caller: i just have a couple of things to say. first of all, it would be really nice if you have live speakers on there, people could be more respectful. don't know what we are doing in our society that you don't have to agree with -- disagree with them, just try to be more civil. sometimes i watch, goodness, gracious. that's all i wanted to say. and just one other thing. two other quick things. one, all we ask for is people to be honest. yesterday on cnn when biden got on there, be honest. if inflation is high, it's high. don't say it was 9% when i took -- when i took office. it was a year and a half later. let's just have some honesty. it's ridiculous. my last point on the bombs. i agree with biden that we shouldn't be sending over those 2,000-pound bombs.

all those people in there. not saying cease-fire. host: raymond, you're muffled at times. it's difficult to hear you. richard in srer roana, missouri, democratic caller. caller: yeah. calling about the students. doing for the arabs on the reauthorization of the federal aviation administration with the renewal deadline friday. castronova house pass one week extension to allow the senate more time to come to an agreement on sunday. the senate could take up the short-term extension today. covid on c-span2. >> the senate will come to order.

>> let us pray. gracious lord, ruler of our lives, help us today to trust you with all of our hearts, minds, and strength. lord, keep us striving to stay within the circle of your will. today, empower the members of this body to bring deliverance to captives, sight to the morally blind, and healing to those who are bruised by life's trials and setbacks. give our lawmakers the wisdom to follow your providential leading even when facing problems that seem too difficult to solve.

lord, help our senators to be strengthened with your peace, justice, and purpose, as you fill this chamber with your presence. continue to equip each senator to do your will. we pray in your marvelous name amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington, d.c, may 9, 2024. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the

honorable angus king, a senator from the state of maine to perform the duties of the chair. signed: patty murray, president pro tempore. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of h.r. 3935, which the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 211, h.r. 335, an act to amend title 49 united states code to reauthorization the federal aviation administration and other civil aviation programs, and for other purposes.

>> i want to thank chairwoman cantwell, ranking member coons and members of the commerce committee because as a general

matter this is a necessary bill with a lot of good provisions in particular the work on air traffic control recruiting and training and pilot training hours. i feel very good about that work that's been done. but the gist of this bill is to promote air safety and there is one provision in the bill that is dramatically contrary to the bill. will increase their safety. it will reduce air safety and/or reduce air safety in the capital of the united states at reagan international airport. i'm going to summarize quickly argument i made the last couple of weeks and then i want to respond to at least three, you know, questions that folks who take a position opposite to me have raised and use some data to demonstrate that those questions though autosave odyssee answers and answers actually verify and uphold the position that my maryland and virginia

and i collect take that we should not be jamming more flights onto the business from in the united states. reagan national airport, dca, although taboo, , a postage sta, 860 acres. by order of comparison does airport is about 12,000 acres. dallas-fort worth is about 19,000 acres. denver is 32,000 acres. when reagan national was built there was a little bit the united states to build a smaller airports near downtown because the airplanes were smaller. and they were props with fewer passengers and they were lighter in the didn't need as much landing runway space to take off or land. when reagan national was built on this 860 acres and if you been there you know it's 860 that can be expanded because it's surrounded on three sides by water and on the other side by you is, not u.s., the george washington parkway. no way to expand this.

it was built with three runways. a primary runway and two commuter runways, and the estimate was in the 1960s that reagan national with these three runways could accommodate 15 million passengers a year. 15 million passengers a year. where are we today circa 2024? reagan national is not 25.5 million passengers a year. 25.5 million passengers, an additional two-thirds over what it was built for on a landlocked footprint with three runways. there's been a couple of when i fixing our southern border, the american people demand that elected representatives prioritize action over rhetoric. it's the easiest thing in the world to do what many republicans have done this year and done year after year -- come

to the floor, complain that the border is a mess, and then do just about nothing to fix the problem. it's the easiest thing in the world to do what donald trump and his followers have perfected over the years -- demonize immigrants, pay lip service to our border agents, but ignore the work required to make change happen. democrats know that the situation at the border is unacceptable. we know that the status quo cannot continue. but democrats also know that fixing the border requires bipartisan legislation from congress. six months ago democrats sat down with our republican colleagues to get work, to get to work on drafting the strongest border security bill congress has seen in decades. it contained many of the biggest issues our republican colleagues demanded -- fixes to asylum, more money for border agents, and it increased the president's

emergency powers to respond to high numbers of border crossings. our bipartisan bill was the closest congress has been in decades to fixing our southern border. until donald trump blew it all up for political gain. i've seen many cynical things around here over the years, but it's hard to think of something more cynical than republicans blowing up their own border deal in order to help donald trump win an election because they think chaos will help them win. after all, how many times have we heard from republicans that we need to fix asylum? how many times did we hear donald trump say that our asylum system was archaic and that, quote, what democrats should be doing now is changing the loopholes. that's trump. trump said that. how many times did we hear our republican colleagues say on the floor things like, quote, we've got to redo our asylum laws, unquote, as my colleague from

florida has said. if my republican colleagues care about fixing asylum, why did they vote to kill the best chance we've seen in decades to fix it? if my republican colleagues care about our border agents, why did they vote against a bill that would have hired 1,500 more agents and given them more tools to stop the flow of drugs and weapons? if my republican colleagues truly believe the system is broken, why did they vote against a bill that would provided more immigration officers and had the support of the very conservative border patrol union? two words is why -- donald trump. it was donald trump who didn't like that congress has finally reached a deal on border that would have taken away a key issue for him on the campaign trail. it was donald trump who made clear that exploiting the border is great, but actually fixing the problem is not. i know this is a frustrating issue for millions of americans.

many of us who want to solve the problem on both sides of the aisle are frustrated as well. republicans are going on and on and on about the border, but facts are stubborn things. when americans ask this year who is to blame for the continued mess at the border, they should listen to the words that came from donald trump himself. he said, please blame it on me. that's what trump said. on taxes, yesterday the cbo released a new report that should be a shot across the bow for republicans who supported the disastrous 2017 trump tax cuts. the cbo reported that extending all of the trump tax cuts which republicans support and donald trump has promised to do if elected would add $4.6 trillion to the deficit. that's $4.6 trillion. let me say that again.

an extension of all of the tax cuts would add a wopg $4.6 trillion to the deficit. to the self-proclaimed fiscal hawks on the right who always complain about deficits, this cbo report about the trump tax cuts is like a pie in the face. this report should come as no surprise. we all saw what happened when donald trump and republicans first pushed their tax cuts a few years ago. they blew a nearly $2 trillion hole in our deficit. they left american families out to dry with no trickle down stemming from the benefits for the very wealthy and the largest corporations. the trump tax cuts were a dud for our economy and a political loser at the same time for the republican party. so i ask my republican colleagues, are they really willing to double down on the disastrous trump tax law and blow a hole in our deficit? are my republican colleagues, who claim to be the party of fiscal responsibility, so desperate to help the very

wealthiest few and large corporations that they'd add another $4.6 trillion to the deficit? do my republican colleagues believe so deeply in giveaways to the ultra wealthy that they would let programs like social security and medicare, which millions of americans rely on every day, would they let them run dry? if nothing else, this shows how out of touch republicans are working with -- sorry. this shows how out of touch republicans are with working and middle-class america. the americans don't want tax cuts that favor the wealthy and corporations. while republicans keep pushing terrible tax giveaways for the wealthy and cuts to social security and medicare, democrats continue to deliver meaningful results for the american people. this week, for instance, we learned that the u.s. will triple its domestic chip

manufacturing by 2032, thanks to our chips and science act. this is great news for both american jobs and the american economy. it's exactly what we envisioned when we were working on the bipartisan chips and science act, a new wave of tech jobs a new wave of scientific research, and a revival of federal investment in the technologies of the future. under president biden and democratic leadership, america is on the right track. now, on the faa -- mr. president, later today, the senate will vote on cloture on faa reauthorization. we hope to get this done today to keep the faa funded and operational before tomorrow's deadline. the work we're doing on faa is going to have practical consequences for millions of americans who travel by air every single day. so, senators have every reason in the world to continue working together on a bipartisan basis to get this done. if we let funding for the faa

lapse, it could be disastrous for the safety of our skies and efficiency of of our airports. air traffic controllers would be forced to work longer and extra hours, funding for trucked projects would be halted. i -- for infrastructure projects would be halted. i urge my colleagues to work together to fund the faa and avoid missing tomorrow's deadline. i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin.

the federal aviation administration reauthorization act. i'm glad we are here even if belatedly. our nation depends on a safe, efficient and robust national aviation system. the bill before us today will help strengthen aviation safety, dressed the pilot shortage, and approve airport infrastructure. all of which will contribute to better experience for the traveling public. i'm particularly please my proposal to create and enhance program for perspective airline pilots was included in the bill. the united states is facing a serious pilot shortage which has resulted in reduced air ther service at airports around the country. this has real impacts on the flying public, kicker for those

in rural states like south dakota since smaller regional upwards received the greatest reduction in flights. to help address this shortage and approve the quality of pilot training senator sinema and i introduced a proposal to create an enhanced qualification program for perspective airline pilots. it was a direct response to a recommendation from the air carrier training aviation rulemaking committee a body of industry, labor, and safety representatives who meet under the auspices of the faa's office aviation safety which recommended the implementation of such a program to create a structured pathway for pilots to obtain intensive training. while the united states has stringent requirements for the nova flight hours perspective airline pilots must complete before updating the pilots license, the quality of that cockpit time is often less than optimal preparation for flying

commercial jets. so to better prepare pilots for airline jobs, our proposal will implement an enhanced qualification program designed and audited by the faa and administered by air call be disp with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: war is hell. it tears apart societies. it alters the course of entire civilizations. and innocent noncombatants suffer. try as we might, humanity has not' rad cated war -- has not eradicated war or stripped it of its horrors. but in the modern world, civilized nations hold themselves to the highest standards and take deliberate

care to minimize harm to civilians. the united states is first among these nations, but even we make mistakes. on this administration's watch, precision military strikes have inadvertently killed civilians in multiple theaters of operations. our ally israel goes to great lengths to avoid civilian casu casualties. over decades of grinding conflict to preserve its security, a circumstance most americans can hardly imagine. israel routinely accepts great risk to its own soldiers to avoid endangering innocent civilians.

but the forces sworn to erase israel from the earth follow a different code. to hamas, civilian casualties are not tragedies, they're tools of the trade. to these savages, kidnapping, torture, rape, and murder aren't crimes, they're tactics. for terrorists around the world, human suffering is the weapon of choice, and hamas seeks to mag any tie it -- magnify it. these are the facts, and any serious conversation about the war in gaza needs to start here. if war could be avoided entirely, so could its terrible

costs. israel tried to avoid this war, negotiated a ceasefire with the savage terrorists bent on destroying the jewish state, all to try to avoid the war. the terrorists used this ceasefire to plan and prepare for war. and on october 7, hamas launched it. they also chose how israel would be forced to fight it, putting fighting positions in hospitals, sch schools, and united nations faci facilities, directly attacking humanitarian aid crossings. this doesn't just contravene the laws of war. it exploits human suffering. why does hamas behave this way? because it works. because they know the media will cover it.

