0

the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mrs. britt: as americans, we believe that every person on the planet is created by their inalienable rights. religious freedom is at the top of that list. and, for me i believe it must every turn. that's why i continue concerned with what's happening in nicaragua. since

regime has persecuted catholic church and various christian missions and charities. this lawless behavior has only escalated recently. in december nicaraguan police arrested approximately a dozen individuals, pastors associated with mountainan faith leaders have been unjustly handed down a sham sentence in march. the regime has imposed a fine of totally -- totaling nearly $1 billion, so that's about % of that country's -- 6% of that country's entire gdp along with 12 to 15 years of imprisonment. let's be very clear. these christians are imprisoned today because of their freedom has been taken away because they chose to preach the and the regime doesn't seem to wantstop there. in addition to those arrested

and impr has issued arrest warrants for three more americans. they are all associated with mountain way is an -- s an american nonprofit based in texas. mountain gateway recruits trains commissions, and sends out ordained christian ministers to spread the gospel. in nicaragua the organization has advanced kingdom through discipleship through feedingnd need through providing assistance after natural the gospel of our lord and savior jesus christ. these individuals doing this work should be celebrated not persecuted. earlier this year, i j bicameral group of colleagues in criticizing regime and this egregious violation of religious freedom led by congressman robert congressman barry moore. alabama's entire congressional delegation has been united

against and on this very important bipartisan issue. we've written letters, we've introduced resolutions in both chambers of congress and we've called on the biden administration totilize all sanction enforcement powers any diplomatic way, any options that are in the used to force nicaragua to remedy the situ today i want to emphasize that we cannot and stop speaking up against this religiousn nicarauga. we are calling to do morenow. this regime must stop targeting american citizens and it needs to begin faithfully upholding religious freedom in compliance with national international standards of human

rights. i yield the floor.

rkrx

'i

al i'm proud to be with these today the senate will have a chance to make our community safer. that is if republicans stie what they said a few years ago. martin heinrich will come to the floor and attempt to pass federal ban on bump stocks. i'm also proud to support the maga supreme court reversed a trumpl& ban on bump stocks a radical decision that endangers our community and law enforcement. wee warning this maga court is going off thessue after issue aligning with thements of the

hard right. i will let senator rose wrenching this decision is a she knows too today is not a simple choice it is a lifesaving one. i beg of a republican colleagues to truly ref on the ramifications of today's uc freedom. yesterday i took the first step to the senate to votereproductive freedom for women act led by senator murray and cosp me but every single female democratic senator. to measure a woman's fundamental right to choose calls for enshrining the protections of roe intoo law which most americans support. as majority leader i will work with my colleagues to bring it to the floor as soon as possible. our crusade onghts will continue when we return to session break. as we approach the anniversary anniversary of roe v wade being overturned this a month was meant to be one of

bipartisanship when the senate came together to pro the rights of millions of americans reproductive freedoms. uld've b ath both sides came together to pass commonsensemmonsense legislation protecting reproductive care might contraceptd've been a monthly put to rest the worries of millions ofca during attacks on the reproductive freedoms in the aftermath of row. but instead juneeen a month of maga maga republicans showing their true colors as thei on women on families on reproductive rights come to they were told by some of that right wing pro life shut we are going to force them to vote they the run away from questions when you ask them they are still going to have to vote and that is what matters most to the american people. in the last few weeks senate republicans have shown for all of their attempts to sound moderate on reproductive care comes to voting they choose maga extremism american people.

so republicans block federal protection for contraception a few weeks ago they chose a maga extremism over the american people. they a maga extremism over the american people. when donald tru this day continues to brag working with the senate hard right antichoice supreme justices to eliminate that is choosing magathe american people. we are telling our republican colleague you could not run away from the truth. your record on women's healthcare is outright visible shameful and out of step with most americans. senator murray for. >> thank you leader schumer. the american people seen a sharp contrast when it comes reoductive rights over the past few weeks democrats the right to birth control republicans voted no. democrats introduced legislation to protect the right to ivf republicans voted no.

don't forget twiceje

i emptied office just a -- i

entered office a year after the nuclear ed in 1975. why did we creat a nuclear regulatory commission? very simple. because there w need for an independent oversite of -- oversight of nar defense power plants in the united states aar activity generally. and there was a decisiohe atomic energy commission which existed, to say ts responsible for regulating nuclear power, bo responsible for promoting nuclearre and around the world. and that wf interest. you promote something by ng the problems or ignoring tnd that was becoming a big problem, that they weren't dealing with the f safety that had been raised abo power in our country. this is beforeee island. it's before chernobyl. but it's anticipating the safety

issues tha growing and growing and growing. so the nrc's current mission,s big passes reflects this cri the american public regulation anree from the influence of industrnd safety above all else. so we have a separate agency it's called the department of commerce. they can go and promote anything they want. they can try to sehar they want domestically or internationally, but tin charge of safety is the nuclear regulatory comme anything that department of commerce is pushiin't danger. so we create this dynamic tension inside of the government. that goal of the that puts health and safety above all else is what protects us against ndents, here or overseas wherever we're sellinar power plants.

the advance act, as attachednd safety act, completely unrelatls with the resources we're giving to fiters the resources we're giving to local fire departments in order to fight fires as they pop up in our local something we all support. but what they did was they at bill language that would requir require, underline that require the nuclear regulatory commission to rewrite its mission, to state that its oversight should and this is quote, not unnecessarily limit civilian nuclear activity regardsst is beneficial or detrimental to public safety and national securitye nuclear regulatory commission shouldn't be t commission. the commission's duty is to regulate not to facilitate. their job is t askll of the safety questions, to make sure the design is oko make sure

that the waste is being stored properly to make sure thant can't happen, to make sure that climate change tides rise doesn't swamp a nucleat. near a river or near the ocean. that's the job, is to protect all the people who live in communities. we'vot other agencies that are funded abl and willing to fulfill the role ong nuclear power. but this legislation does nothing to assure communities at the front line of nuclear infrastructure thaar expansion won't come at their expense in local communities. it compels the nuclear regulatory commission to identify how it can improve efficiency in its oversight and inspection programs without how it can also improve safety or engagement so the public can go in and ask questions about this in their neighborhood. to force the ceo of the company concerns of people who live near

a nuclear power plant might have. it provides no redress fores living near abandoned uranium mines nuclear waste sites. a rapid accompanied by rapid expansion of the rources and help protect community health and do it we should do it all together one big package. this new language also fails to ensure continued ameleadership on nuclear nonproliferation overseas. it fails to do anything to strengthen our current regime and export licenses for nuclear materialsnd be issued to countries that do not meet our own standards for nuclear safety and cooperation. only it law now says it only requires a notification to congress after that nuclear license is issued in another country and exempting ev after-the-fact knowification of ex --f exports for up

to you hear uranium or plutonium, ouk up. in many countries, they see this as a of electricity that has the side effect of is your an yum and uranium and plutonium. we saw in iran in iraq ina, they got nuclear power plants they saw it as aet uranium or plutonium with this wonderful by-product of electricity it generates. we should be concerned because we've been forewarned by our experiences over the last 40 we can see what happens if there's not a proper recognition how all fact be diverted. we shouldn't get al heads that saudi arabia now has american material. that shouldn't happen after the fact. that should happen before the fact. we should know that this is going happen. the bill also pushes the secretary of energy to identify

generally authorized countries for e with existing one, agreements. so what are one, two, three agreements tommic energy act? one, two, three agreements lay the foundation for the responsible exchange of nuclear materials and techn with countries that share common tonium and other nuclear materials in a way that ultimately could wind u bomb-making program. somewhere in be looking for ways to work around or export standards even further. throughout myreer i have seen nuclear safety and nonproliferation undermined in the interest of the short geo political concerns of a particular administration or industry at the expen longer-term nuclear nonproliferation gls our highest foreign policy objects. -- objectives. they get compromised in the short term bec one

wants to use nuclear power plants as a way of ingratiating the united states into the good favor o a particular country. could be saudi arabia soon. could be another country right after that. but without all the safeguards that should to protect against diversion of th so the united states is supposed to be the leader in the global arena and a nation with nuclear capabilitiese a duty to set the strongest possible standards for domestic and international nuclears as an example to the rest of the world. we als clean up our existing messes particularly in environmental justice communities before investing in anything t messes worse. as a result continued support for the fire safety grants and my respect for my colleagues working on this issue, i must now, in 1982 i w a book about nuclear proliferation and plants. the book was

peril, the politics of it's what happens when there is a shortchanging of the safety the security h should be put in place. and it also dealt with the issues domestically of a reduction in the supervision of nuclear power plants in terms of having the highest standards. now, there are many want to see a vast expansion of nuclear power using plutonium and uranium in the united they also support a vast expansion of nuclear power plantsround the world using uranium andplutonium. and i appreciate the fact that they want to do that a the name of climate change because it reduces has its own problems. it brings its own problems. we still don't have a solution to where we're going to bury all the nuclear waste in the united

states. yucca mountain facility in nevada still hasn't been completed, and in my opinion it completed. and we're now up to on it. and similarly, we get into a race with other countries,sia or china in the export of nuclear power plants weer the standards. we should ensure that we're in provider of nuclear power around the world so reduce dramatically the threat of . so my book in 1982 isir d subject right here because whether itkorea that converted a civilian nuclear power plant over to a bomb-making factory, whether it be in iraq with saddam hussein,t be in iran you name it, the story is the have to be very responsible and ensure we have the highest standards.'soming out here. and i am going to vote no because i think i encouraging a brand new era of nuclear7 power here

domestically and internationally, we should have that discussion. it shouldn't be attached to the fire safety billrwe sure that firefighters can put out the fire in the house that's us. we all agree on however, the issue of nuclear estic safety of power plants in our country, that's a different subject. but honestly my great friend chairman carper such an incredible leader on clean energy the chairman of the committee the most important climate billn a generation he is my friend. and i thank him for engaging in a colloquy with me to clarify in of some of these provisions. and i look forward to continu to work on efforts to protect communities, clean up toxic and create a consent-based pathway to storage in our country. the decision the nuclear waste in our country in w

i was in the room when it was made. the national academy of sciences said that the yucca mountain facility was at the bottom of the places in our country. 's near a river. it's near an earthquake fault. no wonder we haven't finished it. the safety questions were never answered atbeginning. and that's all i ask if we're going to move era of nuclear power here and around the world, let's ask thequ make sure we put the safeguards in place. let's make sure we back and say how in the world that we -- did we ever allow something like that to ever occurso i thank you, mr. president, for the opportunity to be and with that i yield back.

a senator: mr. presiden the presiding officer: the senator from kansas. mr. moran: mr.ago, a wait time scandal at the v.a. medical izona, led to a nationwide access and accountability crisis for v.a.

health care system. many of used to that worked to find a solution and we ultimately passed som choice act. subsequent to that we made improvements to what w from the choice act's implementation and veterans and its consequences to the department of veterans affairs. and the mission act which was signed into law six year month. the mission act expanded the ability for veterans to seek care in their communities and made v.a. health care more accessible convenient and centric than ever before. the mission act has also contributed to significant enrollment of veterans utilization and reliance on v.a. carend improvements in quality and trust among veterans. for veterans particularly those in rural states like yours andne the ability to get care closer to home can be life changing and lifesaving. unfortunately, leaders have been taking alarming actions to limit t that the mission act

affords veterans in kansas and the country. it is unfathomable that the leaving veterans with fewer options, fewer options to seek the care they need. yet i've seen a dramatic in in community care-related case work requests from v.a. staff in recent weeks, for whistleblowers in their conversations to me of my colleagues have experienced the samething. i know about what's going onhe v.a. is doing is in the conversations i have withenators and members of congress call case work someone who brings us a problem with the hope that we can make a and find a solution. our case escalated dramatically. a number of these case work requests involves -- oneeteran with cancer. and i mentioned this in a hearing of our veterans affairs committee just in the last couple of weeks but this veteran with he

and others who have n or mental health concerns they're among the most vulnerable in the v.a.'s patient population. in this one case the v.a. canceled community care authorization for a veteran innhattan, kansas about an hour away from topeka where there's a v.a. hospital. the issue here is this veteran, one, why did they cancel the care but two, this had completed 58 of 60ce the v.a. canceled the last two in hise needed to find chemotherapyhe topeka about an hour away. the v.a. wanted him to drive back and forth to topeka for hising treatments. now, the v.a. when i told them the facts, saw this as something that's wrong here wrong here and adjusted to allow him owe toe allow him to have the treatments the last two of the 60 where he h be the first 58. but it's only one example in

wh rolling back the opportunities for veterans the community from continuing ve that care. these kind of decisions would be alarming and unacceptable to me and manyf colleagues i think at any time but it's particulars why i'm on the senate floor today highlighting this issue.it ght now given that the v.a. recently implemented a strategic hiring pause in the v.a. health care system is actively working to reduce the v.a. workforce by 10,000 employees. it defies my understanding how the v.a. expects to lces for veterans in the community, in other into a v.a.-direct c to reduce staff in that direct-care system that are actually available to care for those veterans. independently, these policy goals are cause for concern. together they risk the welfare of veterans and the workforce nationwide. i would encourage my colleagues

to t the case work that their staffs are worf veterans in their states and see if t i'm seeing which is and more veterans saying senator, jerry, senator moran can you help me? i've been receiving care in the mmay i'm receiving that care. i like my provider. and yet the the rug out from under me. these actions could cost lives and drive other veterans away from v.a. health care benefits that they earned and deserve. i have had several veterans tell i like what i'm getting in the community so much i'm going to pay for it out of m pocket. veterans can do better. the v.a. can do better. the must do better. but i don't think this is jus opinion stance. -- the circumstances i'm describing to my colleagues just something that seems to be happening at the v.a. it's a concerted effort by v.a. leadership to bring community care veterans back into direct

care at the v.a. and as my colleague from the mission act, what the law says is a veter instances, most instinstances is entitled to care in the community if he or along with their provider decides it's in the best interest of the veteran. that decision is not made by the v.a. whether entitled to care in the community. it is made by thet, the veteran, and the provider the doctor practitioner the physician assistant. and yet there is a concerted leadership to deny veterans that care and they're going to receive care they receive the v.a. health care system. i'm aan of the v.a. health care system. i support it. i work hard to make sure that it has the capabilities the assets the nsa resources to do its job. but i also know there are particularly in rural areas whereeatment in which it's the right thing to do to allow a veteran with his or her provider saying this is in the best f my patient

to have care provided in the community. this is a really important issue. the v.a. struggled to provide for veterans in the past. many improvements have been given veterans a choice and the v.a. undermine the choice a veteran makes. i call on th v.a. to immediately reverse course. the of course explained to me their rationale, in some deny that there is any concerted effort or any policy change. circumstances are so evident, so i absolutely believe that the v.a.'s policies encouragement of their staff is to do something contrary to thelaw. the v.a. needs to reverse its course reaffirm the rig terans those who served our country. they have the right to seek the care that they need and desire in the communityn live or where they believe the best absolute care can be them under their current health care

circumstances. mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. moran: mr. president, i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: baldwin.s

a senator: mr. e presiding officer: the senator from washington. ms. cantwell: mr. president, i come to the i ask unanimous consent that theall quorum call be dispensed with without objection. ms. cantwell: today the committee was national spectrum skrut act. this bill a hard-won compromise months in the making would have balanced approach to spectrum management protecting our defense ensuring our military has telecommunications capacity they innovation by unleashing spectrum for commercial for america's economic and international competitiveness. it also funded key bipartisan priorities that make our nation more secure and also increase ies for americans to be competitive in higher-wage

