committee. a lot of that is due to senator levin and senator inhofe's leadership. but this time we've got a problem, and it's not going well, and i'm deeply disappointed. i believe we can do better. we must do better. and i will not be able to vote to end the debate as we go forward tonight. i thank the chair and would yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. reid: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are. mr. reid: i ask consent that it be withdrawn.

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent that if cloture is invoked on executive calendar number 456, alejandro mayorkas to be deputy secretary of homeland security, all but one hour of postcloture time be yielded back. that when the senate convenes on friday, the senate resume consideration of the mayorkas nomination with the remaining hour of debate equally divided between senators coburn and carper or their designees. and the senate proceed to vote on the nomination. further that the senate then proceed to a cloture vote on the executive calendar number 459, john koskinen of the internal revenue service as under the regular order. and that if cloture is invoked, all postcloture time be yielded back and the senate proceed to vote on confirmation. further, that the senate then proceed to a cloture vote on executive calendar number 382, brian davis, to be a federal district judge as under the regular order. and if cloture is invoked, all postcloture time be yielded back and the senate proceed to vote on confirmation. the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid on the table, that the president be immediately notified of the senate's action.

further that the senate then proceed to a cloture vote on executive calendar number 452, janet yellen, federal reserve chair, as under the regular order. that if cloture is invoked, all postcloture time be yielded back and the senate proceed to vote on the confirmation on monday, january 6, at a time it be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the republican leader. furthered, that cloture on executive calendars number 455, 371, 457, 356 and 189 be with withdrawn. further, follow the cloture vote on the mayorkas nomination, the senate proceed to a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. mr. reid: for the information of senators, there will be two roll call votes tonight at 11:15 p.m. on the house message to accompany h.r. 344, the national defense authorization act and cloture on the mayorkas nomination -- and cloture on the mayorkas nomination. if cloture is invoked, there

will be a series of six roll call votes tomorrow beginning at about 10:00 a.m. mr. reid: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to a period of morning business until 10:00 p.m. and the senate then resume legislative session. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection.

the presiding officer: morning business is closed. the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mr. sessions: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. sessions: i further ask unanimous consent that commander joe kerrigan, the defense legislative fellow assigned to my office be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the 113th congress. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sessions: mr. president, we all have various people in our government on occasion that help us do our work in our office. as a member of the armed services committee, i have had the pleasure to have a number of fine defense fellows serve in my office and help us prepare the defense bill and deal with other issues of importance, and

commander kerrigan is just another one of the very fine fellows we have had. he is one of the best we have ever had. he has a good strategic mind. he works extremely hard. he's always thoughtful and a delight to have in the office. you know, one of the things when we talk about our military personnel and we have been talking about the retirement benefits and that sort of thing, remember unlike other government employees, they are on call any time, any day, to be sent anyplace in the world at the very risk of their lives and physical well-being. in addition, they work long hours. they are not -- they have no thought to object to being asked to work a weekend or night or 24 hours without sleep to do some task that they are called upon to do, and they get no overtime for it, and it's just the way things are done in the military

because when a challenge is out there, they act. i know some point out the weaknesses on this major, largentity, the defense department, and some of the management and problems that arise, but i have to say without any doubt whatsoever that that institution has quality people, people of integrity, men and women who love their country and serve their country and do whatever you ask them to do, and i just see that every day when we work with people like commander kerrigan, and he will be successful in whatever he does, whatever his next assignment will be. so as we wrap up this defense bill, i just wanted to thank him for his service, to thank all of our men and women in uniform who do their work and hope that we in the congress can be worthy of their trust. i thank the chair and would

yield the floor.