if it bleeds, it leads. because they know it creates an international rush, rush to blame israel. because leftist fifth columnists and useful idiots on university campuses will play at revolution and express solidarity with the terrorists. because the president of the united states will be forced to choose between his supposedly ironclad commitment to an ally under attack and the will of his l leftist political base. and because they bet that the president would choose the latter. well, it would seem that hamas bet correctly. president biden is withholding urgent military assistance to is israel, but he cannot have it both ways. he cannot claim his support for israel is ironclad while denying

israel precisely the weapons they need to defend themselves. the president is old enough to remember 1968, but he seems to have learned the wrong lesson from that pivotal year. caving to the college radicals will only whet their appetite to spend the summer demanding further anti-israel concessions at his party's convention. i fought for months to secure passage of the national security supplemental to support israel, ukraine, and vulnerable asian partners, and to make important investments in our own military. i stood up to the opposition in my own party, to do the right thing. if the commander in chief can't muster the political courage to stand up to the radicals on his left flank and stand up for an ally at war, the consequences

will be grave. other allies who rely on ironclad guarantees from america will question our commitment. nations on the fence in the middle of a major power competition for influence will look elsewhere for their own security. and our enemies will be emboldened. now, on a different matter, i've spoken many times about adeel mangi, president biden's nominee to the third circuit. i've covered his shocking and deep so, with virulent anti-semis and how he muscled or misled the senate about them. i've also covered his association with anti-police radicals. last week it was revealed that

mr. mangi introducened one of his -- introduced one of his anti-cop friends to the head of the rutgers center for security, race, and rights, so they could, quote, collaborate on a project. democrats can't rebut these disqualifying associations because they're facts. so, instead, they've mounted an all-out campaign to gin up left wing support for mr. mangi and force our democratic colleagues to walk the plank on this nomination. and in so doing, they've given the senate reason to move from questioning mr. mangi's judgment to questioning his ethics. after the biggest police unions came out in opposition to his nomination, mr. mangi complained in an extraordinary letter to one of my colleagues that the groups opposing him never spoke to him about his position or views. really?

what would these outside parties have learned about his views had they asked? well, we don't actually have to guess. for the past few months, democrats have prayeded mr. mangi in -- paraded mr. mangi in front of liberal interest groups to secure their endor endorsements. a group of organizations met with mangi and then praised his commitment to help ensure equity in law enforcement. equity in law enforcement? what on earth does that even mean? are those his views? these are questions our colleagues on the judiciary committee might have liked to asked mangi, but unfortunately these meetings took place after -- after his hearing. more recently 125 progressive organizations sent a letter supporting mangi. how many of these left-wing

organizations has mangi met with? did he meet with the afl-cio? what views did he discuss with them? we'll never know. you see, mr. president, nominees have to disclose in their questionnaires whether or not they've made any promises during their confirmation process. committee republicans also ask written questions about meetings and coordination with left-wing dark money. but what mangi has found is that if he makes the sales pitch after -- after the committee process is over, as he did with certain law enforcement groups, and maybe to others, nothing needs to be disclosed. this is particularly troubling given that these small law enforcement groups seem to almost be -- almost always based

in very democratic new jersey counties like middlesex and hudson. hudson county, of course, is home to one of the last old style political machines and the war boss is taking care of mr. mangi, what do they expect in return. compare this to the behavior of judge gareshi, the first muslim district judge whom i supported and mentioned before. he made headlines by striking down new jersey's unique and uniquely corrupt primary balloting system. in other words, he drained the lifeblood of the same hudson county democratic machine while it was calling in favors for mangi. as i've said, there's a better way in new jersey if only the

biden administration would care to look. it's the roll of the senate to provide advice and consent. we ask nominees questions and evaluate their answers, we judge nominees on that political record. mangi's closed-door meetings with interest groups short circuits that process and calls into question what fairness we might expect from him. it's yet another reason the senate should not, cannot confirm mangi. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin.

>> somatostatin memorized the speech i'm about to give because it's at the third time i was given in the last few weeks on a topic that is important to virginia, the faa reauthorization now pending before the body. i want to thank chairwoman cantwell, ranking member cruz members of the commerce committee because as a general matter is this an necessary bill with a lot of good provisions in it, in particular the work on air traffic control recruitment and training and pilot training hours i feel very good about that work that's been done. but the gist of this bill is to promote air safety and there's one provision in the bill that is dramatically contrary to the

thrust of this bill, , it will t increase their safety, it will reduce their safety and it will reduce their safety in the capital of the united states at reagan national airport, otherwise known as dca. i am going to summarize quickly the argument i make the last couple of weeks and then i want to respond to at least three, you know, questions that folksy take a position opposite to me have raised and use of data to demonstrate that those questions though odyssey raised have answers and answers actually verify and uphold the position that my maryland and virginia colleagues take that we should not be jamming more flights onto the business run but in the united states. reagan national airport, dca, built a long time ago, it's a postage stamp, 860 acres. but by order of comparison does airport is about 12,000 acres, dallas-fort worth, dallas-fort worth is about 19,000 acres,

denver is 32000 acres. when reagan national was built there was a little bit the trend to build these smaller airports near downtowns because the airplanes were smaller. and they were props with fewer passengers and they were lighter and they did need as much landing runway space to take off or land. when reagan national was built on this 860 acres, and if you been there you know it's 860 dikembe expanded because it's surrounded on three sides by water and on the other side by u.s., not by u.s., by the george washington parkway. there's no way to expand this. it was built with three runways, a primary runway and two commuter runways, and the estimate was in the 1960s that reagan national with these three runways could accommodate 15 million passengers a year. 15 million passengers a year. well, where are we today circa 2024? reagan national is that wi-fi

.55 million passengers a year, 25.5 million passengers, an additional two-thirds over what it was built for on a landlocked footprint with three runways. there's been a couple of other important changes at reagan national. the idea was to spread the 15 million passengers over three runways but that was when the planes were smaller and they were props. now they are jets and they t land on the shorter runways. so today at reagan national, 90% of the traffic into reagan national has to use the main runway. so think about this. if it was 15 million equally divided, that each runway would bring in about 5 million passengers a year. now the main runway doesn't have 5 million, it has 22.5 million passengers a million passengers a year with only about 2.5,

3 million on the other two runways. another major change since this projection of 15 million a year was made, and that is 9/11. in the aftermath of 9/11 we oppose dramatically more stringent security requirements on the air patterns over reagan national to make it much harder to get into a landing zone to land or to take off. so what does that mean? built for 15.5 million on a landlocked spot, now 25 million come what does it mean? well, it means the main runway at reagan national test of a single busiest runway in the united states. reagan national because it small, is that the busiest airport in the trinity, it's only 19th in terms of the total passengers in and out but that main runway with 90% of the traffic is a busiest runway in the united states. and what does that mean? what does it mean to have one primary runway with 90% of the traffic that's the busiest in the united states? well, it's pretty easy to

predict. it means very significant congestion. so let me give you mr. durbin: i ask that the quorum call be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: mr. president, one of our important responsibilities in congress to is -- is to protect american consumers, with but allies of big businesses on wall street who always fear threats to their bottom lines have been working overtime to convince consumers that the bill that i've cosponsored with senator marshall will do more harm than good. they are recruiting allies from the airline industry. american airline ceo scott kirby said that our bill would, quote, kill rewards programs. end quote. let me be clear. this is false. forbes published an article saying that compared to other

nations, airline rewards programs in the united states have made it more challenging to earn and redeem miles. because while the airline industry is trying to argue that my bill would stifle competition and their loilt programs -- loyalty programs, it is their own questionable practices that threaten america american consumers' ability to redeem rewards. the airline industry knows how many americans value the rewards programs. over 100 million americans participate. this is to reward true frequent fliers, and today millions of americans participate. but this has evolved to include co-branded credit cards. you and i spend a lot of time on an airplane, mr. president, as soon as they have their

passengers buckled in, they advertise their credit cards, i have seen -- and then as you're leaving the plane, they are once again passing them out. they'll seem to focus as much on credit cards as they do on safety. you have to ask yourself why. it turns out there is one reason. airlines make more money off the co-branded credit cards than they do with aviation programs. they are showing troubling reports that airlines use the loyalty programs for unfair practices. it uses airlines to objtain certain credit cards and spend as much money on the cards in exchange for rewards and they -- at will.

for example, there are troubling reports that airlines may be devaluing the miles that you accumulate making it harder for consumes to ever achieve promised rewards. at certain times the cost of purchasing points from airlines' websites may be up to three times the value of points at redemption. this is a rip-off with wings. we must do more to protect american consumers. in october i wrote to the secretary of transportation pete buttigieg and in march i replied. -- march he replied. dot is using its authority to review airline rewards programs. dot has been meeting with major airline programs. secretary buttigieg shared with me that dot has the necessary authority to investigate the programs and taken forcement.

the secretary also announced a joint hearing with the consumer protection bureau, that's good news for consumers. that meeting took place this morning to discuss airline credit cards and frequent flyer programs with labor leaders and consumers. these are important steps forward in the conversation, and i thank secretary buttigieg for showing this initiative. last week i had a chance to raise the issue in the senate appropriations subcommittee. i was glad to hear the department of transportation seeks to protect americans. this week the senate has been considering the faa reauthorization bill. i support a provision which made the final bill that would create a senate-confirmed assistant secretary for the department of transportation's office of aviation consumer protection. i think it's important we put somebody in this post who can have better oversight of

frequent flier programs for the consumers of america. we should pass a reauthorization bill as quickly as possible to ensure there is no lapse in resources for our nation's airports, air traffic controllers, the aviation industry, and all the passengers. employed by the credit card airline industry, critics accuse me of jeopardizing america's airline rewards with my idea of competition on credit cards isn't true. modern-day airlines have become credit card companies that also happen to own airplanes, and it's their deceptive practices that threaten americans' ability to redeem rewards they have earned. i'm committed to holding both industries accountable for exploiting hardworking consumers to further line their own pockets. i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

>> joining us this morning, plans to change the u.s. asylum system. what have you learned? >> what were expecting first is a relatively narrow change to how asylum rules are applied. right now it can take a very long time for certain bands on the side of to be applied to people who cross the border. if they apply for some of the growth of a lengthy process and even if, for example, we have concerns about safety or national security they can still take a little bit of time before we can band of people from asylum and move them from the country. what the administration is doing and were expecting this proposed rules to b.s. trumpisms day they will move that time went up which will enable officials today quickly after some crosses the border determine whether they are perceived to be a public safety threat or national security threat and very quickly

tell them you're banned from asylum based on already existing u.s. roles and deport you quicker. what this really means is that it's going to enable border officials to quickly remove people and give them less time to fight these accusations. this is one thing we expect immigration advocates to push back on for a long time advocates of wanted more time for people to get counsel, to bring in attorneys and help them fight any bands or bars of the asylum application. this would give less time to certain immigrants. >> host: what do they do now that takes so long, and what would these changes do to allow them to deport quickly? >> guest: one of the things that is this has to go to in immigration judge. the asylum system is backlog so things take longer than they are supposed to because there are just so many asylum cases already in the u.s. system now. it takes a long time.

there are limited immigration judges and every case will take time. that's why takes a long. it can take years for someone to get the final decision on the asylum case even if it's pretty clear they're not going to get asylum early on. what this does is this moves the process of what is called credible fear stage, into the weeds but credible fear is just the very first part of the asylum process. the first interview that immigration official has with michael who crosses the border and it happens quickly within a few hours or a couple of days of that person crossing the border. it at this point it will make that determination for particular migrants if they're banned from asylum because they are a public safety threat or national security threat so again it cuts out that waiting time, cuts of having to wait for immigration judge in the specific cases. >> host: what is credible fear that this immigration official

what then can see that's it okay, you can be put into the system? or no, you don't meet the criteria, you're going back home. >> guest: the credible fear is very, very simple interview and all that invite has to do is establish the have a credible fear of returning to their home country. fear persecution in the own country, a low bar. most i could very easily passed this first up, easy to get past it and placed in the process, why is it easy? >> guest: basically to say they're afraid to go home because they have been victims of crime or because of the political belief, host of things they could say that will get them approval. of course the asylum standard is much higher than that. most people past the credible fear standard but i actually obtain asylum. what this will will do is even if they can say the right thing and get past the credible fear stage, if as you up on any of our vetting tools that border

officials used to see if at any history or connections to criminal organizations or terrorist groups, anything that flags during the process will automatically be applied and they will be more quickly barred and deported. >> host: when they are deported who does the deportation and where are they sent you? >> guest: right net immigration customs enforcement i.c.e. is responsible for the deportations. they work with border patrol along the border in this case is worth a closer together especially recently because the large number of migrants up and coming across the border. i.c.e. handles the deportation to migrants are typically returned back to their country of origin. there are some unique cases within may be returned to other places but by and large we returned them to their host country. we coordinate with countries around the world to enable those deportations to take place. there are a handful of nations that make it very difficult for

the u.s. to deport, for example, venezuela has made it difficult for the u.s. to deport its own citizens and they say we really don't take back venezuelans wittiest tries to deport them. there have been times when did e clouded and other times not. i very come to get a process. anytime the administration can expedite the process that will be a win for them and enable them to move faster on some of these cases. i think it's important to put this ruling, this is a relatively small role compared to what we know the biden administration is considering on the border now. this is all about signaling that democrats are taking the border issue seriously after years of republicans really pummeling them politically. >> host: this is a thr change and what they're contemplating, given that that the administration of said what this change would accomplish, do they know that deportations will go up? and if so by how much?

>> guest: it's unclear exactly what impact this would have measuring. we know this will allow some people to be deported quickly. we will have some impact. people i spoke to who are familiar with the process tell me this will definitely increase the number of deportations early on. by how much until the question of how this is in force. how the bars are enforced, how people on the ground decide to use this tool works on immigration advocates, people i spoke to said we know the biden administration wants this to be focused on, people are national security threats for public safety threats but damn doubt it will be limited to that and will not be used as as a broader . a lot of this will come down to if and when this goes into effect and this is a proposed rule. we will have time before this will even go into effect. it's unclear how much of an impact and would have. >> host: how does it compare to what was negotiated in the senate between the bipartisan group of senators?

>> guest: this does not touch on kind of a tactic that that bipartisan piece of legislation took. we know the biden administration that biden is seriously considering using broader executive powers to more forcefully prevent people from illegally crossing the border and seeking asylum through a system called to 12th ave. some of the measures included a bipartisan border deal and buttressing come out this week. this is an early taste of the tactics the biden administration would like to take in this role were expecting to drop today or later this week also goes to show the biden administration has changed its tune. it's the kind of expedited rule by administration came into office taking down from the former administration. so to have the administration are considering moving faster, cutting the carpet may, may have to drop to talk to counsel

survey signals a change in strategy and i think we'll see more on this moving forward trend what we are talking about assignment and border policies this morning. we would teach her thoughts. join the conversation this morning, democrats at 202-748-8000. republicans 202-748-8001. independence 202-748-8002. text is full a local your , city and state to 202-748-8003. brenda in indiana pennsylvania democratic caller you are up first. >> caller: good morning. i have two points to to make an event have a question. first of all, for years the biden administration, republicans have been saying president biden isn't the real president and they've been shouting to the world that the border is wide open. so i believe republicans are responsible for more people coming to the border. second, i think it's quite a

coincidence that represented him in s.o.b. on your show next because he was on the show on -- from florida sits on the department of homeland security committee. and on january 18, he said that 2 million immigrants have come across the border during the biden administration. he said 2 million. now, i would like if you would explain the title 42 policy that trump put in place at the border during the pandemic, i would like you to explain if you can what that title 42 policy was. and when president biden revoked title 42. i believe that president biden revoked title 42 in april of 2023. so i believe that's what held

down the immigration policy, but could you please explain to everybody what title 42 is and when the president biden revoked or pulled back? >> host: brenda doing her homework tragic that's an excellent question, some of the study policy closer i'm thrilled to get to talk about title 42. title 42 did come down last spring about a year ago. i was on the board in el paso when it came down and saw the impact of that essentially what this policy did and it was tied to the covid-19 pandemic was that of a border officials to very quickly turn any migrants back to mexico and sometimes to their home country with. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. cantwell: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum call for the cloture motion with respect to the substitute amendment numbered 1911 as modified be waived.

the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. cruz: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cruz: i ask that the following personnel in my office be granted floor privileges to the end of the conference, jay lind fri, thomas vogel, chad meckly and katherine latoeure. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to close debate on the cantwell substitute amendment number 1911 as modified to championed number 211 -- to calendar number 211, h.r.ed 3935, an act to amend title 49 united states coat and so forth and for other purposes signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory

quorum call has been waived. the question he is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on amendment number 1911 as modified offered by the senator from new york, mr. schumer, to h.r. 3935, an act to amend title 49 united states code to reauthorize and improve the federal aviation administration and other system aviation programs and for other purposes shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. 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 presiding officer: senators voting in the affirmative --

britt, cantwell, capito, carper, cramer, crapo, cruz, durbin, graham, hassan, heinrich, king, klobuchar, lankford, marshall, murray, peters, reed, schatz, smith, stabenow, warren, wicker, young. senators voting in the negative -- cardin, ernst. mr. budd, aye. mr. risch, aye. mr. tester, aye. mr. scott of south carolina, aye. ms. cortez-masto, aye.

mr. schumer, aye. the clerk: mr. vance, no.

the clerk: mr. schmitt, no. mr. lee, no. mr. whitehouse, aye. the clerk: ms. duckworth, aye.

the clerk: mr. tuberville, aye.

mr. menendez, aye. the clerk: mr. ricketts, aye.

the clerk: mr. hagerty, aye. mr. kennedy, aye.

ms. murkowski, aye. mrs. gillibrand, aye. ms. baldwin, aye.

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

the clerk: mr. coons, aye. the clerk: mr. mullin, aye. mrs. hyde-smith, aye.

mr. sanders, aye.

the clerk: mr. booker, aye.

the clerk: mr. grassley, aye. mr. barasso, aye. mr. hickenlooper, aye. mr. padilla, aye. mrs. blackburn, aye.

the clerk: mr. warnock, aye.

the clerk: mrs. fischer, aye. mr. rubio, aye. mr. welch, aye.

ms. lummis, aye.

the clerk: mr. hoeven, aye. mr. moran, aye.

mr. ossoff, aye. the clerk: ms. collins, aye.

mr. kaine, no. choip m -- the clerk: mr. kelly, aye.

the clerk: mr. fetterman, aye. vote:

the clerk: mr. merkley, no.

the clerk: mr. van hollen, no.

the clerk: mr. cotton, aye. the clerk: mr. daines, no.

the clerk: mr. manchin, aye. mr. boozman, aye. mr. lujan, aye.

the clerk: mr. markey, aye. the clerk: mr. sullivan, aye. mr. wyden, aye. mr. cornyn, aye.

ms. rosen, aye. the clerk: mr. johnson, no.

the clerk: mr. warner, no.

the clerk: mr. tillis, aye.

the clerk: mr. hawley, no. mr. murphy, aye. mr. rounds, aye. the clerk: mr. brown, aye. mrs. shaheen, aye.

mr. casey, aye. ms. hirono, aye. ms. butler, aye.

vote:

the clerk: mr. romney, aye. mr. thune, aye.

the clerk: mr. cassidy, no.

- the clerk: mr. bennet, aye. mr. blumenthal, aye.

the presiding officer: on this vote, the yeas are 84, the nays are 13. three-fourths of the senators duly chosen and sworn having voted in the affirmative, the motion is agreed to. mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: i call up amendment 2040 to the text proposed to be stricken. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from new york, mr. schumer, proposes amendment numbered 2040 to the text proposed to be stricken by amendment 1911.

mr. schumer: i ask to dispense with further reading of the amendment. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i call up -- a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from washington. ms. cantwell: i call up second-degree amendment number 2041. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from washington, ms. cantwell, for mr. schumer -- ms. cantwell: mr. president, i ask that further reading be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin.

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. a senator: madam president, are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are. a senator: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the proceedings under the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. a senator: madam president, i come to the floor today to speak for a few moments about the urging, pressing matter about americans held hostage or wrongfully detained abroad. mr. coons: and about a specific positive recent development, to make sure when they are released and freed, they are welcome home

in a positive and meaningful way. today there's somewhere between 30 and 40 americans wrongfully detained abroad and they range all over from the backgrounds to the countries of which they're held. i met repeatedly with rachel and john, parents of an american israeli attending a music festival when he was attacked, badly injured, kidnapped by hamas terrorists and dragged to gaza where he is still today a hostage beneath gaza in tunnels. ryan corbet has been held in afghanistan for years, an ngo worker who was abducted by the taliban, mike has been held in china on narcotics trafficking charges, a sentence upheld recently but not yet imposed. and of course evan gershkovich, a "wall street journal" reporter currently in prison in russia whose mother i met with recently

and who i joined with his family in continuing to pray and work for his release. there has recently been a positive step forward in how we welcome home these hostages, but first, madam president, i have to tell you something disturbing about how we have long welcomed home hostages. the presiding officer: the senate will be in order. mr. coons: jason is a "washington post" reporter who was taken prisoner in iran and ultimately served a year and a half, 544 days in prison in tehran before he was released. and i want you to guess what was the first thing jason got from the u.s. government when he returned home? it was a tax bill with fines and penalties for his failure to file and pay his taxes on time. jason came to meet with me and

recounted to me that when he pointed out to the irs that it was front page news in "the washington post" that he was unjustly imprisoned, of course he couldn't pay his taxes on time, they said we'd like to help you but congress needs to act in order for us to stop imposing tax penalties on american hostages. so today i'm here to celebrate that my dear friend, mike rounds, republican senator and i have introduced and the senate has now passed a bill with the catchy title stop tax penalties on american hostages. it cleared unanimously, thank you. and we now await house action. this is the latest in a number of actions several of us have taken together. there is now a national hostage and wrongful detainee day. it was recognized by a bill that was passed in the defense authorization bill last year and signed into law by president biden. that's march 9.

