the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. wyden: i ask unanimous consent that all -- in fact, i ask unanimous consent to vacate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. wyden: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that all remaining time on the jewell nomination be yielded back. the presiding officer: is there objection? so ordered. all time is yielded back. mr. wyden: mr. president, i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

1234506 vote:

the presiding officer: have all the senators wish to vote or there other senators wishing to vote or change their votes? if not, the ayes are 87, the nays are 11. under the -- the nomination is approved. under the previous motion -- under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table, the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action, and the senate will resume legislative session. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader.

mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: may we have order. mr. reid: mr. president, tomorrow at 11:00, we're going to vote on cloture on the motion to proceed to the gun legislation that's now before this body. this morning, throughout the d day, our friend connecticut, a freshman senator who was brought to the senate with this tragedy having taken place shortly after he arrived here in the senate, my friend, the presiding offic officer, longtime attorney general, the chief law enforcement officer of the state of connecticut, has lived with this tragedy that happened at sandy hook like nothing that ever happened in your career. and for, of course, senator heinrich, new senator here, this was something that he never appreciated that he would be faced with.

i saw the pictures today, these little babies that were murder murdered, some of them shot multiple times. little, tiny kids shot multiple times. the shooting was on december 14, about four months ago. 120 days. mr. president, the time has come, it's arrived, when we have to debate this issue. we have to have a response to this tragedy. this incident took place on december 14 struck me like it did everyone in america -- virtually everyone in america. we had been through aurora, colorado, that vicious, brutal machine gunning of people coming to watch a movie.

and then little kids getting killed. at an elementary school. concernekindergartners, first g. so we have to respond, this great deliberative body, to what the american people want. so we're going to vote. it's time to vote. i hope we get cloture on this matter, mr. president. we certainly should. after that, there's no reason not to start legislating immediately. i hope we don't have to go through this procedural mishmash 30 hours, somebody on the floor all the time; if you don't, there's dilatorious tactics, only one quorum call, all this. let's get past that. somebody has something to say, come and say it. but i -- this week, we are going to start legislating, we're going to start legislating whether there's cloture or not.

one will be a little longer process, but we're going to start legislating on this week. i hope we can get to it tomorrow. i don't think it's in secret if we're on this bill, i'm going to -- the first amendment in order will be the amendment to change the background checks that has been worked on for weeks by senator manchin, senator kirk, senator toomey. and then we'll decide where we go from there. all my friends, we're going to have amendments on this. some of them are going to take a little bit of time. we're not going to finish the bill this week. i don't know if we'll finish it next week. but that really doesn't matter. are we going to legislate the right way or are we goin? are we going to legislate? because i have in my mind these little children who were murdered. now, what we do here is not going to prevent all gun violence in america. but, mr. president, if we stop

a, isn't that remarkably important for us to do? i think we can do a lot more than saving the lives of just a few people. but let's work on this bill. we're going to start. if we have to use up the 30 hours, we use up the 30 hours. i think there are ways around that procedurally. i hope we don't have to test that. there are a number of amendmen amendments. we all know, we've been reading about them, there are lots of amendments. i can't comprehend -- i don't know because people have been waiting for a long time for this legislation. one of my republican colleagues yesterday said i have a number of germane amendments i want to offer. i said, fine, good, do it. we know we have to do background checks, the assault weapons, the ammunition capacity clips or magazines, mental health. that's just to name a few of the

things. and i repeat, we're going to begin this process before we leave here this week. i so appreciate the work done by senator manchin, toomey, kirk and many others. we've had, my friend, senator schumer, has been working on this, my friend, dick durbin, who's been working on guns for a long time, has been involved in this. and i appreciate the work of everyone. and i hope, as the press has indicated, that we're likely going to get cloture on this tomorrow. i hope so. but, as i've told individual senators, if we don't get cloture, we are going to have a vote in the united states senate on capacity clips, assault weapons, the background checks and some mental health items or item. that we're going to do. i hope that we can do it in the regular process. we've had people for a long time now, my friends on the other

side. -- other side. aisle saying, you know, regular order, we want to be able to offer amendments. well, i do too. i hope that people will be -- not see how many amendments they can offer, not to see if they can set a record for how many amendments can be laid down -- because we should have this as a civil process. and culminating in a better set of laws for people in this great country that we live in and for those of us who have the opportunity to try to address this issue. i hope that we all understand that the world is watching what we do. a senator: mr. president? mr. president, earlier this afternoon, i had the opportuni opportunity, the honor to chair a hearing of the senate judiciary committee on which we serve to consider the president's nomination of a highly qualified lawyer to serve

on the d.c. circuit court of appeals. and i'm encouraged by what the majority leader has just said about the very real possibility we will get a vote on the floor of this senate on vital and important issues affecting guns, immigration, and other issues. but what i speak to today is the absolutely essential role that this senate must fill of voting on qualified judges who've been nominated to the circuit courts of the united states. earlier today in this hearing, ten of our colleagues, republicans and democrats, asked thoughtful questions and mr. -- and there were thorough and thoughtful answers. i came away that he has the background, the skills and most importantly the temperament to serve as a circuit court judge. and i was encouraged by comments of both democrats and republicans that they too were inclined to support this nomination. under normal circumstances, today's hearing would be a beginning of a deliberate,

timely, orderly process, a process required of this body by article 2, section 2, of our constitution, by which we advise and consent to the president's nominations. we should, of course, carefully consider the qualifications of candidates and wan not serve ase rurubber stamp. but neither should we be a firewall blocking qualified nominees from service. and unfortunately for some number of years, this senate has in some vital instances served more as firewall than as advice and consent body. instead of doing our due diligence with appropriate spe speed, we've seen delays, stalling tactics and in some instances, sadly, filibusters of highly qualified nominees. five years in president obama's administration the courts are nearly 7% sraeu can't. in my view, when the president of either party submits a highly qualified character of sound legal mound absent exceptional

circumstances, that candidate is entitled to a vote. the actions are in this case inaction of the senate with regard to the d.c. circuit have consequences. the d.c. circuit court of appeals has a series of vacancies, the results of which in my view delay and deny justice for americans far kwroupbd -- beyond the boundaries of the district of columbia. it is called the second most important court in the nation because it handles cases that impact americans across our country, regularly hears cases on issues ranging from terrorism to the scope of federal agency power. and yet it is critically understaffed. this circuit court hasn't seen a nominee confirmed since president george w. bush's fourth nominee to that court was confirmed in 2006. today four of the 11 seats on the d.c. court are open putting the remaining judges under undue

strain to decide the complex cases before this court. contrary to the previous administration, this administration was recently recognized by "the new york times" editorial board as putting forward nominees who are decidedly moderate. president obama first nominated for this vacancy on this court caitlin halligan who waited more than 900 days for a up-or-down vote. she came with the american bar association's highest rating, glowing recommendations from bipartisan supporters, in a diverse legal career marked by distinctive services as new york's solicitor general. nevertheless republicans successfully filibustered her nomination and last month president obama withdrew ms. halligan from nomination. we have a chance today a fresh start with mr. srinivasan who would serve well and ably on the d.c. court of appeals.