quorum call:

mr. coats: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from indiana. mr. coats: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the call of the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: the senate's not in a quorum call. mr. coats: mr. president, saner heads have prevailed. i think the news that we just received about a much more

reasonable way of moving forward rather than two more all-nighters with votes every four hours or so wasn't pleasing for anyone, particularly during the christmas season. and it was totally unnecessary to do this. had there not been some precipitating factors. and i don't -- i didn't come down here to point fingers. there's frustration on both sides, frustrations on the democrat side with republicans but i don't think it's been explained what caused republicans to become so concerned and so frustrated and so, frankly, so angry over the way that the rules were broken to change the rules and

something that has been precious to this body for its nearly -- or more than 200 years. and that is the uniqueness of the ability of a minority to have a say in legislation, to amend, or at least to offer amendments. they may succeed. they may not succeed. but to have a voice. and i think those who have not served here in the past and have never been in the minority can't begin to appreciate that right. now, i started in the house of representatives where majority rules. that's the way the founding fathers established that body. but they said they want the senate to be different, the place where the passions could be cooled, where debate could be held, where amendments could be offered, where laws could be changed or modified. members were given a six-year

term so that they wouldn't have the pressure of running for election in just months out or a year out. so they could step back and simply say, let's -- let's look at the longer view, the larger view. in my first time here in the senate, that practice was led by democrat leaders and republican leaders. the majority changed. i came here with a democrat leader who was eminently fair to the minority and insisted -- insisted -- as did many member members -- none more vividly and emotionally and committed than robert byrd, democrat from west virginia, who probably knew more about procedures and the history of the senate than all the other senators imieppe combined. read his volumes. and we would listen to robert byrd, respecting how he

respected this institution. and so i experienced under robert byrd and then republican bob dole and then tom daschle, democrat, trent lott, republic republican, i experienced respect for the rights of the minority even though i was in the majority. they were sacrosanct. and no one really stood up and said, let's take those rights away. and those that did were shot down by their own party. our party made an attempt at that. sense and reason prevailed. and it was imposed by those who had been here saying, you need to understand the unique role of the senate that's been created by our founding fathers, enshrined in the constitution.

225 years of tradition and history. to have the majority leader, the senator from nevada, come here and say, we're taking that away. what we had promised to do -- that is, keep the rules -- we're going to break them and we're going to impose on you, because you are dragging out the time it takes to secure nominations, we're going to impose on you, we're going to take away your minority rights and we're going to rule by majority. as i said, i understand the frustration that must have been felt on the other side of the aisle when members would delay the confirmation of nominees, but where does that frustration -- but why were

republicans doing that? they were doing that because the majority leader was using a technique to deny us amendments on any number of bills. everyone here has constituent interest, their own interests. they come to the senate. they want to move forward with an agenda. when you're in the minority, you know that the chances of passing that are slim unless you get support from the other side. that's why we cosponsor with democrats when we want to try to move something, to see if they can convince their members to join us. that's the way this -- this place has always worked. but under the process of the so-called filling of the tree -- and i know people say, "what in the world are you talking about, filling the tree?" it's a procedural method which denies the minority the rights to offer an amendment. i don't have the statistics in front of me but the majority leader has imposed that time after time after time. and so the frustration just kept building here day after day,

week after week, month after month, year after year of members who said, you know, i came to the united states sena senate. i don't have a voice. i don't have an ability to even bring up my amendment. what are we afraid of? taking a vote? if you can't take a vote and go home and explain your vote to people, then you shouldn't be here. you vote for what you believe in. you vote for what you think your state and your constituents that sent you here believe in. and some you win, some you lose. but at least you have the opportunity to make your case. and so for month after month and year after year, under the leadership of senator reid, increasingly that right has been taken away and the frustration that boils us from our feeling like you're -- forget it. forget 225 years of history.

forget how the founding fathers decided to structure this democratic function. forget how past leaders, republicans and democrats, held this as sacrosanct, a right for the minority, the minority voi voice. here's the -- here's the party that says, we got elected by a majority and, therefore, the minority has no say. well, as i say, those who have not served in the minority really won't understand the denial of the right to express your views and have it put before this body for a vote. you can get up and talk about it but you can't get it to a vote. so talk is cheap. until they experience that, i'm

afraid twhoantd have an understanding -- afraid, they won't have an understanding of how we need to get back to what this body was intended to be. so i just want my colleagues who have imposed this and supported the majority leader's tactics of denying members the ability to offer an amendment, regardless of what it's for, i want my colleagues to understand, that's where the frustration came from. and that's why we try to use whatever rules we have left to try to send the message that you're stiffing us, you're denying us the very right that we worked so hard to come to have here. and so i'm just making a plea, i guess. i'm making a plea that we sit down and have an adult

conversation about how to make this place more efficient, how to make this more effective but doing so in a way that the minority has a right to participate in the process. going through this exercise that we've gone through here for the last few weeks, these votes every two hours and sleeping on cots in our office or the couch, coming down here in the middle of the night to vote, if we're -- if we're talking about something serious for the country that needs that kind of debate, i'm not saying we shouldn't do that. if it's a defense bill or if it's a -- something critical, a fiscal issue or foreign policy issue, that's what this place is all about. if it takes us well into the night on something substantive like that, then we want to preserve that. but if it's over a nomination of a district court judge, and the

statistics are that the majority party has virtually gotten every one that they wanted, until just recently when republicans said somehow we've got to send a message that we're being shut out and we were shut out by a majority vote of the democrat party which basically told republicans forget the history, forget the past, sit down, you have no role. i hope we can get back to that. i hope we can get back to that because it is so important for the future of this country to have a deliberated that -- deliberative body that has the time and has the opportunity to debate, to offer amendments, to fashion legislation in a bipartisan fashion. maybe we've learned that lesson, maybe we haven't. there's a lot of rancor here right now. i'm glad we came to this agreement that 11:15 this

evening we'll move the process and then six votes tomorrow morning and then we'll be able to go home and enjoin christmas with our families. but i think the solution to this is not to throw daggers at each other but to sit down and think through. maybe reach back, maybe reach back to some of the writings of robert byrd, maybe reach back to some of the stirring, stirring words that were spoken by the majority telling their own members don't go there, you are taking away the very essence of the united states senate. one of the members on the democrat side made -- who has many, many years here, more experience than i, made that plea. unfortunately, it wasn't listened to by members on his -- in his caucus.

but i think if we could step back and we could look at the history of those in the majority doing everything they could to protect the rights of those in the minority, we would recognize that there is a better way to go forward than what we've done here. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. whitehouse: mr. president, a piece of part tri business. may i ask unanimous consent that a military fellow with senator murray's office, major james o'brien be granted floor privileges for today's session of the senate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. whitehouse: thank you. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. mr. coons: i ask unanimous consent that -- the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. coons: i come to the floor once again to talk about jobs, mr. manufacturing jobs. this week under senator amy klobuchar's leadership, the joint economic can committee released a report that lays out thoroughly and thoughtfully why manufacturing jobs have such promise and how congress can act to help spur manufacturing job creation now and into the future. the report shows that today manufacturing jobs are high quality jobs, that they pay better than jobs in any other sector in wages and benefits that they help create more local service sector jobs, that they contribute more to the local economy and that manufacturers invest the most in private r&d of any sector in our country. manufacturing as you well know, mr. president, has long played an important role in our nation's economy. it has spurred the postwar economic boom and served as an

economic backbone that built the american middle class. but over the past 60 years in our country has changed grajtly and then dramatically. so as, the playing field on which we can and must compete. due to global competition and the worst recession since the great depression, we lost 6 million manufacturing jobs in the united states in the first decade of this century. we're now on our way barks but we're well short of where we were tbh 200 in 2000. we have gained 550 thowr -- 5500 manufacturing jobs. a new report from the institute for supply management shows the u.s. manufacturing sector grew last month at the fastest pace in two and a half years and hiring has reached an 18-month high. the value of our manufacturing exports has grown 38 nuclear the

last four years - 38% in the lat four years. but, mr. president, as you and i well noe know, as many of our colleagues know, we need to invest more in that success and growth l, in the private sector and public sector. overall, this is great news about the slow but real but steady recovery of our manufacturing sector. the reason we're coming back is the united states is actually poised to compete in advanced manufacturing in the manufacturing economy of this century. in the 21st century, manufacturing is fundamentally different than it was in our past. rather than repeating the same simple tasks over and over again, workers must now carry out far more complex and varying tasks. they need to be critical thinkers and problem solvers and do math and communicate in writing and as a team and work in ways not expected 20 or 30 years ago. crucially, they need to understand the entire manufacturing process in a way that wasn't necessary before.

yes, there are machines doing a lost work but we need workers who can understand them ands to keep our steady, growing benefits to increased productivity. manufacturers can't rely on someone from outside our country to fix a problem every time there is one. today they rely on their workers to troubleshoot on the fly. our workers need to continue to be one of the most productive in the world and to do that they need to be more skilled than ever, particularly because they are overseeing highly complex operations. the manufacturing floor of today, as this report reminds us, is no longer the dinghy diny workplace. we can win by training our workers for these jobs. while some nations engage in a race to the bottom on environmental, labor, and wage standards, this isn't the playing field that we can or should try to win on. we have the tools to lead the way in manufacturing in an

innovation-centered economy. this joint economic committee report outlines how low energy costs due to greatly expanded natural gas supplies, a highly skilled workforce relative to much of the rest of the world and having still the best universitieuniversities give usl fighting chance. american manufacturing is poised for a takeoff. now we have this report from the joint economic committee which shows us just that. it shows why we should remain optimistic about american manufacturing. if we can simply in this body harness the will to act. this report, well frankly it lays out a lot of why we've created manufacturing jobs for america. manufacturing jobs for america is a campaign, a campaign to build support for the good manufacturing legislation that democrats and republicans can agree on. so far 26 democratic senators have come together to contribute 44 bills to a conversation. 31 of those bills have already been introduced in this body and

almost half of them have bipartisan cosponsors. we are actively seeking republican cosponsors on the rest. our goal overall is to generate more and work more closely with republicans to build consensus for bills that can pass the senate, pass the house, and go to the white house to become law. we want to see manufacturing bills that can really help put americans back to work. and i'm grateful for the leadership of senator debbie stabenow, who along with her cochair lindsey graham -- senator lind di lindsey graham,e bipartisan caucus that is helping to take the bills and ideas generated through this initiative and turn neem solid, bipartisan bills. this joint economic committee report emphasizes four key areas where we have to focus to create manufacturing jobs now in the future and they're exactly the areas that the manufacturing jobs for america initiative centers on as well. first we have to strengthen america's workforce. second we have to fight for a more level global playing field

so we can open up markets abroad and compete successfully. third, we need to make it easier for manufacturers, especially new and small businesses to access capital, to invest in research and development as well as new equipment and products. and, fourth, we can and should do more to ensure a coordinated all-of-government effort in supporting manufacturing by insisting on a stronger, clearer, national manufacturing strategy. together across these four areas the bills in manufacturing jobs for america can have a real and substantial impact if they become law. i believe in the power of this initiative because i've seen the potential of manufacturing up close. in my time in the private sector, i developed a fierce belief in how we can and must act here in washington to support and spur american private-sector manufacturing. before came here, much of my work in the private sector was at a manufacturing company, a materials-based science company that makes hundreds of products. at one point i was part of a site location team that had to

decide where to locate a new state-of-the-art semiconductor chip manufacturing plant. what made the difference in the ultimate decision? it was first and foremost, we needed skilled and reliable workers. second, we wanted the state and city and county governments to be responsible and make investments in infrastructure. while we considered tax credits and training grants, the tboirse first two were the main factors. the skills at all levels and the responsiveness of the state, local, and federal government in investing in infrastructure. this taught me two things: the advanced manufacturing sector can thrive in the united states. this sector was located in america, not overseas. if this congress makes a scertd across-the-board push to help create manufacturing jobs in america, i am convinced we can lay a strong foundation for growth today and tomorrow. the opportunity is there, just

in front of us. we just need to stopt endless bipartisan -- we just need to stop the endless bipartisan struggles and seize the very we will, very positive opportunity in front of us to lay out a bipartisan path afford to strengthen the manufacturing sector in our country. together we can keep our factories humming and lead the way in new industries of the future. we just need the political will to try and that's what this effort dr -- manufacturing jobsr america dpsh is all about. i am so grateful to senator klobuchar and the joint economic committee and for the vision it lays out and i appreciate the effort of all of my colleagues to have contributed great and strong and clear ideas to this manufacturing jobs for america initiative. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call: