has provided complete coverage of the halls of congress from the floor. c-span gives awe front row seat to how issues are decided and debated with no commentary, no interruptions and completely unfiltered. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> c-span's campaign 2024 coverage continues live with the three-day libertarian national convention as they choose their party's nominees for president and vice-president,egning friday at 3:30 p.m. eastern, highlights include independent presidential candidate robert f. kennedy, jr., followed by a vice-presidential debate featuring former republican presidtial contender, vivek ramaswamy. and then on saturday at 8 p.m.

eastern, former president and presumptive nominee donald trump will speak before the delegates. sunday, the party announces its presidential nominee for the presidential election. the libertarian national convention live at c-span, c-span our mobile video app and online at c-span.org. >> on this wednesday morning we take you live now to the u.s. senate where today lawmakers will consider a pair of judicial nominations including a vote on the biden administration's 200th confirmation to the court and later senators will vote on nom fee to be the undersecretary of the air force. live coverage here 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, this day we give you our lives, for without you we are like dust in the wind. shield us from disgrace, as you surround us with your protection, mercy, and love. remind us that disgrace comes to those who seek to deceive others. lord, sustain our lawmakers. show them the right plans, point them to the right path, and lead them to the right destination.

continue to keep them from stumbling or slipping, so that one day they will stand in your presence with great joy. we pray in your sovereign name. amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington d.c., may 22, 2024. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable peter welch, a senator from the state of vermont, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: patty murray, president

pro tempore. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserve.

.

mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: i understand that there is a bill at the desk due for a second reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the title of the bill for the second time. the clerk: s.4381, a bill to protect an individual's ability to access contraceptives and to engage in contraception and to protect a health care provider's ability to provide contra contraceptives, contraception and information relating to contraception. mr. schumer: in order to place the billing on the calendar under the provisions of rule 14, i would object to further proceeding. the presiding officer: objection having been heard, the bill will be placed on the calendar. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to calendar number 397, s.4361. the presiding officer: the clerk will record -- will report. the clerk: motion to proceed to

397, s.4361, a bill making emergency supplemental appropriations for border security and combating fentanyl for the fiscal year ending september 30, 20 24shgs and for other purposes. mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: mr. president, i'd like to begin with a few words about donald trump's dangerous post last night on truth social. what donald trump said falsely suggesting his political opponents are out to kill him is beyond the pale and is the stuff that leads to political violence. donald trump seems to have no consideration for the sanctity and peacefulness and further functioning of our democracy. everyone who was here on january 6 should immediately see what he's doing, what donald trump is doing, using conspiracy theories to spin the hard right into a fr frenzy, and it's despicable for members of congress to spread

donald trump's lies. this is how people get killed, how the seeds of political violence are sowed, and how people lose faith in this democracy. donald trump has no regard for that. he would -- he would basically rip up parts of our democracy for his own -- what he thinks is his own personal gain. let's speak truthfully -- what the fbi did was follow standard practice. they worked with the secret service at mar-a-lago ahead of time to coordinate how to carry out a search warrant. donald trump wasn't even in florida, but instead in new jersey on the day of the search. so, this idea that his political opponents are out to kill him is ab absurd. every single member of the house and senate, democrat and republican, should condemn donald trump's outlandish and dangerous statement. it should be the easiest thing

they do today. if words like donald trump's were -- if words like donald trump's are not fiercely condemned, we're only begging for something far worse to our democracy down the line. we cannot let this man, donald trump, or anybody else, throw these kinds of matches to light flames that could burn our democracy. it's just horrible. i can't believe that someone would do something like that. now, on judges, a much better note, mr. president, today the senate reached a significant mile milestone, 200 judges -- sorry, today the senate reaches a significant milestone, 200 judges confirmed to lifetime appointments under president biden, and this very proud democratic majority. 200 judges who are restoring balance and excellence to our courts. 200 judges who are increasing the diversity and dynamism of

our judiciary. 200 judges who are committed to applying the law fairly, impartially, equally. of those 200 judges, i'm so proud 127 are women, 125 are people of color, both traditionally underrepresented demographics on the bench. we're making our courts look more like america. it's not just going to be partners, male, white partners in fancy law firms. it's much more diverse, and the bench is better for it. it's something we can all be proud of. 127 women, 125 people of color, over twice as many women, more than three times as many people of color confirmed under the last administration. we've confirmed more black judges, more latino judges, more asian american judges. we confirmed the first muslim american man and woman on the bench, the first 1/2a hoe federal -- navaho federal judge,

the first black woman on the supreme court, justice ketanji brown jackson. we confirmed more judges who served as public defenders, civil rights lawyers, consumer lawyers, immigration and labor lawyers. again, not just partners in big law firms. we've confirmed more judges, in other words, who embody the very ideal of america. a place where rule of law is protected, where the rights of all are honored, and where everyone, everyone gets a fair shake. i commend chairman durbin. i commend the judiciary committee for their great work processing judges in and out of our committee. i commend president biden for nominating so many of these people and working with our senate colleagues as to who would be best from their states and regions. senate democrats are very proud of our record. we're proud of our judges, and we will keep going. on the border, well, mr. president, tomorrow senators

face an important decision -- will both sides come together to advance a bipartisan border security bill, or will partisanship get in the way yet again? three months ago, donald trump told his republican allies to block the strongest bipartisan border security bill congress has seen in a generation. luckily, we are trying again tomorrow. and i hope this time republicans join us to achieve a different outcome. the only way, the only way we're going to fix the border is through bipartisan legislation, just like the one both sides spent months negotiating a few months ago, which we're taking up again tomorrow. we don't expect every democrat or every republican to support this bill. it wasn't designed that way. it wasn't designed to get all the votes of one party, which then almost inevitably means you get none of the votes from the other side. it was intended to be a compromise that could pass and

become law. we know there are disagreements, as there always are, about the best way to proceed on the border, but that's precisely why i've emphasized from day one we need to have strong border support if we hope to get border done. unlike h.r. 2, a very partisan bill, the bipartisan border bill was written with the goal of getting 60 votes in the senate, with the support from both republicans and demes democrats. it had input from both republicans and democrats. h.r. 2 can't claim that. if anything is political, it's h.r. 2. it didn't receive a single democratic vote in the senate, because democrats weren't consulted. it didn't even get the full support of senate republicans. h.r. 2 was the definition of political theater, of one side sitting in a room by itself, writing what it wanted, not even thinking of how you pass a bill. our bill, however, is what a serious attempt at border reform looks like.

now, most people might not remember, but a few months ago there was a lot of bipartisan interest in getting our border bill passed, before donald trump killed it in its tracks. our republican colleagues, including the republican leader, was adamant we needed to get border security done as part of the national security supplemental. this is what the republican leader said right before our bill was released -- i think this is the ideal time to do it. he then added, leader mcconnell added, this is a unique opportunity where divided government has given us an opportunity to get an outcome. these aren't the words of someone who thinks our efforts were political theater. these are the words of someone who thinks we were close to reaching a breakthrough. he wasn't alone. my friend from south carolina also said that, that to those who think that if president trump wins that we can get a better deal, you won't, he a added, this moment will pass, do

not let it pass. republican senator from south carolina. so let's be perfectly clear, our bipartisan border bill represented a real chance, in fact, the best chance in decades to act on border security, to make a law, not just to make a political point. importantly, the bill would have made huge strides cracking down on the scourge of fentanyl, given billions for dea, dhs to hire officers to focus exclusively on drugs, and billions for state-of-the-art equipment to detect the flow of drugs at border crossings and ports, and some of my democratic colleagues will be talking about that at 12:30, at an event, how this bill really does more than anything we have done thus far, and we've worked hard on it, to deal with the scourge of fentanyl. so today my democratic colleagues will shine a spotlight on the immense good this bill would do to protect our country from the free flow of this dangerous drug,

fentanyl. if you told me a year ago that this was the kind of bill we had before us, i would have been certain republicans would have helped enact this bill into law, by any objective measure it's strong, necessary. and one final note -- the last time we came close here was 2013, when we passed comprehensive immigration reform. we did it bipartisan. it was the only way to do it. i, and my late friend, good friend, john mccain, had a gang of eight, four democrats, four republicans. we got, i believe it was, 69 votes on the floor of the senate. unfortunately, the house didn't pass it. it's a lesson to all of us, bipartisanship is the only way to go. h.r. 2 is not the least bill bipartisan. our bill was completely bipartisan. so tomorrow we're going to lay out a clear choice. tomorrow, we will see who is serious about actually wanting to fix the border and who prefers to merely talk about fixing the border.

now, on the farm bill, tomorrow house republicans will mark up their partisan farm bill that fr frankly completely misses the mark. the farm bill should support the farmers who grow our food. it should protect our land and invest in jobs for rural communities big and small to rebuild their economies. the farm bill should provide lifesaving lunger assistance for the millions -- hunger assistance for the millions of americans who rely on programs like snap and extend snap benefits to our friends in puerto rico, who've been excluded from this program for decades. and it will expand it to them. it's sad to see that rather than working together to get a serious farm bill passed, house republicans are playing games and pushing a one-sided insufficient partisan bill. senate democrats, on the other hand, have released a farm bill proposal that maintains a bipartisan coalition and invests in all of the areas i mentioned, so i commend chair stabenow for her work. let me be clear --

a purely partisan farm bill that departs from the long-standing spirit of bipartisanship has no future in the senate, and unfortunately i might add it seems to be where this republican house leadership and party always goes, they always retreat to a corner of bipartisanship. they're not interested in improving the liechls of the american people -- in the lives of american people, but scoring political points to a narrow point back home, the maga group that has such power in the party. i hope that doesn't happen on the farm bill. it's always been bipartisanship. house republicans, come on. wake up. you want to help our farmers? work together with democrats and pass a bipartisanship bill. contraceptives -- yesterday, we began the process for the senate to consider the right to contraception act, led by senators markey and hirono in june. now more than ever, contraception is a critical piece of protecting women's reproductive freedoms, standing

is nothing -- as nothing short of a vital lifeline for millions of american women across the country. senate democrats are committed to restoring women's freedoms and will fight to protect access to contraception and other reproductsive freedoms that are essential safeguards for millions of women to control their own lives, their futures, and their bodies. i yield the floor, 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, i ask that the quorum call ab dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: last week -- i guess days after president or ban rolled out the red carpet in budapest for president xi, the chinese dictator rolled out a red carpet in beijing for vladimir putin. the friendship without limits struck between america's greatest strategic adversaries will now endure, quote, for general rapingses to come, end quote. -- for generations to come, end quote. and it appears to be rooted in a shared myth about the nature of world conflicts and a victim

complex that would be laughable if it didn't carry such grave consequences for western peace and security. at last week's summit, russia and china together accused the united states of threatening the world's strategic balance, a if it's washington rather than beijing or moscow trying to redraw borders by force or to disrupt global order. well, if you're looking for the government that has doubled its nuclear arsenal in three years, you'll find it in beijing, not washington. in fact, america's own strategic deterrence continues to suffer from chronic neglect. and the biden administration continues to submit defense budgets that fail to keep up with inflation, much less with

the growing threat posed by the prc. and if you're looking for the regime recklessly developing an insanely provocative and destabilizing nuclear weapon to deploy in space, you'll find that one in moscow. the world's leading authoritarians never seem to let the facts get in the way. but economic and military realities matter enormously to the future of fledgling democracies and developing nations who are vulnerable to their economic concern -- coercion and thuggish political intimidation. the challenge to western peace and security is not confined to the taiwan straits and the

trenches of ukraine. chinese deathtraps and russian security forces are expanding maligned influence from central america -- central asia to africa and to our own western hemisphere. russia's efforts to strangle democracy and wrestle free societies back under its control are perhaps most glaring along the borders of europe. after the collapse of the soviet union, the unshackled nations have largely chosen freedom and workeded to build democratic governments and societies oriented squarely to the west. the neo-soviet imperialists in the kremlin see that as a threat. leaders in washington are prone

to forget how fragile our own experiment in democracy was during the earliest days and how precious are the safeguards or founders enshrined in our government to protect the minority from the excess of authoritarianism of majority rule. sometimes, of course, politicians in washington even flirt with the idea of tearing down these safeguards of democracy to deny the minority any meaningful power. fortunately, there's still a bipartisan firewall in the senate against this sort of shortsighted radicalism. but for nations vulnerable democracies, such safeguards face threats and in georgia a parliamentary majority request for power is threatening to suffocate the nation's civil

society and unravel the guardrails of its democracy. in an attempt to consolidate its hold on government, the georgian dream party would stamp out the euro aspirations of the people. and it is chronically divided against itself. despite their feckless party leaders, thousands of georgians have taken to the streets to protest. their desire for self-determination and freedom from russian coercion is obvious. four in five georgians tell polsters they want a distinctive european future. they believe that planting themselves in the west among democratic nations where the rule of law prevails is in their

best interest. whether georgia looks east or west matters to the united states. standing with free people, resisting the aggression of tyrants like putin or xi is in our own interest. this is true in taiwan, in ukraine, estonia, and japan. and it's true in georgia. the georgian people zev to write their own -- deserve to write their own future, not have it dictated to them by moscow's preferred party chiefs. and why is that russian -- why is it that russians obsess over controlling georgia's future? it's about more than acting out putin's neo-imperialist fantasy. geography matters a. for millennia, georgia and its black seacoast have stood at the crossroads of the civilized

world. it is a key transit point for critical resources, and today along with armenia, it sits as a tantalizing link between authoritarian partners in moscow and tehran. the people of georgia have a long history of enduring conflict and conquest. they have a long tradition of resilience a understand a rich culture to be proud of. they know there is a difference between bending to russia and turning to the west. so, like friends of the georgiian people across the west, i'm hopeful this moment will be one which can take yet more pride. there is a moment when the opposition to russian coercion puts petty differences aside and stands united. of course, this must also be a

moment for georgia's ruling party to recognize the costs of ignoring their people's will in order to fulfill putin's whims and to stop short of shredding their relationship with the west. i hope those in power in -- will withdraw the russian law from parliament. last thursday the biden administration announced its plan to sacrifice yet another source of affordable, reliable american energy on the altar of climate activismism -- activism. after years of bans of on-shore and offshore leasing, the democrats's attempt to the apiece the radical base is an

attack in montana. this region is responsible for producing nearly half of the nation's coal. last year alone, the basin created more than 250 million tons of coal and employs more than 4,000 people. shutting off development will result in lost jobs and millions of dollars of lost revenue for montana and wyoming. the sting of the administration's war on coal is one kentuckians know all too well. and working families across the country are already struggling with persistent inflation. energy prices are -- washington democrats' radicalism may have finely stretched their party to it the own breaking point. in fact, the biden administration's war on affordable, reliable american

energy has proven so radically harmful to consumers, workers, and our global competitiveness that it's facing bipartisan opposition right here in the senate. just yesterday a bipartisan majority passed senator cruz's resolution disapproving of the department of energy's new rule to effectively ban affordable natural gas home furnaces. this rule would signify an increase in the existing efficiency standard and effectively ban the sale of more affordable home heating furnaces that don't need it. by one estimate, this rule will heap as much as $4 billion in new costs onto consumers who can already al. not afford the high

cost. the american people have suffered with bidenomics with the green new deal. i'm glad the majority of the senate agreeses it time to slam the brakes on the administration's assault on gas appliances and i'm thankful for my colleague, senator cruz, for bringing attention to this madness.

the presiding officer: morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the following nomination, which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary. angela m. martinez of arizona to be united states district judge for the district of arizona.

>> 1 million, 624,790 people have the legal across our

1,624,790. so far. we have at least 1.6 million people that have also been designated gotaways in the last three years. that is, they cross our southwest border. the border patrol can see them, but they couldn't get to them. let me give you some context on that. as this body knows well because we talked about over and r again, in the first three years of this administration we've had more in illegal crossings on our southwest border than the previous 12 years combined. more in the last three years and then we had in the previous 12 years combined. if you want to just drill down, one year under president biden has as many illegal crossings as we had under four years of

president trump. yesterday, we had more than 5000 people illegally cross our southwest border yesterday. that has been true every day, i believe, but three in the last three months that we've had more than 5000 people a day. now, the national news media has looked away from the southwest border. with though still live on the southwest border can't look away. they are still facing it every single day period . and in cities and in communities across the entire country it is still happening every single day, day after day, as this president has looked away from what's happening on our southern border. as i said to this department of homeland security multiple times, if they would enforce the border, the same as president obama enforce the border, , we would be in a very different place. but they will not enforce the

border like president trump did and president obama did. they just fail to enforce it. the same law, the same law existed under president obama when we had less than half 1 million people cross illegally in a year that exists under president biden where we've had 1.6 million people so far this year with the still quite a few months to go. the same law. the same capacity to be able to enforce the border. but this president has said over and over again he has nothing that he can do until something is passed. i have been very clear with this body, and i've been very honest with my own party and with my friends on the other side of the aisle. congress has a job to do. when you do clarify what asylum means. we need to add the funds that are needed. we need to speed up the process. when you do take away the

forever appeals that are built into it that incentivize people coming and gaming the system. that is congress' job. we should do that, and i've worked with everyone was willing to work on that to get us to a place where we can get the 60 vote in this body to pass something to do our job. one party cannot resolve this issue. this has to be both parties sitting down and working on it together. that's the rule of 60 in this body. but the president also has things he could do that he has chosen not to do. in fact, this president has taken 94 executive orders to weaken border security. he is creating new parole authorities, no president has ever used before, to fizzle sulfate faster movement into the country -- facilitate. instead of slowing the process down, he's actually sped it up and they have done so

intentionally. in the past few weeks department of homeland security has released a new memo and a new regulatory action that they're getting feedback for that they have admitted to me that will increase screening for, in their words, a handful of additional people. a handful. when yesterday we had 5000 people illegally cross. but currently as right now homeland security saying they don't have enough money to hire more agents, they are spending millions of dollars rebranding homeland security investigation, hsi. they are rebranding them and changing some of their focus on it. now, we've yet to be able to find out how much they're spending on it but we do understand it's within the millions. at the same time they are saying it'll have enough money to be able to handle greater enforcement. this administration is focused on the things that don't make a

difference when we need them to focus on the things that do. this body is also focus on the things that are not making a difference on this. several of us sat down for months to be able to hash out in a bipartisan way how do we solve this. we felt we had a solution that could pass. we did not. now that same option that everyone in this whole body knows won't pass is now come back to this body again, exactly as it was. and many of us including for myself that actually worked on the original language of saying why? this is not about trying to pass something. this is about a show vote in this body to show look, we tried to put a something in the end doesn't mean republicans blocked it. i have to tell you this though when it comes up on thursday because that's when he understand it's coming i'll be

interested in how many democrats but for this as well. because i'll have only heard quite a few democrats have sure i would want to vote for if it doesn't add ukraine, if it is not israel fund in it. because originally it was border security, ukraine, israel fund. some of my democratic colleagues were voting for but now that has none of those things some of them said i'm not sure what to vote for that without the other portions of it into. several republicans are saying the same thing you said before. i know there was a lot of good things in it but i wanted even more in it so they are not willing to vote for it until it's even more. what would be the logical thing that should be done in this body? the logical thing would be to say that vote failed, so what would pass? we could play the same game. because democrats have blocked the bill from senator scott that would fund border security and enforcement of immigration laws in in a different level. democrats blocked that vote.

when marco rubio and senator graham brought bills to enforce the remain in mexico program, president biden is walked away from, democrats blocked that vote. when senator cotton had a a vs to stop a percentage or cities that incentivize more people come into the country and disappear, democrats blocked that vote. when senator grassley brought up a bill to deport criminal illegal aliens, democrats blocked that bill. when the senator hagerty brought up a bill to do with increasing funding for i.c.e. and deport more criminal aliens that have already been visited criminal aliens and the united states, democrats blocked that bill. when i brought up a bill to be able to implement it and fun title 42 authority and to extend that, democrats blocked that bill. when senator marshall brought a bill to bring up h.r. two and senator cruze brought up the bill for h.r. two the house bill that has a broad spectrum for border enforcement, democrats blocked that bill.

when senator hagerty again brought up a bill to ban federal funds are being used to fly illegal aliens from other countries and to be able to give them parole authority into our country, democrats blocked that bill. when republicans senator budd brought up the protecting or bring up the laken riley act, democrats blocked that bill. when i brought up a bill dealing with special interest aliens, those the department of homeland security designated as a potential national security risk, when i brought up that bill to say all those folks could not be released into the country, they had to be detained if they were declared a national security risk, democrats blocked that bill. we could play this game all day long. somehow this belief that if you bring up a bill that a still before the sum of a strong movement to be able to solve the issue doesn't. it plays a political game and we

all know it. so what should we do? actually be grown-ups, sit down and actually try to figure out what we can pass rather than bringing things up that we all know won't pass. now, i don't know if there's a belief that somehow on memorial day week that americans across the country can't wait for the senate to vote again on a bill that's already failed before they could come up again as if something is going to be different. i have a message to all of my colleagues. the people of america are not on memorial day week focused on what the city is doing this week. they are just not. they are thinking about their family member that was lost defending the country or their think about the sale in an appliance store. they are not thinking about this in this drama. we should take seriously though the national security risk that

all of us know about. and do something about it. just as a side note that all of us know full well, the number of people designated by this administration and special interest aliens, those that write national security risk by definition that are coming across our border and being released into the country is in the thousands. we all know it. we should take that seriously. if you want to just do with the people that are on the higher list that are on the terror watch list, if i go back to let's say 2017, they were two people that were apprehended on the terror watch list in 2017. there were six people apprehended in 2018. there were three people in 2019. but if i take that to this past year, 2023, there were 172.

