to blame somebody for poverty and low wages, and really address the issues that impact the poverty. that impact the poor and low-wage. that still doesn't address having strong safety nets for people,y especially for people who are disabled and hurting a fall into poverty. we have got to come to a place in this country where we say things like i remember doing one of the times are going through economic trouble and we said companies were too big to fail. well, i'm a preacher and in my bible it says every person is made in the image of god, which means people are too human and two created by god to fail. and we should address the policies that create and cause poverty and not try to find a way around them or a way to change the subject matter. >> host: again the book "white

poverty: how exposiing myths about race and class can reconstruct american democracy." the co-author is bishop william barber, president of, coach of the poor people's campaign confiding director of the center for public policy and public theology at yale and really do appreciate your time. >> guest: thank you so much and god bless you. thank you for your audience. >> the senate established in for the final week of work before a month-long summer recess. at 5:30 p.m. eastern a confirmation vote on a judge to serve on u.s. tax court for a 15 year term. live coverage of the senate here on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer.

the chaplain: let us pray. eternal spirit, thank you for the continuous blessings of your handiwork. from the first blush of dawn to the wonders of the starry heavens, we're daily made aware of your creative might. lord, bless our senators to see the wonder of your presence on capitol hill. in the hands of the many workers who enable them to do their work, give our lawmakers the wisdom to catch a glimpse of the unity and cooperation you desire for them. make our legislators willing to

both receive and give forgiveness, as they manifest your spirit in deeds of kindness. as our lives intertwine through common tasks, remind us all that ultimately we are accountable to you. we pray in your mighty name. amen. 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 29, 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. stacey d. neumann of maine to be united states distributor judge for the district of maine.

outlined his trade publication. newsletter and campaigns all over the country and all over. presidential all the way down to state legislatures and the last few weeks have been like verbal, christmas and fourth of july rolled into one. >> and the world cup. >> and the world cup and olympics, when we throw that in there? >> you wrote an article with the headline good feelings, he says last week democrats were ready but now they are downright giddy. >> so the democrats talked it

comes to this complete disarray for them after biden's debate performance in june. if you talk to democrats, they were worried not just about losing the white house but because of biden's poor performance. they are worried of the senate and more than double digit losses in the house. all the weaknesses and anxieties democrats pent up the last year or so, lingering questions about biden were answered in the worst ways for them. now after biden stepped aside and harris is almost completely consolidated the party behind her and will be the eventual nominee, this frustration and anxiety has let loose compared to a sugar high right now with democratic enthusiasm skyrocketing in the last week or so harris emerged. democratic enthusiasm among young voters and gen z voters a color is a key part not as

enthusiastic to vote for biden right now. good feelings for democrats harris starts moving ahead you see that not necessarily in pulling head-to-head with trump -- heights, israeli druze children were playing soccer when hezbollah launched a rocket made in iran and killed 12 of them. and on sunday, venezuela's communist dictator hijacked an election, promising the suffering people of his country even more brutal days to come. we live in a world where thuggish repression and terrorist violence are increasingly common. tragically, the slaughter of innocent children by terrorists is not surprising. neither unfortunately is a stooge of the world's most

powerful authoritarians tightening his own choke hold on power. but one thing doesn't ever get less shock ing or alarming, the continued naivete with which our leaders respond. the secretary of state says the biden-harris administration has, quote, serious concerns that the results announced does not reflect the will or the votes of the venezuelan people. well, many of us have serious and long-standing concerns that the administration does not know how to credibly change the calculus of america's adversaries. autocrats don't care about disapproving looks from western

diplomats. don't believe me? ask the mullahs in tehran how worried they were about stern condemnations of their ongoing nuclear enrichment efforts. we certainly don't have to wonder whether promises of sanctions retiree leafed in -- relieved in washington convinced maduro to commit a free and fair election. concern is not a strategy. and speeches, for that matter, are not policy, especially when they're not backed by facts and by force. last week president biden tooted the horn of his own foreign policy and declared proudly the united states is not at war anywhere in the world. well, that was news to america's

servicemembers deployed in harm's way. the very next day the iran-backed terrorists attacked u.s. personnel in iraq and in syria again, for months at his orders, u.s. navy destroyers have expended more than $1 billion in high-tech munitions to intercept the houthis, iran-made arsenal of missiles and drones. in exchange for no measurable increase and deterrence. it's well and good to insist that america is not at war, but the growing list of authoritarians, rogues, and strongmen are at war with us. the president's failure to respond decisively to threats may have let him believe we're not at war, but the same failure has emboldened our adversaries. time and again the biden-harris administration has limited

sup support, agonized over perceived risk of escalation and tried to micromanage the way our friends in ukraine and israel actually defend themselves. and secretary blinken's first public comment after hezbollah's most recent strike, quote, we don't want to see it spread. well, neither did israel on october 6, before hamas spread murderous violence into peaceful kibbutzes in violation of a cease-fire agreement. and neither does israel now as its military continues to focus on finishing the job against hamas and building the pressure necessary to secure a stable peace. there is simply no question that inner an and its proxies -- iran and its proxies are the incscit

-- instigators in this they have planned this violence for years and will perpetuate it until it is no longer in their interest to do so. if the so-called international community wants an end to the war in gaza and chaos in the region they can do more than issue statements expressing concern about escalation. it's past time for civilized countries to present tehran with cold p consequences, with heavy pressure on the leaders responsible for the campaign of death and destruction across the middle east. instead, western leaders have repeatedly blamed the victim. this is the message sent by democrats who boycotted the joint address to congress by the democratically elected prime minister of israel.

this is the message sent by their presumptive presidential nominee who instead of extending a hand at solidarity, pressured a friend and ally to cease military operations to defend itself. this sort of pressure will please the american left, but restraining israel also pleases the butchers in tehran. now, on a different matter, the supreme court is under attack. prominent democrats say it must do what they want and not what the laws and constitution require. they've incited violence against the court. we've had to put justices under 24/7 police protection. even so, a deranged young man is about to go on trial for trying to kill a justice and his family while they slept in order to change the outcome of a case.

in polling last year, the court was the branch of government with the highest level of trust from the public, but that hasn't stopped democrats from devoting the last eight years to an all-out campaign against the court's legitimacy and ultimately against its very existence. radical liberals have called for court-packing. influential members of this body, including the senior senator from rhode island and the chairman of the judiciary committee, have threatened ominously that, quote, perhaps the court can heal itself before the public demands it be restructured. the left wages daily warfare against the justices, illegally picking their neighborhoods with impunity, trying to harm their spouses' careers, and even spying on what kinds of flags

they fly in their yards. today, the biden-harris administration, which desperately wants these radical votes, is once again jumping right into the fray. after talking to a harvard law extremist who had helped then-senator biden stage a character assassination of robert bork almost 40 years ago, they decided the time has come to eliminate the supreme court as we know it. in his op-ed the president says he wants term limits on justices, never mind what the constitution says. never minds the advice and consent role of the senate. president biden and his leftist allies don't like the current composition of the court, so they want to shred the constitution to change it. he wants what he calls an ethics code that already exists, but

the president is actually proposing a stealth process for people other than the justices to decide cases. again, constitution be damned. the fact is that president biden himself came to office and stood up a commission to investigate whether to change the supreme court. this morning the president thanked this commission for its insightful analysis that supposedly informed his reform prop proposals. never mind now, never mind that this commission, cochaired by one of his closest political confidantes, didn't actually recommend that he do anything. on the contrary. it explained in detail the challenges posed by hare-brained idea like term limits. as one member noted, quote, we ought to be really careful about

tinkering with the supreme court, because you don't know what the consequences could be. why is the biden-harris administration so willing to put the crown jewel of our system of government, the independent judiciary, to the torch? because it stands in their way. don't take my word for it. they're running ads about it, pictures of the justices on screen. one commercial intones that the supreme court has made the president above the law because the former president asked them to. what happened to respecting court decisions? the biden-harris justice department took an extreme position in the prosecution of their electoral opponent and they lost. the president accepting that they lost, the biden-harris administration responded with a full-scale attack on the justices who ruled against them. this from the folks who love to

remind us that, quote, you can't only love your country when you win. perhaps the president and vice president should take a good look in the mirror. mr. durbin: madam president. the presiding officer: the senior senator from illinois. mr. durbin: madam president, i want to make sure that the record is clear and unequivocal. the vice president of the united states, kamala harris, met personally with prime minister netanyahu. at that point, she said that -- she said with him and publicly that our alliance with israel is unwavering. that was her exact quote.

despite what you might have heard to the contrary. she went on to say she believed israel had the right to exist and to defend itself, but how it does it makes a difference. that is a significant statement, because what she is suggesting is our alliance has to reflect our values as well as our commitment to israel. i don't believe that's a radical statement. i agree with that statement. and i believe that to suggest otherwise is to mischaracterize what the vice president has said. i think she speaks for america. i hope she does. she speaks for me when she says those words. i thought her meeting with netanyahu was historic, important, timely, and repeated the basic principles that guide our two nations. on the second issue of the supreme court, the republican leader of the senate just characterized the supreme court as the crown jewel of american

government. the crown jewel. those were the words that he used. let me ask if you think it reflects a crown jewel, when one justice on the supreme court receives $4 million in undisclosed gifts from billionaires. does that reflect the crown jewel of our constitution and our government? i think not. no other federal judge could get by with what clarence thomas did to receive millions of dollars worth of travel and gifts and not report them publicly. i don't accept that as routine. i think it is an aberration and reflects poorly on the court and its integrity. it is time for change. president biden is saying that to today. i'll study his detailed suggestion, but i certainly agree with him that the nine people serving on the u.s. supreme court should not be treated differently than any other federal judges when it comes to transparency and accountability for their ac actions. if the court is going to have

any credibility when it comes to its integrity, it must reflect that in its actions. receiving and failing to report gifts of that magnitude is an embarrassment to the whole nation. the republicans should get on board a bipartisan effort. we passed an ethics bill in the senate judiciary committee. it was authored by senator whitehouse of rhode island. it's pending on the calendar. it should be called this year, sooner the better. an ethics code on the supreme court that applies the same standards, laws, and procedures to the highest court in the land as question apply to every other agency of government, including every other court. madam president, on a separate topic, in 2018 i had the chance to visit caracas, venezuela, before they held their last presidential rakes -- presidential election. i will never forget walking into one of the private hospitals, seeing the shelves empty of

basic medicines and hearing the stories of deprivation and political repression that led so many millions to flee that country. i told president maduro if he rant a sham election, which he had scheduled, he'd find the country even more isolated and the venezuelan people enduring even more suffering. unfortunately, that's the path he pursued, and we've seen the heartbreaking consequences. a failed state near economic collapse, millions of refugees in the region, and greater reliance on cuba and russia to suppress the venezuelan public. yesterday's election in venezuela offered a chance for change testimony has been a perilous process, with the regime disqualifying opposition candidates and arresting key opposition supporters. yet on sunday, millions turned out to vote for a change. these are some photographs from that election. you can see people waiting in

line, some up to six hours for the chance to vote. despite independent exit polls showing a wide margin for opposition canndidate edmundo gonzalez, maduro claimed a dubious victory absence ballot evidence. responsible nationles in the region have -- responsible nations in the region have understandably cast serious doubts, and called for a full and transparent counting of the ballots. i join in that request. with evidence pointing to a decisive gonzalez victory, he should be considered president-elect unless credible evidence is provided otherwise. the maduro regime must not be allowed to steal the election or future from the venezuelan people. madam president, on a separate topic of importance, for years this country has suffered from a uniquely american gun violence epidemic.