we're also working on legislation to repair the credit score of those who are wrongfully imprisoned, held hostage or detained. as you can imagine, if you spend years in prison in russia or iran or being held captive in afghanistan or in gaza and you aren't making payments on your bills, your credit score suffers. so senator tillis and i are hoping next to move the fair credit for american hostages act. let me conclude by saying this. we have to do more together to deter hostage taking, to restore to the united states those who have been wrongfully detained, to cooperate across our government. i am grateful that the biden administration has increased its focus on this urgent moral issue, and that 47 wrongfully detained americans have been brought home so far under the present administration. but frankly, all of us should be working together to hold in our prayers and thoughts those who are hostages, those who are

wrongful detainees and their loved ones and to work together, as senator rounds and i have in recent weeks, and as the congress as a whole will in coming days. thank you, madam president. mr. cornyn: will the senator yield for a question? mr. coons: the senator will so yield. mr. cornyn: madam president, i have a great deal of respect for the senator from delaware and we worked well together on the judiciary committee and always operated in good faith, even though we sometimes have differences of opinion. and i know he spends a lot of time thinking about national security and foreign relations affairs. he's traveled the world and knows more leaders of the different countries around the world than i ever will. but i do know that since he shares the concerns about the status, particularly the american citizens who are host hostages in gaza, i'd just like to get some idea if him what his

thoughts are about the administration's pause on weapons delivery to gaza -- to ice. and let me predicate this by saying i remember back when -- of course, we were concerned about al qaeda and fallujah where the marines fought a terrible battle. any time there's a conflict, there's going to be civilian casualties and obviously the goal is to minimize those casualties. likewise in places like mosul where isis made its last stand in iraq. and i would just like to get some idea from the senator if he would be so kind as to share with me his authorities are of what israel is supposed to do in rafah, obviously to satisfy the concerns about civilian collateral damage but also in a way that allows israel to eliminate the terrorist threat.

mr. coons: madam president, i appreciate the opportunity to speak to what is a pressing concern for so many of us. i'll simply reflect on my last in-person meeting with prime minister netanyahu and defense minister gallant in israel now many weeks ago. i was part of a visit i made to a number of countries in the region. but i spoke directly to this and i believe what i'm saying also reflects the views of the administration. of course the united states stands strongly behind israel and its defense and its security. secretary defense austin when asked this same question about what it might mean that there were pauses or reviews of weapons deliveries, what that might mean. just yesterday he said that the administration of the united states remains an ironclad commitment, retains an ironclad commitment to israel's security and defense as just demonstrated a few weeks ago when we worked together with israel, with the u. kfrments, with france, with

saudi kingdom and jordan to provide their defense against 300 missiles and drones launched at israel by iran. so what is it that we're saying with regards to rafah? what i said to the prime minister was you don't just have the right to defend the israeli people against hamas. you have the obligation. after october 7 you have to restore a essential of security and deterrence against this terrorist organization that massacred more jews, more civilians, 1200 people of a wide range of backgrounds in fact. it was the worst day for jews since the holocaust but many who are still held captive beneath gaza by hamas are from a dozen different nations, languages, and re-lilling -- rngs. you have to go after rafah and the four remaining battalions and secure gaza and make sure hamas does not reemerge as a fighting force that could ever threaten israel again.

and given that there are a million civilian refugees who have flown down to the very bottom of gaza and up against the hard border with egypt and egypt will not allow any of them into egypt, you have to provide a pathway for civilians to leave rafah before you go in at scale with a bombing campaign, a ground campaign, to minimize civilian injuries and deaths. if there are 10,000 or so hamas fighters remaining in rafah and if the multiplier, to use a crass term, has been 2-1 civilian deaths for every hamas fighter killed to contemplate 20,000 or 30,000 more civilian deaths in rafah is to contemplate a horrifying outcome. but it is not acceptable to leave hamas in control of a segment of gaza and capable of returning. so what is it i am hoping and expecting israel will do?

to relocate all of the civilians in rafah north in gaza, screen them so that none of the leaders of hamas or the fighters of hamas escape, to provide for humanitarian aid and for shelter in another part of gaza, and then to go in at scale, get into the tunnels, secure the release of the hostages if possible, and finish the job. that is difficult but in my voodooable. and for -- doable. and for us to ignore the cons conventions of using american weapons at scale in a very heavily concentrated place where there's a million refugees there because they were told to move south as the idf carried out its justified campaign against hamas over the last six months would be to undertake a tragic logs of life that is needless. madam president, at this point i'm inclined to yield unless the senator has a following question for me. mr. cornyn: madam president, i appreciate the comments of my friend and colleague from

delaware. i'm reassured by his commitment to making sure that israel will have the capacity too actually -- to actually eliminate the terrorist threat which of course is an existential threat. hamas, a approximate yil of iran, wants to wipe israel off the map. this is not a conflict of choice. it's an existential fight by the israeli people. and of course no one wants any civilian casualties, collateral damage. and from the news reports that i read and see, it looks to me like the israelis are trying to provide a safe passage for many of the refugees who, as the senator says, have moved south but now they're up against the hard border of egypt with nowhere else to go. so my hope is, as he said, that they will be given safe passage if they can to some place where they won't be in harm's way. but again to me the bottom line

is we have to give israel the flexibility they need to eliminate the threat. we would ask for nothing less if it were us as it has been in places like mosul and fallujah in the past. and so i appreciate the senator for responding. again, i'm reassured by his comments, but i hope, i hope we never are so arrogant or so -- that we think we can dictate or micromanage a conflict in a foreign country thousands of miles away when they're in a fight for their lives. thank you very much. i appreciate my colleague. mr. coons: madam president, if i might extend my remarks briefly and then conclude. there is another path, one which bipartisan group of us have worked hard to support and that i hope is still possible. and this path forward, which i also discussed directly with prime minister netanyahu, was

given real life just two weeks ago, three weeks ago when iran attacked israel. and israel's defense against these iranian missiles and drones was, yes, primarily provided by missile systems and by israeli jets, but also by the cooperation and assistance of the saudis, the jordanians, the americans, and the british. there is another path forward where ending hamas in gaza and the region is the joint project of the saudis, the egyptians, the jordanians, and that there is an end to the arab-israeli conflict. it was exactly that prospect that helped precipitate the hamas attack of october 7. yes, hamas is a hateful terrorist organization. it's dedicated to eradicating israel and killing jews. but the timing, the timing of the october 7 attack was very closely aligned to when a final next step in saudi-israeli

reconciliation was about to move forward. they have been determined to prevent peace. there is a way forward whereby hamas may be eliminated from having any role in gaza and the west bank and in the future of the region by a regional cooperation which could be facilitated by achieving peace. and that is also much to be hoped for and worked for. with that, madam president, i yield the floor and thank my colleagubris. the presiding officer: for the information of the senate, cloture having been invoked, the explosion to commit and the amendments there to -- thereto fail. the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: madam president, we've been very bad about meeting our deadlines. we keep kicking the can down the road if a number of cases. that was the situation last

month when one of our nation's most vital intelligence tools was in danger of expiring on the 19th of april. it was the case last spring when the united states hit the debt limit and nearly defaulted on its debts while congress debated solutions. and it was the case in fiscal year 2024 appropriations when congress had to pass multiple 11th hour funding bills to avert a government shutdown. it seems like we've lurched from one deadline to another up against the wall where we have kicked -- we have postponed making important decisions on a timely basis, so there is no more time, no more flexibility, and we've lurched, as i said, from potential shutdown to potential shutdown. but the big item on the senate's agenda this week is is the reauthorization of the federal aviation administration.

and, to my point, its set to expire -- it's set to expire tomorrow night. the federal aviation administration is vital to the safety and the efficiency of our nation's air travel system that millions of us depend on on a daily basis. from certifying aircraft and pilots to overseeing air traffic controls, this agency touches on virtually every aspect of the aviation industry, and its operations have a major impact on all the american people. on an average day, the agency serves more than 45,000 flights involving 2.9 million passengers. that's a staggering number. 45,000 flights, 2.9 million airline passengers a day. a highly functioning faa is vital to the country, but it's clear that the agency has fallen

short in a number of respects in recent years. travelers have dealt with widespread flight cancellations and paralyzing staffing shortages. they've experienced jarring safety issues such as near collisions on airport tarmacs, including one at the austin airport where i live. all of these incidents have underscored the need to pass a strong faa reauthorization bill that prioritizes safety, efficiency, and consumer confidence. my friend, senator cruz, the junior senator from texas, is leading the reauthorization effort on this side of the aisle, and he's worked with the chairwoman, senator cantwell, to help craft a bipartisan, bicameral bill that will make flying safer and more convenient for all airline passengers. this reauthorization bill, importantly, includes a range of reforms, and it will modernize and improve the faa.

it strengthens safety standards, enhances consumer protections, invests in technologies to improve efficiency, and expands training programs to meet the workforce demands of the rapidly growing air travel industry. i'm glad this legislation also delivers a major win for texas and in particular san antonio, where i was raised. san antonio is the seventh largest city? the -- city in the united states and it is known as military city, usa, because of the large presence of our armed forces. as a matter of fact, that's the reason that my family moved to san antonio when i was a freshman in high school because my dad was stationed at lackland air force base in san antonio. but despite the fact that we're talking about the seventh largest city in the country, you can fly directly from washington, d.c., from reagan national airport, to houston, to

dallas, to austin, but you can't fly directly to san antonio. you got to go through a major hub like dallas-fort worth. this is because of this air kay ache -- archaic and really quite inappropriate perimeter rule which limits the number of gates for aircraft to fly in and out of washington, d.c., at national reagan airport. this makes it difficult for military personnel serving in places like san antonio or business people who want to come back-and-forth or simply families that want to come and visit the nation's capital. this makes it unnecessarily difficulty for each of them. but i am optimistic that this will change soon as a result of the underlying federal aviation administration authorization act. this legislation will allow five additional long haul flights

into reagan national airport, giving airlines the ability to establish the direct route tune, in this case -- the direct route, in this case, san antonio and the district of columbia. i want to thank senator cruz for his leadership on this legislation. he knows how important this is to san antonio and the entire state of texas, and it is also important for consumers to have a competitive choice when it comes to the airlines they choose to fly on. because the more competition, it means that the prices will have to be better, more affordable for consumers, and it will force everybody to be better. he and senator cantwell and our colleagues on the senate commerce committee have crafted a strong bill to modernize the faa and promote safety for the american people. so i just want to say a few words about how much i appreciate their hard work, and i hope the senate will pass this bill soon, perhaps as early as

this evening. now, madam president, on another matter, while these big deadline-driven bills often get the most attention, they aren't the only pieces of legislation moving through the senate and across the capitol to the house and then to the president's desk. this chamber, the senate, has been very productive in producing countless bipartisan bills that address some of the biggest challenges our country is facing. one example is the need to protect our kids online. the social media platforms that were designed to connect people have become breeding grounds for exploitation and abuse of chin. so out of every great technology that's made our lives easier and made us more prosperous, unfortunately there always seems to be a dark side that's exploited by bad actors and evil people.