as he demonstrated he has a sharp legal mind. he served in the solicitor general's office for both republican and democratic administrations. he has served in the private sector and the public sector and earned bipartisan support from those who have worked with him. he has been endorsed publicly in a letter from 12 former solicitors general and principal deputy solicitors general, six democrats and six republicans arrest those who served in republican and democrat administrations. the letter signed by conservative luminaries notes mr. srinivasan is one of the best appellate lawyers in the country, with an unsurpassed worketh -- work ethic extremely well prepared. at the same time throughout the course of his career in private practice and public servant, he represented clients with causes diverse enough that any individual policy-maker, elected official is likely to disagree with some of them, including me. i disagree with the position he

argued in rumsfeld versus badilla. but i don't ascribe that position to him. one of the most foundational principles of our legal system is that you do not ascribe to the attorney the position which he successfully and vigorously advocates on behalf of his client. i will not block his nomination simply because i might disagree with a position he took on behalf of a client in one case. s r*eu, in my -- sri is a highly capable attorney with the demeanor to serve on the bench and i support his nomination. i am following in this instance the wisdom of chief justice roberts who said -- and i quote -- "it is a tradition of the american bar that goes back before the founding of our nation that lawyers are not identified with the positions of their clients." so i say to my colleagues here, let's move forward in that spirit. let's return to our historic

constitutionally mandated role. let's give mr. srinivasan a speedy up-or-down vote which i believe he's earned with decades of public service and private sector experience. to be honest, mr. president, if this nomination cannot move forward, if this nomination is filibustered for what really can only be political reasons, i can't imagine what nomination could move forward to this court. a filibuster of this nominee would sadly prove to me just as it did to those of the other party in 2005 that the judicial nominations standards and procedures that work here are unworkable, the system broken and it would lead to a reconsideration. there was a crisis just of this sort when the parties were of opposite configuration in 2005 that led the majority to threaten the so-called nuclear option to end judicial filibusters by the party in which i serve. a result avoided only at the

last moment for the good of the senate and the nation, i urge my colleagues to come together to give this good man a vote and avoid another such crisis today. let's do our job so that the judges of the d.c. circuit court of appeals can do theirs for the people of our nation. thank you. and with that, i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. coburn: i would note that my colleague from the state of delaware, if i heard him correctly, we've just now had a hearing on a nominee for the d.c. circuit court. he's not even on the executive calendar because he hasn't even been voted out of the judiciary committee. so he makes a lot of great points, but i think the fact that we're talking about a potential judge that hasn't even cleared the judiciary committee yet may be a bit premature. he will get a fair hearing. i think we noted that more judicial nominees were approved

in the last two congresses than the two congresses before under the last four years of the bush administration. i rise to speak this evening -- there's been a lot in the news, but one thing that hasn't been in the news very much is the third and final report of the government accountability office in terms of looking at duplication within the federal government. and i hope as the american people listen to this, they'll take a couple of things away. number one, we have a great organization called the government accountability office. they've done a wonderful job. we mandated this four years ago. they have been on time with their reports and what they have shown us has been tremendously revealing. the first thing i'd want americans to note is congress has failed to act on the first two reports. no substantive action whatsoever. one significant thing in the senate: the elimination of the

ethanol mandate. what this report today -- with this report today comes an estimated $98 billion a year in savings. what we take by looking at this report could potentially yield us $98 billion in savings by eliminating duplication, what they just found in this one report. let me go through it for a minute. they found 679 different renewable energy programs across 23 agencies. not across the energy department, where we should be having, if we're going to have renewable programs, that's where we should have it. across 23 different agencies of which we spend $15 billion a year. they found instances where we're given grants to different agencies for the same projects for the same thing, spending three times as much money as we

should be spending on the one project even if we didn't have that. so the potential for us to work our way out of the consequences of a sequester are at our finger tips. trug treatment and abuse, drug abuse prevention and traoepl, -- treatment, 76 separate programs run through 10 different departments with overlap that shows no metrics but multiple agencies having programs doing exactly the same thing. $4.5 billion a year, that's half the size of my oklahoma state budget a year. catfish inspection. i saw the president's budget today. he proposed at three different agencies you have to meet the

requirements for to have your catfish inspected. the only thing they didn't recommend in the budget today is getting rid of the agriculture department, because they approve your cheese pizza, but the f.d.a. approves your pep pepperoni pizza. if you're a pizza maker you have to comply with one agency on one type of pizza and another agency on another. the defense foreign language board, these are people that help us learn other languages, interpret for us other languages so we can have effective response and not have communication error. we have 159 different programs in the pentagon alone, but ten other agencies, what they're estimating is we can save tons of money. we tkphoepbt how much it costs because the -- we don't know how much it costs because the

pentagon doesn't know how much they're spending on it, which the g.a.o. said one of the reasons they can't estimate the savings more accurately is because the majority of agencies have no idea what they are spending on these programs. the question i have is why not? and if they don't know what they're spending, why aren't we doing something about it? higher education assistance, 21 different programs four different agencies not all in the education department. $174.7 billion a year. that includes pell grants. that includes student loans, the costs associated with student loans, veterans employment training, we have six programs not all run by the veterans department but run by the veterans department and other agencies. we're spending $1.2 billion, and here's what we know.

we're running these programs and veterans unemployment, even though they have a skill when they come out of the military, is higher than what the average is in the country. so it's obviously not working. also in the report is something that's very important to me. and let me find it, if i might, for a minute. g.a.o.'s report exposes government office that does some good things. it's called the national technical information service. it was established in 1950 and tasked with collecting and distributing certain reports. despite the fact -- here's what g.a.o. found. 75% of the information that nitz

supplies, all you have to do is google it. 75% of their budget is spent providing reports to other government agencies and other people that you can get with the touch of your iphone. why would we continue to do that? this is just one example that i bring up. we're continuing to fund an agency that three-quarters of what they do has no bearing on it. and if it went away, wouldn't affect us at all. the other thing is they charge other federal agencies a fee for this information that the other federal agency at a touch of their computer can get the same information for free. so it's another case of inefficiency. so what else did the g.a.o.

report show? what the g.a.o. report showed is that we've done nothing of significance in the last two years based on what they've recommended we do given their first two reports. our office calculates based on the three reports the g.a.o. has given us that we could save in excess of $250 billion a year if we would follow the recommendations of the government accountability office. and so if you're sitting out there wondering why we're having tax proposals increased in the president's budget and we're having such a hard time with the sequester, you only have to look one place, and that's congress. congress refuses to follow and do the oversight. we've had g.a.o. do a lot of it.

we refused to pass amendments that eliminate duplication. we refused to make the tough choices. and so consequently we're spending $250 billion a year. that's 2.5 trillion over ten years, that we shouldn't be spending. where did -- where's the money come from to pay for that? it comes from our kids. and it doesn't just come in dollars. it comes from a reduced standard of living and limited opportunities in the future because we don't have the courage or the work ethic to address the very real issues that are in front of us on the tips of our fingers where the

money is, where we could actually save money. we have had almost a thousand days since the first reports have come out. we have done one significant thing in the senate. we have eliminated the ethanol tax credit, saved $6 billion the first year, about $4 billion to $5 billion afterwards. that is one thing we did, we were fought tooth and nail as we did it, but we got it done. so one thing, $6 billion in three years out of $250 billion. no wonder the confidence level in the congress is at 13%, because what we're actually doing is throwing away our kids' future as we fail to address these issues. when we're spending money that we don't have on things that we

don't absolutely need and we're borrowing money against our children's future, i can't think of a greater immoral act of the congress. it's not red hot lit up like some of the more controversial issues, the gun bill we're going to have or immigration, but i would tell you it's going to have just as much a profound effect if we were to address it in terms of the future of our country, the health of our country and the job-creating capacity for our country. and then what is it about your senator or your congressman that keeps them from having the courage to challenge the status quo? and i know what it is. it is the desire to get

re-elected by not offending anybody. and so we don't have those tough oversight hearings. we won't allow bills through greets that actually eliminate. there is a bill that's passed the house that is sitting on the docket right now. it's called the skills act. it takes 47 job training programs and puts them in six. it saves billions of dollars a year. it puts metrics on the outcome, and we won't even bring it to the floor. we won't even bring it to the floor. it would save $5 billion to $6 billion a year. plus markedly improve the outcome of our job training programs, but it's not here. it passed the house. the house is doing oversight in every committee right now. the senate's not. the house is reading the g.a.o. reports and acting on it. they're not right 100% of the time. they are right about 95% of the time, but you're never going to do anything about it unless you

have an oversight hearing to actually find out for yourself. and nothing happens unless you actually write a bill to change things. and yet that's not the emphasis in the senate. there can be no greater emphasis than us to get out of the financial troubles that we're in. there can be no greater emphasis than us to create an environment that produces jobs in this country by quitting wasting money at the federal government level. our answer is more government, not less. our less, according to the president's budget, is more taxes, not less. i commend the president. he's got $25 billion worth of programs that he wants to eliminate in his budget, $25.8 billion. but he could send over what the g.a.o. said and eliminate $250 billion a year. but the problem is not really with the president. it's with us.

