more, including wow. >> the world has changed. today, the fast reliable internet connection is something no one can live without. so, wow is there for our customers, with speed, reliability, value and choice, now more than ever, it all starts with great internet, wow. >> wow supports c-span as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> we take you live now to the capitol where the senate is about to gavel in. today lawmakers are considering more of president biden's u.s. district court nominees. they'll also vote on the house-passed resolution to repeal a sec rule on banks holding cryptocurrency access for customers. you're watching live coverage on c-span2. ...

the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal god, who shall abide in your tabernacle? who shall dwell in your holy hills? you've given us the answers. those who walk upright and work righteousness, who speak the truth in their hearts will abide in your presence. today, prepare the men and woman

of this body to dwell with you. lord, give them the integrity to be true to their duties, always striving to please you. fix their hearts on you, o god, that everything they think, say, and do will be under your lordship. send your light and truth into this chamber as you guide our senators in these challenging times. we pray in your wonderful name. amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to our 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 16, 2024. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable raphael warnock, a senator from the state of georgia, 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 proceed to the consideration of h. j. res. 109, which the clerk will report. the clerk: h. j. res. 109, providing for the congressional

disapproval chapter 8.

>> your professional capacity suggested to the present to invoke executive privilege. he invoke executive privilege. if protection both personally. is that a conflict of interest? >> the justice department is a fundamental part of our . people depend on us to ensure that our investigations and prosecutions are conducted according to the facts, according to the law. we have gone to extraordinary lengths to ensure that the kiddies get responses to their legitimate questions. but this is not one. to the contrary, this is one that would harm our ability in the future to successfully

pursue sensitive investigations. now, , there had been a series f unprecedented and, frankly, unfounded attacks on the justice department. this request, this effort to use as an attempt to as a method -- is just the most recent here and effort to threaten, to define our investigations and the way in which there are contributions to an atmosphere that puts our agents and prosecutors at risk, these are wrong. look, dorothy i can do is continue to do the right thing. i will protect this building and its people. >> you kind of answer that but i was wondering, like what the combined efforts to defund jack's method under texan vitamin station officials say about the broader effort to

discredit you and to discredit the justice department and also how you manage that. how are you resisting that and what can you do about that as attorney general? >> we have to go by following the federal prince was a prosecution as a said we follow the facts and the law. we screened out outside inappropriate influences. that's what we're doing here. we are protecting our ability to continue to do high profile and sensitive investigations. and we will continue to do that. >> mr. attorney general, it now seems -- small, that the two federal cases will begin trial let alone finish trial this year. what does that say about the case of the confidence in this justice department? >> look, special counsel brought both cases last year. here probally requested speedy trial.

the matter is that enhance of the judiciary and unlikely bill to expand any further. [inaudible]

.

>> hello, everyone. welcome senator stabenow, , and it's good to see all. we got some important meetings and business to do in a minute. but i do want to kick it off with one comment. thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you. now, first i want to thank you for your leadership. i know it may not look it but i've seen it for a while. or i know i don't look like a been around a lot but never before have seen a nation as

much of our military. in europe you train and equip ukrainian troops against russia's onslaught. in africa you are working with our partners to take care of the battlefield. the indo-pacific your building an alliance with australia, philippines, japan and the republic of korea. and improving relationship with india as well. putting our nation under strong position as possibly you can. in the middle east have stepped up to defend against a range of unprecedented attacks on u.s. forces, israel and her partners across the region. i look forward to discussing, remarkable, , look for discussig all these issues this afternoon. next, i want to thank you for your commitment. i i know last year hasn't been easy. i know as you face a crisis abroad you've also face unprecedented chaos here at

home. i'm sure doesn't confuse it all. it does me, sometimes. and potential shutdowns, performance stunts that impact morale and readiness, too many military families. but you keep going and you keep showing every person most hard to serve, your made up of incredible men and women. and i know i said before but i mean it. i don't think there's any comparable counterargument. with the greatest fighting force worlds ever seen. that's a fact. and i've had -- since i was a young senator. we have a lot of obligations, only one overwhelming obligation, repair those who stand in harm's way with all they need and take care of them and a families.

we made progress on this front as well. i'm proud for the first time in nearly a decade rates of sexual assault and harassment are within active-duty forces are down, are down because of your leadership. and finally us is that a moment ago know i've asked a lot of you but in everyone in this room i have one more request, please pass along my deepest thanks to all the servicemen and women under your control. and under your charge. i really mean it. right now all across the world where defending our nation. they are defended everyday, risking their own safety, the safety of their fellow citizen. this afternoon on the four to discussing the whole range of things and now i would like to help continue to support your needs and what a great force. i i want to thank you again for being here, and i'm going to ask the press delete so we get down to business. thank you. [inaudible question]

[inaudible question] >> thank you, everyone. appreciate it.

mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: mr. president, tomorrow, tomorrow will be 100 days since senate republicans blocked the strongest border security bill we've seen in a generation. the last two weeks i have come to the floor with my democratic colleagues calling on both sides to set partisanship aside and work together to fix the problems on our southern border. america is proudly a nation of immigrants. we always have been, we always will be. most americans know our country is made stronger because of immigration, but they also know the current condition of the border -- of border security is simply not acceptable. it's a problem going back many years, going back many administrations. after decades of neglect, our border security needs an update. our immigration rules need reform to provide more opportunity and fairness and humane treatment of those who seek opportunity in america, and

the only way we fix the border long term is through bipartisan legislation. let me say it again -- the only way we fix the border long term is through bipartisan legis legislation, like the one we had in the senate three months ago. the bipartisan border act was precisely the kind of proposal republicans and democrats have been trying to produce for years. it con taped the strongest -- contained the strongest border security conditions in a generation. it would have hired thousands of new border agents, invested in cutting edge technology to stop the flow of fentanyl, and given the president new authorities to close the border. now our bill wasn't perfect. not every democrat supported this bill. but unlike other bills, it was designed to pass both chambers in divided government. if our bill was good enough to win the support of the actual border patrol agents, shouldn't it have been good enough to win the support of senate

republicans? and speaking candidly when our bill was first released, many republican colleagues were surprised with how strong it was, even if only in private. py dare say a significant percentage of the republican caucus would have supported it. if both chambers would have voted on our bill without outside interference, i'm confident it would have passed and reached the president's desk. but, as we all know, donald trump swooped in and told his maga supporters to kill the bill. in fact, he was proud to kill it. quote, please blame it on me, unquote, he said. those were trump's words after our bill went down. i certainly don't think elects very mart -- don't think it's s very smart. him to brag this. donald trump treats this like a game. most americans want to see the border fixed, regardless who does it. democrats have not walked away from trying to get something done on the border. we want to work with our republican colleagues on border security, just as we showed we were serious when we worked with

them earlier this year. but our republican colleagues must show they are ready to match their border rhetoric with real action. if republicans are going to call the border an emergency, they can't suddenly kick the can down the road and say he can -- say we can deal with this later and put up a partisan bill they know won't pass. americans don't want just talk, talk, talk on the border. americans want action. americans want bipartisanship. americans want to pass the border security bill like the one we released three months ago. 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. quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection.

mr. mcconnell: twice in the last week, president biden has suggested that inflation was 9% when he took office and claimed credit for bringing it down. "the washington post" gave him a rating of four pinocchios for that very tall tale. in reality, inflation in january of 2021 was 1.4%. as of this month, prices have increased 20% since then. by one estimate -- listen to this -- the average u.s. household has to spend an additional $1,074 every month to keep up the same standard of living they had when president

biden took office. the numbers don't lie and neither do the american people. they know nonsense when they hear it. a 32-year-old engineer from nevada who voted for the president in 2020 told reporters he's frustrated with the way the white house frames the economy. here's what he had to say. it's concerning to me when i keep seeing press come out of the white house where they keep saying the economy is good. that's really weird. because i'm paying more on taxes, more on groceries, more on housing, and more on fuel. so that doesn't feel good. small business owners in

particular have been hard hit by increased prices. they have smaller margins to absorb the increased costs for materials, labor, and other operating expense. and they risk losing customers every time they raise their prices. one small business owner in new york, fourth-generation roofer, repo reported, we've increased more in the last four years than we did in ten. we don't have a choice. the owner of a small printing company in washington state described painful price hikes as death by a thousand paper cuts. he went on to say people are tired of price increases. we are tired of price increases.