last year the national center for missing and exploited children received over 36 million reports of suspected child exploitation. let me say that again. last year alone, the national center for missing and exploited children received 36 million reports of suspected child exploitation online. predators are increasingly using these social media platforms to groom and exploit vulnerable children. republicans and democrats -- again, this is not a partisan issue -- republicans and democrats on the judiciary committee have taken these threats seriously. we've held multiple hearings on this topic, and my colleagues and i have introduced a range of bills to build a safer world online for all of our children. one of those bills is the project safe childhood act,

which gives federal prosecutors and law enforcement more tools to go after online child predators. this legislation that i introduced and passed the judiciary committee has now passed the senate unanimously in last october, but it's still awaiting action in the house of representatives. -- after all these many months. sadly, it's not the only such bill. the house is also sitting on another important bill to protect children called the general in a wynn act. this legislation carries the name of an inspiring young texas woman who was a survivor of child sexual abuse. jenna was the driving force between a 2009 law in texas that required training for teachers, caregivers, and other adults who work with children at schools on how to identify and prevent and report child sexual abuse. given the amount of time our

children spend in class, it's important that our teachers and our counselors and people who work with them in their schools are trained to identify the signs and symptoms of child sexual abuse. since the jenna quinn law passed in 2009, a number of state ofs have passed similar laws, but this training lacks funding typically, and that's where the jenna quinn law comes income tax the bill that i backed comes with federal training attached. this bill passed the senate unanimously but still is awaiting action in the house of representatives. but i'm not done yet. the house is also holding up another bill that would reauthorize project safe neighborhoods through the department of justice. this is another bill that i introduced. this program fosters

partnerships between federal, state, and local law enforcement to help reduce violent crime and make our neighborhoods safer. it was inspired by a successful program that started just down the road in richmond, virginia, called project safe neighborhood. actually had i think it was called project exile at that time. but it also was something that when i was attorney general a few years ago, we scaled up for a statewide effort, and it helped reduce crime rates across our state. now the federal program is called project safe neighborhoods, and during its tenure it has helped reduce violent crime in cities and towns across america. given the growing concerns about crime in our country, including right here in the nation's capital, in the district of columbia, there could not be a more important time to make it program better, stronger and more effective. so, madam president, these are

three bills that were bipartisan and basically voted unanimously out of the senate and are sitting waiting for action in the house. each one passed the senate, as i said, with unanimous support, and each one would go a long way to help reduce crime, support survivors, and make our country safer. but there are a total of ten bills which i've authored that have passed the senate awaiting action in the house, including these three. so when you add the other bills that have been introduced by many of my colleagues, we've got a serious legislative logjam on our hands. the house is sitting on bills to protect children, improve public safety, promote efficient trade and so much more. madam president, i'm here to plead with the house to take up and pass these bills. many of them are, as they were in the senate, not controversial. there shouldn't be any reason

for any more unnecessary delay. we know, here we are six months before the next election, and legislating only gets harder each day the closer and closer we get to the november election. including this week the senate is scheduled to be in session for only 12 weeks between now and election day, and the same is true for the house of representatives. in that time, we'll need to reauthorize the federal aviation administration reauthorization, pass the defense authorization bill, pass a farm bill, fund the government, among many other things. of course, those are just the must-pass bills. there are countless other items, like the ones that i mentioned, that we should be working on together. so we have a lot to accomplish in the next 12 weeks. and i would encourage our friends in the house to take up these commonsense, bipartisan bills that are noncontroversial and send them to the president's desk as soon as possible.

madam president, i yield the floor. and i'd note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin.

quorum call:

>> this week dissent is finally considering the federal aviation administration reauthorization act. glad we are here even if belatedly. our nation depends on a on, efficient, and robust national aviation system. and the bill before us today

will help strengthen aviation safety, because the pilot shortage and improve airport infrastructure, all of which will contribute to a better experience for the traveling public. i am particularly please my proposal to create and enhance qualification program for perspective airline pilots was included in the bill. united states is facing a serious pilot shortage which has resulted in reduced air service at airports around the country. this has real impacts on the flying public, particularly for those in rural states like south dakota since smaller regional airports contingency the greatest reduction in flights. to help address this shortage and improve the quality of pilot training, senator sinema and i introduced a proposal to great and enhanced qualification program for perspective airline pilots. our proposal was a direct response to a recommendation from the air carrier trading aviation rulemaking committee, a body of industry, labor, and

safety representatives who meet under the auspices of the faa office of aviation safety which recommended the implementation of such a program to great a structured pathway for pilots to updating intensive training. while the united states as stringent requirements for the number of flight hours perspective airline pilots must complete before updating the pilots license, the quality of that cockpit type is often less than optimal preparation for flying commercial jets. so to better prepare pilots for airline jobs, our proposal implement and enhance qualification program designed and audited by the faa and administered by air carriers that will give aspiring airline pilots intensive training with experienced air carrier pilots and other experts. intensive training, mr. president, is in the kind and caring environment where perspective airline pilots will

be flying a something that is largely missing from current training. and getting a chance to work closely with seasoned pilots will help turn out highly qualified pilots were better prepared for flying commercial jets. in addition, our programs use of similar trading was proven valley has resulted in its extensive used by the military would give perspective airline pilots exposure to the cockpits of the jets they will be flying, and crucially allow them to experience what it's like to handle challenging and dangerous situations in those cockpits. for obvious reasons standard flight training hours don't involve deliberately flying into perilous weather conditions and with things like fires or engine failure. but similar training efforts offers i should say perspective airline pilots the chance to deal with all those situations and more, and deal with them again and again until the

response of the situations is fine-tuned. mr. president, our proposal is a win-win. it will turn out better prepare pilots and it will help address the pilot shortage by making training more addressable. i'm very pleased it was included in the bill that is before us today. i'm also very pleased senator klobuchar aviation workforce development act and improve an act which i cosponsored was in the bill. this measure will help address workforce challenges across the aviation industry by expanding resources to help recruit and train pilots aviation manufacturing workers and mechanics. and finally with rural air service once again in mind, i am a very my provision to allow communities to receive multiple small community air service development program grants for the same project was included in the legislation before us today.

this will help make it easier to expand sorely needed air service for rural communities. the bill also includes language providing small airports with more flexibility to use aip funding for terminal improvements which will be crucial for enabling real airports to expand access as construction costs continue to rise. mr. president, on another topic, the legislation force today includes my bipartisan increasing competitiveness for american jones act with senator warner which will streamline the approval process for beyond visual line of sight drone flights and through the way for drones to be used for commercial transport of goods across the country. the lighter deployment of drones has potential, to transform the economy with innovative opportunities for transportation and agriculture that would benefit rural states like south dakota.

my bill will help ensure that the united states remains competitive in a growing industry increasingly dominated by countries like china. i'm also please that legislation i cosponsored with senator duckworth to help improve the flying experience for individuals who use mobility aids was included in the final legislation that we are considering. mr. president, no bill is perfect, but i believe the legislation before us today will make real progress toward a safer, and more reliable aviation system, and an improved flying experience for the american public. and i'm grateful to all those who contribute to getting this bill in the floor today. as former chairman of the commerce committee i know how much work goes into the process of drafting and moving and faa reauthorization bill. i want to thank the chair and ranking member in all of their staff. i particularly what you think ranking member cruz for his

tireless efforts both in getting this bill to the finish line and ensuring that we ended up with a strong piece of legislation. his work to ensure we have strong staffing mandate for air traffic controllers as moses efforts to reduce backlogs and improve the faa's efficiency deserve particular recognition. i also want to thank senator moran and senator duckworth for the leadership at the subcommittee on aviation operations and innovation. mr. president, as i said, final passage of the faa reauthorization act has been a long time coming. but the day is finally here and i look forward to seeing this bill and enacted into law in the very near future. mr. president, i yield the floor and i suggest the absence of a quorum. >> madam president, i come to the floor today to speak for a few months about the urgent, the pressing matter of americans held hostage or wrongfully

detained abroad. and about specific positive recent development to make sure that when i released, they're welcome to in a positive, meaningful way. today there is somewhere between 30-40 americans wrongfully detained abroad. and they ranged all over from the backgrounds to the countries in which they are held. i have met repeatedly with rachel and john who are the parents of hers goldberg and american-israeli who was attending the music festival in israel when he was attacked, badly injured, kidnapped by hamas terrorists and drag to gaza where he is still today a hostage beneath i gaza tunnel. ryan corbett has been held in afghanistan for years, and ngo workers abducted by the taliban. been held in china on narcotics trafficking charges, sentence

upheld recently but not yet imposed. of course evan gershkovich, a "wall street journal" reporter currently in prison in russia whose mother i met with recently and you i join with his family and continue to pray and work for his release. there has recently been a positive step forward in how we welcome home these hostages there but first, madam president, have to tell you something disturbing about how we have long welcomed home hostages. >> this it will be in order. >> jason is a "washington post" reporter who was taken prisoner in iran and ultimately served a year and half, 544 days, in prison in tehran before he was released. i do want you to guess what was the first thing jason got from u.s. government when he returned home. it was a tax bill with fines and

penalties for his failure to file and pay his taxes on time. jason came to meet with me and recounted to me that we pointed out to the irs that it was front-page news in the "washington post" that he was unjustly imprisoned, of course he couldn't pay his taxes on time. they said we would like to hp you, but congress needs to act in order for us to stop imposing tax penalties on american hostages. so today i'm here to celebrate that my dear friend mike round public consider and i have introduced anderson has now passed a bill with a catchy title stop tax penalties on american hostages. it cleared unanimously, thank you, and we now await house action. this this is a late as the nf actions some of us have taken together. there is now a national hostage and wrongful detainee day that

is reckoned by bill passed in the defense authorization bill last year and cited a lowlife president biden. that's march 9. we are also working on legislation to repair the credit score of those who were wrongfully imprisoned, held hostage, or detained. as you can imagine, if you spend years in prison in russia for in iran or being held captive in afghanistan or in gaza, and you are not making payments on your bills, your credit score suffers your so it senator tillis and i are next hoping to move the fair credit for american hostages act. let me conclude by saying this. we have to do more together to deter hostage taking, to restore to the united states those who have been wrongfully detained, to cooperate across our government. i'm grateful that the biden administration has increased its focus on this urgent, , moral issue and that 47 wrongfully detained americans have been

brought home so far under the present administration. but, frankly, all of us should be working together to hold in our prayers and thoughts those who are hostages, those who are want for detainees and their loved ones, and to work together as senator rounds and i have in recent weeks, and as the congress as a whole will in coming days. from what. >> madam president, with a signature you for a question? >> madam president, i have great deal of respect for the senator from delaware, and we worked well together and you just committee and always operated in good faith, -- judiciary committee. even though sometimes it differences of opinion. i know he spends a lot of time thinking about national security and foreign relations affairs. he's traveled the world and those more leaders of the different countries around the world that i ever will. but i do know that since he shares the concerns about the

status, particularly the american citizens are hostages in gaza, i would just like to get some idea from him what his thoughts are about the administration's pause on weapons delivery to gaza, to israel. let me just, let me predicate this by saying you know, i remember back when of course we were concerned about al-qaeda and fallujah where the marines fought a terrible battle. and, unfortunately, any time there's a conflict there's to be civilian casualties and obviously the goal is to minimize those casualties likewise, in places like mosul where isis isis made its lt in iraq, and i would just like to get some idea from the senator if he would be so kind as to share with me what his thoughts are but what israel is supposed to do in rafah.

