: mr. hickenlooper, aye.

the clerk: mr. ossoff, no. the clerk: mr. padilla, no. ms. hassan, no.

the clerk: mr. warnock, no. mrs. gillibrand, no.

the clerk: mr. cardin, no.

the presiding officer: mr. king, aye. mr. moran, aye. mr. kelly, no.

the clerk: mr. warner, no.

the presiding officer: on this vote, the yeas are 54, the nays are 45. two-thirds of the senators voting, a quorum being presented, not having voted in the affirmative, the joint resolution on the reconsideration fails to pass over the veto of the president of the united states. under the previous order, the senate will resume executive session to resume consideration of the following nomination, which the clerk will report. the clerk: erika l. mcen mcen

-- to be laborer of -- to be commissioner of labor statistics.

test:

the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. sanders: madam president, i would like to say a few words on the resolution i've introduced under section 502b of the foreign assistance act which i intend to bring to the floor next week. this resolution is privileged. we will have a floor debate on it, and there will be a vote. there is some confusion i think regarding what this amendment, this resolution does, and i want to say a few words about that. very sensibly, the foreign assistance act requires that when the united states provides security assistance or arms to

any country in the world, that assistance must be used in line with internationally recognized human rights. that act prohibits assistance to any government that engages in a consistent pattern of violation of human rights. that is the law of the united states of america. this act also provides congress with several oversight tools to make sure that this law is in fact followed. and one of these tools sf section -- tools is section 5023-c which allows congress to direct the state department to provide a report on any country receiving u.s. security assistance and that government's observance or lack of observance of international human rights. that's what the law is about. and that is in fact exactly what

this resolution does. in line with the existing law, it directs the state department to provide any credible information it may have on potential violations of internationally recognized human rights by israel in its military campaign in gaza. it focuses in particular on the denial of the right to life, a human right in trying in u.s. and international law caused by indiscriminate or disproportionate -- disproportionate military operation, as well as by the denial of basic humanitarian needs and access. it also asks for additional information on steps the united states has taken to limit civilian risk in this war, a certification that the leahy

laws are being fully applied and a summary of the arms and munitions provided to israel since october 7 when the war began. in essence, madam president, we will be voting on a very simple question. this is not a complicated que question. and the question is do you support as a member of the senate asking the state department mr. human rights violations may have occurred using united states equipment or assistance in this war. that's what the resolution does, nothing more, nothing less. this resolution is not prescriptive. it does not alter aid to israel in my way. it does not cut one penny of aid. it simply requests that the state department report on how

u.s. aid is being used. the state department has 30 days to provide a report responding to the request. to my mind, madam president, this is not a controversial resolution. every one of us should want to know whether our u.s. military aid is being used in violation of international law or not. whatever your view on the war may be, it's a simple question. and i hope we can get widespread support for the resolution. now, let me say a word why in my view this resolution is in fact necessary. it is no great secret that the united states has long been very supportive of israel providing billions of dollars of military aid year after year after year.

we also have provided a massive influx of arms and munitions since october 7, the date of hamas' disgusting terrorist attack against israel. the israeli military has made extensive use of these u.s. weapons in its campaign, including the widespread use of 2,000-pound bombs, 1,000-poundz bombs and 155 millimeter artillery. on december 1, "the wall street journal" reported that the u.s. has provided at least 15,000 bombs and 57,000 artillery shells to israel since october 7, including more than 5400 huge 2,000-pound bombs that can flatten entire neighborhoods. "the washington post" reported that in just six weeks after

october 7, israel dropped more than 22,000 american-supplied bombs on gaza. and cnn reported that 40% to 45% of the bombs used in gaza have been unguided or what is called dumb bombs. let me be very clear. this aggressive military campaign has led to massive disruption and widespread civilian harm. there is extensive evidence showing that this military campaign since october 7 in gaza has been far and away the most intensive bombing campaign of the 21st century. madam president, independent human rights monitors and the

press have extensively documented the use of u.s. arms in strikes leading to large numbers of civilian deaths and injuries. the israeli military campaign is not just something that concerns me or millions of americans. it is also something the entire -- the united nations general assembly and u.n. security council have voted repeated will i and overwhelmingly to try to secure humanitarian access to stop the bombardments and enact the humanitarian cease-fire. unfortunately our government has voted against or vetoed most of those efforts. madam president, we all know that hamas started this war with its brutal terrorist attack on

october 7, an attack which resulted in the deaths of 1200 innocent people, injuries or more. and the taking of over 200 hostages. in my view there is absolutely no question that israel has the right to defend itself and respond against the perpetrators of that horrific attack. but while it is clear that israel has the right to go to war against hamas in my view it does not have the right to go to war against the entire palestinian people, including many hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women, and children in gaza. israel has relied on widespread bombardment, including with massive explosive ordnances in densely urban areas.

this bombardment and severe humanitarian restrictions have led to a catastrophe that veteran aid workers say goes beyond anything they have ever seen before. and let me say a word -- let me be very clear about what the devastating humanitarian crisis in gaza looks like right now, today. up to now, some 23,000 palestinians have been killed. 70% of whom are women and children. let me repeat. some 23,000 palestinians -- remember, we're talking about a population of a little over two million people. some 23,000 palestinians have been killed, 70% of whom are women and children. more than 58,000 people have been wounded. 146 united nations workers have

been killed, more u.n. workers killed than in any previous war ever. madam president, in gaza -- and this again is just unspeakable. in gaza, 1.9 million people have been displaced by the bombing. they've been grown out of their homes -- thrown out of their homes, and that is more than 85% of the population. can you imagine a population of some 2.2 million people and 85% of those people have been forced out of their homes. and many of those people today are homeless and some 1.4 million of them are crowded into u.n. facilities which would never -- which were never ever intended to be housing the kinds of populations they're forced to house today.

and today, madam president, tens of thousands of palestinians are sleeping out in the cold as winter sets in. madam president, what is also quite unbelievable is that over 70% of the housing unites -- units in gaza have now been damaged or destroyed. let me repeat that. it is really quite unbelievable. you've got a war that's gone on for three months, only three months. 70% of the housing units in gaza have been damaged or destroyed. unbelievably, according to a study by professor robert pape of the university of chicago, what that statistic of 70% destruction in housing means is that what is going on in gaza

after three months of war has surpassed the destruction that took place in dresden during world war ii. and i think when any person in america who knows anything about history or anybody around the world thinks about the city of dresden, what comes to mind is the horrific bombardments that took place by u.s. and british air force and the destruction in the city. madam president, those attacks during world war ii took place over two years. the destruction in gaza after three months in terms of housing is worse than what took place took place in dresden over two years. now, madam president, let me say

a word about another horrific realty that is taking place in gaza. so above and beyond the death and destruction caused by bombs and the israeli military campaign, what we are now looking at is the realty that israel has made it extremely difficult fre very start -- from the very start of this war for food, water, medical supplies, fuel to get into gaza. this is no great secret. i think everybody knows it. and the result of that is that right now as we speak, starvation and hunger is a realty for the women, the children, the men in gaza. starvation. the united nations reports that more than 90% of the population

there faces, quote, acute food insecurity, end quote, and virtually everybody household is skipping meals many days. gaza is at risk of widespread famine in the coming weeks and months, hundreds and thousands of children go to sleep hungry every night and desperate gazans -- i think we have seen pictures of this -- are mobbing the few u.n. relief trucks that can reach beyond the border crossing. these are hungry people who see a truck full of food, and they are attacking that truck and eating the food as quickly as they can. madam president, gaza's health care system has collapsed with little electricity, water, medicine or fuel. only 11 of gaza's 36 hospitals are able to function at all, and those that remain open can

barely care for the patients who have come in to them. the lack of sanitation and the destruction of the infrastructure there is leading to disease and an overcrowded u.n. facilities, thousands of people must share a single shower and more than 220 people have got to share a toilet. and that is just a small piece of the horrible realty that is taking place in gaza right now. some people may say war is terrible, and this is war. and there's always collateral damage in war. but, madam president, this is not just another war. this is wholesale destruction in an almost unprecedented manner. and it is clear to me that the

netanyahu right-wing extremist government in israel is now waging this war in a deeply reckless and immoral way. nerd, we all know -- in other words, we all know that war is horrible and we've got to do a lot better than we are doing now trying to eliminate war on this planet and in every war there is always clat ral damage, but something more is going on here right now. madam president, i would mention to you that many senior figures in the netanyahu government have said things that only deepen the profound concern we should all feel about what's going on in gaza today. several of these government officials have talked openly about reestablishing israeli settlements in gaza. the current intelligence minister, among other senior officials, openly talks of permanently displacing

palestinians from gaza. the defense minister declared a, quote, total siege, end quote, at the start of the war. the heritage minister posted a picture of the devastation, saying gaza was, quote, more beautiful than ever. bombing and flattening everything. end of kwoechlt all that destruction makes gaza more beautiful than ever. another israeli lawmakers said, quote, the gaza strip should be flattened and/ed be one sentence for everyone there -- death. we have to wipe the gaza strip off the map. there are no innocents there, end quote. and i can go on and on with other terrible quotes from leading officials in the right-wing government of netanyahu. given all of this, given the scale of the destruction, the

unprecedented level of destruction, and the extensive use of u.s. arms in this campaign, including thousands of massive 2,000-pound bombs, congress must act to conduct real oversight. that is what the law is about. and that is why i hope that we're going to have widespread support for the 502-b resolution that i will be offering next week. madam president, the united states, whether we like it or not, is deeply complicit in what is going on in gaza right now. those are our weapons that are killing women and children in huge numbers, that are destroying homes in huge numbers, that are causing massive levels of injury, that are resulting in the hunger, the

lack of medical care that the people of gaza are now experiencing. madam president, i have supported israel for many years, and many of my colleagues have as well. and i don't think there's any debate in congress that israel has a right to live in peace and security, something that has not always been the case. they have been subjected time and again to horrific terrorist attacks. they have the right to live in peace and security. but i do not believe we are doing israel any favors by ignoring what their policies are doing right now. friends, madam president, have to be prepared to tell friends the truth. and if israel is a friend of ours, as it is, we have got to tell them the truth. and the truth is that all over

the world people are outraged by netanyahu's campaign and destruction against the palestinian people in gaza. madam president, the biden administration has urged israel to change its tactics and to be more targeted in its military operations and to protect civilians. we have heard the president say this over and over again. we've seen secretary blinken saying this over and over again. but the netanyahu government clearly has not listened, and they have continued their very destructive and, i suspect, war in violation of international law. their war in violation of international law. and in my view, that approach is simply unacceptable and not

something that we should be supportive of. and in my view, the united states must end our complicity in what is going on in gaza right now. madam president, what this resolution is about again is not cutting one nickel of aid to israel. that's not what this resolution does. you don't have to agree with me. you can disagree with me completely. all that this resolution does is ask for more information from the state department which allows us to determine whether or not israel is violating international law. this is information congress should have. and whatever your views on the war may be, this resolution

should be something that you can support. we are asking the state department for information. that's what we're doing. that's all this resolution does. if you believe that the campaign, military campaign in gaza from israel has been indiscriminate, as i do, then we have a responsibility to ask that question. if you believe that israel has done nothing wrong, that what they are doing is consistent with international law, which is what the israeli government says, then the information coming from the state department should buttress your belief. so, madam president, let me conclude by saying that we are not all likely to agree on the israeli-palestinian situation any time soon, and we will have more chances to debate these issues if and when we consider a foreign aid supplemental bill. but asking for more information

how american arms and security assistance is being used, particularly amid the level of death and destruction we are seeing in gaza right now, should not be controversial. in fact, it is exactly what our job is. and with that, madam president, i yield the floor.

supplemental. test.

this is my fourth trip to israel so i'm here the 95th day since the attacks occurred. we were affected by the attacks and the conflict that followed. time moves differently. i met with the families of hostages held in gaza and hostages that have been released. several of those families i've now met multiple times. for them every day, every hour, every minute they are separated from their loved ones is an attorney. time pills different for families in gaza as well. hundreds of thousands of them are experiencing food insecurity. a mother or father trying to find something to feed a hungry

child and the passage of another day without food is excruciating. time also feels different for israelis and palestinians whose innocent loved ones have been killed. for them, time often falls into before and after. after filled with the loss that most of us will never know and cannot fully imagine. those are just few examples of how heavy these 95 days have felt and continue to feel for the people most affected by this conflict. this immense human toll is one of the many reasons that we continue to stand with israel in ensuring that october 7 can never happen again. it's also why we are focused on

bringing the remaining hostages home and addressing the humanitarian crisis and strengthening protections of civilians in gaza and preventing the conflict from spreading. the reason we are working urgently to forge a path towards a lasting peace and security in this region. we believe this submission against israel the international court of justice distracts the world from all of these important efforts and moreover, the charge of genocide is meritless. it's particularly galling given that those who are attacking israel, hamas, hezbollah, the as well as they well as their support of iran continue to openly call for the annihilation of israel and the mass murder of jewish people. i came to israel after leak meeting with the leaders of turkey greece jordan qatar united emirates saudi arabia. all of those leaders are

committed to using their influence in the time that they have the tube prevent it from escalating to deter new fronts from opening. in addition well expressed great concern about the value of the humanitarian situation and the number of civilians killed in gaza. we know that facing an enemy that embeds itself among civilians who hides and inspires from schools and hospitals makes this incredibly challenging. the daily toll on civilians in gaza particularly on children is far too high. important progress has been made with eight getting into gaza including by opening -- nonetheless 90% of government population continues to face acute food insecurity according to the united nations. children the effects of long periods without sufficient food

can have lifelong consequences. as i underscored in our meetings today more food, more water, more medicine and other essentials need to get into gaza and once they are in gaza they need to get more effectively to the people who need them. israelis are doing everything they can to remove any obstacles from crossings to other parts of gaza including deconfliction procedures to ensure that the aid can move safely and securely which is a critical part of that. the united nations plays an indispensable role in addressing a man's humanitarian needs in gaza. there is simply no alternative. u.n. personnel and other aid workers in gaza are demonstrating extraordinary charge by continuing to provide lifesaving services and what are extremely challenging conditions but i spoke last night with the un's senior humanitarian reconstruction coordinator for gaza about all of these efforts

underway. someone i work closely with two years ago who led the u.n. mission that destroyed the assad regime chemical weapons in syria so i can say from experience she has what it takes to get this job done. she has america's full support and she must have israel's as well. today we discussed the transition of israel's move -- military campaign in gaza and how israel can achieve its essential goal of ensuring october 7 can never be repeated and they believe israel has achieved significant progress towards this objective. the campaign moves to a lower intensity phase in gaza and the idea of scaling down forces there we agree to a plan for the u.n. to carry out an assessment mission. will determine what needs to be done to allow the displaced palestinians to return safely to their homes in the north. this is not going to happen overnight.

there are serious security infrastructure and humanitarian challenges. the mission will start a process to evaluate these obstacles and how they can be overcome. in today's meetings i was crystal clear palestinian civilians less be able to return home as soon as conditions allow. they must not be pressed to leave gaza. i told the prime minister the united states unequivocally reject any proposal advocating for the resettlement of palestinians outside of gaza. the prime minister reaffirmed to me today that this is not the policy of israel's government. we also spoke about intentions on the northern border for at 11 were hezbollah continues to launch daily rocket attacks on israel. i told the war cabinet other senior officials united states stands with israel and assuring its border is secure. we are fully committed to working with israel to find a diplomatic solution that avoids escalation and allows families

to return to their homes to live securely in northern israel and also in southern at 11. finally we continue to discuss how to build a more durable peace and security within israel. i told the prime minister every partner that i met on this trip said that they are pretty to support a lasting solution that ends the long-running cycle of violence and ensures israel's security. i underscored that this can only come from a regional approach that includes a pathway to a palestinian state. these goals are attainable but only if they are pursued together. this crisis is clarified. you can't have one without the other and you can achieve either go without an integrated regional approach. to make this possible israel must be a partner with palestinian leaders who are willing to live side-by-side in

peace with israel and its neighbors in israel to stop taking steps to undercut palestinians ability to govern themselves effectively and violence carried out with impunity demolition of -- make it harder and not easier for israel to achieve lasting peace and security. the palestinian authority has a responsibility to reform itself, to improve its governance, and a subject i plan to bring up with president abbas when they meet tomorrow. israeli leaders will have to make our decisions themselves. when president biden addressed the people of israel days after that cover seventh attack he made this simple pledge. the united states has israel's back today, tomorrow always. the friendship between our nations is truly exceptional.

it's our unique bond and america's enduring commitment to the people of israel that allows and indeed demand we are as forthright as possible at the moment the stakes are the highest and when the choices matter the most. this is one of those moments. happy to take any questions. >> the first question goes to simon lewis of reuters. >> thank you. mr. secretary the feature of the gaza strip has been the theme of your trip and visiting regional countries. i wonder today were you able to make any progress in closing the gap between leaders and israel on specific security reconstruction and governance arrangements for gaza and you talked before leaving saudi arabia yesterday about the need for practical pathway to a

palestinian state and many efforts towards regional integration. i would say that's coming up in your meeting today with the cabinet. as president netanyahu changed his mind or is he still opposed to the creation of a separate palestinian state or have you managed to convince him for any guarantees that this can happen? >> so, one of the things i heard very clearly on this trip and these questions are joined, as many countries in the region are really prepared to invest in a number of ways, to invest one conflict in gaza in its reconstruction, and its security and supporting those opinions governance. , it is essential to them that there also be a clear pathway to

the realization of palestinian political rights and a palestinian state and i think the view that they have expressed is that critical to ending once and for all the cycle of violence at some point in the future as to the realization of the palestinian political rights. that was a clear message that occurred everywhere went just as i heard again the commitment not only to the engagement of the future of gaza but also to take the steps necessary, make this steps necessary in her by the services necessary to give the israel confidence and security in that something that's new in recent years and very powerful, which is the willingness, the commitment of many neighboring

countries not only to live with israel in peace but also generally to have a region that's more integrated in which everyone can feel secure including israel. so there is i think also here a potentially powerful opportunity for the future. it's difficult to get there, hard to get there, hard choices and hard decisions have to be made in order to get there but you can see that possibility. i'm not going to speak for the prime minister or anyone in the israeli government about their views. i can share our own and share a little bit of what i've heard from countries in the region. >> the next question suleman with cox news. >> thank you mr. secretary for taking my question. the israeli government refusing to transfer the money and their

ministers said their 2 million in gaza and i won't give the money to like the u.s. won't give money to gaza and the second question is the cabinet said the war cabinet said they won't let gaza's go back to north gaza for now. is that something that you agree on and thank you very much. >> so first with regard to the palestinian -- these are their revenues. they should have them and they should have them in order to be able to make sure that they can pay their people were providing special services including doing the essential work in the west bank and the palestinian of authoritarian forces in playing a role to try to keep the security and stability in the west bank, something that's profoundly in israel's interest so we believe that those revenues should be released to them.

again, there are revenues are being used to do something that's important to israel and when it comes to the future governance of gaza when the conflict is over, of course people need to be paid to be able to do the work necessary to administer to gaza into the other things that will be critical once the conflict ends. in terms of palestinians and moving back north into gaza as they spoke to you earlier, we have an agreement that the u.n. will now conduct an assessment to determine the conditions necessary for people to be able to move back home. there are a lot of really challenging and important issues to deal with including things like unexploded ordinance and unexploded -- left by hamas infrastructure questions proper

support. all of those things are going to be evaluated by the united nations pursuant to the agreement and then as soon as conditions allow we want to see people be able to move back to their homes and we have been very clear about the necessity of doing that when conditions allow and making sure that people want to go back can go back. >> we will moulton with the "wall street journal." >> thank you so much. i just wanted to ask you heard voices among israeli political leaders talking about the threat of iran in the region and of course its proxies hezbollah and the houthis have been active in and around this conflict. you are bringing a message to the region of de-escalation. was your message at de-escalation heard and agreed with when you spoke to your israeli counterparts and

political leaders today. we certainly haven't seen that in the last few days there've been strikes on hezbollah that would appear to be an escalation. do you support that and the u.s. and its partners are they prepared to take a strike against the houthis because of their continued action check >> thanks, will. one thing we have heard clearly everyplace the phone including in israel is escalation is in everyone's interest. no one wants to see other fronts of this conflict and more than that as i have already shared we have countries around the region that are using their relationships and using their influence to try to make sure that doesn't happen. nomination be withdrawn. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to legislative session, be in a

period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: madam president, i have three requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. schumer: and finally, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate compleepts its business today -- completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10:00 a.m. on thursday, january 11, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed ex-point of order, the journal of proceedings ab approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day and morning business be closed. that upon the conclusion of morning business, the senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the mcentarfer nomination. further, that the cloture motion with respect to the nomination ripen at 11:45. if cloture is invoked, that all time be considered expired at 1:45. finally, that if any nominations are confirmed during thursday's session, the motion to

reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president be notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow.

florida governor in 2024 gop candidate ron desantis delivered the annual state of the state address and tell has been the governor talked about the state's population growth the business sector and stayed budget during his remarks before the legislation. >> good morning everybody. i name is mike miss mike frohman are miss mike frohman are present on the council for foreign relations. it's a great honor for o me to welcome you to our event this morning in conversation with mr. chow was the minister of the internet department of the central committee of the communist party of china.

in addition to the people in the room today the members in the room today we have over 400 cfr members participating virtually and will have an opportunity to ask questions from people in the room and people on video as well. he will give some short remarks and will have a conversation ourselves and then we will open it up to questions in the great pleasure to welcome him to the podium. please. [applause] >> thank you.