that's that. the american people are tired of price increases. they're tired of lies about it. and it's safe to say they're tired of bidenomics. on another matter, this week putin is in beijing tending to what russia and china have called a friendship without limits. but last week it was president xi who took to the road and notably his warmest welcome was in budapest, hungary. the visit from prc's leader came as more of our european nato allies are waking up not only to the harsh reality of russian aggression but also to the

linked threats facing western security and prosperity to the urgent requirements of defense production and to the particular challenge the prc poses as a systemic rival. but hungary? not so much. victor orbin's government has cultivated the prc as its top trading partner outside the e.u. it's given beijing sweeping law enforcement authorities to hunt dissidents on hungarian soil. it was the first european country to join beijing's belt and road initiative which other european governments, for example, like prime minister maloney's in italy have wisely decided to leave. and hungary has doubled down on

huawei after the previous u.s. administration went to great lengths to encourage europe -- hungary has let the prc communications giant bake chinese technology into the country's 5g expansion. even as other european nations are paying vast sums to extract huawei from their communications infrastructure, hungary is now home to huawei's european regional logistics hub, a variable gateway to the west. and last week prime minister orbin's government signed 19 more agreements with the prc from transportation infrastructure to potential nuclear cooperation. a joint statement described the two countries' relationship as,

quote, an all weather comprehensive strategic partnership. that's between hungary and the prc. but the details of china's growing influence in budapest that raise red flags for anyone serious about strategic competition with china. from across the atlantic, there's good reason to appreciate a government willing to question -- things like shortsighted climate change policy or swim upstream in defense of conservative values. but here in washington, we're obliged to evaluate whether allies and partners share our interests. not just our values. and whatever their pluck in dealing with e.u. bureaucrats in

brussels, hungary's leaders have cozied up to america's greatest strategic adversary. now, it's one thing that a latter-day walter durantee who shields for putin on twitter might also admire the only nato member whose lead er -- to pay obeisance to the russian dictator. but hungary's willingness to serve as china's door mat to europe, that part is tougher to square with the position of folks in washington for whom singular focus on china has recently become an article of faith. the democratic party's increasing willingness to abandon israel cries out in frequent and heavy doses of

reality and harsh criticism. unfortunately so does this increasingly muddled logic on the threats facing the west, russia, and china. nato, a government that fauvens over a -- fawns over a russian neo soviet imperialist, a european nation that rolls out the red carpet for greater coercion and espionage from a communist regime, this isn't where america should be taking our foreign policy cues. how about sending a high profile diplomat and trade mission to tehran? hungary's voluntary legitization of the world's most active state sponsor of terrorism. i don't think conserve difference -- conservatives have any time for those who suck up to iran.

maybe aligning with autocrats is in hungary's interest, but let's return from budapest and discuss what's in america's interest. america has an interest in strong allies who are willing to pull more of the weight of collective defense in the face of threats from russia, iran, and china. and we could have welcomed two more such allies in our ranks much sooner, if not for orban's obstruction of sweden and finland's access to nato. not only do these countries have a robust defense and capable militaries, they also each have companies that offer safer alternatives to chinese 5g technology. and while many of us in washington were urging the e.u. was doing more to share

the burden -- hungary stands at the crossroads of three powers bent on undermining our security and prosperity. and the orban government is modeling what not to do in the face of these challenges. my message to america's european allies has been the same no matter their politics or their culture. russia, china, iran, and north korea are working together to undermine us and we need to move faster to rebuild the hard power we need to deter and defeat aggression and hold one another accountable to share the burden of collected defense. there's plenty of work left to do on this front.

now, one final matter. earlier this week, i discussed the growing problems of bbs, bb derangement syndrome, there is a more object knocks just -- objnoxious form of it. this has been ing b incubating n college campuses and making news at harvard. this is unfortunate but at this point it shouldn't surprise anyone. remember cambridge, massachusetts, was ground zero for the current wave of anti-semitism, not to be outdone by their rival to the south princeton, harvard leaders have

announced their own sort of amnesty for the hamas radicals who have intimidated students in recent months. the interim president of harvard and the dean will be meeting with the crimson red guards, quote, to hear their perspective on academic matters relating to long-standing conflicts in the middle east. the interim president also acknowledges, quote, the profound grief people feel over the effects of the ongoing war and the campus hamas sympathizers will also receive a meeting with the top official from the harvard corporation to address questions about the university endowment. divest sanction -- boycott

di divest. it seems the oldest university is this, lawlessness, radicalism, perhaps it's time to divest and sanction the ivy league. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

>> what are the most important supreme court decisions of all time, it's part of our toward justice. on may 17, 1954, the supreme court announced its decision in brown v. board of education. unanimously, unanimously declaring the racist legal doctrine of separate but equal

unconstitutional. today we celebrate peter strzok anniversary and how far we've come as a country since the dark days of jim crow. thankfully we've made substantial progress in addressing racial disparities in education. however, significant step dimmick disparities do still exist today. more work needs to be done to promote racial equity and in discrimination inside and outside the classroom. when the supreme court announced its decision in 1954, the demographics of america in the school age children were significantly different than they are today. at the time the school-age population according to the century foundation was roughly 85% white, 12% black, less than 4% of the races. contrast that with today, america school-age population is much more diverse. 48% white, 27% hispanic, 15% black, 6% black, 6% asian, 1%

american indian, and 4% multiracial. yet even with this increase, dramatic increase in diversity, america's schools too often remain segregated by race. as of the 2018-2019 school year one in six public school students attended schools where more than 90% of their peers had the same racial background. illinois has three of the countries top 11 most segregated urban school districts. this lack of racial diversity in our schools is caused in part by unfair exclusionary zoning policies to keep low income families out of schools and wealthier communities. education can play significant role in helping to close the wealth gap between families unfortunately due to a modern-day segregation many black and brown students often cannot access the same high-quality education as their white peers. if you look at data from this public schools going back to

1967, you will see segregation between black and white students has increased by 64% since 1988 in the 100 largest school districts. all school segregation is not pre-brown versus board of education levels. it is still high and it has been rising steadily since the late 1980s. and because where you go to school depends on your zip code, students from poor neighborhoods and segregated city are often trapped in underperforming schools. this paneling segregation has become more difficult now than it would've been 70 or 80 years ago but we cannot ignore the challenge. unless we focus on desegregating america, and its neighbors, brown's promise of integrated education will remain an unattainable goal. the brown decision was supposed to be the first step in a long march towards equality. and help set the stage for challenges to other policies such as barriers to fair

housing, equal employment, voting rights and public accommodations. unfortunately today the forces of intolerance are working to turn back the clock. just last year the supreme court struck down the gates of precedent by rolling affirmative action policies at two universities were unconstitutional. the attack on affirmative action threatens not just opportunities in education but also equal access to employment and contracts with minorities. the decision rewind the clock and re-create barriers to entry for young minority students looking to pursue a degree in higher education at advanced colleges. quality education should be a right in her country, not a privilege. as a country we still struggle to fulfill that promise. public schools and many other elements in society remain separate and unequal. diminishing opportunities for millions. congress must focus on enacting policies and using resources to provide every student black-white and brown with the

tools they need to learn and thrive in america. we must advocate for all students of heavy race of every place to have these resources to learn without limits. as we celebrate 70 years since this historic decision we honor the brave individuals who fought hard to bring it to reality. those of us here today must honor their determination to sacrifice by continuing. on this seventh anniversary i urge my colleagues to continue working toward equality within her education system in society. it is long overdue for us to repair the broken systems that no longer serve our children,, our grandchildren, and our country. mr. president, i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

mr. thune: mr. president. the presiding officer: the republican whip. mr. thune: i ask unanimous consent the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: mr. president, this week is police week, a week to honor our nation's law enforcement officers. these men and women have had a challenging few years. unsurprisingly calls to defund the police and attacks on the vital work that they do left a lot of officers discouraged and demoralized, even as they were asked to shoulder the same burdens with less support. fortunately, mr. president, i think time has started to provide a corrective as we've watched crime take a toll on american citizens, i think governments and individuals are more and more remembering just how much we need the men and women who bring order and safety to america's streets. and i hope and pray that we are coming to this week with a

greater appreciation for the essential work that these men and women perform. i said essential, mr. president, and they are. but let's remember something else as well. police officers aren't just necessary, they're noble. they sign up for a heroic line of work, for a job that asks them to get up in the morning and go out and put themselves in danger to keep the rest of us out of it. and that asks them to do -- ask them to do that day after day, week after week, month after month, and year after year. and they do it willingly, g gladly. and when they're not doing the big things, mr. president, the hard, heroic work of confronting dangerous situations and individuals, you can frequently find police officers doing the little things as well -- speaking to a school class,

helping out a stranded motorist, buying shoes for a child in need. police officers don't just defend our communities. they play a vital role in building them up. mr. president, i'm particularly grateful for our law enforcement officers in south dakota, who work so hard in communities across our state. they've shared challenges faced by other police departments across the country over the past few years, including dealing with deadly drugs like fentanyl coming over the border and making their way around the united states. and they face some specific south dakota challenges. i'm also deeply grateful for the capitol police here in washington, d.c. who spend their days ensuring members of congress, our staffs, and the many visitors to the u.s. capitol building can go about their days in safety. and mr. president, i am grateful to their families. having a husband or wife, a dad

or a mom who is a police officer is not always an easy thing. knowing that your parent or spouse may not come home from work one day is a difficult burden to carry. and there this police week -- in this police week, as we contemplate the service and sacrifice of our nation's police officers, it is important to remember the service and sacrifice of their families as well. mr. president, before i close, i want to mention the heroic service of moody county chief deputy ken prorock of south dakota killed in february of this year in the line of duty. i want to read a couple of lines from the officer down memorial page on chief deputy prorock's actions. i quote -- chief deputy sheriff ken prorock was struck and killed by the driver of a vehicle being pursued by the madison police department at 4:12 p.m. chief deputy prorock responded and was deploying spike strips

in coleman. the driver intentionally swerved toward chief deputy prorock, killing him, end quote. mr. president, the line that stands out for me the most in that memorial is this -- chief deputy prorock responded to the call for assistance. he heard a call for help, and he went to answer it, knowing full well he could be placing himself in danger, up to and including the loss of his life. but he went anyway. that, mr. president, is the heroism of chief deputy prorock, and it is the heroism of the men and women who serve in our nation's police officers and who, when they hear a call for help, go out to answer it. mr. president, may god richly bless all the men and women who serve our nation as police

off officers, and may he protect them as they stand on guard for us. 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. is .