on july 13, campaign rally attendees in butler, pennsylvania, became the latest victims when a gunman attempted to assassinate former president donald trump. during the gunman's heinous shooting spree, he killed an innocent firefighter and injured two other people. but this assassination attempt exposed more than just the continued threat of gun violence in america. it has also revealed unacceptable security failures in the operations of the united states secret service. despite the implementation of a security plan to secure the site on july13, the shooter was able to fly a drone outside of the security perimeter for 11 minutes. his suspicious activity was reported twice, and he was spotted on the roof of a building prior to taking his first shot. yet his violent plan continued unimpeded. he was able to fire eight shots before a countersniper killed

him. the implicationles are terrifying. when a mere two days after the shooting the secret service needed to secure the republican national convention in milwaukee, and in less than a month the secret service muss secure the democratic site in chicago. between now and then, vice president harris and former president trump will hold countless events with americans across the country. the secret service will need to secure all of these events, but the agency needs first to restore our trust in its abilities to do so. the senate judiciary committee has jurisdiction over the secret service and federal bureau of investigation. i work closely with senator gary peters of michigan, the chair of the homeland security committee, to organize a joint hearing tomorrow morning that will examine the security failures leading to the assassination attempt against former president trump. during this hearing, we will

hear from acting u.s. secret service director ronald rowe about what the secret service is doing to rect ni the issues -- rectify the issues. we will hear from paul bate who will update the investigation. this follows a briefing the secret service and fbi provided last week. there are many questions the american public deserves answers to, including why was the shooter able to connect the renaissance at the fairgrounds ever the rally? how and why was he able to bring on an assault rifle to the premises? why was the building excluded from the secret service security perimeter despite being winning range of an ar-15, the most popular rifle in america? why was the gunman able to conduct reconnaissance and move about freely, even after being identified as a suspicious person, without any intervention by local or federal law

enforcement until it was too late? what organizational and on-the-ground changes has the secret service implemented since this occurred, to ensure better security in the future? which of these changes were in place in time for the republican national convention? and which are still in the process of being implemented for future events such as democratic national convention? madam president, you know that you and i share concerns about tens of thousands of people coming to our beloved city of chicago. we want them to be safe every minute of every day. we want to make certain that the agencies, state, local, and federal law enforcement, are doing the very best job. they've disclosed to both of us their plans. it looks good on paper. my question is what did you learn in butler, pennsylvania, that is being applied to the original plan to keep chicago safe? i might also say the threat or promise of governor abbott to send thousands of migrants on

buses into this convention center in the midst of all of the visitations taking place is irresponsible and mean-spirited. these people, i've spoken to many of them coming off the buses from texas, they're given promises there of jobs and accommodations and special treatment that just aren't realistic. they're doing what they can to protect their families, but they're doing it at the expense of the government and law enforcement in the renal n-- in the region. when we're having the responsibility of a national convention, we can't let such thing occur without complaining and calling the attention of the texas governor to the irresponsibility of this action what challenge does the proliferation of weapons do to protect current presidents, vice presidents and candidates moving forward? these are fundamental questions which we will ask tomorrow. there is a need for bipartisan collaboration in congress to

provide these answers for the american people as soon as possible so the secret service can rebuild trust and fulfill its mission. tomorrow's joint hearing will help to bring about transparency and accountability for secret service failures in butler, pennsylvania. the hearing is a joint hearing of the two committees and it is bipartisan. it has been from the start. there have been suggestions made on the floor here that there is some partisan angle to this. partisanship has nothing do to keep our elected officials and those running for high office in a safe mode throughout their conduct. we have to do this for the good of the nation. political violence is never, never acceptable. i yield the floor. i suggested the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk

christopher devine, political science associate at the university of dayton and co-author running mate? thank you for having me, i am glad to be here. >> so, do running mate matter? they do. don't matter in the way people tend to think about it, kamala harris pick. the state on the cheap through one piece of electoral strategy. we'll find integral a group of voters easily either. keep demographics or something like that where running mates matter mostly in terms of residential candidate, kamala harris. a second donald trump term, that is where it is useful. it's something about the

judgment priority and ideology and of the things about the presidential candidate so like kamala harris where she is well known, there's a lot for people to learn about her in her own right so to fill in the blanks, she can help herself or hurt herself. >> talk about the vetting process because there's not a lot of time. typically there is more time so tell us what goes into the vetting process, what are the factors they are looking at? >> it was a time when the bp was picked at the convention just as the presidential candidate had been picked in that moment, barely any time to consider, maybe a day or so. since the 70s, parties changed their rules so we have this process viewers are familiar with where ever goes to a

primary they get the delicate so for donald trump is here there is time in convention to that candidate, months at a time for they are able to do so. they go to the vetting process, they are going into everything. the financial record in candidates who have gone through this and a colonoscopy so invasive process and it is. if there's something that can be embarrassing, choose or not choose this person or if we go with them, known before the

announcement is made and live with that, it's an important part of the process and she has to rush that process. it is not as much time as usual, they have to be careful about not missing something. >> is the vetting process standard part candidate gets to decide these are the things i want to know and these are the things not important? >> it's ultimately up to the candidate. there's a set of procedures familiar over time and like the vice president's growing over time, these are informal changes nobody has to follow but it's come to be that way because it is the campaign. even leaking out names especially campaigns with the press, they still value that

putting names out there so reporters can investigate as well. numbers of party can react because they need to know what is wrong with the candidate. we need to know before they are stuck with that selection and there's a conversation going on now. some day trump might be in the goes to illustrate once we make the choice and there is a nomination you're stuck with them so better get it out of the way now. >> could he push them out or is it legally too late? >> the pros and cons, he's been nominated officially. make a change, federal how it would work out in the deadlines

coming in with the issue of whether joe biden will be on the ballot and virtual rollcall happening so that could get tricky but i'll be shocked donald trump replaced j.d. vance. i'm king they would hope it goes to illustrate j.d. vance has never been to a national campaign. she had been in the national spotlight and scrutinized. the history and policy so by picking someone in his lifetime over the last year end a half and keeps finding out what happens when you take that risk right now. >> let's look at a portion

talking about that pick yesterday. >> the edition of deviance to this ticket, it's an incredibly bad choice. he's probably sitting watching and everyday and extreme and more extravagant. and what they did for democrats. before the ohio ballot and he has a choice on the ticket where already has, probably even more packaged because we will hear more things, it's his choice.

>> what you think about? >> the campaign could have done a lot of these things in advance. they had access. a lot of what we are hearing for months or years in the past. noticing they didn't know about it. they saw some stranger reassured the party and he someone loyal to donald trump and wants to go further and some things back like on abortion and they believe on the campaign. it does get more complicated now that joe biden is not the candidate and some of the top are hearing now against the harris and pick someone different. i should mention trump and his

file is where doug burgum was government and marco rubio from florida. donald trump, it's not to say j.d. vance could be a vice president in his readiness for the campaign and serve national office and only been senator a year end a half. it was a risk trump took celeste state is taking someone else. federal, state and local government and the national campaign it would have been much better. >> senator take. >> spent 2020 has been going

better. we will see how goes. looking back at donald trump's experience and mike pence, we know he is to say the least, he does not dwell of mike pence. and he was extremely loyal but he had one time for he was confronted in some asked him to do something vice president pence in the constitution did not have authority to do rather than trump supporters as unforgivable so getting a what donald trump was saying no

matter what i asked them to do will say yes to it and mike pence no you look at the resumes and clearly that is out, not to the public servant follow over time. what stood out about him public going on and steve bannon sunday morning talk shows in any situation. i think that is what was the feeling that j.d. vance. >> you could join if you would like to give a call. christopher divine, political science associate and co-author of the book. do running mates matter?

for publicans 2,027,488,001. >> my answer in my research we are looking at past elections. someone clearly audible in many people did, they will hold the

makes that choice and is not clearly up to the job we will look at that and not to govern, is to show people is not really curious about governing. san francisco liberals. in the governor of turkey.

these are people who are perceived as relative. it's very liberal the sky maybe not so liberal. >> you tnk he will transfer power to be pete harris so she can run as an incumbent and improve her odds to win? >> wondering after the june 27 debate in the seems like maybe biden would drop out of the race which he and the doing. maybe give harris an incumbent additionally incumbents do better putting congressional races which is at odds with the way we talk about people in power at one 100% running for

reelection and presidential races who study this in research dollars find a bunk that goes with running is an incumbent. there is question whether that applies but traditionally an incumbent does a little better. one thing that is more difficult is this fact is his decision is that on the presidency and campaign elements, maybe that's people who might be concerned, joe biden another term and running as a candidate this time, wife serve as president but maybe he shouldn't be in that role anymore. there may be other questions make that choice. >> republican, kai, derek.

are you there in williamsburg? christopher of kenya, independent line. >> good morning. presidential nominee was the most consequential in history? never had an impact on the outcome of an election? have a good day. >> thank you for the question. i think you meant by's presidential. there are a range of candidates may have been a little hard to tell. lyndon johnson where people say razor thin election and jfk, maybe that's what delivered texas and the presidency in the

evidence is counterintuitive and less popular in texas than the rest of the united states so we doubt although there were some shenanigans in delivering what is described in his book so that is one thing but not for normal reasons. one other example in 1992, shows how poor vice president and is relevant to what we are talking about today. an interesting strategy kamala harris might want to keep in mind instead of automatically trying to balance who he was it was a lot like him. democrats, moderate and double

the campaign message about who he was. kamala harris this time around and it's part of who she is and doubling down on the dignity and michigan, they high-profile maybe it strengthens thing about abortion is an issue in this election indiana, democrat.

