it's a confusing situation. what is the state of christians in ukraine and how brushes africanism and aggression against ukraine is harming them. >> us their targeted specifically. i've met with multiple times with religious leaders, pastors who were there. some of my own denomination, southern baptists have missioners there, and a lot of these clergy are in fear for their own families. some of them have been targeted. i've seen examples and photographs of families who were taken out by targeted rockets to their apartment building on level five of an apartment building because they are christian. i mentioned earlier the importance of meeting religious freedom, if you can't, can't is always do this -- >> the senate is returning after a cubic state work period over the july 4 holiday. senators will vote on the confirmation of a judge to the seventh circuit court of appeals

which hears federal appeals from the u.s. district courts in illinois, indiana and wisconsin. you are watching live coverage on c-span2. senate will come to order. the chaplain dr. barry black will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. our father in heaven, because of the abundance of your mercies, we thank you for the gift of another day.

we don't pray for tomorrow and its needs, but we do intercede for this day which now bathes us in its returning light. lord, give wisdom and courage to our senators, as you set your seal upon their lips. restrain them from speaking words that needlessly hurt or discourage. as lovers and servants of this land of freedom, make our lawmakers worthy of the past and equal to the present. mold them to your purposes; fashion them with your powerful hands;

shape them on the anvil of these days of destiny into instruments fit for your use. we pray in your majestic 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., july 8, 2024. to the senate: under the

provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable tammy duckworth, a senator from the state of illinois, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: patty murray, president pro tempore. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the following nomination which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, nancy l. maldonado of illinois to be united states circuit judge for the seventh circuit.

.

physically self that is what we a different impression. his presidency he could submit to a full or partial exam, whatever none of us are asking about military members. none of us. we are only asking about the president's well-being so that's why we want to understand. when you see on public record is going into residence we feel like there's more to be said that. >> and i understand and you know i respect you and i've known you

for some time. we want to be also -- are talking about is out there and i understand, i get -- we want to respect a person gives of the privacy they deserve. the moment i see anything about any specialist, it becomes a thing so what i can share, he has seen a neurologist three times. not more than that a neurologist returns and that is connected to the physical we been able to share with you so that gives information the reason i am sharing that there are thousands of military personnel see will also have an understanding is

not considered and not just conservative the care of the medical unit, they get care from the white house medical unit, dermatologist neurologist come through here because the white house and medical unit. for folks. i've confirmed three times i cannot get into details of a person, i cannot do that. our security reasons have to give a measure of privacy. final how all that works, i know how that works what i will do is share the information. i don't want to get into it back and forth on that particular question when you called and

released this medical effort the indication to do so? i can say shared comprehensive medical report details, in-line with other presidents. certainly not full last one but the board the last president we have pretty much been in line with they have been. george w. bush and president obama. >> [inaudible question] back and we know that from this briefing room. for paragraphs, very different. a very different approach. >> i was in the room when they called in share that with you.

what you heard was a passionate minutes. he talked about and laid out his vision for this country and talk about how he wants to make sure we move forward want to be careful because he talked about the campaign which i can't do from here but it's incredibly powerful. >> it is going to be a solo press conference, or the two plus two. we are still working out for you can expect a zillow is conference at the end of the

nato summit in looking forward to it taking your questions. >> i have two questions. can you explain the role of this she oversee care? >> i want to be careful here, i know who you are my team and i would be happy to get back to you the president in the white house engagement with house democrats more broadly, the "wall street journal" the white house can criticizing the about democrats and the white house on interviews with the lawmakers

and the democrats with the white house the interview for details about what was asked and once again a call back. i think you know how stories work. there's a lot of back-and-forth you come from a story and we want to make sure you hear from the voices and make that available it's up to the reporter school reach out for not but we expect and anticipate and understand it doesn't matter a governor or elected official.

fast-forward to where we are today continuing the boat and we heard from many others for more broadly very supportive. the court. >> i don't understand where you are going with the question. i think i explained and when you are working on stories are trying to provide supporters, does not unusual. that is something certainly to

and it is not uncommon and more broadly there are we are talking about what is happening as we are talking about how we look forward. third are hundreds of house numbers what i can say is as you all know they done outreach. as of today, engaged with dozens of members whether in person or on call and we saw him engaging congressional members of the weekend. we saw several trips he's done engage with supporters is been

able to do that. john fetterman and chuck schumer sanders raphael warnock, he goes on and on. as i mentioned already there has been a long list of incredibly supportive congressional members who have continued. >> i'm wondering later schumer 24 hours -- >> i hear you, we shared that just last week the president spoke to leadership on the democratic side. i don't have anything to reach out to you as far as what we shared with you last week the president has been in regular touch and those conversations went very well.

i think he mentioned in particular leader jeffries that went over an hour. he said how much they had a perry good conversation traveled across state and had two big events the president and that is important. >> all three of presidents neurological, with a all conducted at walter reed? >> i have anything to say as to location. what i can say for sure is a neurologist three times and relates to the exam he takes every year end i just don't have a location. >> let me try a different way, has any neurologist --

>> the president does go to walter reed to do a physical exam. >> i'm not talking about anyone in particular regardless of identity, has any neurologist visited president biden box. >> i can tell you during the exams every year for the past three years a comprehensive exam, he seen -- >> at walter reed -- >> you all know he does go to all the reed as part of his it physical exam. that's no secret, it's something does. every time he's done these exams. i don't have anything beyond that.

>> this is different, the president has had to aneurysms and there are complications from aneurysms including short-term memory impaired. as any neurologist work with him trying to observe him as a person suffering from to aneurysms? >> in the comprehensive report we share with all of you on a yearly basis neurological exam has been detailed directly from the doctor and they talk about the specifics. american democracy stands today at a perilous crossroads. one week ago, the six conservative justices on the supreme court undermined the most basic premise in our

constitutional order, that no one, no one is above the law. they incorrectly declared that former president trump enjoist cyathus joyed -- ep joyed broad. i mune -- enjoyed broad immunity for actions he took in office. so long as their conduct is oust ens pli carried out in their oustensbly carried out as president. they incorrectly die claired, in effect, the -- declared, in effect, the same thing richard yicks nics yopp told -- richard nixon told david frost in 1977, quote, nixon said, when the president does it, it means it's not illegal. that's what the court, in effect, was saying. we were all taught in grade school there are no kings in america. what the conservative justices have done is effectively placed a crown on donald trump's head. in their judgment, the president is now free to behave however he likes, even to behave

criminally, as long as he argues that he was acting as president, he's in many ways untouchable. the conservative majority's decision on immunity is the most un-american proposition, the very antithesis of what the framers envisioned. presidential immunity is nowhere to be found in the constitution, and this lawless ruling underscores how hollow the justices' commitment to originalism truly is. we democrats will not let this stand unaddressed. the constitution makes plain that congress has the authority to check the judiciary. -- through appropriate legislation. i will work with my colleagues on legislation classifying trump's acts as. we believe that in america no president should be free to overturn an election against the will of the people, no matter what the conservative justices may believe.

as we work on this important matter, we'll also keep working on other proposals to reassert congress's article 1 authority to rein in the abuse of our federal judiciary. the american people are tired, just tired, of justices who think they are beyond accountability. now, the supreme court's ruling in trump v. united states is just the finishing touch on one of the most destructive supreme court terms in modern history. a few days before the ruling on presidential immunity, the maga court also upended 40 years of precedent by overturning the chevron doctrine. in doing so, they have potentially turned the federal government upside down in a very dangerous way, declaring that judges now know better than agency experts on matters ranging from student loans to medicare to a.i., to net neutrality and many more. from now on, any time there is a

shred of ambiguity, anytime congress didn't anticipate any conceivable scenario, judges are now free to impose their own view, own if they don't know a lick about the policy in question. even though they are not the -- they are the unelected branch of government. it is impossible for the congress to think of every possible scenario, so either you have subject matter experts in the administration making a judgment call or unelected judges making the judgment call. that was the whole point to the chevron doctrine, to give administrative subject matter experts some deference. the maga court's annihilation of the chevron doctrine is their latest and most dangerous attempt to side with powerful special interests against the wishes of the middle class, to come up with new legal theory to suit their ideological needs,

and overturn decades of well-accepted precedent. and these cases are just the start. in the last few months, the conservative majority on the supreme court also passed -- upheld racial gerrymandering in south carolina. can you imagine? allowed the criminalization of homelessness. struck down a commonsense ban on bump stocks. defanged the epa's ability to regulate against air pollution. and so much more. it all points to a clear, growing, disturbing trend emerging out of the supreme court. it is plain as day -- plain as day, this maga majority is hellbent on siphoning power away from the electorate and from the other branches in order to reshape america in their ultraconservative and extreme vision. so i will repeat what i said at the top of my remarks --

american democracy now stands at a crossroads. the maga court's rulesings are a clear illustration of why elections have consequences and this year the american people will choose bean two vastly different visions for our country. if donald trump returns to the oval office, if republicans retake control of congress, the disastrous rulesings coming out of the supreme court will just be the start. the chaos we saw on january 6 will just be the start. if they get the chance, donald trump and the maga right will plunge our country into an abyss of extremism, the vast majority of americans oppose and america has really never seen. nowhere else is this contrast between democrats and republicans as clear as on the issue of reproductive freedom. this week, senate democrats intend to pick up where we left off in june by bringing every single member this chamber to task on a woman's fundamental right to choose. it's our goal to take up a very

simple resolution -- cosponsored by every female senator in our caucus and myself that asks a very, very simple question -- where do senators stand on freedom of choice? do we believe that a woman should have a basic rate -- basic right to reproductive care? do we believe that the rights protected under roe should be federal law? freedom of choice is the defining issue for americans this year and this week every senator must show where they stand. of course, democrats have already made it abundantly clear where we stand. yes, we emphatically believe women should be free to make their own health care choices. democrats also believe in building on the incredible progress of the last three and a half years. under democratic leadership we've made great strides in america to lower the cost. and we've made prescription drugs like insulin more

affordable. we've invested in a clean energy economy and on the world stage we've stood up to defend democracy against autocrats and restored america's good name among the free nations of the world. donald trump and the maga right cannot say any of this. instead, what donald trump and maga republicans have made clear is that if they get into power, they will dismantle american democracy as we know it. maga radicals are long done with talking and euphemisms. the leaders of one of america's most powerful think tanks rasly made their goals very clear. quote, we are in the process of the second american revolution, which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be. that, madam president, is the kind of talk that leads to political violence. to go down the road that maga radicals want to take is to take

america into the twilight zone, something more akin to it the autocratic fervor we saw in europe in the early 20th century than the america we all know and love. the stakes are immense. here in the senate democrats will continue bringing to the floor issues that matter to americans mott and -- most and work to defend them. while it is tempting to reduce elections to a remain to of reality tv, the truth is that the stakes are much higher. i.t. the battle -- it's the battle of two radically different visions of our country. i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: mr. schumer: i have a little more to say. the presiding officer: we are in a quorum call. mr. schumer: i ask that the quorum call be disappeared with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: on another matter, the senate this week will continue its work confirming

more of president biden's outstanding nominees to the federal judiciary. the nominees that have passed through this chamber have in many cases been historic and today is no exception. the senate will vote on the nomination of nancy maldonado, who will be the very first hispanic judge on the seventh circuit, if confirmed. under president biden and democratic leadership, the senate has confirmed 35 hispanic judges to date and nearly two-thirds of all our nominees have been people of color. when our courts more faithfully reflect our country, it's a good thing for faith in our judiciary, which we greatly need right now. and i'm confident that judge maldonado will make an excellent judge. i am proud to vote in favor of her confirmation and thank my colleagues for doing the same. now, i yield the floor once engo and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

it was started 30 years ago. where the war began and it will take us a fair amount to solve the problem. >> i want to get to his problems but i do want to ask about the story of the day. president biden's performance in the debate increasing calls among members of congress. furts under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: this week the senate convenes with important business to address.

america's closest allies are in town. the eyes of the world are on the most successful military alliance in human history. friends and foes are watching to see whether the superpower that forged the neigh a lines -- alliance and guided its success over seven decades has the will to continue to lead. this week the leaders of dozens of allied nations here in washington. the senate can do its part to answer that question. we can show america's most trusted friends and partners that we're still willing to stand with them. we can pass the national defense authorization act, which our colleagues on the armed services committee reported overwhelmingly nearly a month ago.

we could, madam president, but we won't because the democratic leader has other plans, as important allies visits are -- to all the senate, the clearest sign of our resolve to lead instead continue to collect dust. rather than taking up the ndaa, the senate democrats have decided to spend precious floor time on-termive -- an performative stunt votes and more of president biden's nominees, beginning with judge nancy maldonado. there is a particular irony in our colleagues' decision to put off urgent work like the annual defense authorization in favor of giving lifetime tenure to a judge with a staggering backlog of her own.

if the eyes of the -- with the eyes of the world on washington this week it offers the senate the opportunity to demonstrate the credibility of america's commitments. it's an opportunity we can build -- ill afford to miss. now, on another matter last week the supreme court concluded its term with a number of consequential decisions. three of these rulings illustrate just how differently republicans and democrats view the court's role. as i explained before, republicans want a government that is accountable to the people as the constitution prescribes. democrats, on the other hand, want government that is insulated from the democratic process. here's the democratic ideal of how to govern.

if congress has not spoken on an issue, let unelected bureaucrats manipulate statutes, fill in the blanks and make new law. then if anyone violates these new bureaucrat-made laws, let the bureaucrat take them to a bureaucratic court. not to a jury or a real judge, but to a kangaroo court of other bureaucrats who answer to still more bureaucrats. finally, if the president, the one actor in the executive branch who answers to the people, dares to interfere in this process in ways that bureaucrats don't like, let him face criminal charges from yet another group of bureaucrats. it's dystopian. it's something you'd find in the law books of the old soviet union. and the supreme court said they'd have none of it in what might be the most consequential decision in my time here, the

supreme court held that bureaucrats do not get the benefit of the doubt when they write new laws. congress writes laws and the ways bureaucrats apply those laws are subject to full judicial review. there's no get out of legislative free card no chevrons deference. the court also held that when you have a right to a jury trial, it means just that. just because bureaucrats decide to pursue someone for ruinous fines, they don't get to try the case themselves. when bureaucrats go after someone potentially for violating rules that congress never even contemplated, the case has to go to a real senate-confirmed judge and a jury of one's peers. lastly, the court clarified something that careful readers

of the constitution have known forever. bureaucrats can't criminally charge a president for his official actions. the constitution vests in the president executive powers that cannot be circumscribed, not by congress and not by inventive prosecutors. democrats seem to want to turn washington into the hague. their problem with the supreme court isn't that they won't be able to prosecute a president for unofficial criminal activity, because they still can. their problem is that they won't be able to prosecute official actions that they don't like. prominent democrats seem to look at the successful criminalizeization of disagreement in places like europe and south america and think they might just be on to something. it's not hard to imagine what's coming. we've already seen hence in the reports of the inspector general

investigating entirely appropriate conduct by attorney general barr that democrats simply disagreed with. why should democrats stop there? as chief justice roberts explained, quote, without immunity, prosecutions of ex-presidents could quickly become routine. the enabling of the presidency and our government that would result from such a cycle of factional strife is exactly what the framers intended to avoid. i certainly agree. the people elect the president. he's responsible to them for his official conduct, not the bureaucrats with law licenses. so, madam president, we're not just talking about two sorts of reaction to the supreme court's latest rulings. we're talking about two very differently visions of america.

a democratic vision in which bureaucrats decide our policy disputes and have the power to punish those elected officials who dare, dare to disagree. and a constitutional vision in which policies entrusted broadly to the people through representative democracy. sufficive to say that republicans prefer the latter. i suggest the absence of a qu quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin.

reviewers who aren't familiar what is it let's. >> it started 30 years ago. and where it is a problem

because that is the only topic of conversation i do want to ask about the story of the day the debate calls for him to step down calls among members of his own party. >> it's really up to president biden. i'm a year younger than him so i recognize the symptoms and demonstrating so i am the opportunity so i believe there

are more good days than bad days. >> we seen a growing number of democratic congress they have been, is the only going to let's. >> i don't know. even when i was living in washington and it's got harder so it's an error 35 in about 200 or democrat so you got double digits of people saying they should not run, it's important they estimate but it's a relatively small number. the candidate decided to make that decision and decide not run, who do you think would be

the best position to take on donald trump? >> i will have a favorite. we have members of congress capable of doing the job. they've already announced they are competitive so once again it's an important role candidate biden decides. again i will say for the third time exact decision, not me, not you for anybody but him makes a decision, there will be a

process in august in chicago and i hope it's open and fair. >> before the debate you wrote an op-ed saying don't waste the debate, make them into this question about debt and deficit in this country, how are we from a serious conversation on debt and deficit? a long ways away and part of it is they are not telling the american people what the consequences are so essentially we have 537 what you say-year-old american.

in the consequences of doing nothing. in the budget office of the next four years and 20 years old and working together and paying off debt. that hn one of the cost of the get them aativ

small increase in taxes and they eliminated they didn't like what they did. and there is no logical way. in a source of revenue which is relatively my own solution you have to go back and they are mad about this.

if you don't, the problem is solved. >> the numbers going up again from $380 million according to u.s. debt and we hear warnings. >> the largest increase going to interest. in this treasury in the u.s. are out paying interest and i'm worried about china. 800 billion so what you do about them? it's a terrible problem in part of the reason is people don't understand and they are continuing that.

your strength and capacity ourselves and it won't matter how much debt ask. >> it's too much now and continuing to go up the revenue coming in just stabilize it not be radical or stupid but paying down debt.

>> a bipartisan coalition. >> a bipartisan coalition. democrats 2,027,888,000. independent 202-748-2002. top of the hour, 10:00 a.m. eastern time.

david is in new york. go ahead. >> hello. how are you. >> go ahead. what is your question or comment >> i want to make in the six corrupt supreme who did this to keep donald trump from being put in jail. what they fail to understand is he now has an official presidential. using this authority to stop donald trump right now by having him because he is a convicted felon. felons cannot hold. therefore how can donald trump be on the ballot for the presidency. >> what would you say?

>> well, that is in an interesting idea. if he asked me to vote on it, i would vote no. the behaviors that i do not like supporting the decision that the supreme court made. they made the decision. it will encourage people to violate the law. i do not think that it is a good idea although trump has promised to do it. trump has promised to prosecute joe biden and his family and everyone else has criticized him i think it is a terrible promise to make. i hope just on that basis to not elect him. >> what is your basis on the supreme court these days versus the time that you served in the

senate. >> we have always had partisan supreme court justices. look at the constitution, they see different things. unreasonable burden is a good example. the government could not put in unreasonable burden. i see something different and in my day. far more knowledgeable than case law but i saw something different. i interpreted those words differently. it does not mean he is a horrible person or that i am a horrible person. what has happened, you have an organized effort leading it out saying we want to appoint judges that take a view of the constitution. it is hard to see they are using an original standard.

they are promising to do the same thing to get elected. the 2025 plan what is in their is a proposal that trump replace the two older conservative judges bring to get -- younger. some democrats are being trashed by republicans who will then face if trump gets in saying i will expand if something becomes an unalterable majority. slightly conservative, slightly liberal. mostly during the 1990s. i can live with this. radically altering the face of

america. we have the state's argument over and over and over. we have two constitutional amendments on the ballot. by having to do with abortion. it did not settle the issue. >> with all of this talk about age and the executive branch, what about the judicial branch. term limits for members of the supreme court. would you support that? swell, no, i do not think that it is a good idea. they have to have the capacity to basically police itself. let me put it this way. warren buffett was president of the united states right now, would i not want him allowed to run because years old and that is too old? no.

maybe too old for me. it is not too old for him. part of the art hardship, we have to decide. sometimes these decisions are difficult. i considered to be in my lifetime. it was an election that sent me to vietnam. >> an independent, good morning. >> i tell you what, max, you are going in and out. we will try to fix the outline. >> i am still very good at politics. i can answer a question i did not even hear. >> i will let you have that one next time. good morning good morning, how are you. >> good. i often say the same thing over and over.

i would like to ask the senator what do you feel about the native american people were slaughtered and miss treated and taken the land away. do you feel like any of that money should go to repair that? and on taking care of kind of thing that we did and also for the black people of this nation who gave hundreds of years of slave labor which built a wall for our country, i believe. do you feel that they should get some money? people living on the streets maybe? >> we will take questions on reparations. i think that it is important for both of us to acknowledge the

tremendous progress that has been made. at least in my 20s and 30s in nebraska talking about the damage that had been done in the tribes and residencies and reservations in nebraska. we could not have a conversation about leonard. i was not really taught slavery. i was not taught about reconstruction. i was not taught about jim crow. there were no black students in my high school in the late 50s and early 60s. i think that we made a lot of progress to understanding the terrible things that we did. we did finally vote restitution for these individuals. i think that we have to acknowledge it. it is terrible that we are

facing things that we have done. that is really one of the strengths of this country. we are willing to acknowledge that this is not perfect. supporting adolf hitler. we recognize it. we recognize the only way to prove the quality of our country is to acknowledge that we creative with our own policies it the most successful military alliance? i mean that after two devastating world wars about 20 years apart, and those wars brought incredible bloodshed and destruction to europe, now we have had almost 80 years of relative peace in europe. no european nato member has been

invaded. now, we take it for granted that most of europe is peaceful, that was not the case before nato arrived. remember that the soviet union, after world war ii, quickly exerted domination over the countries that it occupied at that time. but the ussr wasn't satisfied with that situation so many people expected war to break out in europe at some point during the cold war, but it did not. thank god no war happened. the soviet union helped launch wars in asia and violent ref losings in -- revolutions in africa and latin america. the soviets invaded afghanistan,

but the ussr did not touch those countries that were under the nato umbrella. a strong defense resulted in peace. nato was not the result of some idealistic dream rather nato was a very practical response to the hard lessons learned of two world wars that the united states tried its best to stay out of those wars as long as it could. now, we all remember from history that world war i was supposed to be the, quote, war to end all wars, end of quote. woodrow wilson, you will remember, proposed the league of nations in a very naive belief

that an international forum could prevent war through diplomacy and international condemnation. obviously, the league failed. by contrast, nato is a working military alliance of nation states, not some debating society, as the league turned out to be. after world war ii, the united states realized that minding our own business and letting europe sort out its messes wasn't working. we eventually got dragged into world war ii anyway, by which time it took an incredible amount of resources and over

400,000 americans' lives to bring that war to an end. nato grew out of the realization that u.s. leadership was essential to preventing world war iii. nato prevented a war by being prepared for war, strength equaled peace. we know that deterrence works, but deterrence must be credible. our defense must be strong enough that would-be aggressors would think twice before attacking. as ronald reagan said, quote, nato's strategy for peace has always been simple. prevent aggression before it starts. be strong enough, be determined

enough so that no adversary should think even for a moment that war might pay. end of reagan quote. at the 2008 nato summit in romania, nato members said that ukraine and georgia could join sometime in the future but made clear that that membership would not be offered any time soon. now, just four months later, russia invaded and occupied parts of the republic of georgia. now, that happens to remind me of when secretary of state dean atchison gave a major speech in 1950 outlining the u.s. defense perimeter in the pacific.

it very clearly did not include the korean peninsula. less than six months later north korea invaded the south. so signals you send as a nation or as leaders of a nation makes a difference sometimes. and that statement by atchison led to the korean war. so just like atcison's speech in 1950 did to korea, the weak statement at the 2008 bucharest summit, made it clear that georgia and ukraine were on their own. that was seen as a green light by putin. the perception of weakness led

to war. how did the united states react to this this gregs against the republic of georgia? there were -- happened to be some stern words that didn't accomplish much. then six months later, the obama-biden administration announced the infamous reset to patch up relations with russia. that reset sent a very dangerous message. the obama policy was almost the opposite of peace through str strength. no wonder that putin felt emboldened six years later to invade neutral ukraine in both crimea peninsula and in ukraine's east.

president obama responded by refusing defensive weapons to ukraine, and at the same time urging negotiations. you can't have fair negotiations whether someone has invaded your home and has a gun at your head. acetone ya prime minister -- acetone ya prime minister often citing a former minister, his rules for negotiations. one this russian says number one, demand the maximum. do not meekly ask but demand that which has never been yours. two, present ultimatums. do not hold back or threats.

since you will always find people in the west who are willing to negotiate. three, do not give one inch of ground in negotiations. they themselves will offer at least part of what you're asking for, but do not take it. demand more because they will go along with it and in the end, you will get a third or even half of that which you had nothing -- of which you had nothing previously. those are the rules of a soviet foreign minister. now, we should remember all of that when we hear putin's demands today. full-scale russian invasion of ukraine start ed in february of

2022. it was the result of a failure of deterrence. we could have avoided additional aggression had the west shown more strength. what about the argument that it was provocative to let countries russia used to dominate join nato. well, here are some key facts about nato that ought to put those arguments to an end. nato is a defensive alliance. number two, nato membership is open to sovereign democracies that want to join but it does not seek expansion for its own sake. three, it is the right of all sovereign countries to choose their alliances is.

there's no neighbor veto to joining a defensive alliance. let's look at the baltics. you remember that they were at one time called soviet republics. actually the united states never recognized the illegal soviet occupation of baltic states that started in 1940. we maintained during that next 50 years uninterrupted diplomatic relations with all three countries throughout the cold war. here is a little known historic fact. upon the founding of nato, the u.s. secretary of state received a letter from acting counsel general of estonia welcoming the

signing of the north atlantic treaty on behalf of his country. here's what the estonia diplomat wrote. quote, estonia is still under the illegal occupation and domination of the soviet union and is therefore prevented from manifesting openly its keen interest in this pact. end of quote. but i want to further quote this ambassador. i have the honor to offer my best wishes to the signatories of the nart atlantic pact and to express my confidence -- north atlantic pact and express my confidence inspired by the ideals of democracy, of individual liberty, and of the rule of law will strive relentlessly for peace with justice which excludes peace at

any price. therefore, i express the belief that countries which were forcibly deprived of self-government and independence will benefit by this noble endeavor, end of quote. that noble endeavor is the establishment of nato. the estonia diplomat was right all those 75 years ago. his country which is now free and a great nato ally has in fact benefited from the north atlantic treaty. while the baltic states have been officially nato members for 20 years now, they would have assigned the washington treaty in a second had they not been illegally occupied by the soviet union. so i consider the three baltic countries honorary founding

members of nato. i have explained that the united states learned after two world wars that it's better to prevent world war iii than get dragged in once that future war could be raging. but we ought to ask again why the nato alliance. the united states with its powerful military and nuclear arsenal would respond to defend an ally if article 3 were invoked. that has certainly played a big role in deterring the soviets and now the russians. but that could be accomplished simply by giving a oneway security guarantee to europe. while that might still serve our national interests in preventing

world war iii, it would put a burden on all of our shoulders. so the real benefit of the nato alliance is that it leverages american leadership to bolster the ability of our european allies to defend themselves. if every country had different defense plans and weapons that used different ammunition, an aggressor would be able to pick off one by one, even if they tried to join forces. in theory, the europeans could do some of this on their own. in fact, some european leaders have suggest ed the european union ought to develop an independent military capacity. now, i'd say if they want to do that, more power to them. however, most europeans accept

that american leadership is an indispensable and has been indispensable to date. it has been our benefit -- it has been to our benefit that nato militaries are interoperable with the united states military. the only time article 3 of the nato treaty has been invoked was after the united states was attacked on 9/11. many of our nato allies sent men and equipment to fight and die alongside the united states military in afghanistan. it is true there are a minority of countries in nato that are further from potential threats and do not spend enough on their own national defense or their contribution to nato. then there are countries like poland and estonia that take national defense seriously and

spend more as a percentage of gdp than even we do in the united states. keep this in mind. it is the existence of nato that sets the 2% spending expectation, makes common defense plans, and helps determine what capabilities are needed for a credible defense. without nato, europe would be weaker and the chances of the united states getting dragged into another war would be even gre greater. a strong national defense is an instrument of peace more than an instrument of war. in fact, we could call our defense department the department of peace. that's really with what its main function is. being strong to prevent war.

making our our military and our allies' militaries are strong enough to fight a war precisely so we don't have to go to war. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin.

the resident is now free to behave however he likes. even to behave criminally as long as he argues he was acting president he has in many ways untouchable. the conservative majority's decision on immunity is the most

un-american proposition the very antithesis of what they envisioned. this flawless ruling underscores just how hollow the conservative justice commitment truly is. we democrats will not let the supreme court's decision stand unaddressed. the constitution plain that they have the judiciary there appropriate legislation. i will work with my colleagues through legislation as unofficial acts not subject to immunity. we are doing this because we believe in america no president should be free to overturn the will of the people. no matter the conservative justice they believe. as we work on this matter we will also keep working on other proposals to reassert article one of our federal judiciary.

the american people are tired. tired of justices who think that they are beyond accountability. the supreme court's ruling is just the finishing touch of one of the most destructive supreme court terms in modern history. they also ended by overturning the chevron doctrine. in doing so they have potentially turned the federal government upside down in a very dangerous way. declaring that judge is now no better than agency experts for medicare to ai to net neutrality and so much more. from now on any time there is a shred anytime congress did not explicitly anticipate every conceivable scenario for how agencies should apply judges are now free to impose their own

views. even if they do not know will lick about the policy in question even though they are the unelected branch of government. it is impossible for the congress to think of every possible scenario. either you have subject matter making a judgment call or unelected judges making the judgment call. that was the whole point of the chevron doctrine. to give administrative subject matter expert some deference. the annihilation of the chevron doctrine is their latest and most dangerous attempt to side with powerful special interest against the wishes of the class to come up with new legal theory to overturn decades of well accepted precedent. in these cases are just the start. the conservative majority on the supreme court also has upheld

racial gerrymandering. allow the criminalization of homelessness. struck down a commonsense band on bump stocks. defame the ability to regulate against air pollution and so much more. it all points to a clear growing disturbing trend emerging out of the supreme court. it is plain as day. plain as day this majority is hell-bent on deciphering away from the electorate and away from the other branches in order to reshape america and their ultraconservative and extreme vision. so, i repeat what i said at the top of my remarks. american democracy now stands at a crossroads. the disastrous rulings are the clearest illustration of why elections have consequences and why this year the american

people will choose between two vastly different positions for our country. if donald trump returns to the oval office if republicans retake control of congress the disastrous rulings coming out of the supreme court just being the start. the chaos we saw on january 6 will be start. if we get the chance they will plunge our country into extremism. the vast majority of americans oppose and america has really never seen. nowhere else is this contrast between democrats and republicans is clear on the issue of reproductive freedom. this week, senate democrats intent to pick up where we left off in june by bringing every single member of this chamber to task a woman's fundamental right to choose. it is our goal to take up a very simple resolution. cosponsored by every female senator in our caucus and myself that asks a very simple question

where do senators stand on freedom of choice? do we believe that a woman should have the basic right to reproductive care? do we agree that the rights protected under role should be federal law. freedom of choice is perhaps the defining issue for americans this year. this week, every senator must show where they stand. of course democrats have already made it abundantly clear where we stand. yes. we emphatically believe women should be free to make their own healthcare choices. democrats also believe in building on the incredible progress of the last three and a half years under democratic leadership we have made great strides in america to lower the cost of living. we have made prescription drugs like insulin more affordable. we have brought manufacturing jobs back to our shores. we have invested in a clean energy economy and on the world stage we have stood up to defend democracy against autocrats and restored america's good name

among the free nations of the world. donald trump in the mega right cannot say any of this. instead what donald trump has made clear is that if they get into power, they will dismantle american democracy as we know it radicals are long done with talking and you feminism spirit a leader of one america's most powerful conservative tanks recently made the hard right goals very clear. "we are in the process of a second american resolution which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be. that, madam president, is the kind of talk that leads to political violence. to go down the road that macca radicals want to take is to take america into the twilight zone. something more akin to what we saw in europe in the early 20th century then the america we all know and love. so, the stakes were country this

year are immense. senate democrats will continue bringing to the floor the issues that matter to americans most and work ferociously to defend them. while it is tempting to reduce elections nowadays to a form of reality tv, the truth is that the stakes are must hire. it is a battle for two radical -- radically different visions of our country. we yield the floor in the absence of a quorum. >> this week the senate convenes with important business to address. america's closest allies are in town. the eyes of the world are on the most successful military alliance in human history. friends and foes are watching to see whether the superpower that forged the nato alliance and guided its success across seven decades has the will to continue to lead. this week, with the leaders of

dozens of allied nations here in washington, the senate could answer that question. we could show america's most trusted friends and partners respect the rule of law adhere to precedent, and they answer only to the constitution. we should add another to that list today -- judge maldonado, an aaccomplished litigator and a distinguished juror who will be a great asset to the seventh circuit. she graduated from harvard college and colombia law school. she clerked for u.s. district judge castillo, a retired judge, friend and he is schemed jurist in the northern district. following her clerkship, judge maldonado spent nearly 20 years at a firm specializing in

employment, civil rights, and fraud matters. throughout her career she tried several cases to verdict, judgment, and final decision. in addition, she was appointed by the cook county state attorneys office to sesqui as a special assistant tasked with investigating fraud. from 2019 to 2022, she was appointed by the illinois attorney general to serve as a consent decree and a special a.g. in 2022, the senate confirmed judge maldonado on a bipartisan vote supported by the presiding officer and myself to u.s. district court for the northern district of illinois. since her confirmation, she's presided over almost a thousand cases. that's in a matter of just two years plus. ruled on thousands of motions and issued approximately 300 substantive decisions. notably, judge maldonado has

never been reversed by a reviewing court in that period of time, nearly a thousand cases, despite what her critics have to say, her record is one of the best, to show that she carefully resolves cases in a way that leaves litigants feeling they have been treated fairly. once confirmed, judge mall -- judge maldonado will be the first hispanic judge serving on the seventh circuit. judge maldonado received a unanimous, unanimous, well-qualified rating from the american bar association based on her integrity, professional competence and judgment temperament. she has broad support across the board. i urge my senate colleagues to join me in confirming this highly qualified nominee. madam president, on a separate, unrelated subject -- let me set

up this easel. 14 years ago the late-senator mike enzi, republican, from the state of wyoming joined me in honoring the presentation of the congressional gold medal to an amazing man, a pioneer in alleviating global poverty. the recipient was bank la daeshy -- bangladeshi professor, muhammad yunus. he came up with an idea of making smaup loans to the poorest people on earth, literately changed the world. it change the bangladesh and the families there struggling to feed their children to the point

where they could buy a sewing machine and make a few dollars with the promise that they could pay it back. this idea was professor yunus' idea. it revolutionized something called microlending, which hadn't been heard of before his time. it provided easy access to small loans to more than seven million borrowers, 90% of them women or groups of women. it changed poverty reduction in the process. such efforts eventually earned professor yunus the nobel pea prize in -- peace prize in 2006. tragically, despite the recognition he's had on an international basis, he's been harassed by the bangladeshi government almost nonstop levying over 100 unsubstantiated

criminal and civil charges. in fact, he'll soon go on trial again, another trial. this time facing possible life in prison on a nonsense charge. last year because of the frustration of his friends around the world with the way he's being treated by the lowell government in bangladesh, 170 global leaders, including more than 100 nobel laureates, wrote to bangladeshi prime minister kashina urging an end to the harassment. i made similar calls and will do so here again on the floor today. quite simply what is happening to professor muhammad yunus is a tragedy that will harm our relationship with bangladesh. it must stop immediately. enough. madam president, on a separate topic, this is a week of great

global importance. world leaders from some of our closest and aspiring allies will gather this week in washington for a momentous anniversary. 75 years ago out of the ashes of world war ii, 12 nations signed an agreement to establish the north atlantic treaty organization known as nato. this historic alliance was bound together by a commitment to collective defense enshrined under article 5. quite simply, an attack on one of the allies is an attack on all. this simple but powerful commitment after world war ii to share defense has helped keep peace in europe for generations. it has deterred and protected member nations from soviet threats in the past and now russian threats of the present. and it's been so successful in its mission that additional members have regularly sought to join the alliance. it now includes 32 nations. the most recent being sweden and finland, two formidable allies

who bring considerable capacity to the organization. we in the senate voted 95-1 on a bipartisan basis to ratify their entry. many nations previously under soviet domination have joined vowing they'll never live under russian tyranny again. i know one in particular. my mother's homeland of lithuania is a country i've been lucky enough to visit before i was elected to congress and since. i saw soviet repression at its worst in 1978 and now see democracy at its best in this current situation. after the leadership, under the leadership of my friend and former president, lithuania joined estonia and latvia in 2004. two years ago their president was honored for its contribution to the nation's integration into nato and the european union. today lithuania is one of the

most outspoken voices. i'm so proud of lilth wayne i can't, a nation small in population and size but large in terms of its impact on the world with the courage they have shown over and over again. they have vocally supported ukraine. they have welcomed belarusian and russian democratic voices and hosted last year's nato summit which i was honored to attend. this week senator grassley and i will introduce a resolution recognizing the baltic relationship and important contributions these nations made to nato. in recent years i've had the honor of joining several of my colleagues, led by senators shaheen and tillis, to attend the annual nato summit. what struck me at these summit meetings was the sustained resolve and common purpose in defeating russia in war against ukraine. our nato allies made -- have

enduring memories of that experience. they are determined to not allow russia's imperial actions to prevail. i want to recognize president joe biden's clear-eyed leadership galvanizing and invigorating the critical nato alliance and support from ukraine. let's put the cards on the table. under former president trump the future of nato is in doubt. nato members did not know in the alliance would continue to exist let alone rise to any challenge. when president biden took office that changed immediately. he made this alliance alive again at a time when it was needed now more than ever with the situation in ukraine. to expand to include finland and sweden was a dramatic move forward. hundreds of miles of finished border, for example, with russia are now part of the nato alliance on the finished side. i spoke to the president of finland about the decision of

his nation after so many decades and the cold war to finally step out and join nato against russia. he said, senator, it came down to a telephone conversation i had with vladimir putin. i called him to tell him that finland was going to join nato. putin said to me you don't have to worry about us. don't join nato. you don't need to. president minesto said i could no longer trust him after what he did in poland. that shows how important the nato alliance is that a country as substantial and with a storied history like finland would decide to step forward and finally enlist their support for the nato alliance. it speaks well of the alliance and what it has achieved and what it can in the future and it speaks well of president biden's leadership in expanding nato at a critical moment in history. despite putin's warnings,

paranoia to the contrary, nato is not a threat to russia. it will defend every inch of members' territory from russia or any other attacker ment putin's colossal blunder cost the lives of hundreds so far. leaving russia no other choice than to beg for weapons from north korea and iran. much to his chagrin putin since his invasion strengthened and expanded nato and summits included participation of several countries from the asian pacific region. strengthening the alliance even more. i believe ukraine's future rests ultimately within nato, and until then the united states and our allies must continue to support defense against russia. i think lithuanian president nalsada argued this as well.

europeans understand ukraine's fight is our fight and it's our fight too. so on this 75th anniversary let's recommit to this historic alliance that served the world so well in maintaining stability and freedom and leapt us continue to -- let us continue to work toward peace. madam president, i yield the floor. mr. cornyn: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: this morning hurricane beryl made landfall as a category 1 hurricane. texas, and particularly southeast texas in the houston area, all up and down the dpufkt are no stranger -- up and down the gulf coast are no stranger to hurricanes. this one struck the texas coast with torrential rain and intense storm surge, which is very dangerous, as you know, and sustained winds of 80 miles per

hour. throughout the day, beryl has taken its sweet time traveling the expanse of our state, bearing down on our communities in the southeast and eastern parts of the state with strong wind, a lot of rain, a lot of flooding, and even tornadoes. more than 2.7 million texans have lost power, and that number is expected to rise as the storm continues to move its way across the state. and sadly, at least two people have died so far, mainly due to trees falling on their homes. i've reached out to the county judges and mayors in some of the hardest hit areas and assured them that we are monitoring the situation, but more importantly, we are standing by ready to do anything we can to be of assistance. and of course we'll be working with governor abbott and state officials when it comes to

seeking assistance at the federal level for did as ter relief. -- for disaster relief. by tomorrow morning the worst effects of hurricane beryl should be behind us and we'll have a better sense of the full extent of the damage caused by the storm. until then, i urge all my fellow texans to follow the guidance of local authorities and do everything possible to stay safe. there's an expression, turn around, don't drown, which causes people not to drive into standing water in the roadway and that certainly can't be said enough. things, stuff is replaceable. people are not. as always, i'm incredibly thankful to the first responders who are putting their own lives on the line to support their communities and the many folks who are working with the utilities, trying to get power back on line as well. in many areas, search and rescue operations began before the sun

even rose this morning. so thank you to those who were on the front lines saving lives as hurricane beryl bears down on our state, and to the linemen again repairing the downed lines as quickly as possible. madam president, on another matter, we've official ly crossd the halfway mark of 2024. election day is only about four months away, and the senate still has a mountain of work piled up to complete during that period of time. the first task on the list is to pass a strong national dwrens p defense authorization act. congress has of course passed the ndaa for the past 53 consecutive years. it's a must-pass piece of legislation and it's time to build on that record particularly at a time, the most dangerous time i think our

country and the world has seen since world war ii. the threats are everywhere, it seems. i want to commend chairman jack reed and ranking member roger wicker and our colleagues on the armed services committee for doing their job and advancing the 64th annual ndaa last month. this bill ultimately passed the committee on a bipartisan vote of 22-3. that strong bipartisan vote includes provisions offered by members of course on both sides of the aisle. the ndaa, the defense authorization bill, was absolutely essential to america's defense. our military readiness, and the safety and well-being of our troops and our military families. at a time when america's position on the world stage is being tested by all of our adversaries around the world, a

strong defense authorization bill could not be more important. it should be signed into law before congress funds our national defense which brings me to our next big task, which is appropriations, paying the bills, keeping the lights on. before september 30, which is not very far away, congress needs to pass annual appropriations bills. there are 12 of them, as the presiding officer knows. these bills fund every aspect of the federal government from our mighty military to disaster assistance programs. we know that passing this bill is no easy task. it requires a lot of time and consideration by our colleagues on the appropriations committee. but the majority leader's part-time senate schedule has not given them much room to maneuver. by that, i mean we come into session often on a tuesday and leave on a thursday. this week is because of the

two-week break we've just returned from is maybe an exception. here we are on monday, we'll have one what is known colloquially in the senate as a bed check vote at 5:30 on a nomination, but that's about it. but when the senate is not meeting, which is it seems like most of the time now, we can't meet to consider bills or advance critical legislation. it makes it difficult if not impossible to solve the biggest challenges facing our country. this summer the senate's timeline is so truncated that the appropriations committee is skipping subcommittee markups entirely. they're moving bills straight to a vote by the full committee because there's simply not enough time given the remaining time in the fiscal year, which ends september 30, to follow regular order, which is something both the majority leader and the chairman and ranking member of the

appropriations committee had said they wanted to do. regular order simply means transparency and accountability and letting everybody know what is happening when the federal government pays its bills. chairman regular. -- chairman murray and vice chair collins said they want to return to a more transparent, accountable process of funding the federal government. last summer they proved this is not just talk. they followed through on that commitment and the committee passed all 12 appropriations bills for the first time in five years. that's an accomplishment, but it should be an embarrassment that the senate has simply not done its job for the previous five years. i appreciate the time and the effort that the appropriations

committee invested in the process. this is not a partisan matter. this is a bipartisan project and requirement, but i'm disappointed that they are now forced to sprint a marathon in the month of july because the majority leader, our colleague from new york, has barely allowed the senate enough time to do its work. unfortunately, the senate's to-do list does not end there. in addition to the defense authorization bill and 12 funding bills, we also need to pass a farm bill by september 30. that's when the current bill expires. this legislation is critical to america's food security and as well as to the hardworking men and women who grow and produce it. our colleague from arkansas, ranking member boozman has been a tireless champion for america's farmers, ranchers, and producers and he and his colleagues on the ag committee

will pass a farm bill as soon as possible. the house has already done its job, and now it's up to us in the senate. but the majority leader's schedule has made it difficult if not impossible to do before september 30. we don't have much time to complete this mountain of work. including today, the senate is only scheduled to be in session for 11 days during the month of july. that's not even a full three weeks of work. after that, we're scheduled to take a five-week recess -- a five-week recess during the month of august and return for a short period of time in september. but before september, the senate needs to pass all 12 appropriations bills and a farm bill in order to meet the deadlines, but we're only scheduled to be in session for 12 days in september as well.

between now and election day, november 5, the senate is scheduled to be in session for 23 days. election day is 120 days away, but we're only scheduled to be in session for 23 days. that should be a source of embarrassment to everyone. the schedule is not conducive to getting our work done, given the important tasks to us, it's not just lazy, it's down right dangerous. funding the government, protecting america's food supply, investing in the safety and security of the american people, these are core to governing. there's no excuse for the majority leader to give us only 23 days to complete all of this incredibly important work. we have a lot to accomplish and the majority leader, who sets the schedule, needs to let us

sket our work done -- let us get our work done. forget about president biden's nominees or show votes, we need to start doing our job, which is to legislate. our colleagues on the armed services committee have done their job, the appropriations committee will no doubt get their job done. neither one of that he's are partisan bills, but we need to get them done and get them done before the deadline. the senate needs to especially prioritize america's national security. i urged senator schumer to file for cloture to start the process of voting on the national defense authorization act so that we could have full debate on the senate floor and pass this legislation before the recess begins at the end of july. with everything we need to

accomplish in the next few months, we can't afford to waste time on stunt votes or radical judicial nominees. senator schumer needs to file for cloture on the ndaa and give members of this chamber, on a bipartisan basis, the opportunity to do what we were sent here to do, which is to legislate. madam president, i yield the floor, and i would note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: ms. baldwin.

, what the polls tell us about the state of the race? >> we've seen a pretty consistent answer which is the polls have curated perhaps not as severely as some people thought. he's lost about two points so he's gone from being down a couple points. it's not a great place at this time in the race but it's not the collapse that i think people. on the democrat side. >> is that general polling for the battleground states as recut closer? >> the popularen vote in the states there is some generation

they haven't had that much because of july 4 weekend when party over another but again two points seems to be pretty consistently the i rule. >> what's your expectation? can relate of that which i describe, and i'm speaking about the uncertainty about those who rely upon flood insurance as we enter into hurricane season. unfortunately and tranlicily, we -- tragically, we have a real live example of this as hurricane beryl hits an area that was devastated by harvey a few years ago. anyone who is dependent upon flood insurance to build and

their premium has just rose have been hit by beryl and can expect their premiums to rise again and this has created anxiety. it isn't just that people flood because some people who don't flood, who have never flooded, will see their premiums rise as well. why? it's because the way this program -- this program is being implemented. and let me say that louisiana stands with mississippi, louisiana stands with texas, and we stand with all parts of the nation that will suffer under the way this program is being implemented. let me put up my first floor chart. we have the national flood insurance program or nfip, as we call it, as a safety net for homeowners after a storm. it protects them from being finally wiped out -- financially wiped out by a hurricane or any act of flooding.

this is different from past years for two reasons. the national weather service predicts that 2024 will see above normal hurricane activity in the atlantic and gulf of mexico. and there is much more uncertainty, and this is a key things, if nfip will be affordable due to the new risk assessment. and the answer is that it is no that it will not remain affordable. this is not just an issue for louisiana. it affects mississippi, texas, and any place there is water, there is a risk of flooding. the national flood insurance program covers 7 million -- 4.7 million policies, they rely

on it to keep their families safe. and we've seen flooding in states that you typically don't think of when you say flooding, virginia, missouri, north carolina, south carolina, new york, new jersey, texas, pennsylvania, california, mississippi, alabama, all are all states that have had more than $1 billion in nfip claims since 1978. again, these states over $1 billion in claims since 1978. those are just the states the hardest hit, those in the dark, the lighter colored states have been affected as well. maybe not a billion, but if you're a family whose home was washed away it has affected you in a profound way. this is not a rich man's a program. if you look in these communities like pennsylvania, oftentimes it's called river flooding, and

folks who are less well off tend to have older homes in the bottom of the valley and the flooding goes through and rips up their homes, they have fewer financial resources by which to rebuild. so the kind of charge that this only protects luxury homes on a beach, totally false. this is for middle-income families, working families, poor families, allowing them to have the security that they can rebuild after a tragic event. in the past three years, we have seen seven major flooding events across the country, each costing more than a billion dollars. in 2021, louisiana saw flash flooding affecting thousands of homes. california, the state where the president now represents, has had two major floods. in january of 2021 and the winter of 2023. kentucky and ms. missouri saw flooding in 2022.

florida in april 2023. vermont, new york, wisconsin, minnesota, illinois, each hit in july 2023. and in december 2023, we saw flooding along the east coast states from florida to maine. remember, these are just the floods that have cost over a billion dollars in damages. and when we consider once again who lives in these areas most affected, we see why we need toe keep the nfip affordable for working families. 62% of all nfip policies are in parishes and counties where the median household income is below the national average of about $54 tho a year. -- $54,000 a year. once more, these are not millionaire beach homes. hardworking people, uncertain whether they'll be able to stay in their home because of a decision made by a bureaucracy with zero input from congress. now we're seeing the consequences of that decision with an estimated 900,000

people, unwif t of all -- one-fifth of all policies dropping coverage because it's unaffordable. when that happens the pool shrinks and the program enters an actuary death spiral where the risk is on fewer people which raises the premiums even more which makes those who are relatively speaking least at risk drop their policies which concentrates more. once more a death spiral, setting up the program for collapse. congress needs to do something before it's too late. first we need to step back and ask how we got into this situation. why did fema implement risk making 2.0, why unjekt this much uncertainty into the system? congress never passed a bill requiring fema implement this. president biden could have stopped it with the stroke of a pen. we've done it in the past. in 2019 my office worked with the trump administration to success fly delay implementation because of concerns over the

methodology of how fema was calculating rates. this time even though the concerns were made, the biden administration would not work with us. now, since the biden administration is allowing this to happen, congress must step in. my team is working on a bipartisan solution that will roll back risk rating 2.0 and make flood insurance affordable and accountable again. let me say to my colleagues, let's talk about it. let's have a conversation. every single member of this body has constituents who rely upon the national flood insurance program. we owe it to them to find a solution to a system that isn't working for americans who are promised a safety net in case of a flood. let's get to work. with that i yield and ask, madam president, that the next segment of my remarks be entered as if a separate -- my next portion be

entered separately into the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cassidy: madam president, as you know, as members of congress, we are fortunate to have highly motivated and productive younger people working for us, essential for our country to meet its goals. i rise today to honor a member of my team who for seven years i have been fortunate to work with. one of the best, my health policy director mary moody johnson. on capitol hill, a lot of our staff come and go pretty quickly. so when you have someone who stays with us for seven years, who's loyal to the things you're loyal to, dedicated, working so hard for so long, you feel a special attachment. after almost a decade on capitol hill, marpy, seven -- mary, seven which she spent in my office serving the people of louisiana, first on my d.c. office and onle health, labor and pensions committee, mary is moving on to a new professional

challenge at the end of this week. it's bittersweet. she's played an incredible role in the success of my office in lowering the cost of health care and serving the americans we represent. just some examples. if someone says my gosh, we've made a lot of progress in terms of mental health reform, mary moody is one of those who is critical to that. if somebody has a surprise medical bill which they appeal and get reversed, that was mary moody, now mary moody johnson, taking three years to work with other offices and with stakeholders to come up with a bill which passed both houses of congress and was signed into law. and it should have been called the mary moody johnson end surprise medical bills. she worked long hours with long spreadsheets. and she got a bill that has saved maybe as many as a million

surprise medical bills a month. on a personal note, it's a privilege to be her friend. she came in my office whether she was 24 -- when she was 24. and had a grandmother from louisiana, cons vinced me she had deep ties into our state. so i hired her. and turns out she was from texas. i've never let her forget that. but i especially like that she married a mon from porch true la -- man from porch true la. now she's just ready to move on. i get that. at some point it's not what you do for the rest of your life. it's what you do next. both because of her marriage and other reasons, her commitment to her church, she's ready to try something else. i'm thankful for all she's done. i'm sure our paths will cross again. i'm excited to see what happens next. so we all wish her the best as she moves on. she'll be missed by all. but our loss is someone else's incredible game.

i yield. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from west virginia. mr. manchin: madam president, i rise today to honor the life and legacy of a world class athlete. nba executive, a proud west virginian and my very dear friend jerry west. often referred to as one of the greatest american basketball players of all time. his career led him to success join be the greats in stadiums across america. born in 1938, jerry spent the beginning of his life in a small town in southern west virginia. he faced many health and family challenges as a young by. but he spent a lot of time shooting hoops in his backyard. at east bank high school, he became -- began educating himself on the ins and outs of the sport he loved. jerry quickly began to excel in the game as the star of his beloved high school team. his jump shot was always his trademark and it allowed him to stand out, even as a young

player. jerry attended west virginia university where his already well developed skills and unyielding consistency were notable characteristics of his playing ability. he consistently averaged double digits and points, rebounds and assists in almost every major game. one personal story i can tell you as a 10-year-old boy in 19 # 57, my mother took me -- she loved basketball and loved to go to mountaineer games. she took me as a small boy. she said you watch that guy, skinny guy. he can move the ball well, has very good delivery. i think he might be something. that was my mother and i'll remember that to this day. in the 1960 summer olympics he won a gold medal as a cocaptain of the u.s. men's basketball team. following his second overall section in the nba draft the same year by the minneapolis lakers, he continued to be a powerhouse on the court as the team moved to los angeles. mr. clutch as he was known

salving a staggering number of winning baskets from both the field and free throw line. with his signature jump shot extending 16 inches above the rim, his defense as well as offense was solid but often it was his work ethic that was the envy of his teammates. one of the reasons that jerry was so successful was that he was never one to back down from a challenge. like all of us he experienced setbacks in life which weren't always met with victory. those are the types of situations where a person's true character will show through. he always believed that hard work, dedication, and percent spreer rans will get you -- perseverance will get you where you need to be, win or lose. with his leadership on the court, the lakers continued to rise through the ranks and subsequent seasons he racked up sag -- staggering number of accomplishments. during his 14 years with the los angeles lakers, he was voted 12 times to the all nba first and second teams, elected to the nba

all-star team 14 times, and continues to hold the nba record for highest average points in playoff series. at a time of his retirement as a player in 1974, he had scored more points than any other los angeles laker in franchise history. jerry capped his momentous career with for enshrinements in memorial basketball hall of fame as a player. he's scheduled to be a&d third time this fall as a contributor for his work as an executive and consultant. his innate talent shined both off and on the court. he continued with the lakers coaching for a short time, leading them to three playoffs in a conference final. shortly after his long-standing presence with the lakers, he continued to as an executive with them. many looked to him for direction on how the game of basketball should evolve. the franchise continued to bypass others. which quite literally defined

the sports throughout the 70's, 80's, and 90's. he set the team up to sign and retain some of the most celebrated names in basketball history. helping him to earn his notoriety with the nba community that still continues to this day. with the skill to take whatever team he was -- with to new heights jerry worked with the grazelies, the warriors and the clippers to improve their stagnant franchises. the teams would not be where they are today without his guidance. when you think of basketball, you think of jerry west, one of the sports most notable icons. it is only fitting his legacy has been forever commemorated in the nba logo. from his skills on the court to his unrivalled knowledge of the game from all perspectives, he it inned to have a lasting impact on the sports world. his thoughts were models for how to manage success, failure, and change.

those all happen in life. how to tat lessons you've learned, adapt them and go on to improve the word around you which is what jerry did every day. i'm honored to have been present at the oval office of the white house when jerry was awarded the presidential medal of freedom in 2019. i can only begin to imagine how many leaders jerry forged throughout his time and how many of his former teammates and colleagues still look up to him to this day. in that spirit i am forever grateful to jer question for his commitment to the sports community as well as our shared passion for representing the people of the state that we both love so much, west virginia. with god-given talent and unmatched character, jerry's life has benefited the people of our home state in a profound way. the legacy he leaves behind is undoubtedly an integral part of our heritage. he was a very der friend -- dear friend to me and proud ambassador of the mountain state.

from the coal fields of west varj to basketball's biggest stages he always demonstrated his mastery of the sport with grace and humility. it is my hope that his family and friends can find peace, strength, and comfort in one another during the loss of this wonderful person. gail and i offer our deepest condolences to his wife karen, his sons david, mark, ronnie and johnny and all his family friends and loved ones who loved him so dearly. we will forever keep jerry and his remarkable legacy in our thoughts and prayers for the rest of our lives. god bless you, jerry. i yield the floor and . -- i yield the floor.

madam president, i ask that the scheduled vote commence immediately. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. the question is on the nomination. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote: mr. booker. mr. boozman. 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. the clerk: 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. l. 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 -- butler, duckworth, gillibrand,

hickenlooper, king, markey, murphy, smith, tester. senators voting in the negative -- cassidy, crapo, hawley, manchin, marshall, sinema, tillis. the clerk: mrs. shaheen, aye.

the clerk: mr. lankford, no.

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

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

the clerk: mr. carper, aye. mr. hagerty, no.

mr. coons, aye.

the clerk: mr. grassley, no.

the clerk: ms. ernst, no. mr. johnson, no.

the clerk: mr. graham, no. ms. lummis, no. mr. kennedy, no. mrs. britt, no.

mrs. capito, no mrs. hyde-smith, no. the clerk: mr. ricketts, no.

the clerk: mrs. fischer, no. mr. daines, no. mr. wicker, no. mr. lujan, aye. mr. barrasso, no. mr. thune, no.

the clerk: mr. boozman, no. the clerk: mr. rounds, no.

mr. padilla, aye. the clerk: mr. bennet, aye. mr. tuberville, no. mr. whitehouse, aye.

the clerk: mr. warnock, aye. mr. moran, no. mr. cramer, no.

the clerk: mr. lee, no. the clerk: mr. ossoff, aye. ms. murkowski, no. ms. collins, no.

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

mr. welch, aye.

the clerk: mr. brown, aye.

the clerk: mr. young, no. ms. cantwell, aye. mr. schmitt, no.

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

the clerk: mr. van hollen, aye.

the clerk: ms. rosen, aye.

the clerk: mr. kaine, aye. mr. sullivan, no. mr. cornyn, no.

the clerk: mr. schatz, aye.

the clerk: mr. sanders, aye.

vote: the clerk: mr. vance, no.

the clerk: mrs. blackburn, no.

the clerk: mr. mcconnell, no.

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

the clerk: ms. stabenow, aye.

ms. cortez-masto, aye. the clerk: mr. kelly, aye. mr. durbin, aye. mr. peters, aye. mr. booker, aye. mrs. murray, aye.

mr. braun, no. ms. klobuchar, aye.

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

the clerk: mr. merkley, aye.

vote:

the clerk: ms. hirono, ay

yunus. vote: no one is above the law. criminal prosecution for actions he checked while in office.

they incorrectly declared all future presidents are entitled to a breathtaking level of immunity. so long as their conduct is carried out in their official capacity as president. they incorrectly declared in effect the same thing richard nixon told david frost in 1977. gault, nixon said when the president does it means it is notid illegal. that is what the court in effect wasre saying. we were taught in grade school there no kings here in america. l be immediately notified of the senate's action. mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye. all those opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to executive session to consider

calendar number 623. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report. the clerk: federal labor relations authority, andrea wagner to be a member. mr. schumer: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: cloture motion, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby bring to a close debate on the nomination of executive calendar number 623, annemarieingaerin -- wagner, of virginia, to be a member of the national labor authority. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. those may never say aye.

those opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to calendar number 420. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the bill. the clerk: motion to proceed to s. 45534, to protect access for reproductive health care after the dobbs v. jackson decision on june 24, 2022. mr. schumer: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: cloture motion, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby bring to a close debate on the motion to proceed to calendar number 420, s. 4454, a bill to express support for protecting access to reproductive health care after the dobbs v. jackson decision on june 24, 2024, signed by 18 senators. mr. schumer: i ask that the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i m-- move to

executive session. the presiding officer: all those in favor say aye. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, federal labor relations authority, clean kiko of north dakota to be a member. mr. schumer: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: 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 621, colleen duffy kiko of north dakota to be a member of the federal labor relations authority, signed by 18 senators as follows. mr. schumer: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. 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 ask unanimous consent the committee on the judiciary be discharged from further consideration and the senate proceed to the consideration of s. res. 736. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 736, a resolution recognizing the importance of trademarks in the economy and the role of trademarks in protecting consumer safety, and so forth. the presiding officer: without objection. the committee is discharged and the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: 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 tuesday, july 9. that following the prayer and pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day and morning business be closed. following the conclusion of morning business, the senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the lee

nomination. further, that the cloture motions filed on june 20, 2024, ripen at 12:00 noon, and that following the cloture vote on the lee nomination, the senate recess until 2:15 p.m. to allow for the weekly caucus meetings. that if cloture is invoked on the lee nomination, all time be considered expired at 2:15 p.m. and that if cloture is invoked on the meriweather nomination, all time be considered expired at 5:45 p.m. finally, that if any nominations are confirmed during tuesday's session the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the the presiding officer: the

he goes on to highlight historic record of success by his administration listing job creation, manufacturing, infrastructure and climate change investment. as accomplishments he plans to run eight finishes two page letter by saying the question of how to move forward has been well aired for over a week now. it is time for it to end we have one job that is to beat donald trump. we have 42 days to the democratic convention 119 days

until the general election. any weakening of resolve our lack of clarity about the task ahead only helps trump and hurts us it is time to come together. move forward as a unified party and defeat donald trump. a new initiative from the biden/harris initiative focused on increasing female participation in politics worldwide. earlier today the endowment for international peace national democratic institute helped launch the project. officials from the white house and other u.s. agencies discussed barriers to women leadership and ways to overcome them. watch tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2, c-span now our free mobile video app or online at c-span.org.

robert schimmel walter annenberg edmund joyce chair emeritus and american studies in journalism at that university of notre dame. he has often written about the american presidency's newest book mr. churchill in the white house. the untold story of a prime minister and two presidents. professor says both roosevelt and eisenhower eventually adjusted to the on conventional habits and hours of their white house to guest who not only proposed his visits but almost always by accident or design stayed longer than initially intended. his book mr. churchill in the white house. this episode of book notes plus. book notes plus is available o that c-span now free mobile app or wherever you get your podcasts. c-span campaign 2024 live to

milwaukee for the republican national convention shouldn't live july 15 delegates from across the country gather to select the republican nominee for president. watch as they lay out their produce for the next four years the party's vision for the future. republican national convention live monday july 15 on c-span, c-span now or online at c-span.org. c-span your unfiltered view of the convention. >> coming up newly elected british prime minister holds eight news conference at 10 downing street on his second day in office. this is about half an hour. thank you very much for coming. yesterday the work of change began we are a change at labor party yesterday we started the work of changing the cou