the last two weeks have come to the floor with my democratic colleagues calling on both sides to set partisanship aside to work together to fix the problems on our southern border. america is proudly a nation of immigrants. we always have been and we always will be. most americans know our country is made stronger because of immigration but they also know the current condition of the border security is simply not acceptable. it's a problem going back many years, going back many administrations. after decades of neglect our border security needs an update. our immigration rules need reforms. ms. warren: i ask that it be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. warren: thank you. we're about to hold a vote under

the congressional review act. the cra was passed in 1994 to give congress a six-month window of 60 legislative days to review an agency rule, and if congress doesn't like that rule, 60 days to overturn it. however, our vote today is not a vote on a notice and comment rule. in fact, our vote today is on something that doesn't even have the force of law. our vote today is on a staff accounting bulletin issued by the sec back in the spring of 2022. now, the sec has issued these bulletins, they're called sab's, for nearly 50 years, without anyone ever suggesting that they were subject to the cra. the cra has a time limit for a reason, so settled law is settled law, something that everyone can count on.

and the cra is limited to agency rules, so that a single member of congress can't tie up agencies in congress with expedited procedures under the cra by raking over the details of every agency action. today's vote, coming more than two years after the sec wrote the bulletin, and applying to a staff bulletin rather than a rule, is far outside the scope of the cra. we should not be holding this vote, and all by itself that is a good enough reason to vote no. but let's talk about the substance of this s arn b for just a minute. fairness -- of this sab for a minute. investors in pension funds and 401-k's and workers trying to save for retirement, all have a right to know what they are investing in. securities and exchange commission is the guardian of

those financial disclosures that give investors information about a company's business plan, about its leadership and about the risks it faces in the market. so to help public companies disclose information about their business in a consistent way, from one business to another to another, so that investors can make comparisons, the sec issues staff accounting bulletins, these sab's, to clarify guidance about emerging issues in the accounting industry, how to tell people about this business. sab number 121 was published to provide accounting guidance to companies that hold customers' digital assets. it says that because of some of the unique technological and legal risks associated with digital assets, public companies

that safeguard crypto assets for their customers should make the risks associated withholding those assets visible to inve investors. one way that this risk shows up is that if a company safeguards property for someone, just an ordinary company is holding property for someone, like stocks or bonds or jewelry, the company bears the risk that the property could be stolen, and that is why for companies that are hold property for others carry insurance, and it's why they have really big safes. but if the company safeguards crypto, there is a special risk that's not there with other kinds of property. crypto can get hacked. in fact, there have been some pretty major crypto hacks in which assets just vanish. the risk isn't theoretical. it is real.

ftx, $600 million, poof. binance, $586 million, poof. ronan network, $625 million, poof. and poly network, $611 million, poof. all in just the last three years. we have seen multiple hacks of crypto platforms. the unique risks of crypto can create liabilities that seriously impact a company's financial condition. sab121 simply clarifies how companies should account for those risks in their financial disclosures. that's all it's doing. now, there's a second kind of problem with crypto, and that is if a company safeguards property for someone, stock, bonds, jewelry like we talked about earlier, if the company doing the safeguarding goes bankrupt, the true owner of the stocks or

the bonds or the jewelry can get their property back. but if the company that goes bankrupt is holding crypto, the recall yurts of -- peculiarities mean that the creditors of the bankrupt company could keep the crypto. the true owner may just be out of luck. once again, sab 121 simply clarifies how companies should make clear those risks in their disclosures. so let's talk for just a minute about what sab 121 doesn't do. it doesn't bring customers' crypto assets onto a crypto platform's balance sheet. or make the platform the owner of a customer's digital assets. instead, sab 121 requires disclosure of what other substantive laws, including

bankruptcy laws, are already doing. this effort to reverse the sec's accounting guidance would deprive investors of accurate information on the risks of holding crypto assets and do road public trust in our financial system and our institutions. the vote today is about ensuring that the sec is able to issue guidance that will help companies of all sizes produce strong, consistent, timely, and meaningful accounting disclosures. it's about protecting critical informational tools that investors and companies have relied on for half a century. and it's about maintaining the integrity of our markets which relies on a clear, consistent accounting rule book. democrats should stand with president biden against this effort to attack the sec's authority.

i urge my colleagues to oppose this bill. 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.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. ms. lummis: i move to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. lummis: i further ask unanimous consent that i be permitted to speak for up to ten minutes prior to the scheduled roll call vote. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. lummis: thank you, mr. president. i rise today to speak in favor of my congressional review act resolution, senate joint resolution 59, and it's house companion, house joint resolution 109, a joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title # 5, u.s. code, of the rule smutted by the securities and exchange commission relating to staff accounting bulletin number 121. staff accounting bulletin 121 or sa b-121, is rule under the

administrative procedure act disguised as an accounting guidance. it was published by the sec staff without the approval of the majority of the commission. accounting guidance is not something that normally would catch the attention of congress. but in this case, a bipartisan group in the senate and house has understand covered serious concerns with sab 121 and the actions of the securities and exchange commission. nearly two years ago i started this process by sending a request for a legal opinion on sab 121 to the government accountability office. that office found that sab 121 is in fact a rule and subject to the congressional review office. shortly after this finding, i

introduced the senate resolution to overturn this guidance in the senate, and congressman mike flood and wiley nichols introduced the house companion. i congratulate them. and house financial services chair patrick mchenry on the strong bipartisan passage of this resolution in the house. staff accounting bulletin 121 put consumers at risk by requiring a covered institution to place consumer assets on its balance sheet. it gives creditors a way to claim those assets in the event of a bankruptcy. we have seen how this plays out for consumers. their assets are frozen for months or even years while the bankruptcy plays out. in some cases they lose their assets entirely.

now, they've entrusted these assets to the custodian. it is the custodian that is in bankruptcy and yet their assets are the assets that are at risk. so this does not protect consumers at all. under sab 121, the ownership of more than $120 trillion in assets placed for safe keeping with america's custodians are in jeopardy. the safest place for digital assets is in a self-hosted wallet but not everyone can digital their assets, including the institutional investors that the sec requires use a qualified custodian. regardless of what each senator thinks about digital assets, they should want consumers and institutional investors to have the option of placing their assets in the safe keeping of

potentially regulated institutions. unfortunately, staff accounting 121 prevents this by placing customer assets on the balance sheet of the custodian, sab 121 also means that capital requirements apply. banks would have to hold as much as a dollar of capital for every dollar of customer assets. as much as the sec would have you believe otherwise, the bank regulators have no discretion on this point. banks must follow u.s. generally accepted accounting principles when calculating capital requirements. finally, sab 121 demonstrates how the sec will push forward its regulatory agenda at the cost of transparency and the stakeholder input that is

required by law. the senate could have avoided this if sec chair gary begins letter was -- ginsler was willing to direct staff to revise accounting bulletin 121 to keep customer digital assets off the balance sheets of custodians and engage in a transparent process. refusing to revisit this policy after bipartisan criticism is odd. the majority of the sec staff accounting bulletins from the last 30 years have been revisions and recisions of prior guidance. revisiting and fixing accounting standards, especially when there's a new technology, is warranted and encouraged. guidance is meant to be flexible. it is not meant to set policy which would require notice and

comment by those that will be regulated pursuant to that regulatory process. but apparently chairman gensler would rather politicize accounting standards to achieve policy goals in the banking industry, an industry i'd like to remind him he does not regulate. rather than conduct a transparent policy-making process. maybe it's because chairman gensler knows that putting customer assets on the balance sheet is bad policy that would garner enough support to finalize a rule or rather would not garner enough support to finalize a rule. maybe it's because he's committed to an ill-informed and unworkable fight against the digital asset industry at any cost. unfortunately, sab 121 does

nothing to protect consumers, nothing to protect consumers. it hurts them. i hope that all of my colleagues will recognize this and join me in voting in support of house joint resolution 109. mr. president, i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: under the previous order, the joint resolution is considered read a third time. the question occurs on passage of the joint resolution. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote: the clerk: ms. baldwin. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mrs. blackburn. mr. blumenthal. mr. booker. mr. boozman. mr. braun. mrs. britt. mr. brown. mr. budd. ms. butler. ms. cantwell. mrs. capito. mr. cardin. mr. carper. mr. casey. mr. cassidy. ms. collins. mr. coons. mr. cornyn. ms. cortez masto.

mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo. mr. cruz. mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst. mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. vote: the clerk: mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty. ms. hassan. mr. hawley.

mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. mr. hoeven. mrs. hyde-smith.

the clerk: mr. johnson. the clerk: 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.

the clerk: 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.

the clerk: mr. young. senators voting in the affirmative -- barrasso, casey, collins, cornyn, fischer, grassley, lummis, marshall, peters. senators voting in the negative -- bennet, markey, ossoff, padilla,

warren. the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, aye.

the clerk: mr. johnson, aye.

the clerk: ms. butler, no.

the clerk: mr. welch, no. mrs. murray, no. the clerk: mr. sanders, no.

vote: the clerk: mr. romney, aye.

the clerk: mr. crapo, aye. mr. vance, aye.

the clerk: mr. kelly, aye. mr. schatz, no. ms. baldwin, no.