>> i just want to say kamala harris governor from tanzania, i think it's a very good ministry. that's all i have to say. >> what you think? >> a couple points i'll pick up. that is something on this position i would say as far as there is candidates, george shapiro might be top of that list. the state of pennsylvania and electoral votes crucial for kamala harris. i am difficult in the research on this before something is studied intensively and there is little evidence that you get this result requires something

nuanced and teaches among voters that they look at the candidate and say preferred trump word rather not vote but imagine a pennsylvania vice president. i don't think people operate that way. it is very well in the evidence supported very well it's very high-profile and that in doing a very good job. it seems whole at 61%. those are good reasons for pennsylvania and i'll put it this way, if the harris campaign will pick him, they should do it because they would assume new jersey and pennsylvania. if it's based on primarily from pennsylvania, there may be a

strategic mistake and focus on other meds not just the home state. if they want the advantage as a bonus and maybe, fine the shouldn't be the basis. >> let's look at westmore of maryland abc. >> you are not interested in being vice president harris is an government and i continued doing my job. first and foremost is the person that gives her a sense of comfort that it will be my partner and work together and exercise part of the country. the truth is if you look at

recent history has not been the case. so she's got to pick someone she knows will be her partner and that is the only criteria. >> i take it you agree with the. >> i think it's a great way to look at it with this person -- and probably will not affect the election very much. they tell you about the residential candidate. it will matter long-term and kamala harris and of whoever it might be. we demonstrate the judgment and leadership like this. as sitting vice president would be sensitive to that argument. she knows what goes into that job in an important role.

campaign advisors and at the event. >> time for the republican convention was approaching and trump hadn't selted the vp, why does it matter now? >> i think it always matters changed over time. it's hard to estimate but if we think back from a they were less powerful. the way they are used has changed a lot especially the

last half-century. people are more identified with geography, there is a time with people i should divide more so than the united states that could have been a time for you to deliver that by choosing someone from pennsylvania or new york or ohio or virginia. that might matter more than but i think it matters less is on the ticket and more is in the white house serving as vice presidents of two changes going on that the way we do. >> a republican in seaport, new jersey. >> i think al gore for bill clinton a certain amount of balancing that gave him someone

had access to the federal government with more experience in congress that i would like ask about 1972 hindsight 149 states. they had to drop that man from the ticket and replace them. >> balancing federal versus state experience. choosing someone like josh shapiro or andrew andy beshear government executive experience could be. however, that person may not have foreign-policy experience in one reason the government of minnesota, i think is greatest during he is not just experience

governor is serving more than a decade in the united states house of representatives. 1972 a fascinating writer in the vp history 1972, george mcgovern was the underdog in that case and richard nixon, he chosen siri senator for peak/. in trying to get ahead of the lots on board say is a well qualified senator attractive in many ways for that mcgovern chose him and he came out he had undergone electric shock therapy

and there was a lot of concern about what that might say to serve well office and there is a great. i would encourage people but then was taken off the ticket even though he said i am 1000% behind instruction from the and they had gone to the united states darrell in north carolina, independent line. >> thank you for michael. this course on this topic is very important socially as we mentioned. do think it was there?

why is it only one party, one party is always portrayed as evil. the other party is portrayed totally as divine. >> elaborate a little bit on what you mean on the criticism on governor vance's character.

>> nothing more than a mere puppet by donald trump. his own integrity and convention as a public servant. i have seen nothing that would even suggest that. and for your guest to demonize someone like that, i just do not think that it helps us to understand the importance on understanding the issue. >> what i'm saying is jd vance has not demonstrated he would say no to donald trump. one thing that i will point to that i think is especially alarming is after the shooting, before knee facts were known, jd vance went on to blame.

that shows a real eagerness to escalate things. i think that is conserving in a potential president. someone who would double down rather than take opportunities to lower the temperature this is an axial's article, this is according to the biden campaign. doing what pens would not on january 6. it says he picked jd vance as his running mate because vance will do what mike pence would not on january 6. bend over backwards even if it means breaking the law. that is according to the trump campaign. here is what senator vance said

in an interview "if i had been vice president, i would've told the. states that we needed to have multiple slates of electors i think that they should have fought over it from there. that is what he has said about that situation on january 6. >> thank you. i would love to have kelly as our vice president. week we're g spend the end of the week wrapping up some of the nominations that are out there. and i want to speak to a nomination that i feel very, very strongly about and would hope that we will have an opportunity to weigh in as a senate on a priority that i

don't think that enough of us as americans think about our role as an arctic nation. and so, as we are processing nominations, i want to kind of move our attention to the top of the world up in the arctic. we have a lot of hot spots in the world right now, and the last thing in the world that we need is for the arctic to become one of those hot spots. and whether we want it to or not, whether we want to will it away or not, the arctic is increasingly gaining attention by others for different reasons, and the fact that the united states doesn't have that diplomatic presence, if you will, is a disservice, i

believe, to us as an arctic nation. so i have come to urge this body to take up the nomination of dr. mike swaga. mike is an alaskan, but he would be our nation's first ambassador-at-large for arctic affairs. so we've not had a confirmed ambassador-at-large position. we've had a special representative to the arctic. but when you send a special representative to some of these dialogues to sit at tables with other countries' ambassadors, there is a disparity there. i think we have recognized the importance and the role of this ambassador-at-large position. dr. swega was nominated in february of 2023. he was reported out of the foreign relations committee this march, and it's just -- it's

time for us to take him up and confirm him. and i get it. i mean, there is a lot going on. i mentioned hot spots around the world. you look at what is happening in ukraine and israel and taiwan, north korea. you've got everything that is happening domestically. sometimes i think the arctic is out of sight, out of mind for many. but it is important that we not lose sight of the consequential nature of the arctic itself. it -- again, we use the phrase, it's a cold place, but it's becoming its own hot spot. and so what we can do, again, to assert not only our areas of oversight and overlay but also from the diplomatic perspective is something that i think is worthy of focusing on.

so why this time, why this particular nominee? first, we've got incredible opportunities on the arctic issues, everything from resource development to tourism to shipping to infrastructure. you have the people who live and work and raise their family there, thousands of american alaskans live in the arctic, and their interests deserve to be taken seriously and represented in the highest councils of our government. we also have the very dynamic situation in the arctic right now with climate change, with national security, engagement with other nations. so let's just talk about our neighbor to alaska's west there, and that is russia, the largest arctic nation. their war on ukraine is now in its third year but is being powered by their revenues from oil and from gas, and now more and more also from seafood. russia is increasingly shipping

its oil through the northern sea route, which has the potential to threaten alaskan waters and our marine resources. they're testing a combat icebreaker, which could give it significant strategic advantage that we currently lack. you are very well, madam president -- you know very well, madam president, that in this country we lack that ice breaking capacity. we have one operational icebreaker. she is currently at dry dock and will be there for a period of months. our medium-strength icebreaker, the healy, it was just reported last thursday, had a fire aboard ship as it was going across the northwest passage, and i have not yet received the report, but my understanding is that that vessel is not in condition to

continue with the mission that they had set out on. and that's it. that's it. we've worked through the appropriations process to authorize the ice breaking capacity, to build out the fleet. we are not there. we're not even close to being there. in fact, the updates that we get from the coast guard on this are beyond frustrating. they are to the point where we have -- we've got a responsibility to ensure that the commitment that we have made for the taxpayer dollars, for the infrastructure that we need, which is the icebreaker, we've got to line these up and we've got to line them up quickly. last week was an interesting week. i know that senator sullivan and i had some pretty in-depth briefings from the head of norad and the head of the alaska command when we saw really an

unprecedented air exercise between the russian bear bombers, two of them, coming together, coordinating with two chinese h- 6's, coming into the alaskan area, some close to basically separating these aircraft by about 200 miles from ourore, close enough to certainly get our attention. they were operating within the rules and they were operating safely. but, again, it is -- it's a demonstration, a show of partnership that while it may not be the first time that we've seen the russian and the kleins flying together -- and the chinese flying together, we've never seen them in these northern areas. so it begs the question -- why? what is their interest up in? so make -- what is their interest up there? so making sure that we are

engaged has got to be a priority a i mentioned seafood. people don't necessarily think about the process expect or the reading of the amendmenty that -- people don't necessarily think about the prospect that russia would be involved with seafood, selling it to china for reprocessing to get around the sanctions that are in place and generally throwing the global seafood markets into chaos. all to generate additional revenues for its war machine. and this threatens not only the species, the seafood, but also the way of life for so many who count on the fisheries for their very existence. in many, many areas, we are seeing the russians and the chinese partnering to help enhance the chinese position in the far north.

i mentioned the activity that we just saw last week in the air. we're seeing the cooperation and the collaboration on russian energy, the collaboration with processing of russian seafood. now russian federation security service has signed a memorandum of understanding with the chinese coast guard to enhance maritime security cooperation in the north pa sick, in the bering -- in the north pacific, in the bering sea, in the arctic. a flotilla of 11 russian and chinese warships were off the alley shall be islands. just a few weeks ago there was a new flotilla that transited off of alaska. so, madam president, we know that they're not going out whale watching or looking at the glaciers. this is activity

that is close to alaska, along our shared maritime border with russia, and just beyond our sovereign territory. but i share these because these are the events that are happening now. these are the events that are happening now, and they're capturing the attention of the country. and so making sure that as we're paying attention to these current events, we have somebody whose day job is to do nothing more than monitor, engage, work with the state department, work with our friends and allies, work with the administration. we've made some good progress in recent years on infrastructure in the arctic. we have done a lot more in partnering from a diplomatic perspective by putting a consulate there in nook, in greenland. but we've got to do a lot more. that's why it comes down to the right people in the right place. the right people in the right place.

and this is why i am so, so strong in urging that we take up dr. sfraga's nomination to be the arctic ambassador-at-large. he's got over three decades of experience on arctic issues. he is the -- he is chair of the u.s. arctic research commission and has been since 2021. prior to his nomination for ambassador at large, he was the founding director of the polar institute, he was the director of the global risk and re resillians program in the -- at the woodrow wilson center for scholars. he serves as a chair and distinguished fellow on the polar institute. he was a colead scholar at the state department for the if you will bright arctic initiative -- for the fulbright arctic initiative. he has served at the national

consigns foundation. the guy knows the arctic. he gets it. he is clear about the realities and intentions of our adversaries. he understands what we need to do. he knows the scenes and they know him. that is really incredibly important. they're waiting for us. they're waiting for us to confirm dr. sfraga's nomination. they've worked with him in the past, and they're really anxious to have him in this position. i was at an event last week. it was the going away for iceland's ambassador to the united states. her next role, her next role is a newly created role. she'll be iceland's ambassador to the arctic at large. we should confirm our own already. the arctic is where our domestic policy meets foreign policy, where homeland defense meets the

protection of our national fisheries. it's where our changing climate meets increased resource development and shipping and trade. it's where nato's other flank, its western plank meets russia and china. it is the strategically most important place in the world. madam president, i know that people are looking at our calendar. they're saying that time is running short. i don't disagree. but i think it's critically important that we have somebody of dr. sfraga's caliber in this position. we need to have that representation, and i would certainly urge the senate to being the an on his nomination hopefully before we conclude at the end of this week. the reality is if we want to do right by the arctic and growing interests and challenges in the region, we can't wait any longer. and with that, madam president, i yield the floor. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the

senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: madam president, i rise today to pay tribute to my chief of staff and dear long time friend matt van kiekn, who will be moving on to the next step in his career this week after 16 years of outstanding service in my office. those of you who know matt understand how passionate he is about golfing. we have all experienced also his witty sense of humor. matt is a literal political pundit. with that, matt, i want you to know there are no ifs, ands or putts about it. i could always count on you to drive right in to solve problems, to scramble to find the best approach to any situation. and to stay the course until the

job was done. matt, from what i understand, my phone calls to you while you were golfing really helped you improve your game over the years. so i want you to know that i have a gift for you back in the office, some golf balls and tees with my campaign colors so that you won't ever forget about my calls when i'm not calling you every day. so true story, madam president, matt first applied to work in my office when he was a student at western michigan university. we offered him an internship in my west michigan office, and he turned us down. but fortunately we didn't hold that against him. 16 years ago i made one of the best hiring decisions ever when i hired matt as a legislative aide, handling energy and environmental issues that i

know, madam chair, you care so much about, as do i. he went on to serve in more senior roles over the years including my legislative director and my chief of staff, including his role now as a key member of our top leadership chiefs. he has had an incredible senate career. since his early days in the office, matt had a way of rising to the occasion. a perfect example of this happened one day in late afternoon in 2013. for reasons unknown, matt was left alone in the office when my private incoming line rang. unsure of exactly how to answer or transfer the call in this line, he was going to let it ring. he soon realized that the line had no voice mail and he decided he should attempt to answer it.

it was a good thing he did because it was president obama trying to reach me. in typical matt fashion, he figured it out, he kept his composure. the call went off without a hitch, although he claims to this day that president obama could hear his hands shaking through the phone. i can point to so many big accomplishments, madam president, where matt has played an absolutely instrumental leadership role. over and over again he doesn't give up. he finds creative ways to get things done in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds. getting funds to address the needs of families and fix the pipes in flint was a herculean effort. because the crisis wasn't a natural disaster, flint didn't qualify for certain types of

disaster funding. under matt's leadership, we found a way to get it done. today almost all of the lead service pipes in flint have been replaced, and the children and family of flint have access to safe water. in 2015, matt was instrumental in getting funding to detroit and other michigan cities to tear down blighted homes and rebuild neighborhoods. my goal, which we thought was simple and found out it wasn't, was to transfer available funds from one account in treasury to another account to address these critical housing issues. over and over again we were told getting support to transfer the funds was impossible. in fact, multiple times leader reed told us it was over. we were playing whack a mole as

one obstacle after another possibled up. but in the end, with matt's tenacity and hard work, we succeeded. and it was worth it. the mayor of detroit recently told me that the actions we took created safe neighborhoods for families in detroit a decade sooner, ten years sooner than they were able to do it if they had not had those funds. so, thank you, matt. i could go on and on. matt helped me get an agreement with canada to limit trash from coming into michigan landfills from toronto. he helped establish the great lakes restoration initiative, glri, which, again, madam chair knows about. a premier funding source to protect our precious lakes. this program has been incredibly successful in michigan and

across our entire great lakes region. and i couldn't have done all of this and so much more without matt's leadership and his hard work. but matt's legacy is more than our legislative successes. it is most reflected in my incredible staff and alumni from my office. he has been the best, the best chief who has built the best team in congress. he has been a friend, a mentor, and supportive colleague to so many. he's created the kind of culture that has made my office so effective at getting things done and a great place to work. at around 11:30 every day matt asks folks in the office, what are we doing for lunch today, and you will see him with at

least two, sometimes more colleagues heading down to dprab food and then coming -- to grab food and then coming back to his office to eat together. during his time as chief, we have had one of the lowest staff turnovers of any office. and it's not just because they love arby's or spicey chicken sandwiches, although he's gotten a lot of recruits to do that. when matt makes decisions, he seeks a lot of input from our office, from our staff, which is so important. one staffer talked about how during the pandemic he would regularly check in with everyone on the team and seek feedback when deciding new protocols and office systems as the pandemic evolved. in chaos and uncertain times, matt made sure everyone felt

supported and confident that they had what they needed to succeed. and of course he has always done that for me. matt has also effectively bridged the divide between d.c. and michigan staff. this means leading our all-staff retreats, making sure everyone knows each other, and setting the tone of constant collaboration and service to our state. the people of michigan have benefited every single day from his leadership and service. matt's relationships outside of our office have also been instrumental in so many successes. these relationships are what keeps our office informed and helps us serve the people of michigan.

when i finally decided not to run again, i knew it was the right decision for me and my family. i knew it was time to pass the torch. but i couldn't imagine not being with my senate family every day and not working with matt every day. it's the hardest decision i ever made, the right decision but the hardest. matt will be starting an exciting new job soon. i know he will continue his commitment to excellence and service in this new role and beyond. and i'm confident that he will continue his great success in everything he does. i will be forever grateful for matt's contributions to my success, for his loyalty and his friendship. i wish matt continued success

and happiness in the next chapter in his life, and i wish him joy and happiness with heather and his wonderful daughter sophie, who is with us today in the gallery. thank you, madam president. mr. schumer: madam president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: madam president, before the senate adjourned last week, we took a major step forward to ensure our kids p online safety by advancing kosa-coppa with strong bipartisan support, a vote of 86-1. thanks to both sides working together, the senate is on track to pass kosa and coppa tomorrow. these bills are perhaps the most important ones in decades to federal laws that protect kids on the internet and a good first step. after the senate passes kosa and coppa tomorrow with a strong bipartisan vote, the house should do the same when they

return in september. the bipartisan momentum behind these bills is real, and we should seize this opportunity to make a law. while social media has many benefits, it also, as we know, has many risks and kosa and coppa will install guardrails that protect kids from these risks. too many kids experience relentless online bullying. too many kids have their personal data collected and then used nefariously, and sadly, sadly too many families have lost kids because of what happened to them on social media. i met with many of the families whose children took their own lives. we felt the pain of loss together. we've cried together. what they have gone through is impossible to imagine. losing a child and in this way. but these families to their ever lasting credit, instead of cursing the darkness, they lit a

candle. they turned their grief into grace by working so hard to make sure this doesn't happen to other kids what happened to theirs. i thank all of the families who he advocate to get kids online safety over the finish line. their efforts will pay off tomorrow. and i also want to thank colleagues who relentlessly championed these bills. senators blumenthal and blackburn, markey and cassidy, durbin and klobuchar, chairperson cantwell and others. getting to this point wasn't easy, that's for sure. it's been a long and winding and difficult road, but i'm sure it will have all been worth it. now on scotus, supreme court supreme court. this is a hallmark of an american democracy. this was the stern warning handed down to us by the framers of the constitution. accountability is how power is

checked, how consent to the governed is secured and how trust between people and their institutions is preserved. later today, president biden will speak at the lgbtq presidential library on the need for accountability for the u.s. supreme court where it is desperately needed. the president published an op-ed in "the washington post" outlining his ideas and will expand on them this ep -- this evening. i believe the president is right to say out loud what so many americans think, the supreme court is morass. i'm pleased that president biden called -- i think congress should pursue the idea and i'm working with my colleagues on the best way to proceed. a few years ago the supreme court was the most trusted institution in government. but today confidence in the court is at an all time low.

millions have request accepted lavish gifts from right-wing benefactors that had business before the court that were funding this. all of this happened in total secrecy and possibly, possibly in violation of the law. and at the same time, the justices have rammed through a flurry of hard-right decisions. reversing decades of precedent. they almost seem to ignore it from time to time when they want to. on reproductive freedoms on affirmative action, on gerrym gerrymandering, and so much more. these decisions on choice and so many other issues are way out of the mainstream. then then one month -- then one month ago, the maga justices ruled that the president is above the law.

the conservative majority ruling is the kind of antithesis is the opposite of what our framers envisioned. they echoed originalismed nixon's view that when the president does it that means it is not illegal. these fringe rulings are not the signs of a healthy supreme court. they are the signs of a court run amok. the good news is that the constitution provides a remedy to the supreme court's current morass, congress has the authority to issue strong checks on the judiciary through legislation and congress has the authority to speak on constitutional issues. the constitution is clear, the supreme court does not get the final word. an option i'm seriously considering is drawing up legislation clarifying that the president is not immune from violations of federal law. one of the justices recently claimed there is to this provision in the constitution

that gives congress authority to regulate the courts. i respectfully suggest that this justice reread the constitution because it's plain as day that congress is well within its rights to conduct oversight. accountability shouldn't be a dirty word when we talk about the supreme court. americans across the ideological spectrum agree that checks and balances are necessary and they agree it should apply to the supreme court just as they apply 0 other branches of government. it's no wonder the court's positive ratings are at an all-time low. if they can't straighten it out themselves, congress should. now, on the iowa abortion ban project and project 2025. this morning, over 1.5 million women across iowa woke up with fewer rights than they had just last night. today a draconian new law went

into effect in iowa banning abortion at 6 weeks. this is radical, it's dangerous, and sadly it's another example of the hard right taking america back in time through the courts. by now, it's beyond debate that attacking reproductive freedoms is a fundamental tenet of the gop. not three days ago donald trump gave a speech where he bragged again about overturning rowe. he -- roe. he said we did something nobody tlaut was possible. i want to thank the justices for the wisdom and courage they showed. unquote. can you believe that? can you believe that? donald trump wants to thank the six supreme court justices for the courage of overturning roe. what a callous message to send to women in states like iowa, florida, and states like texas

where freedom of choice is under assault. donald trump brags about overturning roe all the time. a nuntsdzs ago -- months ago he said he was proud to have been the one to clear the way for overturning roe. he said, quote, nobody else wags going to -- was going to get that done but me. america, when republicans try to sound moderate on choice, they know where the public is. they know where women are. remember the words of donald trump who said he was proud to eliminate roe. remember the votes of the prun r- republican -- of the republican senators, knowingly voting for justice nominees who in their hearings said they would overturn roe or very much alluded to that fact. now, of course, donald trump didn't reverse roe alone, he had

plenty of help from senate republicans who confirmed three maga extremists to the bench. just a few weeks ago when republicans were given a chance to do the right thing on reproductive freedoms, they doubled down on anti-women views by blocking a bill expressing support for a woman's right to choose. last month republicans opposed protections for ivf and contraceptives. can you imagine they voted against protections for ivf and contraception. the republican credo might as well be -- the republican credo might as well be your body, our choice. let's not kid ourselves. this is just the beginning as far as republicans are concerned. republicans, like the junior senator from ohio, are on the record saying, quote, i would certainly like to -- like to ban -- i would certainly would

like abortion to be illegal nationally. that's the republican nominee for vice president. i would certainly like abortion to be illegal nationally. let me repeat it again. i would certainly like abortion to be illegal nationally. and this isn't a view that was dug up from way in the past, this was a statement in 2022. again, let me say to americans. when republicans try to sound moderate on choice, remember the words of donald trump, remember the words of the republican senator, the junior republican senator from ohio, now the vice presidential nominee on the republican party who said he supports a national ban on abortion. consider also trump's plan for a second term as detailed in project 2025. the document makes clear that if republicans reclaim power they will lay the groundwork for a national abortion ban. under project 2025, republicans

could also allow employers to deny access to birth control, continue attacks against in vitro fertilization and keep track of the residency of any woman who seeks abortion anywhere. can you imagine? this is heinous, it's unhinged, but it's what maga extremism proposes for the country. americans do not want to take our country backwards 0s project 2025 promises to do, america wants an jaenld that wants a brighter future, they want more jobs, lowering costs and expands freedoms, not what 2025 promises, the more people learn the details about project 2025, the more trouble donald trump is going to have. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from texas.