ill was to be considered in a markup today, those shared priorities by the secretary of defense, the of staff, and the secretary of comm released a joint statement last week in the support of bill. i ask unanimous consent that their statement be put into the record. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. cantwell: thank you, mr. president. these agencies stop sparring and finally agree to a path forward?lyput, it's because spectrum helps each of them meet behalf of this nation. the spectrum d place that give federal agencies equity at each part of their agencies and a seat at the table in spectrum decision making. eliminated the disruptive interagency disputes that we have come to kw literally have impeded spectrum policy progress in the pas it also reinstated the fcc compromising national security. the fcc has beenor more than

a year because the fighting among these s threaten our economic growth. establishing a sustainable spectrum pipeline would spur our own economic growth and promote it would also have raised revenues to fund critical security and economic opportunitiesstates. one of those key priorities funded through this legislation is the continuation of the affordable connectivity program. and i will note that theofficer, the president, is very vocal inor the affordable connectivity program. i thank him his leadership. this affordable connectivity !÷ program provides affordable broadband to more than 23 million american households. americans need broadband to speako their doctors, to do their homework to connect to their jobs to stay in with loved ones. it's interesting, mr. pr know that there are

parts of the united states where people either can't afford broadband nor are the f e them. i'm p like that in vermont. so it's so important to have a program like the affordable connectivity ram. the pandemic laid bare how important broadband access to every american and to businesses no different access to affordable electricity or heating or capacity. who are these 23 about half of the acp households are military families. about a quarter are african american. another quarter are 32 -- 300,000acp householdsl lands. so a lot of people on fixed still count on affordable broadband for their daily lives. not surprising just as in this article that was inyesterday's

newspaper in my state, the end of the intnet subsidy puts health care lifeline at risk. and it describes the story of a idaho who literally was home in a rural community and actuall leg and then needed that conntivity to maintain connection with her doctors and her health care. these are the americans who need this program. they're in state. one school employee told me abdent who hadn't done their homework for weeks. out. the student didn't want to say. they didn't want to be cal want any of their friends to know they just didn't haveert trying to get out of the work. she was just trying to protect her family and protect herself. we can't be asking parents to choose between a child's food and their education. but despite demonstrated level of need the commerce committee, my on the other side of the aisle, offered amendments to actually the acp program.

they wanted to get rid of the program that helps these families who cannot afford connectivity. i'm not surprising because some members on the other side don't even support the acp program but blocking committee progress will serconsequences. for example this legislation funded a program called rip and remove chinese spy ware from some providers in rural communitiesn't have the resources to as we say, rip out the chise spy ware and replace it with american productsthis legislation would also helpthem. this would lead toon of other technologies our telecommunication providers upgrade to of the chinese technology. getting more of the secure technology will protect our communities from network adversaries and allow americans to be in the leadlecommunication network

equipment. ll all of government management approach allows us to maintain our commercial and military leadership around the globe, including at important standard-setting bodies where adversaries are going to make inroads. this bill would have funded historical investment in our technology advancements that we for in the chips and science act, particularly in are called epscore and other programs to maintain the u.s. way, mr. president, that rip and replace should be don't want chinese spyware in our telecommunication system. there is no way that acp, affordable connectivity for people who c afford it should be an issue. this is about of broadband for the working poor and it should issue. pushing ahead with grant funding

advances america's competitiveness,cts our national security and it helps us with the economic innovation that we all wantappen throughout the united states. i hope my with obstructing and get back to negotiating that will deliver help americans continue to have access to something as essential as affordable broadband. i thank the president and i yield the floor. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the !k

mr. schumer: mr. esident. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: are we in a quorum? the presiding officer: yes. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that thee dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: thank you, mr. president. now, i am proud to today to stand with my good friend and a great issue, senator martin heinrich on a matter of life and death. a few days ago the maga supreme co urt struck once again, reversing ban on dangerous bump stocks like the at the las vegas mass shooting. today the senate must and pass a federal ban on bump heinrich has championed. i urge republicans block this commonsense safety measure. banning bump stocks should be the work of five minutes. it is an ideaconservative senators have claimed to support in the past. one conservative colleague of mine on the republican side said a while ago that a bump stocks ban gets on the senate floor i would vote for it.

the certainlying senatorainlying senator -- senior senator from south carolina says i'm willing to get rid of that. some republicans even supported dona trump when he hardly a friend of gun safetyd bump stocks after las vegas shooting. if banning bump enough for republicans in the past it should be good enough for them today. ns block this bill today after claiming to support bump stock in years past a ban even president trump supported when he was president, shame on them. they'd be siding with the gun lobby over families by gun violence. mr. president, it's amazing to the maga supreme court, even went to donald trump on this issue appalling, very very hard to swallow. reasoning. if republicans can -- if republicans now believe a ban on bump stocks isply too much they should explain their change of heart to the families i nevada who lost loved ones.

if republicans block this bill tog to support bump stock bans in years past shame republicans should explain to parents and teachers and students easier for murderers to access dangerous weapons instead of mak it's not enough for republicans to roll their eyes and dismiss this bump stock vote as a show vote. tell that to the famlost loved ones. i urgeub not to object. americans are sick of gun vif lawmakers who obey the gun lobby and kill any effort to make our communities safer. and i want to thank my friend and a great senate martin heinrich on this and so many issues whether it's environment or protecting the rightsf people or just helping new mexico in every way a he's now helping them with the fires now r the senator from new mexico is one of our great leaders here and i'm s to make the unanimous consent request. the presiding officer: themexico. mr. heinrich: mr. president, i want to begin today before we p stocks by

acknowledging the southfork and salt fires that have forced literally thousands from their homes in lincoln new mexico and the apache nation over thours. i was actually just at the white house discussing these homeland security these are no joke fires. they are fast.moving and they are threatening thousands of people's homes today. i know that many are worried that they may have already lost homes, their property their businesses their animals. my thoughts are with every single one of you. io extraordinary thanks to the wildland firefighte responders local and tribal leaders who are working rightrotect new mexicans. i'm also grateful to all t surrounding communities that have already welcomed thousands of their neighbors. in times of need new mexicans look out for each other, and i2 know that we will do everything possible to help our fellow new immediate emergency and the recovery in

thend and i want to stress the importance forcted area to please heed evuation orders and follow directions from local authorse do everything you can to stay safe. i'm also here today to make a senate to consider my legislation, unlawful machine parts or bufr act owe on bump act. nearly seven years ago on october the 1st, 2017 more than 20,000 people gathered for a large outdoor musicfestival. it was the third day in a row that folks from all around the country joine their friends and family to hear music from some of their favorite musicians, and no one could have anticipated unfold that t night, thousands were listening to the and then over the music they to hear what at first people thought were fireworks, rapid gunfire rained down on the crowd with shots so close

together that theyleed into each other. complete panic for the next terrifying ten minutes, ran in every direction searching for cover where there was none. some falling down next to bleeding frien and dying loved ones. others fleeing desperately trying to reach safety. in total the shooter fired more than a thousan of ammunition in just ten minutes. people that night, injured hundreds more including ultimately perished from their wounds. it was and is the deadliest mass shooting in american history. the las vegas gunman was able to njure so many people so quickly because he used a deadly device known as a bump stocks are an attachment that modify semiautom dramatically increase their rate of fire allowing them to operate as fully automatic apons.

they make it possible to shoot hundreds of rounds a minute. and let me be real clear as a firearms owner myself there's legitimate use for a bump stock, not self-defense not in a law enforcement not even in military applications as they're less accu automatic military platform. but what they mass shooting. now, i know there are people who will say guns don't kill people peoplepeople. but the reality is this. bump kill and injure in the hundreds. as someo owned and used firearms for most of my life for hu self-defense i know for a fact that bump legitimate purpose. and that's why in the days and weeks that followed the horrific mass shooting in las vegas, nevada i led a bipartisan effort to ban bump stocks. i introduced legislation in the senate alongside my republicangue and friend jeff flake

of arizona and senator katherine cortez masto. we alsthen-president trump to use his authority to ban bump stocks in a federal rule. now president trump actually agreed with us at the time and finalized andule to get that done. but last week wildly out of touch supreme court majority in an illogical and deadly ruling they stocks legal once again. now, as justi said in her dissent, when i see a bird that walks like a duck swims like a duck quacks duck i call that bird a duck. i agree withsotomayor. a bump stock equipped semiautoma is a machine gun. and it should be banned just like machine nearly a hundred years. within the supreme court's majority's ruling they gave congress they gave us clear direction on theonly way for us to protect americans from these deadly

devices. congress needs to act. we pass my bill to ban bump stocks and do iroud to lead the banning on lawful machine parts alongortez masto, susan collins, angus kinhe more than 20 new cosponsors who joined our legislation after the supreme court's re this is the same bipartisan bill that i first introduced in 2018 in the aftermath of that shooting.ct would prohibit the sale of bump stocks and other semiautomatic firearms to increase theirire and operate as fully automatic weapons. is is something that nearly all americans agree should be done. this should be a commonsense bipartisety vote that all of us should welcome if we believe that our kids should freedom to feel safe in their church or their movie theater. we should also beappens if we don't pass this legiation.

we will be giving a free pass to street gangs and ctels and mass shooters to access these deadly dev turn them against our communities. that we're putting our communities in. there's some there about whether congress can get this ne us coming together to ban bump stocks is impossible. but two years ago we proved thatty thinking is flat wrong. over my time here in the ave learned that people are always quick to tell you there'srd for your legislation. and the realitynever a path forward until we collectively choose tone. i was proud to be part of the core group the senate that helped pass the bipartisan safer communities act. that was the first significant federal gunafety legislation signed into law in nearly three and during those negotiations i worked especially close colleague senator collins on a

successful effortties for those who would put guns into the hands of illegal to traffic firearms out of our country. and by passing that law, we proved that congress can take concrete action to protect our communities from gun violence.esident, now it's time that we take similaro ban these bump st refuse to stand idly by and wait mass shooting. so i would ask allf my colleagues to please support the bump act, t these deadly mass killing devices once and for mr. president, i ask unanimous consentha committee on the judiciary be discharged from further consideration of 1909 the banning unlawful machine gunceed to its immediate consideration,rther, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed that the motion to reconsider be

considered made and laidn the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? a senator: mr. president, reserving the right to object. the presiding officer: the senator from nebraska. a senator: welcome a the democrats' summer of show votes. we need to be very clear why the majority leader is now holding this show decision last week that he didn't like. a 6-3 majority the supreme court ruled the bureau of alcohol, tobacc explosives overstepped their authority when they tried to bump stocks as machine gu mr. ricketts: the supreme court made the right decision. in j lummis and other colleagues in following an amicus brief urging hat they did. but the majority leader and his democrat colleagues supported the gun grabbing overreach. so the majority has decided to bring up a bill called the bump act. he c will ban bump stocks. but just like his misnamed bills, if you actually read the bill tha all. the bump act targets commont bump stocks.

this is from the text of the bill. the bill bans any manual power driven or electronic device primarily designed or the device is attached to a semiautomatic firearm, the materially increases the rate of fire of the firearm.oesn't ban bump stocks. this bill would ban firearm easier and in some cases safer to shoot. we're talking about competition or adjusble triggers. we're also talking about items that reduce the distance between a shooter's hand trigger like certain firearms stocks or groups. just about bump stocks. that's why disabled veterans hate this bill. heard about veterans in nebraska who are concerned about this disabled or elderly choose to adjust the stock or grip on and safer to shoot. constitution protects their right to do so through amendment. this bill would take that constitutional right away from the same men and women who fought for this bill doesn't even define what it's trying to regulate.

the bill rate of fire five separate times. three o ban a device that materially increases the rate of fire of a firearm. nowhere in the bill it define what constitutes the rate of fire increase. the other two it says it would ban a device that approximates of a machine. but under federal larks it is not the rate of"ses something a machine gun. under 26 5845-b. it is a mechanical function. so either this rate of fire section was written by someone who had no idea whathey were talking about or it's a cynical attempt to include more firearm accessories than just bump stocks. i wouldhe latter. does anyone seriously believe thathild interpret in law in a way that respects w- not! on this and other issues the administration has repeatedly expandedously interpretations of our laws that go way beyond what the obama

administration was comfortable with. and they are no and they were no friends of the second amendment. we cannot bureaucrats to interpret laws the way coness intended. this bill may be called the bump act but it isot bump stocks. this bill is about banning as many firearm accessories as possible and giving atf broad law-abiding gun owners. under this bill owners of any semiautomatic firearm that has been modified to make it easier to fire would be for a firearms alongside actual machine guns in the atf firearm registration and record transfer base. and if they don't they would be in violation of the law. that's really, really scary. if this bill becomes law, it would give the biden administration theforce confiscation of any common semiautomatic firearm that's make it easier to shoot. the majority leader knows this bill it won't pass because enough people in this building sllitution. and the constitution affords

americans the right to own a firearm. this vague, overreaching bill directly infringes upon that right. for safety we ought to enforce existing gun laws and address mental health this bill doesn't do that. in fact it doesn't do anything to address the root causes violence. we're not addressing mental health anding men and women to commit these horrible crime the failedes the oppression the division and glorification of violence on social media. if democrats really cared about gun violence they would be trying to build suppo bill that can actually pass. instead, we have a show vote uses vague language to ban as many firearms accessories as possible and limit the second amendment rights of disabled and elrins certain accessories to use a firearm safely. we that actually keep americans safe like the national defense authorization act. for these reasons, mr. president, therefore, i object. the presiding officer: objection is is heard. mr. heinrich: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from new mexico. mr. heinrich: i just want tnd our

colleagues that we actually did pass legislation two mental health and we passed a piece of legislation. but the assertion that enormous number of firearm devices is certainly not rooteded in fact. it would, bump stocks and it would ban things like glock swites let semiautomatic firearms act as fully aut mr. president i thi people understand what commonsense gun safety looks lakers and that's what the bump act is all about. and i will reserve the rest of mytime but this will not be the last time you hear about these devices it on the floor of the senate. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin.

,? baby

wouldn't survive due to factors th cannocontrol, and at that point parents are forced to makeqdecision which is to end the pregnancy at the baby. that shwhy my -- that is it whyleagues and i have taken to the plead to our republican colleagues tohoose what they do with their own bodies but this bill is an attempt to once again drag our nation refuse mr. president, to sit idly by and watch it happen. for those reasons, i object. the presiding officer: o heard. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from mississippi, pardon me.

mrs. a few moments i would like to ask unanimous consent for the senate te up and pass legislation i've introduced to support genuineons to infertility andr couples with autonomy over how they build their families. moment to recognize the second anniversary of the that underscores the great significance of bringinhis world. it still doesn feel real that we were able to overturn roe. what a blessing forountry that that was. however, we are still fighting to protect americans from the harmful pro-abortion agenda being pushed by the democrats. pro-abortion advocates have been creative in using issues that republicans support, such as access to ivf. i have been clear about my strong support access to ivf and am grateful for its to bring god's beautiful creations

into thi the left wants to stoke fear in this we hone in on the real problem and find longas affordable solutions. infertility affects 15% to 16% of couples in the u.s. and is a pro profoundly emotional experience. while ivf is procedure used to create life it does not treat the underlying that cause infertility and make i sustain that life in the womb. if we are issue of infertility, then we need to solutions that promote genuine healing. this is the mission behind the restore act which i introduced with senator lankford last week. with restore stands for reproductive empowerment and support through optimal provisions of this budget-neutral bill inclu educational tools for women seeking information about conditions and ee re -- and restorative reproductive medicine training

opportunities for medical professionals who feel called to help couples build their families. they will learn to diagnose such as endoe meet trioweses, blocked filltubes and other health conditions that cause infertility. the restore act also directs hhs to conduct data implement ongoing reports to assess the access women have to restorative reproductive medicine and infertility care. ensure strong religious and conscience what we are trying to do here is promote lontermcouples struggling with infertility. we want to empower child bearing generations so that families can fertility concerns in a cost effective manner.is bill is separate and we have seen great success

clinics that take a whole listic approach listic approach to healing the root cause toertility and if ivf is still necessary, the clinics see a greatest success in the first round of ivf. this pro family bill one more step toward increasing successful fertility treatments women and men. i will continue to this in search for ways to help f bringing children into this world. mr. president, if this legislative sessio unanimous consent that the committee on help education, labor, and pensions be discharged from further consideration of s.4533 and the senate proceed to its consideration. further, that the bill be considered read a third timend to reconsider be considered made and laididing officer: is there objection? a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota. ms. smith: thank you, mr. president. reserving the right to object

my colleague, senator hyde-smith with whom i serve on thericulture committee. mr. president, i fear that this bill is another attempt to ch is that republicans are trying to make it harder for women to health care. now, this bill purports to empower and families facing fertility challenges somethinghat i would certainly agree with. but instead of protecting to ivf services and other assisted reproductive it would do is direct the government to actually steer people away from services like ivf in favor of -- and i quote reproductive medicine. now, let me be clear. women a the autonomy to decide for themselves how to start and grow their families in consultation with their doctors, and they don't need politicians deciding what kind of care they should or shouldn't be you need more evidence mr. president, the republicans are trying to these issues look no further than section 2 of this bi that congress finds that quote, assisted reproductive technologies are not under threat at the federal level or in any state or territory of the

united states. that's inection2. well i would say tell that to the families in alabama that saw fertility treatments interrupted by the alabama supreme court'sruling. just last week all but two republicans voted against billrovided comprehensive protections for american families trying toilies through ivf. so when they present bills like this one, it is just more evidence that theykn -- more evidence that -- how they care about women's reproductive health. and they should remember that in these situations actioer than words. and their message here is clear. republicans even the most obvious things to protec pregnant women, mothers, and families except what they need to do. soeasons i object. the presiding officer: the objection is heard.cornyn: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: mr. president, i friends and colleagues from mississippi anddakota and oklahoma for their leadership in protecting of

the unborn and to thank them for in this fight for life. o years have passed since the supreme court overturned roe v. wade a controversial decision that found no basis in the text of the constitution a right that was simply madep members of the supreme court. what they've done is to return where it belongs to the people of the states to protect unborn children. and i rule in massachusetts will be different than texas and you may find some different lines being drawn, but make no mistake about it we're ta with the unborn who have rights of their own. america cannot be at its best if we of the most vulnerable among us.law, too. and that's what we are fighting to deliver. make no mistake. those on the other sid of the aisle want abortion on

up to the limit -- without limit, up t including the point of a live birth. that position overwhelmingly disapproved of by the american people. the declaration of independence guarantees the right to li. includes the unborn just as it does every otherican. so i'm proud to stand here in defense of stand with my colleagues today as we fight to best of our a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the alabama. mrs. britt: thank you, first i'm like to thank my colleague from oklahoma senator lankford for putting this together today showing that we are life the party of parents, the party of families. i'd also like to thank my

colleague from florida, senator rubio and my colleague from north senator cramer for joining me in introducing the moms act. i also appreciate the 20 additional republican colleagues who have commonsense legislation. the moms act stands for more opportunities for moms to that's exactly what this bill would secure. as a mom, i know that there is no blessing in this world than that of being a mother. and i understand many of the chal during their pregnancy journey and while raisi kids. and that's why i was proud to introducact. the moms act would provide critical support for women during typical challenging phases of motherhood. itludes the prenatal postpartum and early childhood stages. at the end of the day this legislation would help mothers their children thrive. let's walk through the three sections ofbill.

first, the moms act would pregnancy.gov. this new website would feature a wide range of resources available to expecting and postpartum moms as well as moms and families with young children. unfortunately, some of my coll other side of the aisle have put out flagrantly false, outlandish information about this part of the bill. these partisan smears hav debunked by several independent et the record straight right now. first, visiting this website is 100% voluntary. next no one would have to disclose identifiable information to use it or to access the there is no no tracking involved. so why did democrats make up

these absurdly false claims? to be honest with qx can't quite wrap my head around it. in my 18 months body i probably have never been more come from things from different perspectives but to create outlandishly false and absurd things about this bill was truly a bridge too far. ultimately they know they can't publicly opp actually in the bill. here are resources pregnancy.gov would connect d i'm going to quote some exact text of the bill. mentorship opportunities including pregnancy and parenting help help and well-being services including women's m services. this includes ob/gyn services primary care and mental health services. financial opportunities, child care resources, foster care resources,n services education opportunities for go on.

it also includes material or legal support. that material support includes transportation food nutrition, clothing household goods, baby supplies housing, maternity homes, help with tax preparation, and also legal support can coverr3 child support, family leave breast feeding protections, and custody issues. i could keep l examples of resources but we would be here for awh next i want to touch on the second part of the bill. so this part would actually create two sep. one grant program would help purchase necessary tools for postnatal telehealth appointments including medical technology for those in rural areas and otherly underserved areas. and the second program would establish a program for nonprofit entities. to su encourage, and to

assist women through their pregnancies. care for their babies after would be funding many of the resources i just mental health services other medical care child care housing assistance education and employment assistance and nutritional and finally, the third part of bill is senator cramer's unborn child support it would require states to apply child care support the time period during pregnancy requested by the mother.uested retroactively and stateevel requirements involving proof of paternity would still apply. the legislation is further evidence that you absolutely be pro-life pro-woman, and at the same time. the moms act comprehensive culture of li. strengthens families and ensures that moms have t opportunities and the resources needed so that they

and their children can thrive and live theirdreams. it's a perfect example of why i believe that the is the party of families. hear after i make my motion to pass the moms act will bey ver whether or not democrats can say the same thing of their party. they're about to answer question. are they more interested in scaring women and families helping women and families? to support women throughout the motherhood, and i am honored to leadpro-life pro-woman, pro-family legislation. mr. president, i ask unanimonsent that the committee on help education, labor, and be discharged from further consideration of 4296 and the senate proceed to itsconsideration. further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made anaid

upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota. ms president. reserving the right to object and with respect to my colleague and senator britt, mr. president, this bill is another attempt to shift the narrative for from the fact that they have blocked every attempt to pass bills that would actually protect women's reproductive health and freedom.majorities americans support protecting act as to contraception, ivf and assisted reproductive technologies and safe legal abortion care. and robes know they are out of step with the that is what we're seeing here today. every since president overturned roe v. health care has been thrown into chaos. so the solution to the problem is simple and obvious. congress shoul pass comprehensive protections for contraception, for ivf.

republicans are blocking those bills an putting forward bills like ts one which would create a federal government website that crisis pregnancy center. health care providers that provide information abo the full range of their options to women including abortion care would be blocked from this website. now, with this website, womenould allow women to put into the website their zipe then find a list of resources for adoption agencies and centers which, mr. president i think we know can pressure and shame pregnant women into against seeking abortion care and sometimes even block them from accessing that care. and i want to be clear that this bill does not require anybody tot in their contact information, but it also does not include anyons on how the federal government could use or share that so mr. president, i don't think americans need another government website. y need is for their government is respect their freedom and dignity and autonomy to make their own decisions

about if and when and how it to grow their own families. for this reason mr. president, i object. the presiding officer: objection mrs. britt: mr. president, i have a great -- the presiding offi alabama. mrs. britt: i have a great deal of respect for minnesota. i am disappointed that senate democrats have blocked passing today. it is a commonsense bill that would help help families. my republican colleagues are going to c tangible solutions like this ll that. i yield the floor.

mr. lankford: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. lankford: mr. president, my guess is, if i went to every person in room every page every person sitting in gallery, every senator and i pointed t this image and said what do you see there? guess is every person in this room would go well, that's baby. that's my guess. i meanorsing i haven't asked -- haven't asked every person here. but my guess is everygo well that's a son know gramm of a --

son sonogram of a baby. looks like a child. so the interesting thing in america is the next question is is should it live or die?s pretty obvious. that's a baby. nd q that one, in america, is not quite so obvious anymore. is interesting. i have two daughters. they're ing, remarkable, beautiful women. they're adult now. i distinctly remember tt test and seeing those my wife and i looking at eachexcitement. i distinctly remember talking to friends, parents, and other folks saying that we were pregnant. shared our story i don't remember a single person to me, well, you'reng to do with it? are they going to live or die?

no one asked us that. no one asked uss it really a baby or is that just a fetus? nosaid you just have tissue. they asked us questions of a name? have you figured out how tohey asked us. because every person we talked to and every person that we shared we were pregnant with all acknowledgedhat reality, that that's a baby.rs ago the supreme court ruled what's now called the the roe v. wade decision that mandated that abortion had to be everyw country and took it back to where it was the first 180 years or so of our country whe

america in but the decisions of how that' by a supreme court, it's done by legislators, as it always had been. that's what the court said. so this is now going back to the people and the people's representatives on all levels. the debate is again scattered acrossun and the debate is very simply over is that a child? and if it is a child, what to it? i have to tell you, that bane is not mine but she's really cute. i look at a baby like that -- my daughters both slept in that same position which we as parents call the touchdown positihe both had their hands up over their head. i'm i'm amazing to see that picture the woman in that position asleep. the this child in the womb womb with her hands over their head and this child is

time. that's it. that baby is as much of a child as that bab baby. there's no difference there. other than time. so we debate and we talk about this very complicated que when is aaluable and when is a child medical waste? when is a child valuable and when is a child disposable? we as americans are grappling with that issue. and the issue about when that child is a child really comes preference and convenience is the child convenient -- if they're convenient they're a child. if they're not convenient, they're disposable. own the same street both of them say, 18 weeks pregnant those ladies on opposite sides of the street one of them steps into workplace and into a and the folks at work talk abouteat.

they're going to talk about where you're going to set up the crib and they're going to talk about baby names and all the expenses and things. the person on the other side of the reet also 18 weeks pregnant is headed to get a surgical so i ask the question o two children what's the difference between those two children? both at 18 weeks o celebrated and prepared for, and one of them will be disposed of. that's the difference between the two. americans are trying to figure out the ans exact question. there are conversations happening alli get t it's a fair -- i get it. it's a when is a child a child? when are they not a child? under this administration this administration far by the most pro-abortion administration

ever in the history of the opinion. that's just the actions of the administration. thate to the dobbs decision. this that we might have fewer abortions in america that the biden administration has aggressively worked to increase n america, to offset the possibility that there could bfewer abortions. because they didn't want to see fewer abortions in america; they want to see as many or more. so the biden administration opened first time v.a. hospitals to providelate-term abortions, even up to the very final m that v.a. clinics would be -- v.a. hospitals would be the first time to provide abortio they're withholding funds for pregnancy resource centers. these are the centers they really hate the most. these are pregnancy resource centers around the country that offer crazy things likeiapers and formula and support for pregnant ant moms walk in and say, hey i'm

really my pregnancy and i'm afraid that they'll say, we'll help you. we'll help provide diplomat tersee7mu a baby clothes and a car seat and we'll walk along with you so you don't have to be afraid and alone. the biden a hates those folks so they're withholding funds oto those folks, where they have received grants in the past. hhs is now p to move peoplelly cross our border to places where they can get we have federal dollars going to move people to make suro illegally cross our border who want access to abortion to be a it. it's been frustrating to be able to watch. in my state -- my state has chosen to say, we think ever child is viable. we look at these two girls and them just a couple of weeks apart. but we see them as young come state the obvious.

but in my allow abortion, promote abortion, health and human services has now stripped away grant services for one reason -- health and human services came to my state and if you don't put a 1-800 number o of your health care materials coming from the state telling women where they can get abortion we will take away your federal funding. if you don't show and give a abortion we'll take away your grant didn't a way just any grant funding. my state to do that. so the grant funding they took my state was for impoverished women to get cancer screenings and for aids patients to gett funding away saying we will any federal dollars coming into your state for aids testing)e and for cancer screening for impoverished women if you don't promote abortion in your state. they were serious, so they did it. because this is administration

is with increasing the number of abortions in the country. finding ways to be able to expand thisook at this picture.een a frustrating journey the last couple of years because we seem to be ignoring the obvious, and we're so tied up on the politics of this even when senator thune brings a that says if a child is born alive half a botch abortion they're fully full-term baby on the table breathing, what should we do? pretty commonsense bill. yet my democratic colleagues have knocked it down today and said no that child should not have the opportunity for life. when senator hyde-smith brings a bill that just says why don't we give education to more doctors and more moms about it doesn't limit ivf at all at all. they were like no no not going to do that.

when senator brit from alabama brings -- when senator britt from alabama brings a bill says why don't we recognize pregnancy, that's really expensive, and if states have the requirement to do child i'll just say it, for a deadbeat not paying for child support, that child support should of pregnancy, not just after delivery. that's pretty common sense. because for any mom, they know pregnancy is really expensive. it is a really expensive time. so child support should when that child is there. a commonsense bill has been kn and i bring one more that i think iss already the law in the united states that every person has the right to conscience. health care providers that go into profession to protect life to save life to many of them also say i don't

want to be a part of taking malife. i went into this profession to so they express to their clinics, their hospitals,t they don't want to be a part of the ey undkistand it's happening in their hospital. they just don't a part of that. they express their consciencsues. that's protected in federal law right now that every one of has the right to be able to express their conscience and not be required to take human life. the problem federal government to actually step in and enforce that law. so let me show you what that looks like. a nurse in vermont a few years ago, that nurse wo her hospital as she normally did, as she went went in to work as she normally does sh passionate about the life of every person including children in the woom -- caught and they said we need you in e.r. now. she said no problem. she steps into e.r. gloves gets ready

to assist. as she walks in the doctor that's in the room looks a and says don't hate me. and she suddenly says what's realizes she's been called in to be able to assist made it clear she doesn't want to be a part of taking human no we'll fire you if you don't help. we need your help. we're short of staff today so you're going to dothis. a direc human law. they expressed it in the operating room. violating heren through the process of starting be able to in that process until the last presidential electn occurred. when the last presidential election occurred the new leadership of hhs stepped in and said we're not going to that. in other words we're dropping that case. it would be the equivalent ofown the street looking at a burglary that's happening, knowing that occurring right there and just saying i'm going to choose not to enforce and just walk on by.

now. so the conscience act that i bring does a simple thing. it if an employer violates federal law and the federal government to enforce this the individual conscience violated that individual has the right case on their own. this is not ngle abortion in america. not one -- we will not have one fewer abortion in america based on this policy. but what do is it will say to an american you're free to be able to live your conscience without fear of being fired for liv conscience. that's the only thing that does. i think that's pretty st commonsense. of all things that we should be able toee to in this body let's protect each other's right and to live their faith.. president, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on health education, labor and pensions be

consideration of s. 452 # 4, a third time passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon e objection? a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the tor from seminnesota. ms. smith: thank you, mr. enseight to object. let me just say that the crisis women and families in this country is a crisis of access to reproductive health care and the solutions to this crisis are i'm sorry to see republicans are blocking those solutions. this bill claims to protect health care workers if they refuse toti to moral or religious obligations. know mr. president, those protections already exist in federal law. and i think this bill would actually go well beyond that. it would in fact create a pathway for to object to providing other critical prevention andexample, treatment to hiv. i think, mr. president, this is americans from the core fact that republicans are trying to restrict access to reproductive health care and reproductive freedom while democrats are trying to protect them. and i, for

mr. president object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. lankford: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. lankford: we'll continue to be able to speak out. we do believe that's a we believe in the dignity of every human g.wife when we were pregnant every single cell in her bo every cell from her toe nails in her toes and her nose and hergle cell in her body has the exact same dna. it her. when we remember pregnant of cells that had different dna. they didn't match hers and they didn't match mine. they were cells with dna that had never existed on earth before until that moment. they were uniquely different. i think we should acknowledge that fact i that there's something special about those different cells.'ll continue to speak up for the conscience rights othe obvious and to be able to live their faith and to think in the days ahead we'll have a time

as americans we'll look back on this season and think why would we turn away from what wasajcj obvious to all of us. i yield the floor. a senator: mr.t.cer: the senator from west virginia. mrs. capito: mr. president, i as allowed to speak prior to the scheduled roll me for five minutes, senator peters for up five minutes and leader schumer for up to two min the. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. capito: thank you. thank yo so mr. president, today i rise to encourage and urge support for our bipartisan that provides a significant boost for the future of nuclear in america. after a lot of hard work andille to be on the floor today as we are on the cusp of getting this bill across the finish line. i see senator whitehouse here from rhode island. he was very integral in making this happen

him. in march of 2023 we introduced ing deployment of versatile advanced nuclear for call the advance act. we did so because republicans and democrats recognize that the develotf new nuclear technologies is critical to energy security and our environment. today nuclear power provides about 20% of our electricity. importantly, it's 24/7 365 days a year. not only is it necessary to continue developing anddeploying more nuclear energy reactors from an energy and environmental standpoint it is also vital to our national security and it's goo economy. so it was important for us as lawmakers to meet the increased demand that predicted to be twice the demand with policies that encourageeployment of nuclear technologies right here on ourdvance act does just that

and preserves the united states as the destination f innovation and expansion, ensuring that we are what we should be global leader for decades to come. here are ways that our bill benefits america's energy;p environmental future. the advance act reduces regulatory costs for companies seeking to license advanced reactor technologies. it requires the regulatory commission to establish a regulatory road license new nuclear facilities on brownfield sites,d be very important to my state of w nrc to update its mission stateme reflect the beneficial uses of nuclear technology and establish a licensing structure to support an efficient, timely and predictable regulatory review. it establishes an initiative to more quickly license fuels that are both safer and more and it provides the nrc new

tools to hire and retain highly qualified staff to enable the licensing of reactors. as i said i'm proud of the work that we put into this legisl over the past few months and years, and with the house having already passed it overwhelmingly i'm excited that we're on the verge the advance act to the president's desk. i want to thankcarper and i thanked senator whitehouse the three of cosponsors. i want to thank house energy and commerce chair ers and ranking member pallone, house energy climate and grid security chair and ranking member diana d{l1}e{l0}gette and all ofor their hard work and support. i also want to sincerely thank ers who have put so much work into this to help getis has been a journey. for my team at like to thank andy zach wendy dixon. courtney taylor and from whitehouse's team cara i strongly

urge my colleagues to join me supporting this bipartisan legislation. and with that i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the ser michigan. mr. peters: mr. president, soon the senate will have an opportunity to ensure that essential federal resources remain available to firements all across our country. every day their health and safety to protect our just respond to fire emergencies. they also help threats like chemical hazard terrorist attacks, and even ivf shooters. the fire and safety act gives our firefighters the support that theydeserve. this bipartisan legislation reauthor v programs administered by fema. these programs departments purchase safety equipment,ss their staff, and provide cancer first responders. the bill also reauthorizes the

united states fire administration which represents firefighters at the federal level. the usfa helps ensure t departments get the proper support and it takes the lead o collection research education, and training for fire service. federal programs like these enable to do their job safely and effectively. and i've firsthand while visiting local departments across my home state of mn and without these programs many fire departments would simply not have the resources and equipment that they need to stay safe in the line of duty. every da backs, and now we can do the same for to thank ranking member paul senator carper senator murkowski and senator collins for their help i legislation. i'd like to acknowledge frank lucas and zoe lofgren of the house committee on science, their work to get this bill passed out so now it's time to finish the job. let's finish the job

this bipartisan legislation to the president and help firefighters everywhere keep our communities safe. i yield the . schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority. mr. schumer: thank you, mr. president. first senators peters senator whitehouse and so many others for their great work on this. today the senate does a great thing for our firefighters in and across america. passing the bipartisan f the fire grants and safety act reauthorizes several firing funding programs that help firefighters with the from staffing to equipment to training and more. i was very proud t help create these programs a long time ago with senator chris dodd but they would have expired in a few months had we not acted today. bill keeps our firefighters whole. thf firefighters. it helps our paid firefighters in larger ty by giving the ability to help thoseom more

firefighters but it also helps er firefighters these are people who volunteer and rush to in urban and rural communities,ly island yet the communities can't afford the equipment that so desperately eded. they are rushing to da risking their lives and need the best equipment and these grants allow that t happen and it's so important to our volunteer firefighters in particularly in long island and new york cit and albany and buffalo and across new york get more firefighters to help them so they're not overstretched and help communities -- ovstre and help communities thato pay them. the advancect help with clean, safe and energy s capito and whitehouse have been the leadership itl nrc's faument issue

ofety. this is a great bill. i'm sorry it took so long. the house dithered after we passed it but now our firefighters both paid and volunteers will get a sigh of relief. this is going to be signed into law. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion to concur. mr. schumer: i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: 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.c@ mr. brown. mr. budd. ms. butler. ms. cantwell.

the clerk:r. carper. mr. carper. mr. case 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.erman. mrs. fischer. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. ms. hassan. mr. hawley. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. mr. hoeven. mrs. hyde-smith.hnson. mr. kaine. mr mr. kennedy. mr. king. ms. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan. 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. risch. mr. romney. ms. rosen.o. mr. sanders. mr. schatz. mr. schmitt.mr. schumer.krida. ms. sinema. ms. ms. stabenow.ee

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. mr. young.

the clerk: senators voting in the affirmative -- barasso, blumenthal buddcapito cornyn cortez masto, cotton

crapo, duckworth, gillibrand hawleyhnkaine, klobuchar, manchin,ley, mullin murkowski, murray peters risch, rubio, schatz schmitt, schumer, scottle floor -- scott of florida, ith, stabenow tillis whitehouse wicker. mr. paul, aye.

the clerk: ms. lummis, aye. ms. butler, ay mr. coons, aye.

mrs. blackburn, aye. the clerk: mr.

the clerk:collins, aye. mr. bennet, aye. pt

mr. reed, aye. th shaheen, aye.

e clerk: mr. hickenlooper aye. mr. scott of south carolina aye. mrs. hyde-smithaye. mr. casey,wyden, aye. ms. ernst, aye.

the clerk: mr. vance, mr. murphy aye.graham aye. ms. warren, aye.

mr. young, aye. welch, aye. mr. ricketts, aye.$o

the clerk: mr. cassidy, aye.mp mr. sanders,no. mr. markey, no. the clerlankford aye. mrs. britt,

the clerk: mr. mcconnell, aye. mr. carper, aye. mr. rounds aye.

mr. ng aye.ncd

mr. heinrich aye. mr. warner, aye.ñ&qa÷[f,pw7uj

the clerk: mr. cruz, aye. the clerk: mr. booker, aye. hagerty,

aye.b÷

the cl

vote:

añ th yeas are 88 the nays are 2. the agreed to. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered laid upon the table. mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the senate resume exece session and resume consideration of the maldonado the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection.