it's our intransigence to do our job and keep in our focal point what is most important, and what is most important is our future and the capability for us to create opportunity in the future for our children and our grandchildren. i have been fighting this for eight years. there is a lot of oversight that's been done, tons of reports. the american people are going to eventually learn everything that's in it because there is an app coming out that's going to be on your cell phone real soon, and you can find out anything about everything about where the government's wasting money. you will be able to punch it, you will be able to look at an address in your own city and see how much money that company or that business or that farmer got of your federal taxpayer dollars, and you will be able to see that in about three months. and when the american people actually really find out our

incompetence, it won't matter that you didn't offend somebody. they are going to see that you didn't do your job. and we're not doing our job because we're not addressing the things that we actually have some control over. what do we do now? here's what g.a.o. explains. although the executive branch and congress have made some limited progress in addressing the issues that we have previously identified, additional steps are needed to address the remaining areas to achieve associated benefits. a number of the issues are difficult but not impossible, implementing many of the actions will take time and sustained leadership. key word there is leadership. who's going to lead in the senate to solve our problems? it's not party identified. real leadership about solving the real problems in front of us

it's time for each congressional committee in the senate to undertake the waste and overlap identified by g.a.o. within their jurisdiction and begin writing bills to consolidate and eliminate these programs and put metrics as far as performance on every one of them. it's also time for the white house to put some real muscle into their proposal coming through o.m.b. i'm thankful we're going to have a new o.m.b. director. she is going to be terrific. she has the skills, the dedication and the qualifications, and i praise the president for nominating her. she's going to fly through the senate because she is really superqualified for the job, plus she is going to know what she is doing. it won't matter what she does if we don't respond. if we don't do our work. mr. president, i'd like to take time now just to spend a moment

or two on the guns issue. i have spent a lot of time over the past few months thinking about sandy hook. i actually met with a large number of those people today. i am an a-plus rated member -- lifetime member of the n.r.a. i firmly believe in the second amendment, and i firmly believe in the tenth amendment. and we're hearing a lot of politics about the gun situation, but what we're not hearing is how do you really keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them? that's what we need to be addressing. now, whether or not that would prevent a sandy hook or not, nobody knows, but there are some things we do know.

what we do know is the vast majority of people who are convicted first time in a gun crime didn't steal their gun. and they didn't buy it from a federally licensed firearm dealer. they bought it from one of us. and the very fact that we're going to have a piece of legislation go through here that will not solve the real problem of keeping hands out of the mentally impaired and felons is a shame. and there are ways that we can do that. i haven't talked to one gun owner that i know that doesn't agree with the fact that they would like to be able to know that if they sold their gun, they didn't want it to go into the hands of a felon or somebody mentally impaired. and yet, we get hung up on

records, and the proposal that comes from senator toomey and senator manchin and senator kirk is a step forward, i won't deny that, but tell me how a record, which is only going to be looked at after a crime is committed, is going to help anybody that's a victim of that crime? it's not. so if you really want to solve this problem, what you have got to do is put in the hands of us americans who are law-abiding the ability to know we didn't sell our gun to somebody that's on the nix list. give me the ability to know when i go to sell my gun to a stranger that they are not on that nix list. now, that's been rejected out of hand because there is no record with it. and the reason this doesn't need to be a record is because we are putting an onus on responsible

citizens doing the right thing. plus the government has no right to have a record of when i transfer a gun. they do have a right to expect me to be a responsible citizen when i go to sell my gun. so the question is are we as a body going to take something that's far less than appropriate to actually keep guns out of the hands of felons and the mentally impaired and call it a day, because that's what's getting ready to happen, or are we going to actually make a difference? and not impair second amendment rights at all and not impair tenth amendment rights because we give state sphremcy on that. if they want to do something more or different, they can. and so we're going to go through all this debate, we're going to have all these amendments. i thank senator reid for making an open amendment process. i called and talked to him last night. i said i'm happy to support going to this bill provided we use the regular senate procedures and that we actually

get to offer amendments that are germane to this bill in any number of ways, and so he's going to allow that. and i take him at his word that he's going to allow that. but when it's all said and done, would we really have made a difference for those families who are wanting us to make a difference? would we really have made a difference? and if you don't allow responsible citizens the ability to know whether or not they are selling their gun to a felon or mentally impaired person, it -- you haven't made any difference. you have made a lot of noise, but you haven't made a difference. and let me tell you why the toomey-manchin proposal won't work. the largest gun show in america is in tulsa, oklahoma. it's called the wanamaker gun show. tennessee of thousands of people come to it twice a year, maybe three times a year. you're going to impede the sale by requiring an f.f.l. license

at that, which is to say a gun dealer at that show is going to be required to do a background search against the nix list for somebody who buys a gun at a show, whether they are buying from that dealer or not. so the first thing that's going to happen is the federal firearm licensed dealers are going to say oh, i want a fee for transferring this gun, for doing the work. rightly so. i don't blame them. what's the option? well, the option that's going to happen is people are going to make the deal to buy the gun, and then two or three days after the gun show, they're going to buy the gun because they won't be at the gun show anymore. now, look at the opposite side of that. if you had a portal where you could get a certificate that says you're not on the nix list and you can buy a gun any time you want anywhere and somebody selling you a gun can have a pin code to mick sure that's you and also see your i.d., whether

you're in a gun show or outside a gun show, the responsible gun seller is going to know they didn't sell a gun to somebody that's mentally impaired for a felon. so we're going to have all sorts of statements of what we're going to do, it isn't going to decrease guns in the hands of felons and the mentally impaired. so we can say we have got to win, but if we want a bill to get through the senate and get through the house that will actually make a difference in people's lives so that felons aren't empowered to buy guns and the mentally impaired aren't empowered to buy guns, you've got to do something different. now, my friends in the second amendment community don't even like my proposal. i understand that. but there's no impairment when all you have to do is go to your cell phone and be able to get a clearance to know somebody's not on the nix list.

we get to decide. are we going to do it in a way that smells good and looks good but doesn't do anything or are we going to fight to do something that actually makes a difference? i hope we choose the latter. i'm not convinced we will. the reason senator manchin couldn't get me to agree on what he has agreed with with senator toomeycy don't think it's going to work. i think the vast majority of gun purchasers at gun shows are going to wait to g.i. guns later from the very same people that will sell them at the gun show, so they don't have to pay a fee and so they don't have to wait three or four days on a background check. so iñ -- so if that happens, what good have we done? how have we made a difference? we haven't. and the sad fact is, as a

practicing physician and having done training in surgery, i got to operate on a lot of people who had the consequences of a weapon. and oklahoma's gun culture -- and i own multiple gun -- and i chair risch my second amendment right -- and a cherish my second amendment right. but with that right comes some responsibility to do the right thing. liberty without responsibility isn't liberty. and it won't last unless we attach responsibility to it. so if we really believe in the second amendment and we really believe in the 10th amendment, we'll re-look at what we're going to do in terms of gun transfers. and there's a way to do it that will actually make a big difference in people's lives in this country and actuall actualy

get through the house. what we're proposing, what we're seeing proposed right now is never going to pass the house. and so consequently we will have done something in the senate with no long-term consequence to actually make a difference for the american people. mr. president, i thank you for your time, and i yield back the floor and notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. grassley: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: i ask that the calling of the quorum be suspended. the presiding officer: without

objection. mr. grassley: i ask permission to speak in morning business for about five or six minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: i'd like to take a moment to pay tribute to former british prime minister margaret thatcher. obviously we all know that she passed away this monday. in the 1970's, britain was mired in debt and even had to go to the international monetary fund for a bailout. britain was known then in the 1970's as the sixth man of europe, much like we think of greece today. governments of both political parties had tried to stimulate the economy through keynesian spending policies and government intervention into the economy was widespread. britain faced massive strikes in the winter of 1978 to 1979 when she became prominent. that period of time was known as

the winter of disconnect. there was talk that britain had become unmanageable and ungovernable. then margaret thatcher came on to the scene big time. her policies of fiscal responsibility and promotion of free enterprise completely reversed britain's economic decline. her foreign policy achievements were no less impressive. this was the era of detente. most people accepted that the soviet union was strong and successful and was here to stay, so we just had to learn to live with the fact that the soviet union was the other superpower. it was fashionable for political leaders to talk as though the soviet system was just different but no better and no worse than

her own system of economics and government. margaret thatcher had no hesitation in pointing out the truth, that the soviet union and its satellites held their citizens in bondage, and she encouraged dissidents who sought freedom. in fact, it was a speech in 1976 when she was still leader of the opposition in which she warned about the soviet military build-up that caused a soviet army newspaper to coin her famous nickname, "the iron lady." together with president reagan, she sought every opportunity to undermine the soviet system until it collapsed. if this doesn't sound like a bold position today, it is only because reagan and thatcher were proven so profoundly right that everyone now claims to have always agreed with them.

i should also note that there is a temptation for many people remembering mrs. thatcher's legacy to note that she was the first female prime minister of the united kingdom. while this is a significant historical fact to mention, -- and to mention it as though it was one of her most important accomplishments comes off kind of patronizing margaret thatcher rejected the identity politics that is so popular today. she said this about that issue: this is a quote, "i've always believed that what matters in politics as in the rest of life isn't who you are or where you come from, but what you believe and what you want to do with your life. what matters are your convictions." end quote.

now because of her convictions and because she acted on those convictions, she restored britain's economy, national spirit and international reputation. millions of people around the world now live in peace and freedom thanks in large part to her efforts. as a result, margaret thatcher is unquestionably one of the most significant leaders of the 20th century. mrs. thatcher's legacy shouldn't simply be relegated to history, however. we have a lot to learn from her today. as the president submits his overdue budget this week, i would ask my colleagues to ponder this quote from margaret thatcher, and i end with this quote, and it's a fairly long quote: "if spending money like water was the answer to our country's problems, we would have no problems now.

if ever a nation has spent and spent and spent and spent again, ours has" -- meaning great britain. "today that dream is over. all of that money has got us nowhere, but it still has to come from somewhere. those who urge us to relax the squeeze, to spend yet more money indies kreupltately -- indiscriminately in the belief it will help the unemployed and the small businessman are not being kind or compassionate or caring. they are the not the friends of the unemployed or of the small business. they are asking us to do again the very thing that caused the problems in the first place." end of the quote from margaret thatcher. i yield the floor. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: are we in morning business? what are we doing?

the presiding officer: the senate is on the motion to proceed at this point. mr. reid: mr. president, i ask consent that the senate proceed to a period of morning business with senators allowed to speak for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to s. res. 95. the presiding officer:. the clerk: senate resolution 95 recognizing linemen, the profession of linemen, the contributions of these brave men and women who protect the public safety and expressing support for the designation of april 18, 2013, as national linemen appreciation day. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? there is no objection. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i now ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today it adjourn until 9:30 a.m. tomorrow morning, thursday, april 11, following the prayer and pledge,

the morning hour deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for use later in the day and that following leader remarks, the senate resume consideration of the gun safety legislation. further, that the time until 11:00 a.m. be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees with senators permitted to speak for up to ten minutes and that upon the use or yielding back of that time the senate proceed to the cloture vote on the motion to proceed to s. 649. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: mr. president at 11:00 tomorrow we'll have a cloture vote on the motion to proceed to the gun safety bill. if there is no further business to come before the senate i ask it adjourn under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until senate stands adjourned until

>> we like to think it's an important book with the sense of how the court works. there's so few good books out there that explain the process, how do they go about this, how did they decide these cases? we see these as split the court five to four. to their personal feelings into? it?= =t's a book about how the court= operates.= >> when you dig into the notes= in the library of= congress, th= memoranda, the= notes back and forth between justices available and a lot of stuff is available. i'm not a lawyer.

but i was fascinated by the human side of it. >> correspond with national journal. senator manchin intrigued by today announced their expanded background or postal. what should we know about it? >> guest: is certainly created a lot of buzz in the senate, which is interesting to watch. it is different from the proposal drafted by senator schumer from new york because it's not a universal background check. it mandates background checks for gun shows and over the internet, but it is not mandating a background check if

i sell a gun to you. >> what motivated senators trent three and toomey to work together on this compromise? >> guest: or something like 91% of the public is the latest member that supports universal background checks on gun purchasers is something that senator toomey said today is the right thing to do. it's been a top part of the gun control movement agenda for years now. it's also consider the want of that could pass the senate. i would order the compromise will pass, but it goes a long way towards republicans had put forth about those neighbor to neighbor or family sales that should be part of big federal background check system. >> host: does that mean i will

get our support from senatorial colleagues and specifically from him? the only person that can positive another senator susan collins from maine and she was very pleased up that she had heard a news that standard i have to review the language and i don't really know. there's a number of senators still on the fence about whether their support to motion to proceed happening tomorrow. they are waiting to see which way the political wind will fail. >> you mentioned a rating for the national rifle association and how they responded to the proposal? >> guest: i haven't seen anything from that, which might mean they are under the radar about it. they put stuff about their own

agenda and they've been pretty quiet, at least to the press about the stuff since then. the gun control act against alito accounts, coalition of gun violence have been front and center. a lot of them have put a favorable responses to the compromise saying it's a good step in the right direction. everyone is concerned about how far it's going to go, but quite frankly it's so much better than what they would've gotten in the past. >> host: in the news conference, senator manchin mentioned their city considered first feared what others are likely to be considered in the debate on the bill? >> guest: we know there will be an amendment banning assault weapons. we know there will be another separate amendment on the magazine clips that will spew out 30 or 40 rounds in a few

seconds. that's probably not expected to pass, although it might take a few republicans who would vote for an all-out assault weapons ban. on the republican side, they look at putting together their own alternative package, a bill sponsored by senator graham from south carolina to update the mental health component of the national database or use this to be checking against people for gun purchases. it would include increases in laws on gun trafficking. they would approve the laws senti regulation health care. they bring how cases anything can violates concerned in the south of a. it's a republican alternative to senator reed's package.

there may be some individual amendment on each of those as well. >> host: a couple of other republican senators, senator cruise and will be an palmer said to have a news conference and they were canceled. can you tell us what's going on there? >> guest: they said they were having problems with scheduling conflicts that went forward with 11 or 12 senators in blocking the bill. i don't know whether they can garner the 40 votes they need, but there certainly said to be doing that. i don't know what's happened with the press conferences, this seems like they're having trouble getting there. >> host: you wrote about the political dynamic is evolving and describing the gun control debate. what does that mean as the bill comes to the floor? what does that look like? >> guest: i just think it's evolving so fast that i can't keep up with it.

the senators are grappling with tough issues on gun control. i've never seen another 15 years i've been covering congress. there's a lot of talk in 1994, but since then i haven't seen the kind of tough grappling that if we need to check people's background, how can we ensure their privacy and make sure we still keep the second amendment right to not have a huge list of gun purchasers out there in the federal landscape? how come a step gun trafficking? there's even some conversation going on outside the senate about what we do a better job policy, which is fueling a lot of crime in the debates and that's been going on as well. for gun control advocates commend the people who've been trying to limit any gun purchases in the united states, this is the kind of thing that wanted to talk about for years and members are just not been willing to.