easy to satisfy the concerns about civilian collateral damage but also in a way that allows israel to eliminate the terrorist threat. >> madam president, i appreciate the opportunity to speak to what is a pressing concern for so many of us. i will simply reflect on my last in-person meeting with prime minister netanyahu and defense minister in israel. now many weeks ago. i was part of this homage a number of countries in the region. i spoke directly to this and i believed what i'm saying also reflects the views of the administration. of course, the united states stands strongly that israel in its defense and security. the secretary of defense austin asked the same question about what it might mean that there were pauses overviews of weapons deliveries. what that might mean. just yesterday he said the administration of the united states remains an ironclad

commitment to retain, remains an ironclad commitment to israel's security and defense as just in the center a few weeks ago when we worked together with israel, with the uk, with france, with saudi kingdom and with the jordan to provide their defense against 300 missiles and drones launched at israel by iran. so what is it that we are saying with regard to rafah? what i said to the prime minister was you don't just have the right to defend the israeli people against hamas. you have the obligation to after october 7, you have it to restore a sense security and deterrence against this terrorist organization that massacred more jews, more civilians, 1200 people at a wide range range of backgrounds in fact, the worst day for jews since the holocaust but many are still held captive in gaza by hamas are from a dozen different nations, like widget and religions. you had to go after them and finish the job. you have to go into rafah and go after these remaining battalions

and yet to secure gaza and make certain that hamas does not reemerge as the fighting force that could ever threaten israel again. and given that there are 1 million civilian refugees who have flown down to the very bottom of gaza and an up against the hard border with egypt, and given egypt will not allow any event into egypt, you have to provide a pathway for civilians to leave rafah before you go in at skill with the bombing campaign, a campaign to minimize civilian injuries and deaths. if there are 10,000 10,0e hamas fighters remain in rafah, and if the multiplier to use a crass term has been to to one survey and death for every hamas fighter killed, to contemplate 20 or 30,000 more civilian civilian deaths in rafah is to contemplate a horrifying outcome. but it is not acceptable to

leave hamas and control of a segment of gaza and capable of returning. so what is it i'm hoping and expecting is what we will do. to relocate all of the civilians in rafah north in gaza, screened them so that none of the leaders of hamas or the fighters of hamas escape, to provide for you military aid and for children in another part of gaza. and then to go in at skill, get into the tunnels, secure the release of the hostages if possible, and finish the job. that is difficult but in my view doable. and for us to ignore the consequences of using american weapons at scale in a very heavily concentrated place where there's a million refugees and their, because they were told to move south as the idf carried out its justified campaign against hamas over the last six months would be to undertake a tragic loss of life that is

needless. madam president, at this point i'm inclined to you unless the senator has a following question for me. >> madam president, i appreciate the comments of my friend and colleague from delaware. i am reassured by his commitment to make sure that israel will have the capacity to actually eliminate the terrorist threat, which is of course an existential threat. hamas, a proxy of iran wants to wipe israel off the map. this is not a conflict of choice. it's an existential fight by the israeli people. and, of course, no one wants any civilian casualties collateral damage. from the news reports that i read and see, looks to me like the israelis are trying to provide a safe passage for many of the refugees who, as the senator says, have moved south but enough up against the hard border of egypt with nowhere else to go. so my hope is as he said that

they will be given safe passage if they can to someplace where they will not be in harm's way, but again to me the bottom line is we have to give israel the flexibility they need to eliminate the threat. we would ask for nothing less if it were us as it has been in places like mosul and fallujah in the past. so i appreciate the senator for responding, and again i am reassured by his comments. but i hope, i hope we never are so arrogant or so full of hubris as we think we can dictate or micromanage a conflict in a foreign country thousands of miles away when they're in a fight for the life. so thank you very much. i appreciate my colleague. >> madam president, can i extend my remarks briefly at the concluded. there is another path, one which bipartisan group of us have

worked hard to support and that help us to possible. and this path forward which also discussed directly with prime minister netanyahu was given real-life just two weeks ago, three weeks ago when i ran attack israel. and israel's defense against these iranian missiles and drones because yes primarily provided by missile systems and by israeli jets, but also by the cooperation and assistance from the saudi skimp the jordanians, the americans and the british. there is another path forward where ending hamas in gaza and the region is the joint project of the studies, the egyptians, the jordanians, and that there is an end to the arab-israeli conflict. it was exactly that prospect that helped precipitate the hamas the tack of october 7. yes, hamas is a hateful terrorists organization that's dedicated to eradicating israel and killing jews.

but the timing, the timing of the october 7 attack was very closely aligned to win a final next step in saudi israel reconciliation was about to move forward. they have been determined to prevent peace. there is a way forward whereby hamas may be a limited from having any role in gaza and west bank. and in the future of the region by a regional cooperation which could be facilitated by achieving peace. that is also much to be hope for and work for. with that, madam president, i yield the floor and thank my colleague. >> to all the people everest on top, all are witnessing history. so on cotton.

[laughing] >> it's now playing local suspect all over joe biden's to factor position is hamas victory over japan israel goal is simple, rescue the hostages including american hostages and destroy hamas to get justice for the worst atrocity against jews since world war ii, and to prevent the next atrocity. hamas go was also simple, survive. hamas leaders and its last four potential are holed up in rafah so israel has to defeat hamas in rafah to win. hamas wins if it survives in rafah. and joe biden has threatened to withhold weapons from israel for fighting in rafah. therefore, joe biden objectively favors a hamas victory over israel. it's just that simple. and the president is only emboldening hamas. why would hamas release hostages

when joe biden will give hamas exactly what it wants, survival, without releasing hostages? he's also emboldening iran. his what joe biden has done since october 7. sanctions for israelis and an arms embargo on israel. sanctions relief in the end of an arms embargo on iran. now some people say joe biden is doing this for his reelection. which would be bad enough. but also i have to add the grounds for impeachment under the democrats trump ukraine standard, withholding foreign aid to help one's reelection. own with joe biden it's true. i'm afraid it's also worse than that. joe biden and israel hating democrats are using electoral concerns as a pretext to do what they've always wanted to do, to

cut israel loose. remember, a lot of barack obama's azor now joe biden's aids disputed that hamas was even a real terrorist group to begin with. for the number joe biden himself threaten israeli prime minister menachem begin more than 40 years ago with cutting off aid to israel. he humiliated by warning him not to threaten israel and saying i am not a jew trembling. israel is fighting a a just ad necessary war. there needs are not trembling. as i mentioned that night you just said, they will fight about if they have to but let me assure all the israelis watching, you won't have to fight alone. you don't have a problem with america. you have a problem with joe biden, chuck schumer of the democratic party. the american people want to

solve the problem for you in six months. >> well, thank you for your leadership on this and all issues that pertain that only to america's national security interest but to that of our allies. 72% of americans support the idea that israel needs to take the actions necessary to protect itself and two in the rule and reign of hamas, a terrorist or position operating not only there but in that entire region of the world. that is a much larger percentage of the american people obviously that support what joe biden is doing. and as has been pointed out, this is an opportunity for america to stand shoulder to shoulder with our closest ally and to convey to the people of that country that the united states is unreliable ally and that we can be counted on to the

problem with what's happening with the biden administration today is not only does it force people to question our reliability as an ally pickett was israel's national security interest at risk. this is insane what is been suggested by this administration. after the congress in huge bipartisan fashion supported over $14 billion to go to aid israel. this administration we decide unilaterally without any input from congress or anybody else that because they don't like the way that israel is defending itself against this threat that some of their going to start cutting off the various assistance the united states congress said that we want sent to israel to our ally to make sure they are able to defend themselves and to root out this terrorist organization operating in the border. the american people support israel. overwhelmingly, as has already been pointed out.

and they also believe that israel needs to do what is necessary. at that includes going into rafah to root out the hamas threat, then that is necessary for their very survival. this is an existential threat for the people of israel, united states needs to have their back. we had the back. the american people have the back. republicans in the united states sent heather back and will do everything we possibly can to make sure that joe biden notwithstanding his statements of the last few days here does what the american people and the united states congress have said we need to do to support our strongest ally in the world. >> well, first i want to say thank you so much for your leadership. let's review a little bit of recent history. ..

quorum call: not informed the armed services committee it was a unilateral decision.

tenth subcommittee hearing secretary austin about the decision made secretly without siltation. said it was not a final decision. if you pause, halt the delivery of weapon system with the need to defend itself and when the war against the terrorist group dedicated to its, that is a decision. thank you. >> i put out a press release earlier that's a lot more detail but the nonpartisan domestic

potable squabbles out of this for a long time, it's been in place about half-century work really well. the administration has stepped outside those boundaries what they are doing any notifications must we have a situation here where the administration is funding and a lot of these sales and closely look at these failed and take the obligation seriously and now this administration is saying we are going to pull this back. this is unprecedented months when be watched by our allies and not helpful to national security of the united states. mark and partly were the administration claims to be trying to do is reduce collateral damage israel goes in

and they are going off without anybody's help on system they've held up smart bombs and precision bombs doing exactly the opposite of what they think they are trying to do. this is trying to have it on each side of the threat. within two hours, said they are withdrawing from negotiations and she's 500 a great victory will invigorate the fighting and it's going to stop negotiations. ms. butler: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: there is no objection. ms. butler: mr. president, i rise today to join my colleagues

in recognizing the indispensable contributions public service make every day. i would like to start by thanking senators sinema and lankford. i would like to start by thanking my colleagues, senators sinema and lankford for championing the 2024 reintroduction of their public service recognition week resolution, of which i am a proud cosponsor. for more than four decades, the first week of may has been set aside to show appreciation to the federal, state, local employees who form the backbone of our country. as we mark the 40th anniversary of this tradition, we have a renewed opportunity to salute those working behind-the-scenes in small towns and big cities, many of whom have dedicated

their entire professional careers to giving back to their community and to this country. california is home to more public servants than any other state in our nation. as one of the two senators representing more than 40 million californians, i could not be prouder of that fact. whether it's here in the halls of congress or in the pockets of our nation, i stand shoulder to shoulder with millions of public servants who get out of bed every morning committed to shaping our world for the better. from our teachers to our librarians, our elected officials, and our election workers, our people in uniform who fight crime and fight fires, they and so many others exemplify some of our nation's highest ideals. i'm inspired by the stories of hardworking californians who have dedicated their lives to public service. they are the reason our

communities are kept safe. they are the reason our students are kept on the right track. they are the reason democracy endures against attempts to erode it, and they don't get nearly enough credit or thanks for the sacrifices that they make to keep our country moving forward. my office performed direct outreach to communities up and down our state, inviting people to nominate those working in local, state, and federal o offices they believe best define what it means to be a public servant. we received hundreds of nominations, extraordinary people from all across california who embody the spirit of public service. and though each and every one of them deserves their own recognition, i'd like to share a few of those stories today. the first is roxanna.

she is a multilianngual academi coach. she is nominated by jgeraldine. she is a member of united teachers of los angeles, roxanna, is a single mom nominated for having the biggest heart and best gifts in working with students from underserved communities. she was a former dean of students at west adams prep school, worked with students involved with gangs, and provided meaningful support to keep our kids on the right path. she currently serves as a coach for title 3 multilingual in los angeles, which is the second

largest school district in our nation. she works for the english language program at millland. veronica is a nurse practitioner at martin luther king outpatient. she was nominated by gutalpa, she is a proud member of the local union and worked at charles drew medical center and she has served for 30 years as a nurse practitioner, including the supervision of the trauma intensive care unit at martin luther king hospital in l.a. she built a track record on training nurses on how to best advocate for their patients and for each other. she also worked closely with

dr. meade who is a nobel peace prize recipient to train interns in the surgery program. veronica has dedicated her life to serving others in the most complex environments. she reminds us of the passion, dedication, and skill in providing excellent patient care. thank you, veronica and gudalupa. joy works at nasa research center and was nominated by her cousin jgeraldi nefrn hernandez she was the first filipino african american and works at the nasa aims research center. she serves as director of

california human resources and chief human capital officer in edwards california. joy is a mother who has dedicated her life to serving her community and according to geraldine has a heart of gold and talent that words cannot describe. thank you, joy, for all that you do to make california and our nation great. josh hoynes, from shasta, california. josh works at the national parks and was nominated by aron ryan who works with josh in serving california constituents. a public servant for more than 18 years, josh currently serves as the whiskey town park superintendent. when he came to the park, over

90% of the park had burned from a fire. despite the obstacles, josh has returned to the park and he returned the park to an effective recreation area. he has done great work with staff and the community and our office and adds that the community is fortunate to have him in the district. i know i'm fortunate to have josh in our national parks as a representative of this government and i'm grateful, josh, thank you, and congratulations. finally, diego rivera. he is from los angeles and a firefighter at the u.s. services national forest in los angeles, california. he was nominated by robert garcia who serves as his boss, the fire chief. on august 16, 2023, diego was fighting fires in the forest of

northern california when he was struck by a fallen tree and severely injured, rendering him paralyzed. since his injury, diego continues to defy a lot of his medical pros knows is -- prognosis, exceeding any expectation that medical professionals have made. despite his paralysis, he remains engaged with his firefighting team and the u.s. forest service fire agency to continue to motivate and entire firefighters to believe in themselves and in each other. in closing, mr. president, service is the rent we pay for living or as shirley chislom reminded us, it is the great we pay for living. i am grateful to those in

california for their service to this nation. choosing a life of dedicated service to others is a decision that demands the highest respect and greatest gratitude. far too often people in in line of work go unsung and underpaid as we use this moment for what they do, let's recommit ourselves to understanding that they are needed, ensuring that they are protected and making the path to public service smoother for those who choose to walk it. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor.

kt policy and i'm honored and have never been more honored this year for the safety and well-being of israel. i've often said watch what joe biden and the democrats do, don't watch what they say, watch what they do this is senator schumer, november 14 we will not rest until you get all assistance needed. we will not rest until you get all the assistance you need. we had a vote for israel.

six times the democrats have voted and funding for israel. i would ask leader she worked, where isaac today? he will not rest until israel gets the knee, where is his outrage today? april 17 wall street colonel joe biden, is not the time to abandon our friend. house must pass legislation for ukraine and israel. april 14 president of the united states same gets urgent and joe biden said never again in one words are empty. now eight up to israel congress

and the schizophrenic foreign policy makes why they don't respect us because he has a schizophrenic policy. he wants to help israel but a handful of votes in michigan putting political aspirations ahead of national security policy and why it seems to me that americans as well. at the end of the day we don't know where joe biden's stance. i don't know where he stands, exists one thing it does another. busy stand with israel or hamas? across american college campuses and actions are saying he stands with hamas. i want our friends in israel to

know for me and my family, we are standing. >> there only 49. [laughter] >> welcome to joe biden's america. tuesday morning i left montana back to washington d.c. we are on our way. i walked on the campus stood in front of the statue of george washington wrapped in a palestinian flag -- ation races squeeze in regulations before the deadline after which they could be overturned about i a new congress. in fact, a recent spate of regulations brought the total regulatory cost imposed by the biden administration in 2024 to over $1 trillion. $1 trillion. in just one year all told the

biden administration's imposed a staggering $1.7 trillion in regulatory costs since the president took office. $1.47 trillion. now, compare that to president trump who had actually reduced regulatory costs by this point in his administration. but, mr. president, perhaps i'm not being fair. perhaps it's not surprising that a republican president didn't impose a staggering regulatory burden. let's compare president biden to his democrat predecessor president obama. by this point in his first term, president obama had imposed regulations costing $303.5 billion. certainly, of course more than president trump, but i'm afraid to say still a long way away from president biden. the total cost of president obama's regulations at this point in his first term doesn't

come anywhere close to president biden's total. in fact, the total cost of president obama's regulations to this point was roughly 20% of the cost of president biden's. 20%. the biden administration has imposed regulations costing almost five times as much as president obama's. president biden is bringing new meaning to the phrase the heavy hand of government. mr. president, what do we mean when we refer to regulatory costs? what do those look like in practice? well, mr. president, they can look like forcing electric generation facilities to spend millions of dollars to install costly carbon capture systems as the biden administration is doing with its new power plant rule. they can look like an additional $7,000 in construction costs for new homes. see president biden's energy efficiency requirements for

affordable housing. they can look like imposing new vehicle emission standards effectively forcing car companies to spend enormous amounts of money to rejiger their supply chains and factories to produce a lot of new electric cars, even though americans are not exactly clamoring for electric vehicles. they can look like forcing farmers and ranchers and other private land owners to spend tens of thousands of dollars for permits or penalties concerning water features on their private land, and for that i would have you see the biden administration's waters of the united states or what we call the wotus rule. i could go on. mr. president, all ever these regulatory costs have consequences. it just stands to reason if your family is facing a major unexpected medical bill, for example, there's a good chance you're going to have to account for it somehow, either by cutting back spending, dipping into savings, or picking up

extra hours at work or perhaps a second job to increase your income. similarly, if you're a south dakota nursing home facing a federal requirement to hire additional staff and for that i would have you see the biden administration's new nursing home staffing regulation, you're likely going to have to do something like reduce the number of patients that you care for or close your doors altogether which is becoming already way too common in my state of south da dakota. or if you're a small business facing the new overtime rule the biden administration recently put in place, which imposes a massive 65% increase in the overtime exemption threshold you may be faced with the unappealing prospect of either increasing processes on the goods or services that you provide, reducing the number of positions you have available, or lowering the base pay you offer to create room to be able to pay

overtime wages. or take president biden's power plant regulations. his so-called good neighbor rule and his new carbon capture and emissions regulations will not only drive up energy prices for american families and businesses, they're also likely to result in a less reliable energy supply. our current assumption that we will automatically have the energy we need to pu other -- power our businesses, operate our heating and air-conditioning systems, run our appliances, and light our homes may not survive long term in position of president biden's power plant rules. and then there are still other costs. american taxpayers are now being forced to pay for abortion services at the v.a. in defiance of federal law, thanks to a biden administration regulation. and this is far from the only attempt by the biden administration to impose its

far-left social agenda through federal regulation and endanger conscience rights in the process. mr. president, we are facing serious consequences from the biden regulatory regime, from threats to conscience rights to questions about the future stability of our energy supply to immense financial costs for families and businesses. $1.47 trillion in regulatory costs in less than four years. i shutter to think what that number will look like should we see another four. mr. president, i yield the floor, and i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin.

they range all over. (an american israeli attending a music festival israel when he was attacked, badly injured, kidnapped by hamas terrorists and dragged where he is today.

donald and afghanistan for years, ngo affected by the taliban. held china hundred trafficking charges, about but not yet imposed and a "wall street journal" reporter currently in prison in russia whose mother met with recently enjoyed with his family and continuing. there's recently been a positive step forward in how we welcome these hostages have to tell you how we have long term. >> senate will be in order. >> washington riposte reports who was taken reporter and

served a year end a half 544 days. reporting released, i want you to guest what the first thing was he returned home. a senator: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: yes, we are. mr. vance: i ask we vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: the quorum is vacated, without objection. mr. vance:cy rise to -- mr. vance: i rise to speak about the affordable connectivity program, something for which gratefully there was a bipartisan group of senators who would, i think, extend the affordable connectivity program for this country, but unfortunately it looks like the leadership does not want to give us a vote on it. so i want to talk about why this program is important and talk about why it is important that we hopefully sometime in the future authorize this important

program, which expired a matter of a few days ago. now, this is a town where we often, you know -- the thing that generates headlines are sometimes the most partisan fights, the things that are most press pain-capable and most relevant -- the most pressing and most relevant -- i participate in debates as much as anybody. but sometimes -- hopefully most of the time -- this body should be geared towards accomplishing things for the constituents that we represent. in the state of of ohio,the affordable connectivity program benefits over a million households. and my cosponsors from vermont, from new mexico, democratic colleagues, and from a number of republican states as well, i think, testified to how important this program actually is. let me just sort of try to identify a couple of the reasons why it's important.

so the first reason it's important is because we know that connectivity is actually one of the important, necessary parts of living life in the 21st century. we may not like this. we may think that this was a negative trend. burkes look, kids -- but, look, kids can't do their homework without connectivity to broadband. a lot of parents can't do their work from home if they don't have connectivity from home. teachers can't prepare lessons for the next day and particularly in a country that's constrained by budget and fiscal matters as ours, one of the great ways to lower health care costs is telly medicine. and yet you can't do telemedicine if you don't have an internet connection. the affordable connectivity program solves this problem but ensuring that our low-income residents all across the country can afford their internet bills. now had it's not just about the consumers. it's not just about our citizens who need high-quality

connection, but the guarantee that consumers will be able to pay their internet bills regardless of their income level is one of the things that makes it possible for a lot of companies to invest in rural broadband infrastructure. now, i talked to a number of companies, a number of businesses that do rural broadband infrastructure just in the state of ohio, and it costs a lot of money, right? you lay a mile of fiber in a place like cleveland, columbus, or cincinnati, and you instantly have thousands upon thousands of people who are ready to tap into that connection. but you lay a mile of fiber in rural southeastern ohio and maybe if you're lucky you have a few people who are willing to tap into that connection. so it is more expensive in the parts of our country that are more sparsely populated. that's one of the reasons why my democratic colleague from new mexico is as passionate about this as i am, senator lujan, is because you have, of course, large numbers of reservations all over new mexico and a large number of rural areas that are

on reservations. and, look, you need to be able to access the stuff. you need to be able to access an internet connect in the 21st century. it is important for economic development, it is important for people to be able to live their lives. but in order to ensure that people are willing to actually invest in that broadband infrastructure, to pay for that mile of fiber-optic cable, a you got to make sure that on the other end, there are customers that are willing to actually access and pay for those services. so this is an important thing, and it's already expired. and it hasn't expired because of partisan bickering. this is a bipartisan piece of legislation that wants to reauthorize this program. and it hasn't expired because we don't have the resources. this is a very, very small amount of money in the grand scheme of the federal government. the reason it has expired is because sometimes in washington people are too busy arguing about public policy and not actually busy enough doing public policy.