the clerk will report. the erk: nomination the judiciary, nancy l. maldonado of illinois to be united statuit judge for the seventh circuit. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. president. mr. president, we don't have to over everything here. it's if occasionally we find consensus around commonsense things that we could do toget keep our country safe. i consensusleast the idea

that civilians their hands on machine guns. i understand there's differences between republicans and de ar-15's. maybe not all my rublican think that everybody should go through a background check before theygun. but i thought, i thought we were that fully automatic weapons were too dangerous to be in the hands of civilians, that these are unquestionably weapons of they are designed designed for mass slauter. you just do not need you to fire hundreds of rounds per minute in order to hunt in order to protect your home in order to shoot for sport. but apparently mr. president, we doot have consensus on the question of whether americans should have access to machine

gun technology because earlier today senator heinrich a gun a lot about weapons, came to the floor to ask that we make sure that civilians can't get their hands on a device called a bump stock that allows you to coert a semiautomatic weapon into a machine gun. that's effectivelyp it allows you to change a semiautomatic weapone trigger in order to fire each round, into an automatic weapon in which one physical pull of the finger allows you to fire multiple rounds. it effectively gives you accesn automatic weaponi thought that we ad that automatic guns should be in the han military. i especially thought we agreed

on that after what happened in vegas. ctober 1, 2017 a gunma on a concert from theor of the mandalay bay hoteds between that gunman on the 32nd floor and those innocent concert goers. that gunmaed about 1,10roununds killing 58 people -- 58 people -- a 500. when we think about the las vegas we focuses on that number. 58 people a stunning number an instant. we don't talk about the 50op injured,

many of them thatirforever. many of them whether they were injured or not dealinged their lives forever. 1,100 rounds fired from the 32nd of the mandalay bay hotel. you know how long it took himget off 1,100 rounds? 11minutes. 11 minutes gunman was able to fire around every 10 seconds. why? because he had taken a bump stock and converted a semiautomatic weon turning it effectively into an weapon. even donald trump, thest backer of the nra and the gun ever been in the white house, k to change. he put forward a regulation to ban bump stocks and most of my republican colleagues that change.

i don't remember many of them opposing it. this month the supreme court papro-gun lobby justices mosted by donald trump, ruled that that i think they got it wrong. i ink they absolutely got it wrong. i think if you look at reading of the statute, bump illegal, and the regulation proffered by the trump administration should have been ruled as constitutional. they bought the argument of the gun lobby and they ruled that bump stocks could sold commercially in this $]untry. and so we thought that it would be an easy case to our colleagues that having seen the regulation proffered by the trump administration be ruled upreme court the chance to fix that statutorily

thatsiness this week but we are not because republicans objected to our efforts to try to pass into law a ban on bump stocks to try to take away from psycho paths and madmen the technology that allows them to weapon crowds of concert goers 1,000-plus rounds in a period of time. what republicans in the united st the house of representatives are doing on a regular basis is facilitating the mass slaughter of hand ing handing to individuals who brains are breaking theofslaughter, refusing to do the easy popular, commonsense things t just make it a little bit harder for 58 people to be gunned down people to be injured in a 10-minute period of time. no law that we pass will end gun

homicidesy. no law that we pass completely eliminate mass shootings. but there simply are technologies like the bump stock that turn a mass shooting in which or 10 people might have died into a slaughter.e that when you have a weapon like an converted semiautomatic weapon with a bump stock that the slaughter is worse, that more people die. why on earth would we choose to hand to these killers weapons that are designed forpurpose and one purpose only -- mass slaughter. you do stock in order to protect your home. you do not need a machine gun in order to hunt for sport.

the only reason stock is toe in mass murder personally because i have lived through of mass slaughter as has the presiding of. i did lose a loved but i've come to know those families from sandy like they are family and i know the getting over losing a loved one frankly, whether it be to a gun death by suicide o slaughter. but it makes it harder to deal with the loss of a loved one mass killing when you know the people that you elect to positions of high office to prevent the slaughter, or at least prevent it from being as it was, and they chose to do nothing.

l n that this was a political stunt. what about everything that joe biden has said and done? what about the efforts that senate democrats have undertaken that we aren't sincere to prevent unnecessary gun we have over and over again acted to try to find bipartisan compromise around changing the gun laws of this nation. joe biden has shown absolute sincerity in his desire to try to keep alive. this is not a gotcha unanimous consent request. this is a real attempt to a consensus that people shouldn't have access to machine gun technology in this country. senate republicans could have agreed to work with us. they could make an o to expedite consideration of

this bill next week.nly political decision that is being made here is by republicans who a opposing a bill that is supported by the mass majority of americans. so if this wasn't the way theicans wanted to do this then i'm open to other offers. because we have passed bipartisan legislation te lives li who have joined us most recently on the bipartisaner safmu and what we know is that when we do come together and pass laws that make it harder for dangerous people to get their hands on dangerous weapons, we save lives. down by 20% in this country. from 2022 to 2023, we saw the sharpest decline in gun murders in the history of this country.

in 2024, mass shootings are down over --ll around 30% compared to the same time period in 2023. we are seeing a precipitous decl country, whether urban homicides or mass shootings. i'm not suggesting the entire reason is the 2022 bisafer communities act. but you better believe that's a big part of the reason.;5you better believe when we pass laws that make it harder for dangerous people to get their hands weapons we save lives. and what matters in this country more than protecting t physical safety of your loved ones? what matters more? nothing. think about it you would give anything

anything protect your son or daughter from physical trade away your career your savings, up your own life.n easy opportunity, we had an easy opportunity, republicans had an easy opportunity earlier today to just make it a little bit harder for the in this country whose brains have collapsed believe that the only way to deal with their demons on others. we had a chance to make it less lyke be able to kill 58 people like what happened in las vegas. and we couldn't even!# to start for

expand your family, and they have at every step and now we're going to see -- on protecting the women in this country and we'll see where they stand. for us, we know where we stand.

democrats are working every day to defend our freedom to make decisions about our own health. not a politician -- not a judge. the women of t have the freedom to make our own decisions about our ownr lives and our futures. and we're not going ges fully protected. >> i ask unanimous -- i ask unanimous consent that the senate consider the following nominations, en bloc -- calendar numbers 671 through 699 and all nominations on the secretary's desk in the air force, a that the nominations be to reconsider be considered made and la intervening action or debate, that no further motions be in order to any of immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to legislative session and be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without

objection. mr. schumer: i have seven requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. schu and finally, mr. president i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10:00 a.m. on thursday, june 20; that ;tfollowing the prayer and pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, ç,g business be closed. following the conclusion of morning business, the senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the maldonado nomination. further, that the cloture motion with respect to the maldonado nomination ripen at 1:45 p.m. the presiding officer: without objectn. mr. schumer: there is no further business if there is to further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate standard ofs adjourned until

>> if you ever miss any of c-span's coverage you can find it any time. online at c-span.org. videos of key hearings, debates and other events, feature markers that guide you to interesting and news worthy highlights these points of interest markers appear on the right hangsd side of your screen scwh you hit play on videos. this timeline toll make it is easily to get i of what was debated and decided in washington. scroll through and spaned few c-span's points of interest.

earlier today boeing ceo calhoun testified about a series of issues at his company including distinct in january when a door plug blew off a jet mid-flight. watch the senate permanent sub hearing tonight at 8 eastern on c-span now our free mobile video app or online at c-span.org. since 1979 we've been your primary source for capitol hill. providing balanced unfiltered ernment. taking you to where the policies debated and decided all with the supreme court of america's cable companies. c-span 45 years and counting if powered by cable. democratic senator elizabeth warren talked about the need to overhaul the nation's tax code.during

her remarks she urged her colle stand firm on raising tax on wealthy and negotiations with republicans on the nation's tax policy. she spoke at an event hosted by the washington center for equitable growth, and this runs about 30 minutes. [applause] >> thank you very much it is all it is good to be here. hello old frien for the introduction it is good to be here at the center.r.