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

the clerk: mr. fetterman, no. ms. ernst, aye.

the clerk: mr. warnock, no. the clerk: mr. dp graham, aye.

the clerk: mr. cotton, aye. mr. rounds, aye.

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

the clerk: ms. cantwell, no.

the clerk: mr. braun, aye.

the clerk: mrs. shaheen, no. mr. hoeven, aye. mr. kaine, no. mr. hagerty, aye. mr. blumenthal, no.

the clerk: mr. tester, aye. mr. king, no. ms. rosen, aye.

mr. lee, aye. mr. tuberville aye. miss hassan, no. ms. stabenow, no. mr. cramer, aye. the clerk: ms. duckworth, no. mrs. capito, aye.

the clerk: mr. cassidy, aye. mrs. britt, aye.

the clerk: mr. paul, aye. the clerk: ms. sinema, aye. mr. coons, no.

the clerk: ms. murkowski, aye. mr. carper, no.

the clerk: mr. scott of florida, aye. mr. reed, no.

the clerk: mr. wicker, aye. the clerk: mr. whitehouse, no.

the clerk: mr. lujan, aye.

the clerk: ms. smith, no. the clerk: mr. boozman, aye.

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

the clerk: mr. tillis, aye. the clerk: mr. merkley, no. mr. van hollen, no.

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

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

mr. moran, aye. mr. budd, aye.

the clerk: mrs. hyde-smith, aye. mr. young, aye. vote:

#

the clerk: mr. brown, no. the clerk: mr. manchin, no.

the clerk: mr. sullivan, aye.

the clerk: mrs. blackburn, aye.

the clerk: mr. rubio, aye. # mr. murphy, no.

the clerk: ms. hirono, no.

the clerk: mr. wyden, aye.

the clerk: mr. heinrich, no. ms. klobuchar, no.

mr. lankford, aye. mr. mullin, aye.

the clerk: ms. cortez masto, no.

the clerk: mr. schumer, aye.

the clerk: mr. cruz, aye.

the clerk: mr. durbin, no.

the clerk: mr. mcconnell, aye.

the presiding officer: on this vote the yeas are 60, the nays are 38, the resolution is adopted. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session do consider the following nomination, which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, camela c. theeler, of south dakota, to be united states district judge for the district of south dakota. the presiding officer: there will be two minutes of debate equally divided. mr. thune: i rise today along with my colleague from south dakota, senator rounds, in support of judge camela c. theeler who has been nominated to fill the vacancy at the

district of south dakota. she graduated from the south dakota school of law, she has been a judge for the second district since 2018. she served as an assistant u.s. attorney for south dakota from 2012 to 2018 and spent time at two south dakota law firms. when she's not trying cases, she often welcomes students to the courthouse where she gives tours and give mock trials. i believe her experience and record will make her an excellent district judge, and i believe she has the character and impartiality to serve a lifetime appointment on the federal bench. i'm proud to support her nomination, and i encourage my colleagues to confirm her as a judge for the u.s. district court for the district of south dakota. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from south dakota. mr. rounds: i am pleased to join

senator thune today in supporting the nomination of camela c. theeler. she is a native of my home community and has an impressive list of experience including te teaching and working as a state circuit court judge. it is because of her commitment to upholding the law along with her commitment to public service that she received the south dakota young lawyer of the year award in 2009. she will undoubtedly exercise judicial restraint and apply the law as written. i want to congratulate eric shulte for his confirmation for the u.s. district of south dakota. he is a well qualified attorney and will serve south dakota well as a district judge. i encourage my colleagues to support camela c. theeler for u.s. district judge for the district of south dakota. thank you, mr. president.

the presiding officer: under the previous order, the question occurs on the nomination. the yeas and nays have been kwtd. is there a sufficient second -- kwted. is -- requested. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. 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. vote: the clerk: senators voting in the affirmative -- collins, cornyn, cotton, cramer,

cruz, durbin, ernst, heinrich, hirono, kaine, king, lankford, manchin, mcconnell, moran, murray, rounds, rubio, sinema, smith, tester, thune and wicker. no senator voted in the negative. ms. cortez-masto, aye. ms. murkowski, aye. ms. stabenow, aye.

the clerk: mrs. shaheen, aye. mr. ossoff, aye. mrs. britt, no. mr. carper, aye.

the clerk: ms. hassan, aye.

the clerk: ms. butler, aye. ms. cantwell, aye.

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

the clerk: mrs. hyde-smith, aye. mr. markey, aye.

the clerk: mr. casey, aye. mr. fetterman, aye. the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, aye.

mr. schumer, aye. mr. whitehouse, aye.

the clerk: mr. hickenlooper, aye.

the clerk: mr. kelly, aye. mr. boozman, aye.

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

the clerk: mr. tuberville, no. mr. scott of florida, aye. mr. reed, aye.

vote:

the clerk: mr. sullivan, no. mr. cardin, aye. the clerk: mr. warner, aye. mr. grassley, aye. mr. bennet, aye.

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

the clerk: mr. peters, aye. mrs. fischer, no. mrs. fischer, aye. mr. schatz, aye.

the clerk: mrs. capito, aye.

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

the clerk: mr. risch, aye.

the clerk: mr. booker, aye. mr. young, aye. mr. wyden, aye.

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

the clerk: mrs. blackburn, aye.

the clerk: ms. warren, aye. the clerk: mr. cassidy, aye.

mr. barrasso, aye. mr. blumenthal, aye. mr. schmitt, no. mr. romney, aye. mr. lujan, aye. mr. vance, aye.

mr. coons, aye.

the clerk: ms. klobuchar, aye.

the clerk: mr. scott of south carolina, aye. vote: the clerk: mr. welch, aye. mr. johnson, aye.

the clerk: mr. braun, aye. the clerk: mr. warnock, aye. ms. rosen, aye.

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

the clerk: mr. hoeven, aye.

the clerk: ms. lummis, aye.

the clerk: mr. lee, aye.

the clerk: mr. brown, aye.

vote:

the clerk: mr. mullin, aye.

the clerk: mr. van hollen, aye. the clerk: the yeas are 90, the nays are 4. the nomination is confirmed.

under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table, and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of the following nomination which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, seth robert aframe of new hampshire to be united states circuit judge for the first circuit. the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. hagerty: mr. president, i ask consent for senator schatz and i to conclude our remarks prior to the vote. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. hagerty: thank you. mr. president, last week the house of representatives passed the equal representation act. this commonsense bill would require that only u.s. citizens are counted for the purposes of

allotting congressional districts and electoral votes. this makes sense. in order for every american's vote to have equal weight only legal voters should be counted in apportioning voting power. on the other hand, the current method of counting dmreel aliens dilutes the vote to some americans. it also serves as a perverse incentive for open borders and sanctuary cities because resettling illegal aliens increases the relative power of the states and voters who do so. what was once called a conspiracy theory turned out to be a fact democrats now acknowledge. migrants here illegally are being counted in the census and counted for determining electoral college votes and congressional seats. commerce secretary ramon dough

confirmed this yesterday when i asked her in a committee hearing it is impossible to dispute this increases the policy of districts and states that res resettle illegal aliens. some democrats call for more illegal immigration to increase their power. this year a video surfaced of a new york representative who said when asked about ilillegal alien, she said i need more people for restricting. she said the quiet part out loud. she represents the same district where james madison high school is located. you may recall last fall, last winter james madison high school was the school where students were told to go home and study by zoom so their school could be used to housed illegal aliens.

what congressman clark means is americans are fleeing blue city states in mass and congressional seats are based on population. so if you're losing population you have to lose congressional seats. that's where the illegal aliens come in. this congresswoman's statement helps explain why president biden and democrats are allowing record-breaking illegal immigration. it's to preserve their political power. since president biden took office alone, over ten million illegal aliens entered our country. that could amount to more than a dozen congressional seats. this bill is simple, mr. president. it would simply require that the census bureau include a citizenship question to provide a basic understanding of the u.s. population, which is the purpose of the census. and it would allow for delineation between citizens and noncitizens for apportionment purposes.

my bill would count only citizens for purposes of congressional and lech tral college apportionment. it would count only citizens for determining citizens voting power. that way the power of each americans' vote doesn't depend on how many illegal aliens are in their area. the equal representation act will ensure the weight of every american's vote is equal. it will restore the one-person, one-vote principle and end the perverse incentive under which illegal immigration increases political power. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that as if in legislative session and notwithstanding rule 22 the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 386, h.r. 7109. i further ask that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? a senator: mr. president.

the presiding officer: the senator from hawaii. mr. schatz: mr. president, reserving the right to object. a couple of points. the first point is actually the main point, which is that we had the toughest bipartisan bill on border security in generations on this floor, and when donald trump found out how tough it was and how effective it was going to be, he told senate republicans to kill it, and that's what they did. and so spare me the crocodile tears about the situation at the border. we had the opportunity to fix that, and donald trump explicitly said don't pass this. blame me. blame me. number two, my good friend, the

senator who feels very passionately about this, his quibble is with the constitution. the constitution provides that all persons in the united states are counted. all persons. it says nothing about their citizenship status. and so if you've got a problem with the way the census is conducted, you have to amend the constitution of the united states. not the law, not the statutory laws of the united states. but the constitution of the united states. and i have lost count of the number of times that republicans have tried and failed to add citizenship questions to the census. and we have to see this for what it is, an attempt to reduce the count in immigrant communities. unless that sounds like sort of a rhetorical flourish, a little bit too much, let me remeaned you it was only a few years ago that the supreme court ruled against adding this question. they ruled against it. and why? it's because the real reason

that they wanted to add it was, and i quote, from a conservative effort who thought it would -- here's the quote. quote, be advantageous to republicans and non-hispanic whites. be advantageous to republicans and non-hispanic whites. they wanted to ask people the skip question not -- the citizenship question not in a longer census of questionnaire, but the first question out of the gate, to scare people from interacting with the federal government because someone knocks on your door from the federal government and the first question is are you a citizen? you will decline to participate if you have friends or family or cousins or neighbors who may have mixed citizenship status. and here's the other quote. that it would clearly be a disadvantage for democrats. this was never about enforcing the law. it is a pretext to scare people,

particularly immigrants, out of taking the census, out of being counted at all. to undercount people in favor of one political party and don't take this progressive democrat from hawaii's word for it. i am not a lawyer, but i remember this -- i remember they said they had no nonpretextal reason to ask that question. in other words, they were asking this question in order to gain partisan advantage. so for those reasons, i respectfully object. the presiding officer: the objection is heard. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. hagerty: mr. president, first i'd like to remark that the border security bill would increase the processing of illegal aliens into this country.

that would be the fix. that of -- the bill that he referenced would have not addressed the border security at all. mr. president, my democrat -- my democratic colleague is objecting to legislation that would actually restore the one person, one vote principle. and it would end the perverse incentive in which illegal immigration increases voting power. it is -- congress can direct that a citizenship question be included in the census. it was included for most of history until barack obama's administration took it out in 20 and that the consensus will be conducted in such manner that congress shall by law. second, on the question of what population is counted for

apportioning house seats and electoral votes, the constitution says that you count the number of persons in the u.s. it doesn't mean literally everyone in the u.s. we don't count people here on vacation, we don't count people here on temporary stays, why would we count people here broken in illegally. it means citizens of the american political body, a body that votes on permanent representation and has allegiance to our constitutional system. it may be unconstitutional to count illegal aliens under the 14th amendment, because it undermines the principle of one person, one vote. the constitutional artillery for the in -- argument is indefensible, it supports the notion that more illegal aliens means more political power for the states and the communities. thank you, mr. president.

the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion, kr the clerk: the clerk: senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby bring to a close debate on on calendar number 460, seth robert aframe, of new hampshire, to be united states district judge for the first circuit. the presiding officer: the man tri-quorum call has been waived. is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of seth robert aframe of newspapers shall be a united states circuit judge for the first circuit? the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rules. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mrs. blackburn. mr. blumenthal. mr. booker. mr. boozman. mr. braun. mrs. britt. mr. brown. mr. budd. ms. butler. ms. cantwell. mrs. capito. mr. cardin. mr. carper. mr. casey. mr. cassidy.

ms. collins. mr. coons. mr. cornyn. ms. cortez masto. mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo. mr. cruz. mr. daines.

ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst. mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty. ms. hassan. mr. hawley. mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. mr. hoeven. mrs. hyde-smith. mr. johnson. mr. kaine. mr. kelly. mr. kennedy. mr. king. ms. klobuchar. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan. ms. lummis. mr. manchin. mr. markey. mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. menendez. mr. merkley. mr. moran. mr. mullin. ms. murkowski.

mr. murphy. mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. mr. ricketts. mr. risch. mr. romney. ms. rosen. mr. rounds. mr. rubio. mr. sanders. mr. schatz. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer. mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen. ms. sinema. ms. smith. ms. stabenow. mr. sullivan. mr. tester. mr. thune. mr. tillis. mr. tuberville. mr. van hollen. mr. vance. mr. warner. mr. warnock. ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden. mr. young. senators voting in the affirmative -- brown, collins,

duckworth, hassan, heinrich, king, markey, peters, rosen, schatz, shaheen, smith, warner, welch, whitehouse. senators voting in the negative -- budd, capito, cassidy, cotton, cramer, daines, fischer, grassley, hashg -- hagerty, hyde-smith, moran, mullin, paul, rubio, scott of florida, tillis, vance, young.

the clerk: mr. reed, aye. mr. merkley, aye.

the clerk: mr. cardin, aye. ms. cantwell, aye.

the clerk: mr. sanders, aye. mrs. blackburn, no. mr. braun, no. mr. hickenlooper, aye.

the clerk: mr. sullivan, no.

the clerk: ms. murkowski, aye. the clerk: mr. risch, no. mr. schmitt, no.

the clerk: mr. thune, no. ms. butler, aye.

ms. sinema, aye. mr. boozman, no. mr. wicker, no. mr. hoeven, no.

the clerk: mr. ossoff, aye. mr. barrasso, no. ms. baldwin, aye.

the clerk: mr. cornyn, no. the clerk: mr. booker, aye.

ms. hirono, aye. mrs. gillibrand, aye. mrs. britt, no. mr. fetterman, aye. mr. wyden, aye. mr. padilla, aye.

mr. schumer, aye. ms. stabenow, aye. mr. ricketts, no. ms. cortez-masto, aye.

ms. warren, aye. mr. casey, aye. the clerk: mr. carper, aye.

mr. kaine, aye. mr. mcconnell, no. mr. tester, aye. mr. warnock, aye. mr. bennet, aye.

ms. klobuchar, aye.

the clerk: mr. graham, no. mr. van hollen, aye.

the clerk: mr. lujan, aye.

the clerk: mr. lee, no.

vote:

the clerk: mr. rounds, no. the clerk: mr. durbin, aye.

the clerk: mrs. murray, aye.

the clerk: mr. coons, aye. mr. tuberville, no. mr. furphy, aye. mr. murphy, aye.

the clerk: mr. blumenthal, aye. mr. cruz, no.

the clerk: ms. ernst, no. mr. scott of south carolina, no. mr. manchin, aye.

vote:

the clerk: mr. kelly, aye. the clerk: mr. johnson, no.

the presiding officer: the yeas are 52, the nays are maine the motion is agreed to. -- the nays are 43. the motion is agreed to. mr. schumer: madam president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that all time on the aframe nomination be considered

expired and the confirmation vote be at 5:30 on monday, may 20. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: the question -- i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. sure schumer i move to -- mr. schumer: i move to proceed to consider calendar number 599. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary. chris is a m.lanham of arizona to be united states district judge for the district of arizona. mr. schumer: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: 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 a close debate on the nomination of executive calendar number 599, krissa lanham of

arizona. the presiding officer: i ask that the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i move to road to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on. the motion is agreed to. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar number 600. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. favor fafrment -- all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary. angela m. martinez of arizona to be united states district judge for the district of arizona. mr. schumer: i send a cloture notion the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: 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 a close debate on the nomination of executive calendar number 600, angela m. martinez of arizona to beious district judge for the district of

arizona, signed by 17 senators as follows -- mr. schumer: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. schumer schumer i ask consent that the mandatory quorum calls for the cloture motions filed today be waived. the presiding officer: officer without objection. mr. schumer: madam president, i yield the floor. i note the absence of a quorum quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin. the clerk: ms. baldwin.