mr. cornyn: clear the november 5 election is prominent on the minds of the majority leader who has made the use of the senate chamber that should have been a paid announcement for the harris campaign. let me focuses on his remarks about the supreme court. it's clear that the majority leader and our democratic colleagues don't like the constitution. they don't like the separation of powers. they don't like the independence of the judiciary, which is really the gold standard for courts worldwide based on the rule of law. what they want is a political branch of government, not one that calls balls and strikes, one that decides cases based on the law and the facts. he talks about how the supreme

court's reputation has been tarnished. well, one reason why the supreme court's reputation has perhaps been tarnished in the media is because the majority leader stood in front of the supreme court and called out two justices by name and threatened them if they made a decision that he didn't like. he said they won't know what hit them. well, that kind of irresponsible rhetoric by the majority leader and others is perhaps responsible for people wondering, is the court an impartial institution? i would point out when the court was maybe constituted a little differently, that our democratic friends didn't say a peep as long as the court was making decisions that they liked and they agreed with from a

political perspective. but it is fundamentally irresponsible for the majority leader to come here. i guess he's caught up in the fervor of the november 5 election. having established a political coup and replacing the sitting president with the vice president without going through the democratic process of actually holding elections, he's feeling his oats and perhaps cannot restrain himself. but it's clear that our democratic colleagues don't like the constitution and they want to change it. but they know they can't do that because there's not the support across the country or in congress to do that. so he uses this as a political platform into the runnup to the

election. it's unfortunate and it reflects the desperation with which the majority leader views this upcoming election on november 5. madam president, america's southern border has been in a state of crisis for the last three and a half years and our country is desperate for a change in direction. they know that the millions of people coming across the drugs that have taken the lives of 108,000 americans last year alone. the crime, the potential vulnerability of terrorist attacks, they are not happy with the status quo, which is what the biden and harris administration have provided us for the last three and half years -- and a half years. throughout his time in office, president biden has shown zero interest in stopping the flood of illegal immigration across our border. he's only visited the border once, and i doubt he will make

another trip to the border during the remainder of his term in office. but, of course, i don't think he actually talked to the people who could have best informed him of what the problem was created by his very policies. his policies have made it worse, not better. certainly worse than it was under the trump administration. president biden is in texas today. he's in austin, texas, and then he will go to houston, but i doubt he will bother to make a quick trip to the border because the message he has sent loud and clear for the last three and a half years is that he does not care. he doesn't care about the migrants that are swarming into our major cities like new york, washington, d.c., chicago, the burdens those have placed on local taxpayers about the crime that is associated with the fact

that uncontrolled, you don't know who is coming across the border. admittedly most migrants are coming here for work, for better life, but the criminal cartels who continue to get rich smuggling people to the border from all around the world also are the ones who smuggle the drugs to the border only to be distributed to kill our sons and daughters who inadvertently take fentanyl, presuming it to be some oh, knockus drug -- some drug like a percocet, only to find that it is fentanyl. what does a potential harris administration look like? does it mean more of the same when it comes to the border and immigration policies? would is signal a new direction and if so, what would that drks be? well, the truth is we already know the answers to those

questions. we don't have to wonder about vice president harris' policies because she has played a starring role in the current biden border crisis. these are, after all, biden-harris policies. just a couple of months into president biden's presidency, illegal border crossings surged as a direct result of the policies that he and vice president harris implemented starting the first day in office. mainly by dismantling piece by piece the forgetive policies of the trump administration -- the effective policies of the trump administration. but it became clear that the situation at the border was veering in a dangerous direction, at least in terms of the politics to president biden so he tapped the vice president as the administration's border czar. that's what the headline from axios, a political publication

heralded at the time. it said, quote, biden puts harris in charge of the border crisis. but curiously it took three months before she made her first and to my knowledge only trip to the southern border as the individual with the administration in charge of the border crisis. she steered clear of the rio grande valley which is ground zero to the krifrs but -- crisis but instead did what can most accurately and fairly be called a drive-by in el paso in far west texas, a very different environment than the rio grande valley. this was vice president harris' first and only trip to the border, and it provided an early signal about how little she ca cared. the vice president was in texas last week and will be there again later this week, and once

again no trip to the border is scheduled. if she cared, don't you think she'd show up? don't you think that's maybe what someone would do to learn about what's not working, what could we do to make it better? but the reality is over the last three and a half years, vice president harris has proven she has no interest, zero interest in stopping the alarming number of people streaming across the border and the results speak for themselves. we've seen a record shattering number of people flowing across the border because all of the signals being sent by the biden administration is come by any means you can, come to the border and we will release you into the interior of the united states.

for the last three and a half years, we've logged more than #.1 -- 8.1 million border crossings which is unprecedented. during the entire 12 years, 12 years of the obama and trump administrations, the u.s. encountered about half of that -- excuse me -- about 6.1 million migrants at the southern border. so that's 12 years. we've experienced less than what we've experienced in three and a half years under the biden administration. so in those three and a half years, president biden and vice president harris have not only hit that previous total but significantly exceeded it. the number of illegal crossings at the border, though, only tells part of the story. it's only one data point. every day border patrol spots migrants on cameras or sensors but they're unable to get there

to them in time to apprehend them. these are known as got-aways. since president biden took office, the agency's recorded more than 1.8 million got-aways. we don't know who these individuals are, where they are now, what their intentions were in coming to the border, and what kind of dangers that they may pose to the american people. are they terrorists? are they drug traffickers? convicted rapists? sexual predators? we have no idea and neither does president biden and vice president harris. and they simply don't care. on top of that, the administration stood up a number of new programs to hood wink the american people into thinking that the problem isn't as bad as it really is.

while unbelievably incentivizing even more illegal immigration. one example is the cpb app. that's an app for your phone, customs and border protection app is what it stands for. but this was sold to the american people as a safe and orderly way to manage the border crisis. instead the system is being exploited by cartels and criminal organizations. and basically all you have to do is schedule your appearance at the border and then the border patrol and customs and border protection will allow you to come into the country and release you. but this app requires users located in central or northern mexico to schedule an appointment, but the cartels have found a way to circumvent that requirement by using a virtual private network or vpn. this has allowed them to boost

their sales pitch and sell cbp points around the world. they're using it to market their services. it's -- to encourage more illegal immigration, to enrich these criminal organizations more. another separate biden-harris administration program allows up to 30,000 migrants from cuba, haiti, nicaragua, venezuela to enter the united states every month. that's 360,000 a year. no claim of asylum, no claim of credible fear of persecution. you show up and you're allowed to stay. 360,000 a year. that's another magnet for people to come. record number of illegal

crossings, grave humanitarian conditions, dishonest accounting. this has been the reality of the biden-harris administration. and there can be no serious doubt that if elected president, vice president harris would keep these disastrous policies in place. she's already told us as much. before serving as vice president or even as a united states senator, vice president harris was attorney general of cali california. in 2015, then-attorney general harris claimed in an interview that an undocumented immigrant is really not a criminal. well, she knows better. our immigration statutes explicitly establish that illegals -- illegally entering the united states can be a

crime. even though she served as the top law enforcement officer for a border state, she refused to acknowledge even this basic fact. then when campaigning for president in 2019, then-senator harris affirmed that she still held that belief. the moderator of a debate asked the candidates to raise your hand if they supported decriminalizing illegal border crossings. and of course her hand shot up into the air. it's hard to decriminalize something that you don't think's a crime, but we get her drift. of course, that's only the beginning of vice president harris' views concerning the border and immigration. back in 2018, then-senator harris was asked if she supported the abolish ice movement. you may recall this is back when our colleagues on the left, the

democratic party, supported defund the police. she went even farther and said we ought to abolish ice. that's immigration and customs enforcement. those are the folks who enforce our immigration laws. she said we need to start thinking about that from scratch. i guess that means when you start from scratch eliminating all the laws that currently exist and replacing them with something new. but she was certainly willing to abolish ice while she created something unspecified different. that same year in a senate hearing, she compared u.s. immigration and customs enforcement to the ku klux klan. how outrageous and irresponsible is that. these are law enforcement officers who serve the nation,

put themselves in peril, in harm's way, and she said they are like the ku klux klan. that says everything you need to know about how a potential biden-harris administration would approach illegal immigration and border security, including dismantling the very enforcement agency responsible for enforcing our immigration laws. beyond that, vice president harris has advocated for a pathway to citizenship for the 11 million or so people in the country illegally. i also heard this weekend one of our colleagues, the senator from massachusetts, say one of the things that she would anticipate from a future harris administration would be establishing a pathway to citizenship for people here illegally in the united states.

we also know she supports federal health coverage for undocumented immigrants. in other words, she wants all of us as taxpayers to pay for the health care, people who won't even respect our laws and who enter the country illegally. and she's dell straightened that she -- demonstrated that she is all too quick to judge and vilify law enforcement. three years ago mounted border patrol agents were trying to control a crowd of about 15,000 migrants near del rio, texas. del rio, texas, is about 35,000 people. can you imagine the chaos and the challenge associated with 15,000 migrants from haiti showing up in this town of 35,000 people? well, one photographer captured an image that went viral for all of the wrong reasons. the image showed an agent grabbing the back of a man's

shirt while on horseback while the horse's reins dangle on the side. at first glance people like then-vice president harris assumed the worst and accused the agent of whipping the man to the ground. but before the agency could even investigate the matter, she had attacked disparaging the very law enforcement officials that are responsible for enforcing security at the border. she said these images evoked those of slave ry and described the agent's behavior as horrible and deeply troubling. had she waited to actually investigate the incident, she would have learned the facts, that there was no whip and there was no whipping.

if she'd bothered to speak to the head of border patrol, she would have been told the same thing. but as reports indicate, the vice president of the united states who was appointed the border czar by president biden has never spoken to the head of border -- the border patrol. neither the current one or his predecessor. think about that for a minute. if your job is to be the border czar, kwoonts that be the -- wouldn't that be the first person you'd talk to is the head of border patrol, maybe to learn what you could about the problem and what you could do to help fix it? but she hasn't even bothered to talk to either the current or the previous border patrol chief. the fact is that vice president harris has played a key role in fueling the largest immigration crisis our country has ever

seen. if she was able to accomplish that much as the vice president and border czar, i hate to know what kind of damage she can inflict from the oval office. madam president, i yield the floor. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin. the presiding officer: the senator from hawaii. mr. schatz: madam president, i ask unanimous consent to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schatz: thank you, madam president. after a long time of talking about all the ways in which social media is harming kids and debating what to do about it, this week the senate is taking some action. for years kids have been swimming in a toxic stew of bullying and harassment, glorified violence and constant false comparisons, and the

results have been absolutely catastrophic. record rates of anxiety and depression, levels of self-harm, an alarming epidemic of loneliness and low self-esteem. these things did not just happen overnight. the fact that young children as young as eight or nine or ten can feel so sad and so helpless that they think they'd be better off not living at all, that is a uniquely modern malady inflicted by social media. sadness in kids is not new, but a pandemic of youth depression is new. the fact that it's relatively recent phenomenon is also cause for us to have some hope. it does mean that this is fixable. this is not the way it is supposed to be. this is not the way it has always been. it means if we choose to take some pretty commonsense steps,

we can finally get kids the help they need. and commonsense steps are exactly what the kids online safety act and the children and teens onloob privacy protection act are. i'm proud to cosponsor both bills which will provide important tools to protect the safety and privacy of kids online. and i want to thank senators blumenthal and markey for their early leadership on both of these bills. for the first time in the age of social media congress is staking meaningful action to confront the very worst of the internet's ills. it's been a long and difficult journey to get to this moment, not least because some in big tech have done everything in their power to protect profits over kids. and so it's to the credit of everyone involved in these bills that we are here overcoming stiff opposition and inertia to finally enact something. it is a good step, but we have to do a lot more.