we have the votes. we have the need. we have the necessity. but the reason why this program has fallen, the reason why this program has lapsed, the reason why it's gone off-line, if you'll forgive a pun, is because we can't actually vote on t and that, unfortunately, i think is a reflection on senate leadership. it's a reflection on the brokenness of this town, and it's a reflection on the fact that too often so many good public policies for the people of our country fall through the cracks because other things take priority. well, this should take priority. this is important. and i think, unfortunately, a lot of people are about to find out how important it is when they start to see the effects of it expiring. so one of the things, mr. president -- i'm mindful of the little bit of time here. i received a number of letters about this. and one of the really fascinating dynamics of becoming a united states senator -- i've been here for all of 18 months -- is that your

constituent letters very obvious tell you -- very often tell you the issues, the people that you represent, the people that you serve, that they actually care the most about. and sometimes i expect a lot of constituent mail, positive and negative, and sometimes i am surprised by t i am always surprised that any kind animal rights comes up, that's when i get the most mail. people in ohio really love animals, and rightfully so. and this issue i've gotten a lot of letters on. it matters to a a lot of people. senator vance, i am wright to you today to express the importance of the affordable connectivity program. my household relies on gps for tracking the whereabouts. i am his legal guardian. so when he wanders off, i will not be able to find him through his cell phone device.

more than 21 million other households in the united states, 8% or so of our population, rely on this program to pay for broadband services. without the support provided by this program, my home and many others would struggle to afford a broadband subscription. even when we go beyond correspondence with my office -- excuse me. i'm going to read a second letter here, but i just want to highlight what an extraordinary testament that is. a legal guardian of a special needs person who needs broadband access to be able to keep tabs on this person when they need to. and the program that they desperately need has already expired, and they're about to start feeling it. it only expired a week ago, so they haven't maybe noticed it. but they certain will i will. and this person needs access to

this program to keep track of a special needs person. and you wonder, will they have it without this continued program? let me read another letter here. this is from poland, ohio. dear senator vance, i represent the ohio connectivity champions, a group of connectivity experts, hired by the ohio education computer network during the pandemic to help ohio families find affordable internet. we originally focused on the one hand parents of students who needed internet so their children could complete schoolwork. since then we have focused on all ohioans in helping them with enrollment in the program as well as other technology-related assistance. we have heard from thousands of ohioans on how much the program has helped them with affordable internet. i know that budgetary issues are very important. the acp is one of the most effective social programs in a long time. the pandemic opened everyone's eyes to it the digital divide in had the country. it has allowed for millions of

americans to participate in the 21st century economy. i no he that the acp will most likely be adjusted by congress. but to not fund the program would affect many ohioans. we should appreciative your -- we would appreciate your support. another letter comes from columbus, ohio. and though one of the things that i really admire and like about the acp program is it induces investment in rural broadband infrastructure, we also know there are a lot of people who could not afford their bills without the program. this is from national -- from natalie. this program makes a significant difference in our monthly business as we are on food stamps. this makes a significant difference in our lives. without it it the $30 would have to come out of our food budget.

food costs have gone up. every month we end up spending more on food than we get in food stamps. when we get that extra $95 at the end of the month, it helped. however, that program ended. now another program is scheduled to end. these are two people, a husband and wife, disabled, who are actually going to forego food because this program has expired in my home state of ohio. what a shame. -- that we have failed them by failing to reauthorize this program and what an opportunity to actually get off our rear ends and make sure we do it when we get the opportunity. this is from -- another letter i'm going to read from mansfield, ohio. i am 73 years old. mansfield, ohio, is where my wife and i got the first dog we ever owned together. without the acp, i would not have internet. so i am writing to you taied to express the importance of congress continuing funding for

the acp. the support provided by the acp program has kept my family and families like mine online. we use it to stay connected to work, school, and health care providers in addition to family and friends. without the acp, the relate city we may no longer be able to afford to be connected and that would be an added hardship. think about this, i know that like a lot of americans with young kids at home, probably the most important thing that i use my broadband connection for is so that my three little kids can call their grandparents, they call their aunts and ankh -- and uncles. i wonder whether this resident from managesfield, whether she'll be able to keep connected with her family who are not easy to get to if this program disappears. one final letter i want to read.

sorry, mr. president. given time, i will not read the last letter that i have, but the point that i think these letters drive home is that real people are going to suffer when this program goes away. you have people who have to pick between food service and internet connectivity. you have an elderly woman who may not be able to connect to her friends and family. you have people worried about their telemedicine and health care visits. and on the point about federal spending, it sort of breaks my heart when a constituent who want afford internet service is writing to us apologizing for a program's budgetary hit when it's a tiny, tiny slice of the american federal budget. and i know this is a controversial comment with some of my colleagues, but if we can afford to fund military conflicts the world over, can't we afford to provide the basic connectivity and services for our own people?

disabled people choosing between food and internet connection. that is the choice that we have foisted upon them by not authorizing this program. i am disappointed by that, mr. president. and, again, i'll say that it presents an opportunity for us to do the right thing, to make reforms to the acp program where it needs to be reformed, but to do the right thing, reauthorize this program and ensure that ohioans and people all over our country don't have to choose between internet service and food. we can do that. we just have to do our jobs. thank you, mr. president. i yield.

mr. lee: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. lee: thank you, mr. president. this is a little bit like deja vu all over again. here we are dealing with another piece of legislation. it's an important piece of legislation. it's a piece of legislation that deals with a lot of things important to a lot of americans, affecting something that is uniquely distinctively within our legislative jurisdiction as federal lawmakers. that is the work of the federal aviation administration. it's part of an interstate network from the dawn of the republic, article 1 section 183, the commerce clause has been interpreted among others things to give congress regulatory legislative jurisdiction over channels and instrumentalities

of interstate commerce, and air travel happens to be one of those things. of this important faa reauthorization bill that has a lot of provisions in it, some of which i like, some of which i'm not wild about, was processed by the senate commerce committee. the commerce committee, the chair and especially the ranking member did yoemen's work in incorporating into the base text amendments from a wide array of mem members. i've appreciated the hard work that they have put into it. it is important to remember that no matter how hard a committee chair and ranking member work, as certainly the ranking member, my friend and colleague, the distinguished senator from texas, have done in this case on this bill, it still doesn't obviate or sup plate the need of robust amendments to be offered

on the senate floor. because remember, any one senate committee, including the commerce committee, contains at most a few dozen members of this body, a couple of dozen is about all, and there are of course 100 of us. every one of us hold an election certificate. one of the most fundamental rules in the constitution, a rule that by directive of the constitution itself can't be changed is the principle of equal representation among the states in the senate. so to give life and vitality to that, it's absolutely imperative that individual senators be given the opportunity to have meaningful input into legislation, whether they sit on the committee of jurisdiction or not. to that end, mr. president, throughout the nearly two and a half centuries of the existence of this body, the united states

senate, our rules have given pretty broad deference to individual members and given certain prerogatives to each and every senator, no matter how junior or how senior. whether each member is with the minority party or with the majority party. and the whole basis of traditions in the senate built into our rules, things like the filibuster, like the cloture standard, they are all designed to allow members to engage in robust debate. you can't really have meaningful debate and meaningful input from every member of this body who wants to participate unless you have something of an open amendment process on the floor. now this was always the norm in the history of the senate. it was even when i arrived here and was sworn into office at the beginning of 2011. the presiding officer of course

joined us not too long after that, and thus commenced the golden era of the united states senate, with the arrival of the current presiding officer. but when we arrived here in the senate, there was still real live, significant vestiges of the way the place always operated, namely, when we had a significant bill, especially a significant must-pass legislative vehicle like the faa reauthorization bill we're considering now. it was still normal, still to be expected that an individual senator could come down to the senate floor, call up his or her amendment, and make that amendment pending. once an amendment is made pending, then the senate has an obligation eventually to dispose of that amendment either by passing it or voting on it and declining to pass it or tabling it or something like that. there were not many options but it had to be disposed of once it was made pending. we've gotten into a bad pattern

since then. and unfortunately both political parties have played a role in this. but we've had an increased prevalence of a situation in which the majority leader will come to the senate floor, file cloture on the bill to bring debate to a close, and set that process for bringing debate to a close in motion and fill the tree. fill the tree, filling the amendment tree is what that refers to. that's a fancy senate terminology that just means the majority leader has some tricks at his disposal to make it nearly impossible to get amendments made pending by individual rank and file members. it's fairly common that we could make our amendments pending as recently as 2011, 2012, when i arrived and then when the presiding officer arrived in the senate. it's almost unheard of now because filing cloture and

filling the tree have become almost automatic, almost reflect sieve. they're almost self-perpetuating. and it's relentless to the point that many members who have joined us since then have not ever really experienced the senate the way it is more properly expected to function. where individual members have to beg and plead, go on bended knee to political leaders of both parties in the senate asking, please, please, may i have a chance to do this? and without the acquiescence of the majority leader, the only way you can get your amendment pending in many circumstances involves coming to the floor and asking unanimous consent to make it pending. that consent is too routinely denied now, very often by the majority party, typically by the majority party. sometimes not. and what that results in is really a truncation, an

abbreviation, short circuiting of the legislative process as it's always functioned here, as it was designed to function in the senate rules, as i imagine it to have been envisioned by the founding fathers. and as a result, there are 100 members of this body, and they should all have the opportunity to fight publicly for their constituents, to make improvements to the bill, to take away things they consider harmful, to add things that have not been included that they think should be included. this bill has not been amended on the senate floor. that's why i opposed cloture moments ago. like i say, there are some things in this bill i really like. there are other things that i don't like. but the biggest single reason to oppose cloture on the bill is i don't know how you can in good conscience vote to bring debate to a close when the debate has effectively not happened, at least not on the senate floor.

and i don't believe debate can happen meaningfully, effectively on an amendable vehicle like this one where there's been no opportunity to amend. the bill hasn't been amended on the senate floor. the senate shouldn't simply agree to rubber stamp the so-called four corners agreement. four corners agreement, that term can refer to several different things. very often it means it's been blessed, depending on the nature of the bill, very often it's been blessed by the law firm of schumer, mcconnell, johnson, and jeffries, or perhaps the law firm of schumer, mcconnell, johnson and jeffries accompanied by the chair and ranking member of the appropriate legislative committee or committees. but we're not a republic ber stamp for -- a rubber stamp for one or more committees or for the firm. we are each elected by the voters in our respective states, should stand accountable to them. and in order to do our jobs, we've got to stand here and be willing to debate. if you don't want to fight fires, for heavens sakes don't

become a fire fighter. if you don't want to cast votes, including lots of votes on legislation even where you don't feel like taking the vote, even where you'd rather be kicking back drinking a root beer or something, you'd be really doing your constituents a disservice if you subjugated your own desires, your own desire for bliss and for inaction, and you preferred those over your duty to your constituents who elected you. so we're not here to celebrate somebody's birthday. we're not here to rubber stamp what the committees do or what the law firm suggests. we are here to legislate. we're not really legislators. we are a gigantic rubber stamp to the extent that we ourselves don't have the opportunity to vote for amendments. that's why i call upon all senators within the sound of my

voice, whether you're a democrat or a republican or something else, a liberal or a conservative, whether you've been here for a few years or a really long time, it doesn't matter. you should want your job that you worked really hard to get elected to, you should want to be able to to do your job. i want to be clear, there are a lot of amendments that have been prominently featured and touted in connection with this bill, amendments, sponsors of which have really aggressively argued for it. a lot of those amendments are not amendments that i support. in fact, a number of them are things that i strongly oppose and would really hope would not pass. some of them i'd support. others i wouldn't. notwithstanding the fact that some of them really are awful. call me old-fashioned, mr. president, but i tnk