the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. brown: i ask unanimous consent that dispense with the quorum. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. brown: each year during police week we honor the law enforcement officers who made the ultimate sacrifice in service to community. this year we added names of four ohioans to the national law enforcement memorial who laid down their lives this year and last year. officer timothy james unwin iii of the springfield township police department. deputy sheriff marcus

zigler. deputy sheriff hamilton. we know already of two names that will be added to the memorial next year. jacob durbin of the euclid police department who was senselessly ambushed and killed in the line of duty last weekend. he leaves behind a father who is part of the department, the same euclid department. i spoke at length to the chief of police in euclid last week. the young man was engaged to be married. his grandfather had been at a suburban police department. we add the name of rodney osborne, southern ohio correctional facility who died in an accident during a training exercise. each of these losses is a tragedy. these ohioans lives are a reminder of the ideals we should strive for. we need officers who are true public servants, people who have

give themselves to the community, people like these brave men. officer timothy james unwin was dedicated more than eight years to serving ohio communities at the hamilton county sheriff's office and springfield township police department. in his free time he enjoyed working on cars and family and friends. he was always helping others. he wanted to make the world a better place. he lost his life in a tragic car crash while responding to a call for help from fellow officers. deputy sheriff marcus zigler worked in security and defense before joining the hamilton county, the cincinnati area in southwest ohio, joining the hamilton county sheriff's department, he was proud to serve as deputy. while he was only on the department for nine months, he

made an impression on colleagues and community. he always had a smile on his face, always happy to lend a hand, eager to grow? his career -- in his career. our thoughts are with his wife and his five children. deputy sheriff john hamilton was a former u.s. navy reservist and army national guard member who served in the prebble county sheriffs team, known for his commitment to our country and to the county community. deputy hamilton is survived by his parents and his daughter. we extend our condolences to them and all the loved ones these public servants leave behind, children who will now grow up without parents -- without a father, or parents who grieve children. this year we added the names of six officers to the memorial who died from covid-19. terrence batemman, billy irig, gerald lynch, matthew mitchell. we can't begin to repay the debt we owe these officers and their

families. we can work to protect more officers and communities, and the communities they swear an oath to serve. it's why i work with colleagues on both parties with legislation to support law enforcement as they do their jobs. if we could help them do their jobs more safely, we all win. two years ago i worked with my colleague, senator grassley and congressman david joyce, my friend from ohio, to pass legislation that provides customs and borders patrol staff with fentanyl containment devices. this keeps officers safe. we know how potent even a little bit of fentanyl is, even to this touch of the skin. and this keeps officers safe. it keeps evidence preserved for trial. now we're working to get cops and sheriff's deputies access to the same protection locally. it's why we introduced the protecting first responders from secondary exposure act. it's why senator cotton and i introduced the providing officers electronic resources act, the power act, to help state and local organizations to

provide high tech screening devices to detect fentanyl. i'll keep fighting to make sure police officers can retire with dignity. my bipartisan social security fairness act will ensure social security benefits will be there when officers retire from a life of dedicated service. one of the best ways we can keep law enforcement in our communities safe is by keeping fentanyl out of the country in the first place. something i've heard from law enforcement personnel at virtually every place in ohio. 400 ohioans every month die from fentanyl poisoning. it means 400 individuals with 400 individual families and 400 different neighborhoods have died. it's why we fought to pass my bipartisan fend off fentanyl act. the president just signed it into law. it's going to help us target the entire fentanyl supply chain from the chemical suppliers in china to the cartels that manufacture and transport the drugs in mexico.

by going after the billions of dollars these traffickers make in illicit profits we target them where it hurts the most, their bank accounts. it's why we work with ohio and national law enforcement to write this bill and build a broad bipartisan coalition to get it passed. this police week let's offer more than empty words. let's provide support and resources the men and women need to keep themselves and communities safe. nothing can be done to truly appreciate the sacrifice so many have made by laying down their lives, we honor them by supporting their fellow officers. we must get our officers the tools and the training that they need to do their jobs and to build trust with the communities where we all live, the communities that they are sworn to protect. thank you, madam president.

the presiding officer: will the senator from ohio withhold his request. the senator from indiana. mr. young: thank you, madam president. i ask unanimous consent that demark shulze, a 2005 graduate of the university of notre dame be granted floor privileges until august 3, 2024. madam president, 100 years ago this week a legend was born. 100 years ago the champions of religious freedom refused to back down in the face of intolerance and hate. 100 years ago today, madam president, the university of notre dame earned the

moniker, the fighting irish. on may 17, 1924, thousands of members of the indiana chapter of the ku klux klan gathered in south bend, indiana, for a rally, a rally called by their infamous leader t.c. stevenson. the target that day for their despicable and misguided message of true americanism was the catholic institution of the university of notre dame. the young men who attended the university in the holy cross priest who taught at it: in the years that preceded that day the kkk watched with despair as coach newt rock ni barn stormed across the country winning praise for their fighting spirit in the university. madam president, we can't forget

that at the time catholics were a major target for the kkk in the midwest. and notre dame's success off and on the field was an affront to the klan's false message of superiority. the kkk gathered outside the golden dome for a three-day rally complete with parades, speeches and dances and no small amount of overtly violent intimidation. you see, they weren't used to anyone standing up to them. they weren't expecting anyone to stand up to them. and little did they know that the mostly irish catholic student body across the street had no intention of being intimidated. little did they know that the students were so animated, that the university president, father matthew walsh, a world war i veteran had been trying in vain to tell his students to stay

safe and shelter in the school. little did the kkk know that on that day the intended aspersion that the student body co-opted as their preferred nickname, the fighting irish, was about to reach a national audience. as the story goes, no doubt colored with some apocryphal additions over the years the klan arriving in south bend and hundreds of students marched out to meet them. at first the students almost playfully offered to assist the klansmen in finding lonling and food -- lodging and food, sometimes leading them down alleys, other times back out of town. when one kkk leader became wise to the ruse and pointed a pistol at a student who had intended to pull down the unsacred cross of lights hung in a downtown third floor window, well, as they say, all hell broke loose.

klansmen that chose to fight quickly met their match and scrambled out of town. students grabbed produce, yes, even potatoes, from a local vegetable stand and hurled them at the cross, taking out all but the uppermost bulb. at that very moment legendary four horseman quarterback harry threw a potato 40 feet in the air at the bulb, successfully darkening the last unholy light. p moments later the rest of the klansmen were run out of town, tails between their legs. a subsequent exchange the next day led to another route by notre dame running the record to two and 0 against the klansmen that weekend. in describing the takedown of the most vaunted kkk chapter in

the country several newspapers seized on the fighting irish moniker that had previously only been applied to the football team. if you're interested in more details about that fateful weekend, notre dame alum todd tucker wrote a book entitled notre dame vs. the klan. events like the one that took place in south bend, indiana, often prove to be historical inflection points. in early 1924 intolerance and hatred were on the rise in the country not just in indiana, but from coast to coast. for many, it was easier to give in to the fear of an uncertain future than to work to build a better community. but indiana and the country were soon to turn a corner in the timing -- and the timing couldn't have been more poetic. rockney, stoldrey and the rest

of the football team would pull off a perfect season in route to the 1924 national championship. and the indiana chapter, the kkk would quickly fizzle after the rape and murder conviction of its leader, d.c. stevenson, the next year. as for the university itself and its brave and proud student body, it would be three more years before father walsh would reluctantly give in to the wave that started that may day in 1924 and officialize the nickname the fighting irish. but make no mistake, madam president, it was 100 years ago this week in an act of defiance against religious intolerance that the fighting irish truly came into being. and so on this day we remember their bravery in exercising their most basic of american freedoms as we celebrate the day they put the fight in the

university of notre dame fighting irish. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor.

.

the presiding officer: the senator from california. butler butler mr. president -- ms. butler: mr. president, today i rise on the heels of mother

day to talk about the health crisis for black mothers. i begin by acknowledging the invaluable contribution mothers make each day, kissing scraped knees and chasing monsters out of the closet, mr. president, mothers are indeed our nation's true superheroes. all across the country mothers are the driving force for our economy. according to the center for american progress, mothers are to thanks for most of the economic gains enjoyed by middle classes families -- middle-class families. their data shows that the women's increased labor participation and increased earnings grew the u.s. economy by 13.5%, which translates to an additional $2 trillion in

economic activity. and according to the department of labor, 40.5% of working mothers are equal primary or sole income earners for their family, a fact that is especially true for black mothers. in the united states, black mothers are a critical part of our labor force and 80% of them are the breadwinners for their families. but, mr. president, these same mothers face a health care system that is failing them. the united states has the highest maternal mortality in the world amongst high-income nations. thousands of women in america have lost their lives due to pregnancy-related causes in recent years and over the past decade while the birth rate in this country has declined by roughly 20%, maternal mortality rates have steadily risen. this crisis is exacerbated in

communities grappling with the lack of essential maternal health care. according to the march of dimes, one-third of the counties in the united states are considered maternity care deserts, meaning there are no hospitals providing obstetric care, no birds centers and no obstetric providers. imagine your loved one preparing to give birth and bring new life into your family having no choice but to drive hours away from home to seek care. we know from the data that this crisis has not been felt equally among black and native indigenous communities, maternal mortality rates are two to four times higher compared to those of white communities. the good news is the champions

in this chamber have spent years laying the groundwork with a path toward rectifying this crisis. in 2018 vice president harris had to initiate the momnibus act, it is a comprehensive legislative package that would make historic investments to address every dimension of the black maternal health crisis. i'm proud to serve as a cosponsor of this much-needed legislation. the good news, mr. president, is that since leaving this chamber, vice president harris has remained consistent and insistent in carrying these efforts forward into the biden-harris administration, spearheaded the administration's blueprint to address the

maternal health crisis. the blew print has models to provide health care for low-income women and a strategy to address mental health and substance abuse disorders. this, along with thoughtful legislation, is what we need to combat this devastating crisis. as a member of this chamber, it's a privilege to truly be able to contribute to those legislative solutions and be a part of this fight. that's why i introduced the nih improve act, alongside katie britt and representatives underwood and fitzpatrick in the house to help address some of these disparities, the nih improve act authorizes the funding necessary to sustain the

critical activities of the national institute of health's improve initiative, which supports research on how to reduce preventible causes of maternal death, improve health for women before, during, and after pregnancy. the initiative aims to address the four most causes of maternal mortality in the united states as well as significant pregnancy-associated and pregnancy related health complications such as diabetes, obesity, mental health and substance use disorders. this bill would provide the steady funding necessary, at least for the next seven years, to ensure that nih it continue to pursue this research into the root causes of our maternal mortality crisis. the bill will also help to build an evidence base to further improve maternal health care in

underserved areas and target health disparities associated with maternal mortality and morbidity. just one example of how the improve initiative is already supporting critical maternal health research is the story of a young researcher, a doctor of public health student of tulane university. through the support of the improve initiative, denise and her colleagues are conducting pregnancy-related research to eliminate disparities. specifically their rae search exams strategies to support healthy eating and increased physical activity among low-income, postpartum women with a history of diabetes during pregnancy, one of the many conditions associated with

maternal mortality. denise studies such as this has transformed her educational experience and catapulted her professional aims as a training research scientist. in addition, denise is also a black mother. denise is a manifestation, a real-life example that black women, black mothers, and all mothers are so much more than just a statistic. they are vigorously working towards solutions that away need to improve maternal health outcomes in this country. the urgent research efforts called for and outlined in the nih improve act and initiative will not only help to address our nation's maternal health crisis, they will also help to support the incomes generation of black mothers, scientists, and leaders such as denise.

the lifesaving research supported through the nih improve act will bolster solutions that are designed to combat the crisis that all women are facing. mr. president, i'll close with this. in the majority opinion of the dobbs decision that was -- that essentially ripped away the reproductive freedom of women that they have fought for nearly 50 years, justice alito wrote, women are not without ee heckoral or -- electoral or political power. well, i disagree with most of what justice aleito wrote, excet this, the women in this country demand the health care that we need, demands the health care that we deserve. advancing the nih improve act

will serve as a key step towards accomplishing that. and so while i serve in this chamber, i will continue to push and to push us to deliver the investments required to address this crisis head on. i'm committed to seeing this through for my daughter, if she decides to become a mother, for every woman who chooses to be a mother, and for the future of the nation that they will shape. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. mr. schatz: mr. president. the presiding officer: the deputy whip from hawaii. mr. schatz: thank you, mr. president. over the past year i've worked with colleagues on both sides of the aisle on legislation to protect kids from the harms of social media. the role of platforms like instagram and tiktok in turbo

charging the mental health crisis among our kids is clear. the data shows it, our personal experience shows it, warnings from experts like the surgeon general confirm it. which last month after months of work with the commerce committee and outside stakeholders, i introduced an updated version of my bipartisan called the kids off social media act with senators cruz, murphy, britt and many others. the bill does a few straightforward things, it sets the age of social media use to 18 and sets the platform of targeting kids under 17 with their black box algorithms. over the past several weaks my team and i have continued to work with other member offices

as well as a wide range of outside stakeholders to re retine -- refine the bill in important ways and we continue to have conversations in order to strengthen the bill. colleagues may have seen the hotline run on my bill and we continue to work towards a markup. there are other bills pending on this issue which i support. it's my hope that the senate will consider all of these bills in short order and finally give kids the help and the protection that they need. congress has to act in this area. we now have many good proposals, most of them not in competition with each other. let's take some action. i yield the floor -- i do not yield the floor. . mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to legislative session and be in a period of morning business, with senators permitted to speak

then for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schatz: i understand there's a bill at the desk, i ask for its first reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the tile of the bill for the first time. the clerk: s. had 361 -- s.4361, making emergency supplemental appropriations for border security, and so forth and for other purposes. mr. schatz: i ask for a second reading. in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule 14, i object to my own request. the presiding officer: objection is heard. the bill will be read for the second time on the next legislative day. mr. schatz: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following senate resolutions -- s. res. 695, s. res. 696, s. res. 697, s. res. 698, s. res. 699. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding en bloc? without objection.

mr. schatz: i ask unanimous consent that the resolutions be agreed to, the preambles be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all en bloc. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schatz: mr. president, i have seven requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. schatz: i ask unanimous consent that the -- when the senate completes its business today it stand adjourned until 3:00 p.m. on monday, may 20. that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed. upon the conclusion of morning business, the senate proceed to executive session to resume considering of the lanham nomination. further, that if any nominations are confirmed during monday's session, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection.

mr. schatz: if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order, following the remarks of senator lankford. the presiding officer: without objection.

members approved a resolution that repeal security and exchange commission rule and banks holding crypto currency assets. the resolution goes to the president who plans to veto it. you are watching live coverage of the senate on c-span2.

.

this commonsense bill would require us citizens are counted for the purposes of congressional districts and electoral votes.

this makes sense. for everyone's vote to have equal weight, only legal voters should be counted and apportioned voting power. on the other hand, the current method of counting illegal aliens and allocating americans voting power dilutes the votes of some americans. it also serves as a perverse incentive for open borders in sanctuary cities because reselling illegal aliens increases the relative political power of the states and voters that do so. what was once called the conspiracy theory turned out to be an objective fact democrats now acknowledge. migrants here illegally are being counted in census and are counted for determining electoral college votes and congressional seats. i asked in a committee hearing, it is impossible to dispute this

policy increases the voting power of districts and states that we settle more illegal aliens. some democrats have taken it a step further calling forth more illegal immigration to increase their power. of this year, video surfaced of us representative from new york named yvette clark who when asked about illegal immigration, quote, i need more people in my district just for redistricting purposes. she said the quiet part out loud, she represents the same district where james madison high school is located. you may recall last winter james madison high school was the school where students were told to go home and study by zuma so there school could be used to house illegal aliens. congressman clark means they are fleeing blue cities in mass because of daily government and

congressional seats are located based on population so if you are losing population you have 2 backflip or lose congressional seats. that's where the illegal aliens come in. this congresswoman's statement helps explain why president biden and democrats are allowing record-breaking illegal immigration, to preserve their political power. since president biden took office alone, over 10 million illegal aliens have entered our country. that could amount to more than a dozen congressional seats. this bill is simple, mister president. it would require the census bureau include a citizen question to provide an understanding of the us population which is the focus of this. and allow delineation between citizens and noncitizens for apportionment purposes. in my bill, would count only citizens for purposes of congressional and electoral

college apportionment budget would count only citizens for determining citizens voting power. that way, the power of each american's vote doesn't depend how many illegal aliens are in their area. the act will ensure the weight of very american's vote is equal and restore the one person one vote principal and will end the perverse incentive under which illegal immigration increases political power. mr. president i ask unanimous consent if in legislative session and not 22, the senate proceed to immediate consideration of calendar 386, hr 7109. i further ask the bill be considered read 1/3 time and passed in the motion to reconsider be considered made and the laid on the table. >> is their objection? >> mr. president. >> senator from hawaii.

>> a couple points, the first point is the main point which is we have the toughest bipartisan bill on border security in generations on this floor, and when donald trump found out how tough it was and how effective it was going to be, he told senate republicans to kill it and that is what they did. and spare me the crocodile tears about the situation at the border, we had the opportunity to fix that and donald trump explicitly said don't pass this, blame me, blame me. number 2, my good friend the senator who feels very

passionately about this, but constitution provides persons in the united states are counted, all persons. it says nothing about their citizenship status and so if you've got a problem with the way the census is conducted you have to amend the constitution of the united states. not the law, not this editorial law but the constitutional location of the united states. i've lost count of the number of times republicans have tried and failed to add citizenship questions to the census. we have to see this for what it is, an attempt to reduce, the counted immigrant communities. unless that sounds like rhetorical. mr. lankford: mr. president, thank you. can i just recap for this body. starting last october, a group of us sat down to have a serious conversation about combord -- about border. we have a democrat senator from

connecticut, chris murphy. we had an independent senator kyrsten sinema from arizona arizona. we all understood the problem is serious and it's a he very real threat to our economy. it is spiraling out of control on the border. october is the highest month ever in the history of our country. november was the highest number in the history of our country. december was the highest number ever in the history of our country with the largest day of illegal crossings in the history of our country in december of 12,000 people in a single day. things were spiraling out of control at the border and they continue. so we sat down in a serious conversation and said we had differences of how to be able to resolve this but we all want to be able to fix this. so we spent months trying to be able to hammer out a resolution. this is serious dialogue that we hope to be able to get to conclusion. but we failed to do that. we created a bill that i felt

like was a great bill with common ground in it. it didn't have everything that i wanted in it. but it did have the essentials in it to be able to change the way we do asylum, to be able to change the processing. it literally took it from the very first person that crossed the border each day would be detained, quickly screened, and then deported, the very first percentage. if we had a flood -- a caravan of up to 5,000 people crossing a day, we can't control that so in that situation, instead of detaining, quickly screening and deporting, we would just detain and deport. because there was no time to do the screening. we weren't going to release people in. we weren't going to turn people around. it changed the structure dramatically from what was happening on the border. i felt like this was a good bill to be able to move forward. and i moved in good faith to be able to get that done. but it's also with el known here -- well known here that i had disagreements. some within my own party, the

majority in my own party, that said this is not the time to be able to resolve this. it is what it is. it's the political nature of what's going on right now. i understand that. but the problem is still unresolved. yesterday we had 5,500 people that had illegally crossed the border yesterday, yesterday. last month we had 174,000 people that illegally crowed our border -- crossed our border last month. that would have been the highest month ever, in fact it a would have been the highest month in the past 20 years if it wasn't for the last three years under the biden administration. it would have been higher than any month under president obama, under president bush, under president trump. it would have been higher than any of those months but it doesn't even beat the records that were even set in the previous months before under the biden administration because of their dramatic change in policy. one and a half million people now illegally cross the border

in fiscal year, one and a half million people. and they continue to be able to come across our border with almost no restraint. i've said for a long time this is a serious issue that we need to address. my own party has said this was not the time to be able to do that. now i'm hearing rumors that next week the folks i was sitting down with to be able to have serious dialogue to fix it may bring bills back up again and to say let's do a political thing on the other side of the aisle. listen, if we're going to solve the border issues, it's not going to by doing competing messaging bills. if we're going to solve this, let's sit down like adults and let's figure out how we're going to actually resolve this together. if there's a messaging bill come back, even the bill i help negotiate next week, just to bring it up again and try to poke republicans in the eye for some sort of messaging piece,

why are we doing this? all the american people see it, everybody sees this is political, but everyone in the country also sees why don't you guys and ladies fix this instead. why don't you ally resolve it -- actually resolve it? there's a couple of quotes that have come out lately. my democratic colleagues have put out a memo, and this was the memo, saying tom swazi flipped the script on his republican opponent successfully painting her as unserious about border security because of her opposition to the bipartisan border bill, in turn what could have been a devastating political liability into an advantage. democrats should learn the lesson from new york three. quite simply, we risk losing the 2024 election if we do not seize this opportunity to go on offense on the issue on the border and turn the table on repub republicans, their key of failing the vote.

senator schumer made this statement. it's a win if the republicans abandon us at the last minute. because if democrats put together a tough bipartisan bill on the border, it would not take border away as an issue for the republicans, but it would at least give us a 50-50 chance to combat it. listen, i understand the politics of the moment. i do. we're in a presidential election year. everybody in america is watching what's happening on the border and saying something needs to be fixed. and it is easy for republicans to look at the white house and to say there are 94 executive orders that the white house has proactively done that changed how the border was enforced under president trump and under president obama. a high number, a high number under president obama was 2,000 people in a day. yesterday we had 5500 people.

if president biden would just enforce the border the same way president obama did, much less the same way president trump did, the border would be very different. everybody sees that. everybody also sees we need a change in the way we do asylum policy. that's a change that has to be done in congress. that's a vote that we have to be able to take. so instead of us pointing at each other and doing political stunts, let's solve this. let's actually sit down and figure out how we're going to resolve it. he can't do everything. the bill that i worked with senator murphy and senator sinema on, we're not growing to be able to pass. so let's find the sections of it that we can pass. the worst-case scenario is doing nothing. that's what we're currently doing. now, the house of representatives passed a bill yesterday saying that if someone who is not legally present here in the country attacks a law

enforcement officer, whether that is state, local, county, federal, tribal, whoever it may be, if they attack a law enforcement officer, they're going to be deported. well, the bipartisan passed over in the house yesterday. is that coming over here to the senate? probably not. it probably won't be taken up. but in a bipartisan way, it passed the house yesterday. we've had two different votes of a house bill called h.r. 2 that was a very comprehensive bill dealing with all areas of border security. it passed the house. it came to the senate. it's had two votes and it's failed both times. so republicans can now say democrats didn't take our bill and democrats will -- looks like are going to bring things up and say well, republicans wouldn't take the bipartisan bill and we point at each other and we're still in the same spot. the american people expect us to actually solve this, not just do politics on it. so here's my counsel.

stop doing all the political games. let's stop bringing up the messaging bills. this is a national emergency. of the 5,500 people that crossed the border yesterday illegally, i haven't seen the number yet but i will tell you in all likelihood if it's tracking similar to other days, several dozen of those folks were designated by the department of homeland security, this department of homeland security, as special interest aliens. that is they are coming from areas of known terrorism that were designated at the border as a potential national security risk, and then they were released into the country awaiting a hearing. and by this afternoon we'll have no idea where they are. that happens every day now, because there's a large percentage of the people that are crossing the border every day now that are not from the western hemisphere. they're from west africa, they're from all the stan countries. they're from pakistan, they're

from india, they're from china, they're from russia. they're from areas where we know there's active terrorist cells but we just don't know this person. they're not on our list. but we do know what clan they're from and there are people in that clan in that tribe, in that particular location that have been an issue. but because we don't have derogatory information they're being released every day. this has been the bell i have been ringing for months now. the immigration issue is not the same as what it was two years ago. there's been a huge shift in who is crossing the border, and we are not taking this seriously. this is a national security risk, and we need to be attentive to who is crossing our border every single day and take that seriously. this poed knows full -- this body knows full well i am not

antidprags. we are a nation that welcome people from all over the world and we should continue to do that. we have a million people a year that legally become citizens of our country but in the last six months we've had 1.5 million people illegally, illegally cross into our country. that million that came in that became citizens of our country, they were vetted, they went through the process. they're being welcomed and integrated. that 1.5 million other folks that crossed illegally, we have no idea. some are coming to join family, some are coming to be able to find a job, but some are no doubt also coming for nefarious purposes, and we can't tell the difference. so my counsel to us is let's take this as serious as it actually is. press conferences take one person. passing law takes 60.

that means we have to sit down together to be able to talk this through. we have to be able to figure out how we're going to actually get something done and at least make some progress. what is dhs currently doing? dhs has just announced they're doing a rebranding of homeland security investigations, of hsi. these are the hsi i.c.e. they're going to reprand them and take away the i.c.e. designation. we're going to have a new logo and a new listing of what they're going to actually do. at the same time they're saying we don't have enough money to be able to get more border patrol, to be able to detain more people, deport more people. we're spending millions of dollars. we haven't seen the amount yet. but we're spending millions of dollars on rebranding hsi. we should take this moment as serious as it actually is.

in the past three years the price of groceries has gone up 20%. the price of gasoline has gone up 55%. but the price of fentanyl has gone down on the streets. we should take this moment as serious as it is. we have more drugs coming across our border based on the porous nature of what's going on, where migrants will come in, border patrol will engage with them for humanitarian purposes, and then the cartels will smuggle drugs two miles up river or through the desert when they know that no one's watching that area. so we have a dramatic increase in fentanyl coming into our country directly connected to 5,500 people that illegally crossed yesterday, 174,000

people last month, and 1.5 million in the last six months. what are we going to do about that? i hope not just talk about it. i hope not just do political messaging. i hope not just saying we'll bring up this bill to fail, that we all know is going to fail. i hope it's actually sit down together and say let's do the work to actually resolve this issue. that is what people sent us to do. i fully understand it's hard. i've personally experienced it. but we were sent here to do hard things, so we should probably start doing them. let's get this solved. with that, i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate stands closed, adjourned, ended, it's over until 3:00 today, senate lawmakers approved a resolution that repeals the seer curies of exchange commission rule on banks holding koto currency assets for customers. the resolution goes to the president who plans to veto it. and the district court nominees. watch live coverage on c-span 2. and the chair of the sec

testified on her agency's 25 budget request a tell communications issues. water house appropriations subcommittee hearing tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span2, c-span now, our free mobile video apps or online, c-span.org. >> they want to come here and collect our welfare instead, so no asylum cases. >> most people come here to make a better life if not for them, for their kids. my italian grandparents never spoke english and never had a conversation with them but they made america great. >> and coulter and columnist debate reason magazine's nick gillespie and the young turks over the question should the us shut its borders, the debate is moderated by barry white. watch it friday at 9 p.m. eastern on c-span and online, c-span.org.