because we have yet to address the fundamental question of when is it appropriate for a child to be on social media. we have more than enough data, more than enough lived experience, more than enough scientific expertise to know that social media is harming kids' brains. pushing them down rabbit holes, plunging them into deep and dark places. we know that even adults aren't equipped to process the dizzying amount of information online at all times. that's to say nothing of the hate andtory -- hate and vitriol. that bess the question -- that biggs begs the question, why is a or 8-year-old on tiktok to begin with? why instead of playing outside or playing and learning an instrument, getting radicalized or starving themselves because of something they saw on

instagram? the fact is we need to delay the onset of social mooia use. -- social media use. ness no safe signal. there is no settings that are going to solve this problem. my bipartisan bill, the kids off of social media act, which i introduced earlier this year with several of my clearly, will finally set a legal minimum age for social media use to 13. it will also ban platforms had from targeting kids under 17 with powerful black box algorithms designed to keep them scrolling for hours on end. these are reasonable proposals. these are proposals that can be implemented. these are proposals that will pass constitutional muster. and so the question in front of us is, why in the world is a 9-year-old allowed on tiktok when we know that the stubborn

facts operate like this -- the longer people spend time on your platform, the more money you make in ad revenue. okay, that stands to reason. the more people who use your site, the more money you get to make. here's the stubborn fact that meta and twitter and tiktok and everybody else actually stumbled upon -- how do you get people to stay on your website? how do you get people to stay on your social media platform? the most reliable way to get any user to stay on a social media platform is to upset them. and so you've got these publicly traded companies, some privately held, but they all have an obstacles to try to -- an obligation to try to maximize profit. in order to maximize eyeballs,

you have to systematically upset, alienate, anger, make sick a whole generation of children. we don't have to do this to ourselves. it's not impermissible for us to set a minimum age for a product for children. there is a compelling government interest. there is a compelling moral interest for us to take this action. the bottom line is our kids need help, and after a series of fits and starts, we are starting to deliver it. progress, however downdue, ought to be recognized and celebrated but let's also remember that our work here is just beginning. the scale of the ongoing crisis and the needs of kids who are overwhelmed online demand that we do nor. -- do more. and we must do more in the months and years ahead. madam president, i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin.

the presiding officer: the

senator from louisiana. mr. cassidy: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are. mr. cassidy: i ask that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cassidy: madam president, social security is a sacred trust between the american people and our government. it's a promise to workers, many of whom have no other savings besides social security, and a promise almost by definition does not change. it remains consistent despite new challenges. it is a question of whether society has the courage to honor that commitment. now, social security, as we know it, is headed for a fiscal cliff in nine years. if it hits that cliff, if we do nothing, there will be an estimated -- and we just attempt to borrow or way out of it, there will an estimated $615 trillion in accumulated debt if

we just attempt to borrow our way out. now if we don't borrow our way out of it, there is a 20% to 24% cut in benefits to social security recipients, both current and future. this is the rock in the hard place. either the 28% or so cut or with borrowing costs a $615 trillion addition to our nation's deficit. i've spoken before on social security. today i want to focus on two unfair provisions that we would eliminate if we actually have a chance to address social security, the larger picture. the two i will speak is the windfall elimination provision and the government pension offset, also known as weapon gpo. these penalize those who work in a state or local service job for past of their career and have a pension separate from social security.

now, how do we get here? wep & gpo was introduced by president clinton and speaker gingrich decades ago to address perceived inequalities in the social security system. but it had the effect actually of creating inequality. s. when someone, say, worked for the state of louisiana or the state of california and then they didn't pay into the social security system, but they left that job after 20 years and went into the private sector, then they worked for 20 years paying into the social security system, getting their quarters. here they are unfairly penalized, overly penalized for the years in which they did not contribute into social security. now, what the windfall elimination provision, it reduces the social security benefit of individuals who also receive a pension from a non-social security-covered employment. for example, state or local

government. this is the result of thousands of individuals -- this has resulteded in thousands of individuals who have paid in a social security during their career but nonetheless receive an overly reduced social security benefit when they retire. gpo reduces -- now, this is wep. now let's talk about government pension offset. the gpo reduces social security spousal or survivor benefits for individuals who also receive a government pension. now, this provision can reduce or even eliminate social security benefits that a spouse or widow might have expected and relied upon. louisiana has more first responders per capita than any other state in the nation. tens of thousands of teachers. meaning that our state is disproportionately affected by wep & gpo. a few years ago i met a retired louisiana schoolteacher impacted by gpo. again, government pension afterset. -- offset. she had been a teacher, her

husband had paid into social. she should have gotten the spousal benefit from social security. but it was remarkably reduced. and she cried in my office. she was unable to understand why she was getting less in social spousal benefits than if she had never worked at all. think about that. if she had never taught, she would have gotten more benefits than the fact she did teach and was subject to this government offset. she thought she was being punished for being a teacher educating generations of louisiana children. and indeed she was and she is. there is a excuse -- there is no excuse to treat public servants this way. we have an opportunity to fix it. with president biden stepping aside in the presidential race, he has the opportunity to show presidential leadership, the presidential leadership he failed to demonstrate until now

on the issue of social security. if he is going to demonstrate for several more months why not support a bipartisan plan to save social security, to hold true to the promise to our seniors, as well as to make the system fair with one of his last acts in office. the american people deserve a president willing to work for them. here's an opportunity. with that, i ask that the next portion of this, of my remarks be entered separately into the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cassidy: the american people understand the importance of energy. it keeps the lights on, puts food on the table. living in louisiana, you happen to know the person who works at the liquefied natural gas or the oil and gas rig who produced the energy. he's your neighbor. that's why the biden-harris administration, their pause upon lng export permits in january, it was to me clear who they'd be putting out of a job. last month the american people gained a major victory, a u.s. district judge in lake charles

ruled that the lng pause was, quote, completely without reason or logic. the court ruling reinstated sanity at a time when the biden-harris administration adopted absurd arguments. the fact of the matter it the biden-harris pause was a clear attempt to under-usg liquefied natural gas prouks and superior court. president biden and vice president harris have not been shy about their desire to kill production. vice president harris called for a total ban on fracking adoption a leave it in the ground mentality on the far left, even going so far as to blow up the filibuster to pass the green new deal. that's, that's the now president of the senate would have us in

the filibuster -- end the filibuster to kill american energy, help china, russia, and iran, and raise prices on working families. i don't know whether we should be more concerned about the fact that they say leave it in the ground despite knowing that renewable resources can't meet u.s. energy demand, or that they say it thinking that it may actually work. curtailing u.s. natural gas production will not lower global greenhouse gas emissions, but unleashing american energy will. u.s. liquefied natural gas is one of the cleanest burning fuels in the world in terms of life cycle emissions. in fact, natural gas is principally responsible for u.s. emissions being lower today than they were in 1988 despite a much larger economy and population. and just because we limit the ply of natural gas, the demand does not go away. the demand will turn to other sources of energy. we saw this in europe after the invasion of ukraine.

european countries refused to buy russian natural gas, and i applaud that decision, but with the biden-harris lng export pause, the world must turn to dirtier alternatives like oil or coal purchased from dictators or despots in russia and iran as if putin himself called up the president and said let's put a pause on this because by golly this is going to help the russian economy. you don't have to be a rocket scientist to know that as coal use goes up, global emissions increase. the administration's thinly veiled plan to reduce global emissions actually backfires. it backfires because if other countries don't get our natural gas, they burn their coal, global emissions increase. the administration's war on american energy didn't just affect our allies. it also wages a war on american workers. two-thirds of u.s. liquefied natural gas is exported from louisiana, providing thousands of louisianians with good-paying

jobs. the biden-harris freeze impacted 18 lng export facilities, 12 of which were going to be built in my state. to be built is the key phrase here because it didn't just affect energy jobs. it affected construction jobs as well. because the biden-harris administration wants to appease the rich climate lobby, the future and financial security of construction workers in louisiana and across the country is thrown into limbo. even though we have this court ruling, we're not out of the woods. the federal court's ruling brought common sense back, but the department of energy can still slow walk permits, and this is something congress must watch closely. this is something congress is already looking to address. the bipartisan support for setting a time limit on how long department of energy can take to review new permits, a shot clock, if you will. when we unleash american energy production and lng exports, it

creates high-paying jobs, it boosts our my, and it strengthens the u.s. and the national security of our allies. it denies income to putin and drives down global greenhouse gas emissions. these should all be bipartisan goals. common sense prevailed in the courts. now it's time for common sense to return to the white house. with that, i ask that the next portion be entered separately into the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cassidy: madam president, the national flood insurance program or nfip was created to probate americans and their -- protect americans and their families, it covers 4.67 million american homes but fails top serve that core function when it becomes too expensive to afford. this is my poster, make flood insurance affordable.

fema's new risk assessment system has blind sided homeowners with unprecedented spikes in their insurance premiums and it was never passed by congress. i speak to constituents constantly about flood insurance. a few months ago i shared several stories my team and i have heard from people in louisiana about the issue and their stories matter. they are the stories of americans struggling to get by, and they deserve to be heard. so i'm back to share a couple more. one resident in new orleans nearing retirement told us she was l struggling to keep up with rising premiums because they no longer allow her home to be grandfathered into the program. her house was built in 1987, up to the standards under the flood map at the time. she did everything right. her home flooded during katrina, like so many did, but again was saved from skyrocketing premiums until risk rating 2.0. it's important to note the

flooding during katrina was due to the failure of federally designed and built floodwalls. so she's being blamed for the army corps of engineers failure and, therefore, now she's got skyrocketing premiums. she tells her that her future premiums will eventually rise to over $8,000. her hazard insurance is almost $12,000 and dproeg each year -- growing each year. she wrote, quote, there is no way i'll be able to retire and afford the premiums. i can hardly pay them now. there is no way i'll be able to retire. her story is one that is shared by many homeowners in our state. there is another woman in the city of central, louisiana, outside of baton rouge, an area that doesn't often flood. as she put it, in order for her house to flood, the whole city of central would need to be under water. but when risk rating 2.0 hit she learned her premiums would quadruple if she opted for the coverage she wanted.

so instead she dropped coverage all together. now that's the problem of blind siding people with higher premiums. if they don't flood and they cannot afford insurance, they drop their coverage. when that happens, the pool of holy holders shah -- policy holders shrinks, which raises premiums even more and you enter into what is called an actuarial death spiral. fema forecasted that over 20% of stakeholders would leave the program within ten years with these increased premiums. we are setting the program up for collapse. and, by the way, these are not wealthy people. the wealthy are like a small minority of those affected. there's a stereotype that this is for wealthy people with their camps at the beach. no, this program is for working and middle-income americans, the

kind of folks who wake up every day, go to the refinery, make the jet fuel that helped us get here, who do the work that literally powers our economy. and they are the ones affected. 62% of all nfip policies are in parishes and counties where the median household income is mroe the national ample of about $54,000. these are hardworking families, not millionaire beach homes. and it's not just louisiana families getting hit. we have seen flooding in states that don't typically make you think of flooding. so if it's the dark yellow, it is a state which has had over $1 billion in claims. it includes the president of the senate's home state of california, her native state of mississippi and all these other beach states, including a nonbeach state, which would be the state of missouri. so the yellow which is not at

dark are again places which have had over $50 million in nfip claims. this is a pervasive problem. national program. 44 states have had over $50 million in claims and every state has had at least{$}5 million in claims. you may be surprised to hear that rio doso, new mexico, faced 13 flash flood emergencies since june 19 of this year due to runoff from heavy rain. on july 17 homeowners in nashville, illinois, were devastated when the town's dam flooded and caused damage to dozens of home. on may 24, there was an executive order issued declaring a statewide disaster to flooding in northern montana.