we have people crossing our border that we know are a national security risk while we are playing political messaging games here. let's sit down and solve this. let's not just voted things we know are going to fail. let's not just to political messaging. let's actually sit down and solve this. over the past two years something has shifted on our southern border. it's not just people from the western hemisphere better crossing illegally. if some people from all over the world. deadliest threat in its history. to the south there is a war of survival, 1200 israelis and 250 men and women and children were abducted. to the north hezbollah, the most

armed terrorist organization in the world, is menacing israeli towns and forcing tens of thousands to flee their homes. and just last month, iran launched more than 300 ballistic missiles and attack drones against israel, for the first time attacking the toer territory. outlaws in yemen are also firing missiles and drones at israeli and allied shipping to include u.s. naval vessels. as israel is under siege at home, it's also under diplomatic assault abroad from hamas's proxies at the united nations, the international criminal court, and even american college campuses. joe biden's allies on capitol hill have frohn increasingly hostile as well. the majority leader and former speaker of the house, nancy pelosi, called for the removal of benjamin netanyahu from power. the majority leader said that israel needs new elections.

i think new york may need new elections. senator bernie sanders said we should, quote, not send another nickel for netanyahu, while congresswoman alex and ra ocasio cortez-masto supports a bill that would strip the tax-exempt status of pro-israel charities. instead of backing our friends in this moment of maximum danger, the biden administration has sanctions israelis, condemned its military, and second-guessed it, while trying to undermine its dlement elected -- democratically elected leader. two week ago, joe biden hauflted the shipment of bombs and bomb kits israel needs to limit casualties and destroy strongholds inside rafah, and for that matter to free smojs, including american citizens -- hostages, including american citizens. the president also will withhold additional offensive weapons if

israel targets heal in rafah -- targets ream in rafah. joe biden is instituting a de facto arms embargo on israel that will save hamas. the reason is simple, he wants to apiece a small minority of p p pro-hamas voters in his own parties in critical swing states necessary for his reelection. that's why i partner with congressman ken calvert to pass the israel support act to reverse the arms embargo. this legislation simply requires the prompt delivery of all weapons shipments approved by congress. it also withholds pay from any department of state or defense bureaucrat who withholds vital military aid from israel. earlier this week -- i'm sorry, earlier last week, the house did its part and passed the israel

security assistance support act with a bipartisan majority that included over a dozen democrats. now it's the senate turn. therefore, mr. president, as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 398, h.r. 8369. 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: in my capacity as senator from vermont, i object. mr. cotton: i regret that the democrats will not allow this bill to come up for a vote, which will simply ensure that aid congress has approved is delivered promptly to israel in the middle of a shooting war of survival, a bill that i would remind everyone passed the house of representatives with a bipartisan majority. the time is now to reverse joe biden 's de facto arms embargo on israel. i yield the floor.

proich the republican whip. the presiding officer: the republican whip. mr. thune: is the senate in a quorum call? the presiding officer: it is not. mr. thune: last month, president biden announced yet another student loan giveaway. this would wave accrued and capital interest for certain borrowers and staggeringly provides significant loan forgiveness for three-quarters of a million borrowers with an average household income of $312,976. that's right. president biden's latest reckless expenditure of taxpayer dollars will go to provide loan forgiveness for three-quarters of a million borrowers with an average household income above $300,000. all told, it will cost nearly $150 billion. that's on top of the

$475 billion in loan forgiveness the president announced last summer. that scheme, which the administration dubbed the saving on a valuable education plan, will implement de facto loan forgiveness on a massive scale by creating a system in which the majority of future federal borrowers will never fully repay their student loans. the department of education estimated that borrowers with only undergraduate debt enrolled in the save program can, on average, expect to pay back just $6121 for each $10,000 they borrow. that amounts to the federal government taking on, on average, almost 40% of the cost of these borrowers' student loans. mr. president, there are so many problems with the president's plans that it's difficult to even know where to begin. first, there is the staggering

cost of these and other biden administration student loan programs. the committee for responsible federal budget, where the president's own treasury secretary sat on the board said, and i quote, including the biden administration's new student debt cancelation plan, we estimate all recent student debt cancelation policies will cost a combined $870 billion to $1.4 trillion. that's more than all federal spending on higher education over the nation's entire history. that again is a quote, mr. president, from the committee for responsible federal budget. let me repeat that last line. that's more than all federal spending on higher education over the nation's entire history. and the vast majority of the debt cancelation, the committee goes on, was put in place through executive actions under president biden. mr. president, the staggering

cost of president biden's giveaways is one major problem, especially when you consider another major problem, that the president's giveaways will do nothing to fix the actual problem, which is the ko of higher education -- which is the cost of higher education. they could very well make things worse. for one, there's reason to fear that his student loan giveaways could encourage colleges to raise their prices. of course, the president's giveaways do nothing to encourage students to only borrow what they can afford. indeed, there's a good chance students will increase their borrowing as a result of the president's plans. so mr. president, president biden's student loan schemes will cost a massive amount of money while doing nothing to solve higher education costs. the problems don't end there. to start with, there's the question of whether or not what the president is doing is even la lawful. last summer the supreme court struck down the president's

original student loan foe giveness plan because -- forgiveness plan because the president lacked the statutory authority to forgive student loans. there's reason to wonder whether his save plan or these latest measures could be struck down in the courts as well. of course, mr. president, on top of these issues, there's also the fundamental issue and that's the unfareness of asking tax -- unfairness of asking taxpayers who never went to college or worked hard to pay off the full balance of their student loans or who worked their way through school to avoid a heavy loan burden or who covered the cost of their education by enlisting in the military and risking their lives for their country to shoulder the massive cost of all this loan forgiveness. why should someone who never went to college be taking on the burden of loan forgiveness for borrowers making in excess of

$300,000 a year? and then of course there's the troubling message sent to students when we teach them they can expect to be becamed out for the debt they -- to be bailed out for the debt they take on, even though they agreed to pay it. i could go on. mr. president, the president announced his first student loan forgiveness scheme two months before the 2022 congressional elections. i don't think there is a coincidence about that, and i suspect it's no coincidence that he suspects -- expects toism merriment the latest -- to implement the latest giveaway this fall, before the 2024 election. last week i joined senator cassidy and congresswoman fox on a bicameral letter to the secretary of education urging him to withdraw this latest plan. but unfortunately i suspect that the president and his administration won't be withdrawing anything they think could win them a few votes in

november. so the american people will once again have to endure yet another disastrous biden administration spending plan. mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. welch: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. welch: thank you, mr. president. i was in the chair and onned in my capacity -- and objected in my capacity as the senator from vermont to the unanimous consent motion of the senator from arkansas. i'd like now to have an opportunity to explain the basis of that. first, the senator from arkansas essentially said that president biden is apiecing pro-hamas -- appeasing pro-hamas voters in opposing an arms embargo in