all of a sudden they seem perfectly happy to. >> host: fawn johnson with national journal. thanks for joining us. >> guest: pleasure. >> democratic senator joe manchin and pat to me announced legislation to extend background checks for gun purchases. their proposal would extend for firearm sales and the internet. there's news conference in the capital was about 20 minutes. >> good morning. i'm going to be covering up some peoples phones here. let me just say good morning to all of you and i'm proud to be here with my good friend, pat toomey from a sister state. we are side by side and come from states that have deep-rooted cultures as you know and they've been very strong and

i also want to give special thanks to two people who aren't here today who have worked from the beginning trying to find common ground and that is senator chuck schumer, my good friend and dear friend, mark curt. mark has been with me from the beginning and has never left in check and a staff in all of them have worked so hard. i also want to thank tom coburn. tom has been invaluable to the process also coming from a culture become friends in the third grade and put all the way through this process. i want to make it clear from the start that this is the start and not the end of her work. we still have a lot to do. we still have an agreement with senator curt and senator schumer. we have an agreement on an amendment to prevent criminals

and mentally ill from getting firearms and harming people. that's extremely important for all of us. also, we agree we need a commission on mass violent made up of people's expertise. people have expertise in guns, mental illness. people have expertise in school safety and expertise in video violent. we have a culture of violence and a whole generation who basically has been desensitized. if you go talk to the people today, it is what it is a myth that to find out how we can change in riverside. we also need to protect legal gun owners like myself and pat who basically cherish the second amendment rights that we have. we have done that also, but today is just a start of a healthy debate that is sent with the senate and house, hopefully passing commonsense measures and the president signing it into law. back home with common sense

common nonsense and that we have guns than that as we were talking about. the events that newtown changed us all. we changed our country, our communities, our towns and our hearts and minds. this amendment would ease the pain. it will not ease the pain of the families who lost their children on that horrible day. but nobody here, not one of us in this great capital of ours with good conscience could see if i had not that from happening again and i think that's overdoing. americans on both sides of the debate can and must find common ground. that is that pat and i have been working on them but we been able to do. today's agreement is the first step to keep guns out of dangerous hands and keep our children safe. this is a bipartisan movement, a bipartisan amendment and we all know that a bipartisan solution is a lasting elution.

nobody here in good conscience could sap i am not prevented a mishap and from ever happening again. i can't say enough about my friend, pat toomey and they appreciate him so much for working this hard in their staff doing what they've done in perl of us coming together today. they too introduce my dear friend, pat toomey. >> thank you very much, senator trained three. went to command senator manchin. our staff has worked very hard as well. i hope i'm many things. i want to mention the terrific work. he's been a valuable asset in the import voice in this discussion and i appreciate that. pennsylvania has a long bipartisan tradition of

supporting gun rights and i've been proud to be part of that tradition i continue to be. i'm a gun owner and the rights enshrined in the second amendment are important to me personally as they know they are to so many people across pennsylvania. i've got to tell you candidly i don't consider criminal background checks to be gun control. i think it is just common sense. if you pass a criminal background check, you get to buy a gun. it is the people who fail come a criminal or mental health background check that we don't want having guns. my time in public life have not taken a very high profile role on this issue. i spent most of my time and energy focusing on policies that will generate economic growth and job creation and put us on a sustainable fiscal path. that has been my focus and will continue to be my focus. let me explain mind standing here today with senator mansion.

over the last few, several things became apparent to me. first is the gun legislation destined to reach the senate floor. it is something that i is inevitable. second thing is they became apparent that there are a number of gun control proposals that i think would infringe second amendment rights. i will tell you categorically that nothing in our amendment prevents the ownership of guns by any lawful person and i wouldn't support it if it did. what became apparent to me was the danger that reminded up accomplishing that you cannot pick and to progress or recode. that's a nice added touch to senator mansion and senator curt and others to see if there's a place we can find common ground and we found it. msn is simple proposition that criminals and the dangerously mentally ill shouldn't have

guns. i know anyone who disagrees with that promise from either political party or whatever folks use an ip on broader gun rights issues. if we start with the notion that dangerous criminals and dangerously mentally ill people shouldn't have guns, the question is how we should accomplish that? background checks are not a cure-all, but they can be helpful. from 1999 to 2009, 1.8 million gun sales are bought by the current background check system because people were not qualified to own a gun. i support them now. the year to exist for the purchase of guns from licensed dealers. in pennsylvania they account for all purchases. but i measure will do is expand background checks to purchases

of firearms at gun shows and over the internet. it would not require a record-keeping by the citizen. the national clout we have had pennsylvania's experience have done nothing to restrict the lawful ownership of guns by law-abiding citizens and neither will our amendment. the worries they are sometimes about background checks leading to an erosion of second amendment rights simply hasn't happened. we've got to make sure that it doesn't. i also should point out that this amendment is a genuine compromise in addition to expanding background checks includes a number of measures that help to secure second amendment rights of gun owners that they have long sought. the bottom line for me is this. if expanding background checks to include gun shows and internet sales can reduce the likelihood of criminals and mentally ill people from getting

guns and we can do it in a fashion that does not infringe on the second amendment rights of law-abiding citizens, we should do it and in this amendment we do. thank you very much. >> here's more about the gun legislation from the senate floor today with senators nelson, murphy and inhofe. >> madam president. >> senator from florida. >> madam president, i want to talk about the issue of gun violence. our hearts are still had the

friendly reminders of what happened in connecticut. and i want to say that i come to this issue from a position of moderation and common sense. icon to this issue is having grown up in the country as a hunter. i grew up on a ranch. i've had guns on my life. i am very familiar with gun and to this day, still enjoy hunting quail and pheasant with my son. but is there anybody that realistically doesn't believe that we ought to have a criminal background check for the person

that is purchasing a gun? i am very encouraged to hear that senator manchin and senator toomey have come together to find a way to close the gun show loophole and that's instructive what happened in my state of florida years ago, we amended the state constitution with an overwhelming vote of the people in florida and then there were ways that in prior case it's been found to subvert the law that was the will of the people in our state, that she can't purchase a gun in a gun show without having a criminal background check. what they do is that i'll consider you a personal friend and therefore that is an exception to doing a background

check on you. well, senator manchin and senator toomey have come to an agreement to find a way to close that gun show loophole and that proposal will also establish a commission to better understand the root causes of how to prevent mass violence. they should simply no reason why we should be able to do a criminal background check to find out what is one way of finding out the tension of somebody that is buying a gun. and if you bring it back to its basic, it's all about common sense and it's especially so given the circumstances that we find ourselves or people go when

slaughtering children. now, is there anybody that thinks that we need ammunition clips for 60 rounds? that's not common sense. when i go hunting, if it is quail, i usually have two shotgun shells in the gun. if you are going to give the quail a chance and if it is hunting instead of killing, then let's see how good a marksman you are. and i can't see any reason that common sense would dictate why we would have more than 10 rounds in a clip. and yet people want to give

clips for 60 rounds. i think that is telling you some things about what they are intention is. i noted on this in 2004 added the 1990s and we sat and not legislation, it can and few other it's okay. now, is that not reasonable? is that not common sense? so, if we don't have reasonably more they need to intend comment then that's what we are to draw and the law. and then there's another element of comments since and that is why the assault weapons?

when i served this country were in the uniform this country, the united states military has assault weapons. people are going out and buying these ak-47s. they are derivative of the same what then that was used by the north vietnamese against us in the vietnam war and the assembly asked the question, are these guns for hunting or are they for killing? and if the legitimate and serious they are not for hunting, or for some collectors purposes, then they have another purpose. and obviously that is what they were designed for is an assault weapon in a combat circumstance. so, how do you approach the legitimate recognition of the

second amendment, the right to bear arms with assault weapons? and i don't think you can. it seems that amount people of goodwill, using common sense and moderation, and that she could come to some definitions that would be in these types of assault weapons. our probably not going to have the votes to pass it here, but we need to take the vote and we need to see how everybody feels about this issue. i want to conclude by saying that there are those of us that are taking this position of moderation and common sense is if we are not for the second amendment. that is false. of course i support the second amendment. i just gave you my history

growing up in the country with guns, having guns on my life and still having a number of guns in my home today. i support the second amendment. i do so in light of the circumstances in our society today. those circumstances have changed. my final comment in all of this is it's moderation and common sense that are so much the solution to facing the issues that confront us today and here is another role. let's use a little common sense. not impressive at, i yield the floor.