residents in new mexico, illinois, wisconsin, not places you typically think of when you think flooding. again, it is a national issue, not just a coastal issue. let me say to my colleagues who represent those states and all my colleagues who come to talk to me about it. let's have a conversation. every single member of this body has constituents who depend upon the national flood insurance program. 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's find a way forward. with that, i ask that the next portion be entered separately into the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cassidy: madam president, for 25 years the venezuelan people have suffered. they have endured the chavez -- maduro regimes, regimes that stole their money, ruined their

country's infrastructure, destroyed public services, tortured their politicians and tried to destabilize the region. one little fact toyed, at one point venezuela had the third-richest economy in the western hemisphere per capita and now their per capita income is that of haiti. they've gone from third to being the worst. but venezuela's freedom loving citizens kept fighting. yesterday again they went out to vote for freedom in a movement lead by macharo, the opposition leader who was barred from running and edmundo gonzalez, the opposition's candidate. the result was an overwhelming, overwhelming win for the opposition and for democracy. and here's maria and here's edmundo. multiple exit polls and quick counts showed the opposition winning by more than 30%. edmundo gonzalez won with the

largest landslide in venezuelan history. this landslide win comes despite the regime's efforts that bar the vast majority of the 8 million venezuelan exiles from voting. the real electoral numbers were so bad that the regime simply stopped counting votes and made up numbers. venezuelans obviously want change and the regime does not. they are desperately holding on to whatever power they can grab. this is a critical moment in our hemisphere. do they have to wait another 25 years of tyranny and repression when they're just three hours from the united states? do we the united states allow the russians, the chinese communist party, drug cartels, iran, and others to use venezuela as ground zero in their plans to harm the united states and our allies in the hemisphere? do we allow venezuela's collapse to eventually flood the united states with refugees? we need to change course.

it starts by recognizing president elect edmundo gonzalez. it starts with an international coalition to ensure the political transition that venezuelans already began at the polling booth. the world knows what happened at the ballot box over the weekend, but we must have the courage to come together, stand against maduro and tell him not this time. i stand here today saying so, not this time. maria corina always said her fight will go until the end as she puts it. the free world must ensure that this is not the end. with that, i yield. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of the following nomination, which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, united states tax court, adam b. landy,

of south carolina, to be a judge. the presiding officer: the question is on the nomination. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote: the clerk: ms. baldwin. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mrs. blackburn. mr. blumenthal. mr. booker. mr. boozman. mr. braun. mrs. britt. mr. brown. mr. budd. ms. butler.

the clerk: ms. cantwell. mrs. capito. mr. cardin. mr. carper. mr. casey. mr. cassidy. ms. collins. mr. coons.

mr. cornyn. ms. cortez masto. mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo. mr. cruz. mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst.

the clerk: mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty. ms. hassan. mr. hawley. mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. mr. hoeven. mrs. hyde-smith. mr. johnson. mr. kaine. mr. kelly. mr. kennedy.

the clerk: mr. marshall, no. 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. the clerk: mr. romney. ms. rosen. mr. rounds. mr. rubio. mr. sanders. mr. schatz. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer. mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen.

the clerk: 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: -- duckworth, grassley, manchin, peters, sinema, and whitehouse. senators voting in the negative -- lee, marshall, and paul.

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

mrs. gillibrand, aye. mr. reed, aye. mr. carper, aye. ms. cortez masto, aye.

the clerk: mr. kaine, aye. the clerk: ms. smith, aye.

the clerk: mr. wyden, aye.

mr. rounds, aye. mr. heinrich, aye. mr. graham, aye.

test. vote: the clerk: mrs. murray, aye. mrs. blackburn, aye.

the clerk: ms. baldwin, aye. mrs. shaheen, aye. mr. durbin, aye.

the clerk: mr. sanders, aye.

the clerk: ms. hassan, aye.

the clerk: mr. schatz, aye. mr. booker, aye. ms. warren, aye. the clerk: mr. schumer, aye. mrs. fischer, aye.

the clerk: mr. barrasso, aye. the clerk: ms. lummis, aye. ms. stabenow, aye. mr. sullivan, no.

the clerk: mr. lujan, aye. mr. johnson, aye. the clerk: mr. cornyn, aye.

the clerk: mrs. capito, aye. ms. ernst, no. mr. van hollen, aye.

the clerk: ms. klobuchar, aye. mr. tester, aye. mr. tillis, aye.

the clerk: mr. king, aye. mr. murphy, aye. the clerk: mr. hawley, no.

the clerk: mr. kelly, aye. ms. murkowski, aye. ms. hirono, aye. mr. daines, aye. mr. wicker, aye.

mrs. britt, aye. mr. young, aye. mr. casey, aye.

the clerk: mr. thune, aye.

vote: the clerk: mr. budd, aye.

the clerk: mr. mcconnell, aye.

the clerk: mr. mrs. -- mrs. hyde-smith, no. the clerk: ms. collins, aye. mr. mullin, aye. mr. ossoff, aye.

the clerk: mr. welch, aye.

the clerk: mr. hagerty, no.

the clerk: mr. kennedy, no.

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

the clerk: mr. moran, aye. the clerk: ms. rosen, aye.

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

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

vote:

the clerk: mr. braun, aye.

the clerk: mr. cruz, no.

the clerk: mr. bennet, aye.

the clerk: mr. hickenlooper, aye.

mr. cramer, aye.

vote:

vote:

good afternoon, everybody. do you want to kick us off. >> i saw the conversation taking place over the weekend after the rocket strike that killed 12 children and teenagers. what conversations has the u.s. been having with lebanon and israel since that strike? >> i will not get into the specifics, but, first, let me say we strongly condemned the rocket pack. killing 12 children. secretary antony blinken spoke with the israel president today. he expressed condolences for those killed. the protection of civilians in any contact. the blue line across israel and hezbollah. going on for long enough. it is in for everyone's interest

to come along quickly. it is both achievable and urgent engaged in dramatic talks because our ultimate goal is on both his sides of the border so that they can safely return to their home. the conversation is ongoing and we coordinate closely with those parties. >> have the worst israel to exercise their strength in retaliation at all? >> israel has a right to defend itself from terrorism. we are continuing to engage. >> how confident are you that this won't affect the cease-fire talks? this turns into a few days of fighting spirit official said the fighting there and for could this derail talks at all? >> we believe a cease-fire could help bring, relieve the tensions

and create the conditions as i have said for displaced lebanese civilians to go home in the south end israeli civilians to go home in the north. as it relates to broader cease-fire efforts, we are continuing to engage in the process. we are hopeful about the development. they continue to believe that a deal is both achievable, but we think it is necessary and urgent those conversations will continue as a secretary and others have said. when they n been asked similar questions when it's not helpful to negotiate on the inner workings of those publicly. we will continue to engage in the process. >> netanyahu has inserted new condition since the proposal. is that your assessment as well? this comes after netanyahu's visit he had where they

emphasize the importance of cease-fires. are you concerned about the timing? >> i will not get into the specifics of the negotiation process consider calendar 710,. the presiding officer: question is on the motion. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary. meredith a. vacca of new york to be united states district judge for the western district of new york. mr. schumer: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the cloture motion. the clerk: we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of executive calendar number 710, meredith a. vacca of new york to be united states district judge for the western district of new york signed by 17 senators as follows -- mr. schumer: i ask consent 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. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar 709. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary. joseph francis saporito jr. of pennsylvania to be united states district judge for the middle district of pennsylvania. schumer i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the cloture motion. we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of executive calendar number 709, joseph francis saporito jr. of pennsylvania to

be united states district judge for the middle district of pennsylvania signed by 117 norse as -- 17 senators as follows. mr. schumer: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: question is on the motion. all those in favor, say aye. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. sure schumer i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar 582. the presiding officer: question is on otomotion. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. schumer: i send -- the presiding officer: the clerk will report the ngo's nomination. the clerk: department of state, dorothy camille shea of north carolina to be deputy representative of the united states of america to the u.n. mr. schumer: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of executive calendar number 582, dorothy camille shea

of north carolina to be deputy representative of the united states of america to the united nations. signed by 17 senators as follows shall did. mr. schumer: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: question is on the motion. all those in favor, say aye a -- those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to consider calendar 349, h.r. 7024. the clerk: an act to make improvements to the child tax credit. and so forth and for other purposes. mr. schumer: i move -- i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the cloture motion. the clerk: we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to proceed to calendar number 349, h.r. 7024 an act to

make improvements to the child tax credit and so forth and for other purposes signed by 17 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 mandatory quorum calls for the cloture motions filed today, july 29, be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. so ordered. mr. schumer: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on the judiciary be discharged from further consideration of s. 4610 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. -- to its immediate ratification. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. 4610, a bill to amend title 46 united states code to designate the bald eagle as the national bird. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the motion? without objection. the committee is discharged and the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third

time and passed, and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on the judiciary be discharged from further consideration of s. 3574 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. 3574, a bill to amend chapter 3 of title 36 united states code to designate the ma cern tad -- the mastadon as the national fossil of the united states. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. the committee is discharged and the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: okay, mr. president, mr. president, dumont i am -- tonight i am very happy to

announce i just filed cloture on the tax relief for american families and worker act, a bill to expand the child tax credit, expand the affordable housing tax credit, help small businesses with the r & d credit and lift half a million kids out of poverty. for the information of senators, this step sets up cloture vote on thursday. mr. president, it's time to get this bill done right away. this bipartisan bill passed the house overwhelmingly, 357-70, and we hope this week the senate republicans will join us. democrats strongly support moving forward on this bill, because it is filled with good news for our kids and small businesses and jobs and housing. for one, democrats strongly support expanding the child tax credit because we know it will do immense good for tens of millions of families and so kids. in fact, one of the very first

things this majority did in 2021 was expand the child tax credit significantly under the american rescue plan, and it cut child poverty in close to half. that turned out to be an enormous success. unfortunately, that propose vision expired. we have a chance to help more kids get out of poverty, many more kids, millions of kids, through this important provision once again. the bipartisan tax package will are be a small -- a boon for small business because it rewards them and other businesses for investing in the r&d and helping them pay for new equipment so they can compete against larger competitors. this will inevitably mean more jobs for americans, when businesses get this tax credit for investing, they're going to hire more people, more workers. it particularly benefits small businesses that don't have the flexibility to do these things on their own without this tax break.