israel, and also in that assertion suggesting that president biden is not fully supportive, as he has been throughout his political life, to israel. let me start by saying something where what i say i believe represents the unanimous point of view of this united states senate, and that is that the attack by hamas on israel, the taking of hostages, the sexual assault, the murder of so many innocent israelis, is condemned by each and every one of us. no one condemns it more than president biden, who went to israel on his own to show his solidarity and empathy for what happened to the israeli people. second, i believe that every member of the suns senate supports -- of the united states senate supports the jewish democratic state of israel. number three, while the senator

from arkansas is suggesting, quote, arms embargo, the united states congress, without my support by the way, for reasons i'll explain, has sent billions of dollars in aid with the supplemental appropriations bill. the fact that the president is raising questions about how best to secure the long-term status of israel as a jewish and democratic state in the context of this conflict in gaza is in no way a suggestion of lack of support. there is serious debate within israel about the war plan that is being prosecuted by the netanyahu government. and in fact, a member of the war cabinet has indicated that he will leave the war cabinet if in fact the prime minister does not come up with a war -- with a

plan for what happens after the cessation of hostilities in gaza. is there going to be an occupation by israel? is there going to be a joint arab force that will be peacekeeping? will there be an effort to constitution a palestinian government that has the support of its people? none of these plans envision hamas having a role, and they can't have a role, but the president is asking responsible questions that are being asked by serious -- seriously engaged military, political, and security folks in israel. so, to suggest that the president is raising questions because he's looking over the horizon, and saying that adding to the 35,000 casualties in gaza, half or more women and

children, to suggest that the president when he says we should not invade rafah, or israel should not invade rafah, because of the catastrophic consequences of more humanitarian losses, to suggest that when the president says 2,000-pound bombs that would be dropped on the most densely populated couple of square miles in the world, without massive civilian casu casualties, is not showing support for israel, i dispute that. i disagree with that. this effort requires judgment, and the president has been given authority, by this congress, to send arms to israel. he has made a decision that 2,000-pound bombs should not be included in that, and he's not alone. there are many in israel raising the question about the wisdom of

how this war is being prosecuted. we know that in order for there to be peace between israel and the palestinians, we must have a two-state solution. that is not just the policy of the biden administration. it's been the policy of the obama administration, the bush administrations, the carter administration, two states for two people where the respective rights of those people for self-governance, the renunciation of violence towards one another has got to be the long-term goal. we have a situation right now where our ally israel and the current government of israel disagrees with that two-state

solution approach. and, in fact, the netanyahu government position is that there should be one state. and what we're seeing right now is the escalation of violence by extreme settlers in the west bank that is causing more instability. so the president, as our commander in chief, must be given some latitude about how best to distribute whatever munitions have been authorized by the united states congress. and in the president's judgment, 2,000-pound bombs to rafah are the wrong munitions at the very wrong time. all of us have enormous heartbreak for what has happened to those israelis and their families, to those palestinians in gaza who are being used by the vicious hamas as human

shields, but the president is committed, as i'm committed, as i believe all of us are committed, to the peace and security in the middle east, and we believe, most of us, that that requires a two-state solution where there's an independent, democratic palestinian state, self-governing, respectful of israel's security, and where there is an israeli state that reciprocates towards the palestinians in gaza and in the west bank. it is for those reasons, mr. president, that i stood in opposition and objected to the unanimous consent request of my colleague from arkansas. i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: the majority whip. mr. durbin: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: nope. mr. durbin: thank you, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent that alexandra gelber be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the 118th congresses. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: i ask unanimous consent that i be allowed to complete these remarks before the roll call begins. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: thank you you mr. president. over the past three years something profound has happened on the floor of the united states senate. we have been building one of the most important accomplishments

of the biden-harris administration, the confirmation of highly qualified independent, evenhanded judges to the federal bench. today the senate will confirm the 200th lifetime judge since president biden took office. this is an extraordinary slate of judges who are ruling with reason and restraint. these judges respect the rule of law, adhere to precedent, and above all answer only to the constitution. i've served on the senate judiciary committee for more than two decades, including as chair for the past two years, during that time, i have been called upon and vote on over 1,000 judicial nominees that the committee has considered and have been brought to the senate floor. in my opinion, the recorded is clear -- president biden's nominees to the federal bench represent the best in our judiciary. they are highly qualified. not a single one of these

nominees, these 200, have failed to be found qualified or well-qualified by the american bar association. that is a departure from the previous administration's record. i've heard some of my republican colleagues extolling the quality of those nominees in the previous administration as compared to those of president biden, so i want to set the record clearly as straight as i can. for each judicial nominee that comes before this senate, the american bar association conducts a nonpartisan peer review that ranks their qualifications. the qualifications are based on integrity, professional competence, and judicial temperament. during the trump administration, senate republicans confirmed eight trump nominees whom the american bar association found unqualified to serve on the federal bench. compare that to president biden's record. under this administration, not one of the 200 judges we've confirmed received an unqualified rating, not one.

when there was a suggestion that one might receive that rating and they asked me whether we should move forward, i said the answer is clearly no. so when i hear some of my republican colleagues reminisce about the former president's nominees, i have to wonder, which ones are they talking about? are they talking about several nominees who have never tried a case? how about the district court nominee in the previous administration who challenged the real basis for both surrogacy and inveto fertilization? or the nominee who likened to slavery? or the nominee whose colleagues called him lacking in knowledge of day-to-day practice of law. yet some republican senators have relied on increasingly absurd criticisms in an attempt to criticize president biden's nominees. in a new low, some of my republican colleagues have gone so far as to falsely claim that

an historic nominee, who would be the first muslim american to serve on the appellate court, is bigoted. something stands out about president biden's nominees aside from their qualifications and loyalty to the rule of law is the professional diversity they bring to the bench. we've made history confirming more black women to the federal circuit courts than all prior presidents combined. we confirmed the first black woman to seven on the supreme court, justice ketanji brown jackson. as we celebrate asian pacific islander heritage found, i want to point out that of president biden has appointed nor aapi judges than any previous president. this includes the first ever

asian american judge in the third and seventh circuits, the first asian american judge in virginia. beyond this demographic diversity, there is a-breaking professional diversity. in the past three years we have confirmed more circuit judges than all prior presidents combined. we've confirmed state court judges, federal magistrates and bankruptcy judges and prosecutors who have made significant contributions to the country's judicial system. we've confirmed jurists who have protected civil rights, women's rights and lgbtq rights. another notable aspect is that the vast majority, nearly 90% of these confirmations have been bipartisan. nearly 90%. this includes over three-quarters of the appellate nominees. in addition, i want to thank a number of my republican colleagues who have worked in good faith with the white house, with me and the committee to fill vacancies in their states.

this focus on qualified consensus nominees will go a long way toward restoring trust and faith in our judiciary. the american people deserve federal judges who not only look like america but understand the american experience from every angle. we have accomplished this during the longest, evenly-divided senate in history. we celebrate these 200 judges but should not stop here. we will continue elevating judges who are principled and committed by law to protecting the constitution. the american people deserve nothing less. mr. president, let me close by saying it has been an honor to serve as chairman of the committee. but our success in bringing these nominees to the floor really belongs to the members of the committee -- ten democrats and ten republicans. those democrats in particular have dutifully come to the committee hearings and waited patiently for the opportunity to vote and bring these nominees to the floor. we wouldn't be here without

them. i salute them, their dedication to the rule of law and our responsibility on the judiciary committee. and i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin. mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without

objection. mr. schumer: so, mr. president, this is an amazing moment in the history of this senate and of all senates because in just a few moments the senate will confirm angela m. martinez to be a district judge for the district of arizona. judge martinez will be the 20oth federal judge under this administration. reaching 200 judges is a major milestone. simply put, our 200 judges comprise the most diverse slate of judicial nominations of any president in american history. our federal judiciary is now far more balanced, far more diverse, far more experienced than it was just a few years before president biden took office. i'm so proud of the 200 judges. 127 are women. 125 are people of color.

that's a majority of the judges, more than a majority. over 60%, women two-thirds. women, two-thirds people of color. 58 black judges, 37 black women judges -- each a record -- 36 hispanic judges, 33 asian american pacific island judges -- also a record. it's amazing. and it's not just, there's also not just demographic diversity but professional diversity. it's not just a lot of white male partners in big, fancy law firms anymore. it's people who are public defenders, civil rights lawyers, labor lawyers, immigration lawyers, consumer lawyers. we have so much greater diversity on the bench, and that is so good for america because the bench, the powerful federal judiciary filled with lifetime appointments should reflect america. it's taken too long to get to

this point. we still have more ground to make up but we're getting there and we're so proud of it. and of course the first black woman to serve on the supreme court, justice ketanji brown jackson. ever since i've gotten on the judiciary committee, it's been my goal to diversify the bench, and the judges i've chosen in new york have been like that for over two decades. but now under the biden administration and under the great leadership of chairman durbin and his judiciary committee, we have really moved forward. and i want to give special consideration, because she works full time on this, to my nominations director. we work so closely with the white house. and that is catatalina tham who has been so important and so dedicated behind the scenes in getting these judges confirmed. this is a really fine day for america. when you look at all the trouble and all the things swirling

around, and then you realize so many fine people who never would have even had access to the federal bench are on the bench gives you faith in the future of this great country. i yield the floor and ask -- i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the question is on the nomination. 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.

the clerk: 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.

the clerk: mr. schumer mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen. ms. sinema. ms. smith. ms. stabenow. mr. sullivan. mr. tester. mr. thune. mr. tillis. mr. tuberville. mr. van hollen. mr. vance. mr. warner. mr. warnock. ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden. mr. young.

the clerk: senators voting in the affirmative -- booker, capito, cardin, cramer, crapo, duckworth, durbin, hickenlooper, klobuchar, lankford, lummis, marshall, murray, schatz, schumer, sinema. mr. coons, aye.

senators voting in the negative -- barrasso, blackburn, braun, fischer, hyde-smith, johnson, rounds, schmitt, tuberville, vance. mr. murphy, aye. mr. thune, no. the clerk: mr. kaine, aye.

the clerk: mr. casey, aye.

the clerk: mr. bennet, aye.

the clerk: mrs. britt, no.

mr. van hollen, aye.

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

the clerk: mr. reed, aye. mr. graham, aye. mr. lujan, aye.

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

ms. cortez masto, aye. ms. baldwin, aye. the clerk: ms. stabenow, aye.

the clerk: mr. cruz, no. mr. kennedy, no. mr. romney, aye. mr. scott of florida, no.

the clerk: mr. warner, aye.

the clerk: mr. king, aye.

the clerk: mr. heinrich, aye. mr. cotton, no. the clerk: mr. markey, aye.

cornyn, no. -- the clerk: mr. cornyn, no. mr. brown, aye.

the clerk: mr. daines, no. the clerk: mr. welch, aye. mr. fetterman, aye.

the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, aye. ms. butler, aye. vote:

the clerk: mrs. shaheen, aye. ms. collins, aye. ms. hirono, aye. ms. hassan, aye. mr. grassley, no. mr. cassidy, aye. ms. warren, aye. mr. sanders, aye.

the clerk: ms. smith, aye.

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

the clerk: mr. kelly, aye. the clerk: mr. carper, aye. mr. hoeven, aye.

the clerk: mr. boozman, no.

the clerk: mr. whitehouse, aye.

the clerk: ms. rosen, aye.

the clerk: mr. risch, aye.

the clerk: mr. paul, no. ms. cantwell, aye. the clerk: mr. ossoff, aye.

vote: the clerk: mr. moran, aye.

the clerk: ms. duckworth, aye. the clerk: mr. warnock, aye.

the clerk: mr. wyden, aye.

the clerk: mr. sullivan, no.

the clerk: mr. tillis, aye.

the clerk: mr. budd, no. ms. murkowski, aye. mr. rubio, no.

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

the clerk: ms. ernst, no. vote: the clerk: mr. young, aye.

the clerk: mr. mcconnell, aye. the presiding officer: the yeas are 66. the nays are 28.

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. the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of executive calendar number 571, dena m. coggins of california to be united states district judge for the eastern district of california signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of dena m. coggins of california to be united states district judge for the eastern district of california shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll.

vote: the clerk: ms. baldwin. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mrs. blackburn. mr. blumenthal. mr. booker. mr. boozman. mr. braun. mrs. britt. mr. brown. mr. budd. ms. butler. ms. cantwell. mrs. capito. mr. cardin. mr. carper. mr. casey. mr. cassidy. ms. collins. mr. coons. mr. cornyn. ms. cortez masto. mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo. mr. cruz. mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst. mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley.

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

mr. kennedy. the clerk: mr. king. ms. klobuchar. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan. ms. lummis. mr. manchin.

mr. markey. mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. menendez. mr. merkley. mr. moran. mr. mullin. ms. murkowski. mr. murphy. mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. mr. ricketts. mr. risch. mr. romney. ms. rosen. mr. rounds. mr. rubio. mr. sanders. mr. schatz. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer. mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen. ms. sinema. ms. smith. ms. stabenow. mr. sullivan.

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

the clerk: senators voting in the affirmative -- duckworth, durbin, gillibrand,

hassan, hickenlooper, hirono, merkley, reed, schumer, sinema, and welch. senators voting in the negative -- capito, cornyn, ernst, grassley, hoeven, johnson, marshall, mcconnell, paul, rubio, scott of south carolina, and young. the clerk: mr. sullivan, no.

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

the clerk: ms. rosen, aye. mr. kaine, aye. mr. romney, no. mr. cassidy, no.

the clerk: mr. lee, no. mr. tillis, no. mr. kelly, aye.

the clerk: mrs. fischer, no.

the clerk: mr. whitehouse, aye. ms. collins, aye. the clerk: mr. rounds, no. ms. cortez-masto, aye.

the clerk: mrs. murray, aye. the clerk: mr. lujan, aye.

the clerk: mr. peters, aye.

the clerk: mr. ricketts, no.

the clerk: mr. cotton, no. mrs. britt, no. mr. scott of florida, no. mr. budd, no. mr. vance, no. mr. carper nikes mr. carper, aye.

mr. crapo, no. ms. butler, aye. mr. schmitt, no. the clerk: mr. sanders, aye. mr. fetterman, aye.

mr. kennedy, no. mr. wicker, no. mr. tuberville, no.

the clerk: mr. schatz, aye. the clerk: mr. bennet, aye.

vote:

the clerk: mr. warner, aye. mr. cramer, no. mr. braun, no.

the clerk: ms. stabenow, aye. the clerk: ms. baldwin, aye.

the clerk: mr. ossoff, aye. the clerk: mrs. shaheen, aye. mr. murphy, aye. the clerk: mr. markey, aye.

the clerk: mr. graham, aye. mr. lankford, no. mrs. hyde-smith, no. the clerk: mr. risch, no.

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

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

the clerk: mr. brown, aye.

. the clerk: mr. heinrich, aye.

the clerk: mr. thune, no. the clerk: mr. daines, no.

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

vote:

the clerk: mr. warnock, aye.

the clerk: ms. smith, aye. mr. booker, aye. ms. klobuchar, aye.

the clerk: ms. lummis, no.

the clerk: mr. coons, aye. mr. wyden, aye. the clerk: mr. van hollen, aye.

the clerk: mr. moran, no.

the clerk: mr. cruz, no. the presiding officer: on this vote the yeas are 50, the nays

are 44, and the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination nomination, the judiciary. dena m. coggins of california to be united states district judge for the eastern district of california.

.

>> so far this year 1,624,790 people have illegallingly crossed our southwest border.

1,624 west virginia. mrs. capito: thank you, madam president. last week, may 14, our friend and ally, israel celebrated its 75th independence day. israel was founded in the wake of the holocaust to give the jewish people a homeland that allowed them to return to their ancestral land they had been forcibly removed from. i'm proud, very proud, that the united states was the first country to recognize israel, and since then we are steadfast allies who support one another through times both prosperous and challenging. however this year's israeli independence day came during a time of great turmoil. as israel battles terrorist forces that have ruthlessly waged war against them since october 7. we join them as they mourn the

loss of over 1200 israelis killed in that initial attack and pray for the safe return of the hostages still kept in captivity by hamas. in an alarming development, this long-standing u.s.-israel relationship is now becoming unnecessarily strained by president biden's quest to appease those in his party who do not support the state of israel, a bastion of democracy in the middle east. the attack was the deadliest day for the jewish people since the holocaust. so how did we get to this point? the common refrain for those opposed to israel now has been to call for ceasefire now. we've seen it all across our colleague campuses. and we saw president biden clap along to these demands again as

he delivered a commencement address just this past weekend. and what's even more mind-boggling is that those who are protesting are demanding -- who are they demanding a ceasefire from? i haven't heard a single campus protest group call for hamas to lay down its harms or call for hamas to release the hostages. why? why? because they want israel to stop fighting. because they want israel to stop defending itself, and because they want israel to lose. we cannot forget the fact that a ceasefire was in place on october 7, and that ceasefire was broken by hamas as they deliberately attacked innocent civilians in the most brutal and barbaric ways. so let's not forget that some of these communities, the border towns in israel that were attacked by hamas were some of

the most ardent supporters in israel for the palestinian people. they were some of the biggest advocates for peace. yet, despite the reality here in the united states, our colleges have become embroiled in controversy over this and played host to anti-israel and an anti-anti-semetic -- and anti-anti-semetic protests and a rabbi recommended some students return home for safety. protesters demand that israel drop their weapons, yet refuse to acknowledge that hamas is the instigator of the war. but we now know what hamas' plan was, to minimize any chance of peace in the region, to attack israel's most peace-promoting citizens in the most brutal of

fashions, especially and most horrifyingly towards israeli women. -- to stop an emerging normalization deal with saudi arabia. and to conduct an attack on israel so horrific that israel ha no other -- had no other choice but to respond. in what world would -- would we ever expect a country to be attacked in such a brutal fashion and not fight to defend itself? it's important to note that the chaos and instability benefits one bad actor above all else, and that is the iranian regime. without iran's help, both financially and militarily, hamas would not have been able to execute their terrorist attacks on the israelis. iran has further supported

hamas' efforts by launching over 300 projectiles on israeli on april 13. and lest we forget it was an iranian-made drone that killed three american soldiers in jordan on january 29. we must recognize that the deep ties between hamas and iran and their common goal of destdestroying israel and bringing harm to the -- to the united states. it is their stated aim to repeat the october 7 attacks a second, third, and fourth time. israel must defend itself and they must root out the evil that is hamas. so earlier this week we learned that the international criminal court would seek arrest warrants for leaders of hamas and israel for war crimes. it is simply shocking to me that

the icc would seek to establish a delusional level of equivalency between the actions of israel and the actions of hamas. i've seen the footage of the attacks on israeli and american citizens that occurred on october 7, and it is clear that hamas is the real criminal involved in this conflict. hamas continues to show no regard for its own people, spending billions of dollars on over 300 miles of tunnel systems, yet, they're refusing to allow their palestinian citizens to shelter there, they use hospitals, schools, places of worship for military purposes knowingly placing citizens in harm's way. while israel was founded on t the -- principle of promoting development for the development of its inhabitants, hamas' only

mission is to destroy israel. the differences between their founding principles, their leadership and their actions do not be any more different, and it is abhorrent that the icc would attempt to argue otherwise. in these times of instability you would hope that the president of the united states would display strength. instead, president biden has decided to play politics by placing a hold on security assistance that this congress most recently approved. this is just the latest foreign policy blunder from an administration plagued by wakeness on the international stage. shortly after this policy of withholding weapons was announced, hamas steps away from the negotiations on the safe return of the hostages. it seems like a pretty big coincidence to me. hamas is still holding american hostages captive, although i

wonder how many of these hostages are still alive after we discovered last week four bodies were discovered and president biden should be doing everything within his power to bring home those american hostages. instead he is publicly withholding weapons from our ally and giving their adversary cover. when president biden took office, he pledged ironclad support for israel and now he is backing down from that promise. he's projecting to our allies and our adversaries that the u.s. promises can be subject to political pressure. to further underscore the administration's lack of responsibility, my epw committee came across something very disturbing this week of president biden's so-called inflation reduction act. you might wonder what epw or the

ira have to do with israel and their battle against terrorists. but we discovered that the climate justice alliance, a group that received $50 million from the biden administration in december, openly denies israel's right to exist and actively supports the horrific actions of hamas. they even promote graphics that glorify the bulldozers used by hamas on october 7. this -- it is despicable that the u.s. is sending millions of dollars to the ira to a group that promotes hatred under the guise of climate change and this administration would allow u.s. taxpayers funds to fund this. there is no doubt that the last seven months have been an incredibly difficult time for

israel and the jewish americans here at home. never in my life. never would i have ever expected to hear and see the anti-semetic discourse i see being conducted on our own land, our own american shores, and the violence and intimidation towards jewish communities. together we must condemn the rise of anti-semetic and make clear that this has no home in our country and in our world. my republican colleagues and i will continue to display our unwavering support for israel and push for the assistance they need to censure their survival and victory in this fight as allies do have needs, particularly in this time of need. so with that, i yield the floor to my friend from north dakota. senator ha-- senator hoeven.

mr. hoeven: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from north dakota. mr. hoeven: madam president, i am pleased to join which are colleague from west virginia, and others who you'll be hearing from, next our colleague from nebraska, in regard to our

absolutely ironclad support for israel. and why it is so important that we stand and we stand strongly with our friend and ally israel. on october 7, hamas committed appalling atrocities against jews in southern israel. i went to israel one month later to show support for our close ally during their dark hour and i'm still proud to stand with israel. but i'm very concerned about the biden administration holding up weapons that need to be delivered to israel. that's why i cosponsored two important pieces of legislation asking the president to expedite aid to israel, first senator cotton's israeli security act, and then the assistance support act that senator cruz is -- put forward as well. that's the assuring resupply of

munitions for arm act. congress moved decisively to support israel and these bills make crystal clear -- there's no doubt about it -- our dire that israel receive our support without hesitation. we said october 7 could never happen again, but if we say never again, we should mean it. if we truly mean never again, then the only path forward is for israel to win the war, to win the war. and that is why it is so important that we give israel the tools it needs to win the war as soon as possible. destroying hamas means allowing israel to reestablish security for its people. destroying hamas also means it can no longer terrorize and repress the people of gaza. if we're concerned with the lives of jews in gaza, the sooner hamas is defeated, the

better. the sooner hamas is completely defeated, the better. putting limits on military standings only means prolonging a conflict that israel must win. and it means greater loss of life among both israelis and gazians. delaying or halting military aid also sends the wrong message to both our allies and our adversaries. our allies like israel rightly wonder if u.s. promises will be kept when times get tough. our adversaries like hamas and iran wonder whether they can manipulate us into failure. when we hesitate to keep our promises and give our enemies the chance to regroup, we inyents advise the very -- incentivize the very behavior that we must oppose. we have to wipe out terrorism. we have to work with our allies, not just israel but all of our allies to wipe out terrorism.

if hamas survives tshgs will certainly -- it will certainly seize more hostages in the future. that's what hamas does. if hamas survives, it will keep using innocent civil yans as shields -- civilians as shields. think about that. using innocent citizens at their shields. if hamas survives, it will see october 7 as a triumph rather than a disaster. the administration may believe that pausing military assistance will save lives or limit suffering, but it will only sow the seeds of future conflict. there is no substitute, there is no substitute for victory over hamas. congress has provided the resources to support our ally israel and i call upon the administration to keep our promises, to act according to the will of the american people and to accept nothing less than the complete defeat of hamas. with that, madam president, i yield the floor.

mrs. fischer: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from nebraska. mrs. fischer: thank you, madam president. madam president, this weekend president biden called for an immediate cease-fire in gaza. what the president didn't acknowledge is that israel and gaza were not in a state of war until october 7 when hamas broke a cease-fire. they stormed israel's borders and they raped, tortured, and killed innocent civilians. far left prohamas activists are painting hamas as freedom fighters who want to liberate their fellow palestinians. nothing could be further from

the truth. hamas uses innocent civilians, anyone from babies to the elderly, as human shields. they shelter themselves in schools and in hospitals. they have no regard for human life or dignity, not for israelis and not for palestinians. members of hamas filmed themselves laughing as they maim and murder innocent people. they use sexual assault as a weapon of war. these are no freedom fighters. they are terrorists. we saw a sobering example of that this weekend. the israeli military recovered the bodies of four hostages who were captured, abused, and

murdered by hamas. they found them lying in a tunnel in gaza. these included the body of a young woman hamas captured at the music festival on october 7. she and the other hostages ran from the armed terrorists who were killing people to their left and to their right, but hamas caught up with them. they sexually assaulted and maim ed her before they murdered her. this weekend the israeli military returned the mutilated body of a young daughter to her grieving parents. these are not the deeds of freedom fighters. these are the deeds of

terrorists. there are still over a hundred hostages being held in gaza, many of whom are believed to be dead. eight of those hostages are amer americans, three of whom are dead as well. three americans. when president biden calls for a cease-fire, one neither party has agreed to yet, he's just calling for israel to surrender. he's emboldening hamas and abandoning the dozens of people still being abused by these terrorists. he's equivocating because of political pressure. president biden must stop sacrificing a moral backbone for

political gain. you don't negotiate with terrorists. hamas is using hostages as political pawns, and no amount of diplomacy is going to change that. the biden administration should not be telling israel's democratically elected government what they must do. israel must make those decisions to protect their people and protect their country. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from nebraska. a senator: thank you, madam president. i rise today to join my colleagues in expressing my complete support for the state of israel in the war against the hamas terrorists.

mr. ricketts: there was a cease-fire in place prior to october 7. hamas broke that cease-fire. hamas attacked israel and murdered over 1200 israelis and amer americans. they also took hundreds of hostages, including americans as well. hamas is responsible for every death on october 7 and every death since that day. they need to surrender. hamas must surrender. if hamas surrenders and releases the hostages, a, can freely -- aid can freely go into gaza to support the gazians. instead hamas continues to prosecute this war. in fact, after october 7 said they would continue to do atrocities like october 7 if

given the chance. they will continue to try to destroy israel. they will continue to murder israeli citizens. they just don't chant death to israel, they chant death to america as well. terror groups like hamas and hezbollah represent an existential threat to israel. they have repeatedly declared their intention to wipe israel off the map. israel has the right and the obligation to destroy the terrorist obligation -- terrorist group hamas. they must have the ability to defend themselves. and they will be doing the world a favor by destroying hamas. we need to support israel and their efforts to do just that. part of that support means

pushing back on anti-semitic organizations like the united nations or the international criminal court that attack israel's legitimacy and their sovereignty. the international criminal court's loot crouse decision to apply -- ludicrous decision to apply for west warrants for benjamin netanyahu and the defense chief is the most recent example of anti-semitism. this outrageous decision not only emboldens terrorists around the world but creates problems for us here in the united states as well. in the statement the icc prosecutor describes crimes that have been committed on the territory of israel and the state of palestine. that's exactly backwards. he should have said the state of israel and the territories of palestine. but that was intentional. it is a continuation of the

rampant anti-semitism in these organizations like the icc and the u.n. it is designed to delegitimatize the state of israel. and the crazy thing is, the icc's action in itself is illegitimate. it lacks legal basis. under its own charter, the icc is banned from moving forward with prosecutions unless the relevant government is unwilling or unable to police themselves. the icc knows israel has a robust and independent judiciary. the icc knows and has admitted that israel has trained lawyers who advise commanders in a robust system intended to ensure compliance with international humanitarian law. by moving forward with these arrest warrants, the icc is calling israel's laws, governments, and democracy illegitimate.

it's wrong. there is no moral equivalency between the state of israel democracy and the terrorist organization hamas. there is no moral equivalency between hamas' terrorist actions and atrocities on october 7 and israel's right to defend themselves to take action to destroy that terrorist organization. hamas terrorists have shot unarmed civilians, dismembered soldiers, raped women, and massacred children. meanwhile, israel has fought its war while taking great pains to avoid unnecessary civilian casualties. we need to be supporting israel in its mission, not undermining the israeli government. it's in our interest to do so. neither israel nor the united states are members of the icc. both countries are outside of

the icc's jurisdiction. yet it's going after the -- the icc is going after israel anyway. america should take note. if the icc can violate israel's sovereignty, it can violate america's sovereignty. the icc needs to face the consequences of its anti-israel policies. while it's good that president biden has condemned the arrest warrants as outrageous, israel needs more than words. it needs actions. last month my republican colleagues and i sent a letter to the icc with a warning. if the icc moves forward with arrest warrants for israelis, we would push to end all american support for this disgraceful organization. we're here today to tell president biden one simple thing. if your commitment to israel is really ironclad as you