>> madam president. >> senator from connecticut. >> thank you, madam president. i think my colleague from florida for his thoughtful remarks and of course my colleague, senator from connecticut. we are here on the floor today to help lead a discussion about how this nation can finally own up to its responsibility to take on the scorer which of gun violence that assert they been highlighted at the massacre in sandy hook bay spoke about in my first speech before this chamber. it's become too routine throughout the streets of this country went three, 4000 people losing their lives to god island since seeing the helicopter.

and boston a lot of the debate here about the particular policy prescriptions weatherby universal background checks are part of a 90% of americans for a ban on high-capacity magazines supported by two thirds of americans for a federal law ending of the coke on trafficking supported by three fours of americans, lost amidst all of the political back-and-forth of negotiations between republicans and democrats. the pronounced and said the nra and gun control groups. out of the debate about politics than policy or that it tends. the deck incited people, boys and girls come in men and women, mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters who die every single day in this country. i described it this morning like

raindrops. it's just backgrounders to this country the number of people who are dying every day. so i decided after having given my speech this morning that i would come back to this floor. not to occupy the floor or commandeer the floor, but to the extent that there is time to spend time on this floor telling the stories of visit tim's, the individual people whose lives were tragically cut short by guns because it happens here more so than almost every other nation in the world. more people lose their lives. my people have been ascendant prematurely than almost any other corner of the world. it's time that we do something about it. yes because of the aggregate numbers, the holder in sandy hook, that every additional life that is cut short his affiliate of the responsibility to do something about it.

i want to spend some time on the floor in between others giving speeches today, tomorrow next week to talk about these big games -- victims can tell you who they are. especially the little ones, may be who they were going to be. so, let me start in newtown. let me start in sandy hook. and we can put up some pictures for just a handful of the victims are in sandy hook and cities across this country. the mr. with the little guy in the middle here. daniel barton. i talked about him this morning. he was a pretty amazing little boy. his parents taught about the unbelievable compassion that he had. i talked about it this morning that he never failed to turn off the light when he left the room.

he was always the kid in school that was fitting that the kid who didn't have anybody to sit with. when his parents leave the grocery store they get halfway across the grocery store parking lot, turn around and didn't know was that with him because he was still holding the door open for other people leaving the store. he was a pretty amazing little kid. he loved spending time with his family. he loved riding the waves at the beach. you can tell he was a beach bum. they transcend the ban but his brother james and sister natalie. i'm not running, his father was a professional musician whose here this week, taught him how to play jingle bells that learning. she woke up really early and that is really funny because he was the last of the three kids to go to school. they were all in such schools.

his parents.this is strange that that morning he woke up early. in fact, it was the first day all year. this is december 14 kunda said they been in school for months. it is the first day the entire year daniel had woken up before his oldest sibling went to school. as walking onto driveway to go to school, daniel ran after him to tell him he loved him. first day. he'd never done that all year. it just shows that a compassionate but okay daniel west. i actually worry preset for daniel and as a bracelet that her face but page called what would daniel do. it's got 16,000 linux and the point of the pages so here they've done amazing things to spread the word about who these kids were and who they were going to be. it's just a forum for people

of -- you know, invest in local acts of kindness to try to live up to the inspiration of this little 6-year-old onset for his family and neighborhood. the people posted stories on the website for the last several. the kind acts they performed, like the woman who bought coffee and donuts for a firehouse in the home state of new york and missouri woman to restart the food pantry in daniel's honor and play for a stranger's mail and on the back of the bill wrote of her daniel barton. he was going to grow up to be a really, really amazing young man. loved life and did amazing things for people. but we didn't get to know daniel barton later in that because he was gunned down that day in sandy hook. let me tell you this story is

somewhat equal the amazing how we got to know for 20 more years than the kids he was charged with looking after. her name is one you might now and that is victorious soto. but tori is soto was 27 years old, a teacher at sandy hook elementary school. that's what she wanted to do. she wanted to be a teacher her mom said she was 33 years old. imagine knowing what you want to do when you're three years old and sticking with it. a lot of people know what they want to do in their three and change their mind. she didn't. church every day from the time she was 13 to get ready to be a teacher. she was turning out her classes so she could ultimately be a teacher. when she got to sandy hook elementary school, she made time for night classes reissues getting her masters degree in special education.

and mentor others say she was the last one he would've wanted hero status, but nobody was surprised to hear but she did in that classroom that day. when hannah bloch into her classroom, victorious soto was the only person he saw. why? because she had ushered her special education teacher come anne-marie murphy and several caves under a desk and she had pushed a number of other kids into a closet to hide them. it can't hurt and then killed the kids under the desk. because he did not cause that come in many of them lived. many of them survived and were discovered after the incident because of the heroic actions of this 27-year-old teacher.

imagine what she could have done with the rest of her life. students loved her. parents love her. she was made for teaching. think of all of the compact. she probably had dirty more years. she had hundreds if not thousands she could have touched in her life, gone. the genius as a teacher will no longer be able to be realized because of what happened that day. if we don't do something about it, she will be the last teacher got down. this won't be the last educator we will mourn here on the floor of the united states house of representatives. let me tell you about charlotte became, six years old. i lost count of the number of funerals and wakes i went to, but i do remember charlotte's

funeral. she had this crazy head of curly red hair and she was described by her family is sweet, outgoing, exuberant, somebody willing to argue for whatever she believed in, even at six years old. she loved the color pink and she loved animals. and the animals she met, but she really loved her coat retriever. she wanted to be a veterinarian. a lot of these kids know what they want to do with their lives. these are ambitious kids who have special parents as well. she was really looking forward to christmas because she wanted to show off this new pink dress in pink boots she had gotten in to see christmas outfit, she was waiting until christmas to show it off. but on the morning of december 14, it can -- again, strange things happened that

morning. that morning she woke up i wanted to wear that dress and boots and her mother let her do it. she wore that special pink dress and boots to school friday, december 14. her family has established a non-prophet called newtown kindness. the organization is comprised of community members who are trying to bring positivity is strength back to the newtown community. i talk about the fact that for many of us who lived through the tragedy, not anywhere close to the way the big dems families have, not those 10 minutes of violence and evil, but also millions of acts of humanity that is filled forth from within the community and outside the community in the days and weeks since. this encouraging children to do their own acts of kindness like charlotte did and submit stories through drawings or letters to the organization.

newtown kindness is going to show some life on all these wonderful things. kids do everywhere in the same way charlotte did for the kids she loved in the family is she that for the animals. that may type a little bit about another teacher, rachel did e-mail. we chose very much like victoria and that she knew she wanted to work with kids. she had a lot of interest. she was born in waterbury, received her undergraduate degree and got a masters in post-university. loved animals. probably why she connected with these kids. she looked baking, photography and karate. she drew lots of things. what to draw animals. dogs, frogs, anything with skills or father or for how much

you love draw. working with kids with autism. there were a number of kids who had autism and were doing great because of the work people like rachel and anne-marie did to work with these kids. she integrated these kids into her daily life. she brought the kids to her home, involved the kids in her family and treated these kids like family. they matured. they did better under her care. she probably didn't know what when she died, but her best friend and her boyfriend, tony, was about to pursue her. in fact, he had gone to her parents to ask permission to marry her. he was going to do it on christmas eve, 10 days after the incident. he didn't get to ask. instead, the wedding ring was placed on her finger before she

was. she was an amazing teacher who invested in these kids staying in day out and it would've been great to know what rachel does he know who's going to become a she matured as an educator. this is just a sampling of the stories from one day to newtown, connecticut. less kids and adults died in newtown that day and die every day across this country. i mean, we think how awful and how horrific that we lost 20 kids and six adults. and yet that number is less than the average number of people killed every day by gun violence across this country. so i want to joke about them,

too. i want to talk about just over the last couple weeks and months will be put us across this country. i want to talk about the day of panels than in chicago we've heard a lot about because for the presidential inauguration, she was here. she was performing at their school's nature a team in the festivities. she loved performing. she was an honor student at king's college prep high school in chicago. she is 15 years old had remembered by her friends as someone who's raising her hand in class. should all the right answers. she wore bright lipgloss that made her stand out. she loved to dance. she danced at her church and she was a member of her cheerleading team as well. she likes chinese food, loved fig newtons. she was thinking about going to

college, either journalism or pharmacology. either way she wanted to go to harvard. she was 15 years old. she was shot and killed while standing with a friend at a park in chicago after she took her final exams coming days after she came back from washington d.c., probably one of the most amazing experiences of her life. i was think to myself whether i saw her performing. 15 years old. she was going to cut harvard, become a journalist, a great dancer. all of the things we miss just because she was standing in the way of the wallet at a park with her friends after she took her final exams. think about lavinia will williams, who in january of this year was visiting with his mother and sisters in marion city, california, celebrating his 70th birthday.

17 years old "usa today." he was checking in on his sister come april, to make sure she was fired because they were suspicious activity going on in the housing complex that day. so he went downstairs to check out what the commotion was about and moments later was shot dead because he walked down some stairs to check out some commotion. the deputies were right on scene saw people desperately trying to revive, but he was pronounced dead at the scene. he'd been hit by several bullets. he was just a visiting his mother and two sisters and to celebrate his 17th birthday. he died june the 11th, 2013. talk about the connection to the background checks piece of the discussion. we can talk about anne-marie

botch. she returned home after dropping her kids off at school on april april 8, just a week or so ago in milwaukee and her live-in boyfriend pulled behind her in a taxi cab that he drove. shot her in the head. he then took his gun and turned it on himself. he was on probation for recent domestic violence incidences involving his daughter, in which he had beaten up his daughter. he had firearms arrests going back 20 years. he was a convicted felon and was prohibited from carrying weapons. i don't have in front of me why he had the weapons that day and how he got them, but he wasn't supposed to happen. he had a long rap sheet when it came to convictions regarding firearms. he was ordered to undergo anger

management training, but it's unclear whether that happened. he's not here to answer those questions and neither is his girlfriend, anne-marie who died that day, 39 years old after dropping her kids out of school. earlier this week in akron, ohio between your 8-year-old man was shot by taking garbage to a trash bin in a big dolls that he worked in. taking garbage to a trash bin and got shot in that. his name hasn't been released, but he'd been working at mcdonald's for 10 years and his coworkers said he was the kind of person that would give you his last dollar. he always gave his coworkers get some holidays, christmas and thanksgiving. he worked at mcdonald's. certainly couldn't have had a lot of money to go out and buy

gifts for his coworkers, but he worked at that place for a decade. because of this generous nature with whatever money he had, he made sure he loved him. 28 years old, earlier this week, he died in akron, ohio. this staff is happening every day. i'll keep on going through them here, that this is happening every day throughout this country. people are dying on our streets by casual gun violence. brittany garbage to a dumpster outside of emmett donald. walking down the stairs to check out commotion at your sister's housing complex. pulling into your driveway after dropping off your kid. these are not people going and looking for trouble. these are people who are just

doing their regular, everyday business. president obama came to connecticut on monday and told the story of a mother who was so frustrated at the phrase regarding her daughter's death due to gun violence that her daughter was in the wrong place at the wrong time. she just happened to be in the way they stray bullet. her purpose now, she was the right place at the right time. she was lucky his school. this guy was bringing garbage to the dumpster. anne-marie was coming home after dropping off her kids. lavinia l. was looking out for his sister. they are doing exactly what they're supposed to be doing. and yet they were guns down. and we have no answer. we are not able, after 20 years to step up and do something about it.

it's like raindrops. it's just become routine. so let me go back to newtown. and tell you more about these kids. let me tell you about olivia rose angle, six years old. olivia was a bright eyed burnet six-year-old girl. she loves school, left school, particularly loved reading and math. that's good because that's a lot of which are doing, reading and math. you're probably in good shape. her favorite stuffed animals and a lamb and her favorite colors as many people here throughout, specially squirrels, pink and purple. she was all set to play the angel in her churches nativity play on the night of the

tragedy. she laughed a lot and her parents said she lit up a room when she what didn't. she did a lot of things. she played soccer and tennis and took art classes and loved swimming and she loved her ballet classes and took a pop to lessons. she was involved in her d.c. girl scouts and loved playing soccer as well. every night when they gather for dinner, they would have olivia say grace and she was a great accessory. olivia really loved her 3-year-old brother, brayton. she was killed that day in sandy hook elementary school. josephine bay celebrated her 17th birthday three days before the tragedy. joey is what she was caught by her family. she was a kid with indomitable

spirit. she was autistic, like a handful of these kids, but she was still so sure. she very affectionate. she was getting really good care from professionals they are. she grew up in maryland actually, not too far from here and fell in love with the color purple. she loves the color purple. she smiles all the time. she loved hugs and even though she participated and rigorous therapy for her disability, she had treatment on a daily basis. she did it without complaint. she did it without complaint. she left her barbie dolls, computers, seeing as when with her sisters.

in late in sandy hook elementary school. at taxi about iv a iv of richmond. i've gotten to know idl pretty well over the course of the last few months. i've got to know a lot of these families over the last few. her parents have done something remarkable, which i'll mention. theriault, guess what color she loved? she left pane. to that pink cowboy boots a lot riding her pony, betty. she turned six years old too messy for the tragedy and she moved to connecticut a few years ago from san diego. she loves san diego. she was barefoot all the time. she went on the beaches of san diego until the sun went down and her relatives used to joke about how hard it was to get shoes because in san diego's she never used shoes and certainly wasn't going to use them here,

even in the colder climate connecticut. she had curly brown hair, infectious smile and her parents kept a blog, who they called their little hummingbird. she loved spending, icepack -- she actually loved the movie brave and tried out archery, the great things for her parents to do as well. they tried archery because of her love for the movie. they were obsessed with an easy bake oven issue is hopefully going to get for christmas. her parents are scientists and they have started a non-profit in the wake of arielle staff to raise money to get to the root cause of the illness that causes

someone to pick up a gun. it's an amazing thing for the richmond studio. i talked about a number of these efforts, others to face the page for daniel barton of the website to encourage kids to engage in acts of kindness or why aviel's parent state. it's an amazing things to do at the same time you are craving to find silver lining in all of this. the richmond's hope is they can use the memory of their precious six-year-old daughter to go race money twos the research on the causes of illness that led to this tragedy because it is an illness. to me, we talk about it in terms that even though and i've used that term, but it is evil masquerading as evil. and so, the richmond's will do

their part to go out and raise money so they can try to do a better job of figuring out what is going on in the brain that causes someone to leave their parents homes of the church in elementary school and start shooting, but also to examine what causes someone to walk up to a big donaldson will be as they are delivering garbage to the dumpster and shoot them as well. it is a different kind of illness i suppose, but it deserves examination nonetheless and the richmond sardar wrote to the fact he decided to reach out and try to make this discovery. another teacher to talk about it forever so. she wanted to be a teacher so bad. she was 30 years old. she had spent six years up to the point that she was hired as a full-time substitute teacher at sandy hook elementary.

she had spent six years working part-time jobs, just to make ends meet so she could substitute teach during the day. she was looking for a full-time job and had finally found that october she had been hired in newtown to be a full-time substitute teacher. it is just what lauren wanted do. and she was really good at it. and she was literally on the verge of that six-year dream when her life was taken into this bubbling and out or went and spent the morning of december 14, looking forward to a movie on a hot day. this is a big deal getting to see the hobbit. she loved animals, too. she was passionate about doing something about child poverty.

as part of the reason she went into education as she felt like she needed to live her life in a way that is going to reach out and eradicate the scourge of child poverty. everyone at her funeral were purple. she was a huge uconn basketball fan. in particular, she was a big fan of uconn women's basketball. if lauren is looking on from up above, she is very, very happy because our uconn women are national champions again. she would've watched that game last night and hopefully she was. lauren russo, she was right there. her dream is right within her grasp, what she had worked for all her life and in an instant, it was gone. lauren russo. teachers, little girls, little boys could have been great people, great educators, dancers

and singers. daniel barton said he wanted to be a paleontologist, just like his older brother and could've done great things. but they're gone. this isn't the first massacre that we feed. daniel barton and anna marques green and john hockley and benjamin wheeler, these are all kids that were killed in newtown connecticut. unfortunately, nissan is the latest in a line of mass shootings. 40% of the mass shootings that have happened in this nations history have happened as the assault weapons ban expired. 40% of all of the mass shootings in this nations history have happened in the last 80 years,

eight years as the assault weapon bans expired. i'm not an expert on cause a correlation, but that cannot be a coincidence. during those 10 years and high-capacity magazine, we saw 37% decrease in gun violence. we saw two thirds decrease in assault weapons. real numbers, real reductions in gun violence and gun violence perpetrated with these dangerous assault weapons. the minute the ban was lifted, if your magic increase in mass shootings. newtown was the second worst school shooting. it's seared in our memories in a different way because these are just precious young little kid

and you can't help but grieve in a fundamentally different way for six and 7-year-olds. the virginia tech was worse. virginia tech still to this day saw the highest number of people gunned down. so i want to talk about a few of those people. wrath of the 19 is a virginia tech sophomore. he left computer games and he played a lot of them competitively. she was very much into home computer repair and there were some that he wanted to do with his life. 's customers always loved him because they would bring computers to have it was one of the few people who know how to fix them. he did a lot of stuff outside his fascination. he loves rollerblading, whether in between classes are going for

long rollerblades omnes days. he adored movies and music. he played the piano and sang a local coffee house. he had a fondness of light wedge and has strong opinions, too. he was part of the date debate club. he talked in every single one of these classes creating of this cancer is something to say that ross is definitely one of them. she loved life. decide to make other people laugh. he used his music to do that. one of his classmates remembered as many qualities. his wit, humor and insightfulness made him so much fun to be around, but is caring for others was also always present. ..

he would regularly cut his hair and donated to the locks of love he was doing it for salary i am sure but he saw his ponytail as a means to donate to other people who needed some help. he was another techno-guru. he knew a lot about complicated gadgets and one of those was cameras. he was a great technician with the camera but also an avid photographer and jamie leaves behind a lot of wonderful art

which captured the intensity of the beauty that surrounded him. he hailed from a small-town pine mountain georgia and he was a big fan of the atlanta braves so he would be excited about the start the atlanta braves have had this year. he was a tough teacher. he really believed that understanding language was a way for people to engage in the world. it was a joy but it was really fundamental to understanding humanity. if you understood language and you understood different cultures you understood something bigger about it was to be a human being. jamie believed in what he did and he wanted to teach kids german but because he wanted to teach kids about the world. he died at virginia tech on april 16, 2007 at the age of 35.

brian roy blunt was a graduate student and he was a key aide at virginia tech. he cared about water resources, something that we actually talk about here pretty soon and something that not a lot of graduate students think about. he cared deeply about a just distribution of water assets across the country and that is what he was working on at virginia tech. but his first love was. and he was dedicated to building a relationship through his church with his god. he was one of the friendliest guys you would ever meet his friend said. he had a smile for everybody. he was a big sports fan. brian grew up with a passion for sports particularly baseball and his favorite team or the detroit tigers. he was one of these guys who followed every thing about his favorite team. he watched all the games but when the tigers weren't playing in the winter or the early

spring he would be analyzing every statistic from the past season and getting ready for the next season and he also loved virginia tech sports especially football and basketball. he was one of those people you would see on tv who came to all those games with the colors on his chest to show his support. his family said he will be remembered for his love of god, family friends and the detroit tigers and virginia tech and he was lost on that set date of april 16, 2007 as well. ryan christopher clark was known to his friends as back. he made a 4.0 gpa when he was a student at genentech and again he was a kid who had a mastery of science. he had a triple major and i didn't even know you could have a triple major but he had a

triple major in psychology biology and english. can you imagine what he would be a will to do with his life? can you imagine what he would contribute contribute to society if he lived with a triple major in psychology biology and english? he was a big man on campus and a leader on campus. he played the baritone in the marching virginians university band and was a resident at or so he was doing great things on campus and passing along a lot of knowledge to kids underneath him. his friends said he was a wonderful part of our baritone section. he was fun and loving in his delightful person to be around and he cared so much for the people. he would a friend anyone. he was a delight and he was a joy. ryan christopher clark was doing to do great things with his life. he was a student leader and at his young age he had already shown a compassion for his fellow students by being a resident adviser and showed a

talent for music by performing in the band and he was a triple major. publicly going to do something great in the scientific field in this country. but staff did not get to live that dream because along with so many others he was gunned down that day at virginia tech. virginia tech, newtown, aurora, tucson, and i can keep on going but these victims just don't and and stack on top of that 40, 50, 60 people every day being killed on our streets. and it's important that we talk about these big dems. that's why i wanted to come down to the floor today to do that, because if we don't do something

in the next two weeks these lists are just going to grow. because, the illegal guns that are used on the streets of chicago and bridgeport and new haven washington d.c. and new york, they weren't always illegal guns. they were legal guns before they became illegal guns. somewhere along the line their status transferred and the question is what can we do to stop the transformation from happening? i believe in the second amendment. i believe in the protection that it affords people to own a gun in to be able to hunt or shoot first board or to protect themselves but i want to make sure that guns they end the legal category and don't leach into the illegal category. that is why 90% of americans believe we should have a law in this nation that provides for universal mandatory background checks for everybody that buys a

gun. that's a really simple thing to do. it's just a sampling of the lives that could have been protected. the gun that was used in newtown went through background checked but so many of the guns that are used to kill boys and girls and young adults and men and women in our cities, those guns don't go through background checks. we think about 40% of guns that are sold across this country don't go through background checks. one of the tragedies in this long line is directly relevant to this bill. in columbine high school the gun that was used was bought at side of the background check system and a friend of the shooters who bought the guns said after the incident that the reason she bought it in the method that she did was because had she gone to another source it would have passed the background check.

it's the gun show loophole. what has it been, a decade plus since columbine and we still haven't closed the gun show loophole? we still haven't made a collective decision that we should make sure that they don't buy guns? she said she would have bought the gun if she went to licensed gun dealer because she would have been prohibited. and so a bunch of kids died at columbine high school and i know you can make the argument that because that's gotten their hands at way it may have gotten their hands another way. i get it. the fact that another sandy hook is going to happen and certainly you can't guarantee the fact that our streets are all of a sudden going to be safe overnight but you can make it a little bit harder to get that gun, little bit more difficult for criminals to get his hands on a weapon?

your chances look a whole lot better to survive on the streets of our cities or our schools and mosques and movie theaters. but as senator blumenthal pointed out i can absolutely make the case that if we had laws on on the books today newtown may not have happened and even if it did happen some of these kids would be alive today. what happened in one of those classrooms? a handful of kids survived because victoria soto put them into a closet. and when the shooting was over they were discovered in that closet. but another set of kids survived a different way. when lance went to switch magazines there was a delay in the shooting and a bunch of kids ran out of the classroom, five of them.

six were in the closet and five of them ran out of the classroom and decided -- as lance switched magazine clips. the five kids who don't look different from anna and daniel and dylan and benjamin that are are -- there is jesse, that are alive today because adam lanza had to switch clips. he only had to do is six times to get off 154 bullets. we won't exactly understand why bit he didn't discharge all of this 30 round clips. sometimes he shot 10 or 15 bullets before he switched that some of them went straight through. he only switch clips six times to get off 154 bullets in 10 minutes. if we had on the books a lot like we did that in the 1990s and early 2000's that restricts the ammunition clips to 10 rounds and amended the senator blumenthal and i will bring to

the floor next week either an amendment or a separate l., that shooter would have had to change ammunition clips 15 times, nine more opportunities for kids to run out of the classroom. i know we can't guarantee that things would have been different but let me tell you they're an awful lot of parents at newtown who believe that their sons or daughters might likely be alive today had we continued to have a restriction limiting ammunition clips to 10 rounds. we know that in tucson people would be alive today because that incident absolutely stopped when the shooters which clips. it was during the transfer of ammunition magazines that he was tackled. we know that if he had 10 rounds rather than a higher number there would still be people alive today. we know what happened in the movie theater in aurora. back i walked into the movie

theater with 100 round drum and the reason why somebody needs a 100 round drum that jams because these guys are amateurs. they haven't done this before. people say well it's not going to make any difference, 10 rounds, 30 round so it takes 10 seconds to switch. it's not really going to provide a different outcome. for professional shooter takes three seconds but for a nervous 21-year-old kid hyped up on adrenaline it's a different thing. five kids escaped in newtown. the shooting stopped in tucson. the shooting stopped when the gun jammed upon exchange of magazines in aurora. people are alive today because there is something that happens when you have to exchange magazines