of course, i'm very happy that this tax package delivers big wins on something near and dear to my heart, affordable housing. the bill expands the low-income tax credit ferrets litc, one of the most -- tax credit, litc. i was insistent this go into the bill. i said it's nonnegotiable. well, i'm glad it's in the bill. when it comes time to vote later this week, the american people will see for themselves who in reality supports the fine provisions of the tax bill and who does not. when we vote, the american people will see for themselves who in fact favors expanding the child tax credit and taking so many kids out of poverty, and they'll see who opposes it. the american people will see who supports expanding affordable housing and who doesn't. and the american people will see who stands for small businesses, and who stands against them as

they have so requested this important r&d credit. i urge my republican colleagues not to stand in the way of helping businesses, small businesses, families, and young people keep a roof over their heads when it's time to vote thursday. i thank chairman wyden for his great lohse on this -- great leadership on this package and the finance committee members for their great work. and now, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today it stand adjourned until 10:00 a.m. on tuesday, july 30. 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 neumann nomination. further, that notwithstanding rule 22, the order of july 25

with respect to the house message to accompany s. 2073 be modified so that at 12:00 noon amendment number 3022 be withdrawn and the senate vote on the motion to concur in the house amendment to s. 2073 with amendment number 3021 without further intervening action or debate. further, that following the disposition of the house message to accompany s. 2073, the senate resume executive session and recess until 2:15 p.m. to allow for the weekly caucus meetings. that at 2:30 p.m. the senate vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the neumann nomination. further, that if cloture is invoked on the neumann nomination, all time be considered expired at 4:15 p.m. and that if the nomination is confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: madam president, if there is no further business

to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order, following the remarks of senators cramer and merkley. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i yield the floor. mr. cramer: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from north dakota. mr. cramer: thank you for the recognition, madam president. thank you to my friend and colleague, mr. merkley, for yielding a few seconds early in the evening. madam president, it's my honor to recognize a remarkable milestone in the fargo, north dakota and morehead, minnesota, madam president, area. for 60 years, rick electric incorporated has been a shining example of hard work, dedication, and innovation in the fargo-morehead area. this family owned business has been a fixture in fargo-morehead, providing topnotch electrical services and unwavering commitment to excellence. their sons took the helm in

1998, continuing the legacy of their parents with a passion for their craft and a deep seated commitment to serving their communities and region. rick electric's involvement in the national electrical contractors association speaks volumes about the family's dedication to upholding the highest standards of safety and professionalism. their contributions go beyond providing quality service, as they've been incorporate grail to the -- integral to the growth and prosperity of the area and the surrounding region. as they celebrate this anniversary, i speak on behalf of all north dakotans in recognizing rick electric for 60 years of outstanding service, leadership, and community involvement. the impact they've had on our region cannot be overstated, and i am honored to congratulate them on this remarkable achievement. here's to rick electric and to many more years of success and prosperity. thank you for all you have done over these past 60 years. congratulations, and happy birthday. i yield.

mr. merkley: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. merkley: madam president, the postal service of the united states has always in the past been about great service. their motto said it all -- neither snow nor rain nor heat

nor gloom of night shall stop these courageous couriers from swift completion of their appointed rounds. that just rings with the ethic of good service. but today, the postal service is run by a man named louis dejoy. he's the postmaster general. i'm sorry to report that there is no joy in dejoyville. small town america relies on the u.s. postal service, and the postal service's own words, it operates as basic and fundamental service provided by the government of the united states to the american people. it continues, our basic mission is to provide prompt, reliable, efficient mail and packages service to all americans, regardless of where they live and at affordable rates. so, one can understand, then, why so many members of this

cha chamber, on both sides of the aisle, are alarmed by the growing chorus of complaints about the deteriorating quality of service by the u.s. postal service. postmaster general dejoy labeled his restructuring plan delivering for america. a better name for this plan would be delaying mail in america. you only need to look at what's happening in my home state. postmaster dejoy's tenure delivering for the america reorganization plan for the u.s. postal service calls for consolidating mail processing, which means downgrading regional mail processing facilities, which means sending all of the mail to portland, oregon, to be sorted before it's returned to the community it original naipted in. now, my state is -- originated

in. my state is 300 miles north to south, 4 moon miles east to -- 400 miles east to west. it takes a lot of time, when all the processing occurs in portland. medford in southern oregon was the postal sorting facility. it sorted, post marked, distributed millions pieces of mail every year for southern oregon. now, under delivering for america, or otherwise known as delaying mail in america, now all that mail has to be shipped to portland, oregon, 270 miles to the north, and sorted, then trucked 275 miles back to the south, even if you're sending a letter just across town. now, the postal service claims that this doesn't delay mail, but they refuse to explain how adding on 500 to 600 extra miles of driving doesn't delay the

mail. and meanwhile, for this deteriorating service, they're raising prices. july 14, a single stamp now costs 73 cents. so for example just start to think about if i want to send a letter, it's going to cost me a dollar, envelope and the stamp. the postal service says our new system is more efficient and more cost effective. it's not more cost effective if people quit using the service because it's so terrible. you know, these price hikes and these delivery delays, they hit our rural communities the l lardest -- the hardest. small town americans rely on the postal service to deliver lifesaving medications, to pay their bills, to run their small businesses. when they get an order, they need to be able to mail out the product. newspapers in rural and coastal communities rely on the postal

service for timely delivery. even large corporations like amazon, fedex and ups rely on the postal service to deliver their packages. reliable, timely mail service keeps our friends, families, businesses and in vote-by-mail states like oregon, keeps them connected. that's why i've been raising the alarm about this delaying mail for america plan of dejoy's over this past year. i called him up to discuss it. he didn't call me back. so i called him again. and he didn't call me back. so i organized a bipartisan group of senators to send him a letter, hopefully it didn't get delayed because he took away so many processing centers. we know he got the letter. we sent a bunch of them and we did get some replies. but these are from bipartisan senators who have been seeing the challenges his plan is

creating in their communities. the letter said, stop doing this. stop taking away our processing centers that are making mail so much slower. you know what? we won a round. he said he'll stop taking away these centers, at least for the balance of this year, meaning until after the election. well, that's politics. that's not good business. that's just politics. but in states that have already suffered the downgrade of their facilities in places like oregon, georgia, virginia, states all over this country, we need those distribution centers reopened. we need the machinery reinstalled. we need reliable, affordable mail service restored. the postal service has repeatedly said to my team that

they aren't hearing about any significant issues for the delivering for america plan. well, maybe that's because they're not asking or maybe that's because the letters of complaint came to us other than them. so i've collected some concerns from my oregon constituents. i asked them, particularly in the medford and eugene areas where the two service centers were recently downgraded, if they had been affected. i didn't receive one or two letters. if you asked dejoy, he would only expect me to receive letters that say how great the postal service is doing. i didn't receive any letters like that. i received hundreds of pages of responses. and they're describing, these oregonians, the similar problems, the same problems that the postmaster general's inspector general found in his recent report on virginia. and right now the inspector

general is preparing a report on oregon, and i fully expect it will have similar issues documented, but for now, let me document the issues by citing those letters that my constituents sent to me. woman in medford said, i am a 71-year-old disabled senior citizen. i order medicine, food, and household items through the mail. it is consistently late. a constituent in clement falls reported, it's taking two to three weeks to send mail from clement falls to clement falls. ridiculous. her comment, of course, is a reflection of the mail having to be trucked almost 300 miles to be sorted and then trucked back. i've heard from many small-town oregonians who are concerned about the delivery of their live saving medications -- lifesaving

medications. an oregonian from white city shared, my elderly mother relies on mail delivery for her medications. twice in the past few weeks she's had to go days without necessary inhalers because of postal delays. miserable, breathless, dangerous da days, he said. patricia coates on the coast said we get our medications through the mail, some instances it has been delayed where my husband has gone from five to seven days. antwon net evans in grants pass said, my insurance company will not let me order early to compensate for the delay so if i run out before delivery, i have to pay the full price for my expensive medicines. and these delays can seriously affect medical care as well as the delivery of pharmaceuticals. branch mckenna in ashland, a mother said, as guardian do my

son with severe disabilities, i need to go through mail service to get written consent for his services. it took weeks for a simple consent to get to his provider, delaying much needed services. those are services for her disabled son. these late deliveries risk lives, risk livelihoods. businesses of all sizes depend on the postal service. another person in grants pass said, i depend a lot on the mail as part of my business. packages are not showing up when they're supposed to. payments for bills are not getting to the venldzor on time. -- vendor on time. it's a source of major frustration. that word frustration showed up time and time and time again. carolyn russ in eugene described how hard it is to keep the books balanced. our company have seen our payable deliveries delayed five to ten days resulting in late

fees. we finally resorted to paying all our vendors a week early so our payments would be received within a day of being due. we've also seen checks from our customers take three to four weeks to be delivered. now, businesses aren't the only ones getting smacked with late fees for bills they paid on time. ordinary folks are as well. nadia carson in eugene told me, my bills arrive basically a day before they are due which means even if i mail the payment back on the next day, it's already late. and i'm charged a late fee. another said on march 27, we mailed our verizon and geico payments as usual. on april 10 we received notify teagues that our payments -- notification our payments had not been received and we were facing a cutoff of services. we made arrangements to pay over the phone and we're shocked and angered when verizon charged us

$10 to speak to a customer service agent. extremely frustrating, she says. a woman in baker city said, i pay my estimated taxes quarterly. more than one time checks i have mailed never reached their addresses. local services recommend using a credit card to avoid late payment because of the poor usps service, even just across town. another constituent in eastabrooks wrote to say i work with a nonprofit organization in medford that provides assistance to the working poor and to the homeland. the one-week delivery time can have catastrophic outcomes to families who are already struggling. the delays cause late fees of $75 added on to family's rent obligations and the potential for eviction from their rental. late deliveries are a massive problem for one of the postal

service's most important customers, newspapers. timeliness is essential for newspapers. in this fast changing world, nobody wants to read news that happened three or four days earlier. that seems like almost a month old, just feels that way. but most small local, regional newspapers, they can't afford to hire delivery service so they rely on the postal service to deliver the papers. but since july of 2022, the postal svs has -- service has jacked up the delivery prices for newspapers by about 42%. it makes it a lot more expense if for -- expensive for small newspapers that are often already struggling from the loss of advertisements for local goods in this electronic age, the loss of classified ads. it makes it much more expensive for them to deliver their newspaper.

we need these small-town newspapers to thrive but if the newspaper is given late, delivered late and if the cost of delivery is going up, that's just one more challenge affecting them and making it harder for them to thrive. and when people get their papers late, it isn't just that they're frustrated. it's that they start canceling their subscriptions of, again, hitting our small newspapers hard. publisher joe warren with country media which has community papers up and down the oregon coast told my team, delivery is sporadic. some weeks local mail which is guaranteed the same day if we get papers to them by a certain time of day is not happening. some weeks it's the next day or two. other publishers have told me that they've taken it upon themselves to hand deliver papers to some subscribers because the postal service

simply did not deliver while still charging them an arm and a leg. perhaps matt hall who owns multiple community newspapers in around oregon said it best when he said to my office, the usps treats newspapers like a mine. they know we are reliable source of revenue, but they keep extracting and soon there will be nothing left. postmaster dejoy claims the service changes are necessary to run the postal service like a profitable business, but here's the thing. profitable businesses thrive by delivering good service. if they don't deliver good service, they don't stay profitable and very soon they're out of business. that's the challenge. this is not a sustainable situation. the challenges reported by my constituents back home in oregon, late deliveries of lifesaving medications, small

businesses and individuals struggling to pay their vendors, struggling to get their checks delivered on time to avoid late fees, newspapers losing subscribers, mail taking weeks to go to a house just down the street because it has to go hundreds and hundreds of miles to be sorted instead of going to a more local regional sorting facility. now we need to reverse dejoy's downgrades. now we need to restore reliable, affordable mail delivery. now is the time to take the delivery for america plan and return it to the sender. let's restore the vision that's

so powerful in the usps, united states postal service motto, that rain nor heat nor gloom of night will stop swift completion of their appointed rounds. let's not live in a world, let's not accept the world where there is no joy in dejoyville and our constituents are so poorly served. thank you, madam president. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow.