wrote from henderson county, that's because his premium will jump $400 a month to over $1,100 a month under obamacare. americans he wrote were told we could keep our existing policy if we chose. not only was this a lie, it's a lie that will cost me an additional $700 a month. how is a political show vote going to help him? of course, it isn't and there's respect a thing the democratic party's political arm can do to fix these problems. kentuckians and countless americans suffering under obamacare need real solutions, not gimmicks. not base-pleasing ideology. solutions is what is needed. look, washington democrats forced america's middle class to enter this impossible situation. they basically blocked every reasonable attempt to reform this law or to change it in any

meaningful way. yet now obamacare is becoming politically difficult for them. they are deflecting blame. just this morning, we saw several imperiled obama democrats spin an op-ed that underscores the point. but americans are not going to be fooled by any of this. americans agree that it's time for washington democrats to work with us to remedy the mess they created, and that means repealing this law and replacing it with real reforms. it's time for them to work with us on a real jobs agenda, too, to take up the numerous bills the house has already sent over and get them onto the president's desk. americans are fed up with the games and the tricks. they want serious solutions. you don't need a campaign pollster to figure that out, and republicans believe it's about time the american people got those solutions.

the presiding officer: the leadership time is reserved. mr. mcconnell: mr. president, i haven't yielded the floor yet. mr. president, i want to pay tribute to a kentucky soldier who tragically has been lost while serving his country. colonel michael c. cable of kentucky was killed while guarding officials in afghanistan on march 27, 2013, exactly one year ago today. he was 26 years old. for his service in uniform,

sergeant cable received several awards, medals and decorations, including the bronze star medal, the purple heart, the army commendation medal, the army good conduct medal, the national defense service medal, the afghanistan campaign medal with bronze service star. the iraq campaign medal with bronze service star, the global war on terrorism service medal, the noncommissioned officers professional development ribbon and the army service ribbon. the overseas service wimbledonon, the nato medal, the combat action badge and the air assault badge. a decade ago as a high school student, michael was a star on the davis county high school cross country team, and they won many races. i sent out an email this morning with this bible verse, says tony

row, michael's former high school coach. no man has greater love than a man who lays down his life for his friends. he's a hero. he died fighting for us and trying to make life better for the people of afghanistan. what tony rowe says about michael is absolutely true, and in fact the most important thing that michael's family wants the world to understand is that michael was performing a mission at the time he was attacked. and this important mission was protecting others. it was not only highly important work but highly dangerous. before leaving on his final deployment, michael pulled his family members aside to warn them his mission would be dangerous. he was prepared before he left for anything that happened, said raymond johnson, michael's older brother. in that conversation, michael described his sister's and --

hissters and a close family friend as the most important people in his life, and he asked his family to take care of them if anything happened to him. it's very hard, says raymond. he was my little buddy. he wanted to make sure that no matter what, we continued to enjoy life, and we're trying to do that. michael's tragic loss was the first combat death for the 101st airborne division based in fort campbell, kentucky, for that deployment to afghanistan. he joined the army in august of 2007 and arrived at fort campbell in december of 2010. he served as a fire support specialist. in his family, michael was known as a prankster. his last big prank was pulled on his younger sister, dallas. michael promised dallas he would buy her a car. he had his older sister wendy

tell dallas that michael was determined to make good on his word but that he had bought her a really old and ugly car. wendy told dallas that she would have to act excited so as to not hurt michael's feelings. far from a beat-up clunker, michael gave his sister ace own -- his own jeep cherokee just before he deployed to afghanistan. michael loved sports of all kinds. he played golf to relax and won a golf tournament at fort campbell. his favorite professional sports team, the green bay packers. michael had plans to leave the army after his tour in afghanistan to open his own home remodeling business. his family remembers michael as always busy spending time with friends. so, mr. president, we are thinking about michael's family today, including his parents, vicki and raymond johnson, his siblings raymond, lisa, wendy, kennedy and idalis, and many

other beloved family members and friends. i would like the family of sergeant michael c. cable to know that this united states senate recognizes that sergeant cable was doing his job, and we are filled with gratitude. without the men and women brave enough to wear our country's uniform and to do the jobs our country asked them to do, i fear for what would become of our nation. i know my colleagues join me in honoring sergeant cable for his life of service and for his tragic sacrifice, and i want to extend my deepest condolences to michael's family for their loss one year ago today. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. under the previous order, the senate will be in a period of morning business until 10:30 a.m., with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each, with the

time equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, with the republicans controlling the first half. mr. thune: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from south dakota. mr. thune: mr. president, yesterday we -- the democrats in the senate here held a news conference in which they rolled out their agenda, which has been described differently by different news organizations. the headline from the "washington examiner" said majority threatened, democrats take up populist agenda to distract obamacare." "the wall street journal" said "senate democrats try to change subject from obamacare." and "the new york times," in reporting on that story, their headline was democrats as part of mid-term strategy to schedule votes on pocketbook issues, so

that was a little more perhaps flattering headline. in the story in "the new york times," it goes on to say that the proposals have little chance of passing. democrats concede that making new law is not really the point. rather, they are trying to force republicans to vote against them. and later on in the story, "the new york times," it goes on to say part of the goal is to energize a democrat base which will be crucial to turn out in the more conservative states where the party needs to win this year. so everybody kind of gets the -- gets the joke, mr. president, that this is really about the midterm elections, and the agenda the democrats are now rolling out is designed really to try to create a distraction away from their economic record and from obamacare. and it's interesting to me because the democrats have been in the majority here in the united states senate now for eight years. eight years. and so you would think by now that this sort of an agenda would have been enacted.

in fact, they were for a few years had a filibuster-proof majority here in the united states senate, had 60 votes. were able to do literally anything that they wanted to do, and most of these items now are being rolled out because it is, as i said, an election year. and they are saying these are things we can do for the american people. well, i think the american people, mr. president, are saying enough already. you've done enough to us. please don't do any more. and the agenda is being described as a fair shot for everyone. well, i think the american people perhaps don't see it as a shot for them as they do a shot at them. if you look at the last several years as any indication of that, it hasn't worked very well. the agenda that's been advanced by the democrats here in the united states senate and by the president of the united states has left us with a sluggish economy, chronic high unemployment, massive amounts of debt, the lowest participation rate, labor participation rate literally that we have seen in

35 years. in fact, last year, the economy grew at 1.9%. so you have got this sluggish, anemic economy that's sputtering along, and the american people are going where are the jobs and where is the take-home pay? since the president took office, household income in this country has gone down, not up. down by $3,700 per family. and if you look at all the policies that are put in place by the democrat majority, there isn't anything really you can point to that helps create jobs, mainly because it's heavy-handed, top-down management from washington, d.c. what the american people need, mr. president, are policies that will unleash the american free enterprise system that will unleash our entrepreneurs and our small businesses and allow them to go out and to create jobs and to grow this economy, expand this economy, which is better for every american, every managed care middle class family in this country wants to have a better quality of life, a better

standard of living for their children and grandchildren than what they have experienced. this may be the first generation of americans where that's not true. why? because policies here in washington, d.c., make it more difficult, more expensive to create jobs. you go right down the list. you look at obamacare, and according to the congressional budget office, obamacare is going to result in 2.5 million fewer full-time workers, according to the c.b.o. 2.5 million fewer full-time workers over the next decade and a trillion dollars in lower wages. fewer jobs, lower take-home pay. that's what we are seeing as a result of the policies that have been put in place by the democrat majority here in the united states senate and by the president of the united states. now, yesterday, there was another announcement about yet another delay of obamacare, which will be, i think, the 30th delay that we have seen so far with regard to that legislation, and in speaking about that delay, the majority

leader of the united states senate said yesterday that he thought the delay was necessary because people weren't educated enough about how to use the internet. now, only in washington, d.c., only in washington, d.c., do you see politicians blaming the american people for their failures, because that's essentially what this is. the obamacare legislation by and large, i think most people will conclude, just isn't working. it didn't add up in the first place. it's not working. it's leading to fewer jobs, higher premiums, higher deductibles, lower take-home pay for the american people, fewer choices for doctors and hospitals, and as to the idea that it's the american people's fault because they aren't educated enough about how to use the internet, my dad is 94 years old. he lives in my hometown of myrtle, south dakota. it's in the middle of the state, a town of about 500 people. he uses the internet every single day. i don't think the problem is the internet or that the people in this country aren't educated enough to use the internet.

i think it has a lot more to do with the fact that incompetence here in washington, d.c., led to a failed rollout that confused millions of americans, and that is not the responsibility, nor should we blame the american people for that. that is government trying to do big things and not doing them well. mr. president, the government doesn't do complicated things very well. and so when you hear the new agenda now coming out from the democrat majority here in the senate that we're going to do this for the american people, we're going to do that for the american people, they talked about a minimum wage increase, there again you have the congressional budget office saying that raising the minimum wage by 40%, which is what is being proposed, would, in fact, cost the economy jobs, up to a million jobs and also would raise prices. and it's going to raise prices on the people that will be hurt the most by price increases, lower income americans. now, instead of doing -- putting policies in place that cost the american economy jobs, we ought

to be looking at things that actually create jobs. we have a proposal called the keystone pipeline which the president's own state department has said would create 42,000 jobs. so those are real jobs, shovel ready jobs that could be available today. but instead we want to put policies in place that are actually going to cost the economy jobs. now, if you're an american citizen out there and you hear that washington, d.c. is going to do more for you yet again, you have got to be saying whoa, hold the phone, we've seen enough of that already. we've seen this picture before. we've seen what that results. when the government tries to do big, complicated things, it doesn't do them well. the web site is that, as is the obamacare legislation followed by 25,000 pages of regulations which the people of this country have to discern and try to figure out. i would submit there are things that would create jobs. the keystone pipeline we know will create jobs.

trade mow proa motion authority, passing trade promotion authority and allowing our negotiators to create more market students for small businesses and ranchers and intiewrnls will create job. passing trade promotion authority and getting the trans-pacific trade agreement enacted they say would expose american businesses to a billion you in consumers worldwide. those are the types of things that do create jobs. we know that. instead of having an election-year agenda that is just tairptly state -- trairptly -- transparently stated to do that, why don't we talk about things that will improve the overall standard of living for people in this country. i would make one other observation, another thing coming out of the administration which is incredibly harmful to the economy, make it difficult for lower-income americans and middle-class americans to make ends meet are policies out of

the e.p.a. that will drive up the cost of energy. energy is an important input. it is a huge factor in places like south dakota where we have a cold weather climate, where we have an ag-based economy, travel long distances to get places so when you talk about raising the cost of energy in a state like south dakota, you are significantly increasing the cost of doing business in way that will make it more difficult and expensive to create the jobs we need to get the people back to work and the economy growing at a faster rate. these things are harmful, mr. president, to job growth. i talked to a bunch of small businesses in my state last week and asked them about some of these policies and asked them what are the biggest obstacles right now to your success and what are things that could be done that would actually be helpful. and, of course, obamacare is something that immediately comes up, but also the whole issue of the minimum wage which a lot of these small businesses and i was talking to businesses, the smallest i think had 30 employees, the largest had maybe a little over 200 employees.

and they just said look, this is a job killer. because what that does, it means we have -- we're not going to be able to hire as many people. it adds significant higher operating costs every year to our businesses. and makes it more difficult to create the jobs for the people who actually need those jobs. most of whom in a lot of these places are going to be young people trying to get that first job and make their way up the economic ladder. mr. president, i -- there are lots of things we could talk about that really do address the problem rather than just addressing the symptoms and we want to vote on an extension, we're going to vote on an extension of unemployment insurance, the 13th time we've done that. there is a need to help people who have lost jobs and been displaced in the economy but when are we going to start focusing on the problem rather than the symptom? the problem is we've got almost four million americans who have been unemployed more than six months. we ought to be looking at, what

can we do to create jobs for the people who don't have jobs in our economy? i've introduced an amendment to the unemployment insurance legislation that has some simple solutions. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to speak for additional three minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: and one of those things is to waive the employment for -- employer mandate for any employer who hires somebody out of work longer than six months. you get a waiver the employer mandate could which could save several thousand dollars a year. it calls for a six-month payroll tax holiday for employers which if you have a $40,000 employee on your payroll would say $2,400, you could say $4,000, $5,000 a year in the cost of hiring someone with the those suggestions. another suggestion would be to allow people to have access to

low interest loans up to $10,000 to relocate to places where there is lower unemployment. my state of south dakota is looking for workers. i travel to my communities, we can't find workers. well, one of the biggest obstacles for people to get to jobs to is to relocate. to give them a low-interest loan to allow him the to move to places where there is low unemployment and where there are jobs would make a lot of sense. finally, it adopts the skills act which passed the house of representatives which consolidates 35 federal programs down to nine so you don't have all this duplication and overlap in all these federal programs for job training for worker training, and shifts that resource out to the states where states can design programs that actually prepare and equip the people in their states for the jobs that are available. those are the types of solutions that we ought to be talking about, mr. president, rather than top-down, heavy-handed

government-driven solutions that make it more difficult to create jobs and the equivalent of throwing a big wet blanket on the american economy at a time we can least afford it. my state of south dakota is a good example. we've balanced our budget of year, we have zero personal or corporate income tax, a trained work force, a good climate for doing business. the light integrity touch and we have a low unemployment rate, a vibrant economy, and mainly because we just understand, mr. president, that it isn't the government that creates jobs. and so when the senate democrats and the president come out with the election-year agenda, a poll-tested agenda which is clearly driven simply to try and generate votes in the midterm elections rather than solve problems and it says that in these stories, i mean the stories basically are transparent about about what they're trying to do. we ought to focus on things that actually great create jobs,

passing the keystone pipeline, passing trade promotion authority, looking at real solutions that do more than just treat symptoms but actually get at the problems. the problem is we've got too many people in this economy unemployed for a long period of time. we need to get the economy growing at faster than 1.9% a year. if growth is back up to 3% or 4% a year, it will dramatically change the future for middle-class families in this country. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, as many here in this chamber know, i am very proud of the many ways my home state of washington is leading the way. our state is an economic leader, we're home to the american aerospace industry, we have a thriving agricultural sector, and dozens of companies creating new products and new

jobs with cutting-edge technology. we're a leader in protecting the environment and educating our children, and washington state is also the place that tens of thousands of service members and veterans call home. and last but not least, i could not be more proud of our state's history of protecting the rights of all of our citizens, including members of the lgbt community. we know in washington state that it's just wrong to discriminate against people. we know that a person's race or their religion or their gender have nothing to do with their worth as a human being, and we know that actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity don't either. we get that in my home state of washington, but we can't stop working until the same is true in all 50 states. so, mr. president, that's why i've come to the senate floor today. i want to share with everyone a

story about a young man by the name of chris. chris would be the first to tell you he has not led the easiest of lives. after turning 18 years old, and aging out of the foster care system in texas, chris found himself homeless -- homeless -- at 18 years old in houston, sleeping on whatever park bench or apartment roof was available to him that evening. well, as luck would have it, one night while chris was searching for a public rest room to use, he stumbled on an admissions fair for the university of houston's downtown campus. chris had always had ambitions to go to college, but because of his very unstable childhood and minimal income pursuing higher education was never a priority. but once he learned that night that tuition for the school was waived for foster system

alumni, this dream seemed more like a reality. so chris decided to enroll. he went to school, declared his major in social work and settled into college life and made friends and participated in extracurricular activities on campus. in fact, chris got so involved that one of his good friends, isaac, invited him to be his running mate for the upcoming student government election. chris was very excited about that idea and realized that it was his opportunity to make a real difference for many of the students on campus who had been through some of the same trying experiences that he had. so chris and isaac kicked off their campaign and pursued elective office. then one day, in fact, one year ago this month, chris was called into the dean of students' office. chris sat down and the dean

reached into his briefcase and pulled out a stack of fliers with chris' photo on each and every one of them. with a big x across his picture. in big, bold letters across the top of the flier, it read "want aids" with a question mark at the end of it and across the bottom of that flier it read" don't support the isaac and chris homosexual agenda." then on the back of the flier, unbelievably, was a copy of chris' official private medical record displaying in plain view that chris was h.i.v. positive. stunning. i'm sure every one of you are as stunned as i was. then the dean informed chris that these had been found all over the campus. and as if the situation could be any worse, the dean told

chris, there's nothing the university or the administration could do about it. nothing. at one point chris said that the administration even accused him of being responsible for these acts. chris was told that the administration's sole responsibility was simply just to inform him that this was going on. nothing more, just to make sure he knew about it. chris was told that words like homosexual or aids were proper terms, protected speech, and not grounds for punishment. well, as you can imagine, chris was devastated. he didn't attend class for weeks officer that and his friends and family and loved ones started to seriously worry about his well-being. in the meantime the word of this and chris' status as h.i.v. positive spread, as you can imagine, like wildfire across this campus. and while chris had been out to a small group of friends, there

was no going back once the local paper picked up on the story and eventually it circulated in the national media. well, mr. president, thankfully, there is a happy ending to this heartbreaking story. and yet another example of how the younger generation in our country are swiftly helping to turn the tide against intolerance. chris and isaac won that election, and chris served a term as the student body vice president. well, chris has now moved on to serve in a different but somewhat similar capacity, and that is as a congressional intern here in my office in washington, d.c. and i'm proud to say that chris is here with us on the floor today. and just like the fate he found that one night in search of a public rest room, chris now has another chance to be a part of a life-changing experience because today, mr. president, i've come

to the floor to reintroduce the tyler clemente higher education anti-harassment act of 2014. now, as many of you may remember, this legislation is named after tyler clemente, he was an 18-year-old freshman at rutgers university. back in 2010 without his knowledge, tyler's roommate streamed video footage on the internet of tyler in his dorm room being intimate with another male. after his roommate and another student invaded his privacy in such a serious way and continued to harass him over the internet, tyler leapt off the george washington bridge and sadly took his own life. well, when i sat down and spoke with chris about this recently, he told me how his story was very close to ending just like tyler's. he didn't have anyone on campus to turn to.

and since the administration said they were unable to do anything about this hate crime, chris really felt like he had no opportunity for closure. chris told me, and i quote, "for most young people when things like that happen, we've got to have people who are going to be proactive in helping them and not someone telling them there's nothing we can do to help you." quite shockingly, mr. president, despite statistics telling us that lgbt students are nearly twice as likely to experience harassment when compared to their heterosexual peers, there is no federal requirement today that colleges and universities have policies to protect their students from harassment, and that's why i feel so strongly about this legislation. the legislation i'm introducing will require colleges and universities that receive federal aid to establish

antiharassment policies for students, no matter who they are or what they identify with, and they will be required to have the language of those policies easily accessible. it will recognize cyberbullying of all kinds as serious means of harassment. finally, the tyler clemente act authorizes competitive grants for schools to initiate or expand programs to prevent these kinds of things from happening to provide counseling for victims of the accused and train everyone on campus about how to prevent this in the future. mr. president, when i was back home last week in spokane, i told chris' story, just like i did today, and about the desperate need for these kinds of protections, and i'm sure like many of those listening, most of my constituents were pretty surprised to learn that these policies aren't already in place at all of our institutions of higher learning, and i

couldn't agree more. why aren't colleges and universities across our country all being proactive in establishing these programs and points of contact for students like tyler or chris who have experienced or could experience such a life-changing event. now, many schools currently have successful prevention and counseling programs in place, but students shouldn't have to take their health and safety into account when they decide where they're going to study in this country. mr. president, chris recounted for me how each day during this horrible experience he would wake up and there were five or six seconds where he would just feel normal again, as if nothing had happened, but then reality set in and it felt like a ton of bricks had fallen on top of him. fortunately for chris, he was able to lean on the campus lgbt community for support during this very trying time, but he

said, and i quote -- "if i hadn't reached out to the community, i probably wouldn't be here today. every day, going to school felt like a battlefield." mr. president, unfortunately, there are others like chris who don't have that point of contact on campus, a supportive parent or a tight-knit group of friends who help them get through these kinds of experiences, so i am very proud to be here today with the support of my outstanding cosponsor, senator baldwin, to take a major step to change this, and i would be remiss today if i didn't take a moment to pay tribute to my friend, senator frank lautenberg, and his staff for their tireless work to craft this original bill which serves as a tremendous honor to the life of tyler clemente. mr. president, no student, whether they are gay or straight or black or white or christian or muslim, should have to face

discrimination and harassment in pursuit of their education, and while i know it is impossible to eradicate all bad behavior from our society, we have to arm our campuses with the tools and resources necessary to not only efficiently and effectively support the victims but also to take action against those who have perpetrated such senseless crimes. mr. president, that is why i am here today. i'm very proud to introduce this legislation. i want to thank chris for his courage in speaking out and his ability to be here today to make sure that no other student in our country ever has to go through what he did. thank you, mr. president, and i yield the floor. the presiding officer: morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to the consideration of h.r. 4152, which the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 328,

h.r. 4152, an act to provide for the cost of loan guarantees for ukraine. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the time until 12:00 noon will be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their assigned designees. mrs. murray: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the time under quorum call be equally divided between the majority and minority. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. murray: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. reed: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. reed: mr. president, i would ask unanimous consent to dispense with the calling of the quorum. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reed: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i rise today to urge my colleagues to support the bipartisan agreement that i have reached with five of our colleagues from across the aisle. senators heller, collins, portman, murkowski and kirk, to provide emergency unemployment insurance to 2.7 million americans. this commonsense bipartisan agreement is one of the main things the senate should do to help create jobs and strengthen our economic recovery so that it works for every american, so everyone has a fair shot. so i hope my colleagues will join with us and pass this bill quickly so it can be taken up for a vote in the house. the individual and economic consequences from the lapse of these unemployment insurance funds are very clear. i have described many times, my

colleagues have come to the floor many times and indicated the individual cases where people who have worked for years find themselves without a job through no fault of their own, desperately needing some modest assistance, and these benefits are about $300 or $350 a week just to keep going, to keep looking for work, to keep trying to be part of the work force, which they desperately want to do. we share these stories and these individual hardships ripple across our entire economy. indeed, the congressional budget office and other economists looking at this, not from the individual perspective but from the overall economy, find that this is one of the most effective ways to keep the economy moving forward. the c.b.o. has indeed estimated that our failure so far to extend benefits through 2014

would cost the economy 200,000 jobs, and that simply is a result of these payments to individuals go right back into the economy. it stimulates other workers that have work and have demand. so restoring economic assistance for americans who have lost their jobs and are trying to find new ones, it's not only the right thing to do but it's also the -- the smart thing to do for our economy, and that's why i have been pressing for an extension of these benefits on a longer period of time. but we have reached a principal compromise -- and i have to underscore the word compromise -- to do it over a five-month period, some retroactive and some if we move quickly enough prospectively. but it's frustrating to realize that some in congress don't want to do this, and i think that's unfortunate, not only because of

the effects it has on their individual constituents but also because it's going to adversely affect our economy. it's not going to add jobs. in fact, as c.b.o. suggests, it could indeed take away jobs. let me take a few moments, though, of addressing some of the arguments that are being raised in the house of representatives and why they can't support this. basically it comes from the notion this is just too hard to implement. even if you concede that these benefits are absolutely important, that they would provide economic stimulus, we can't implement it. these concerns were highlighted by a letter that was proposed from the national state work force agencies. but all of these concerns are addressable. indeed, the secretary of labor, tom perez, has addressed these concerns point

by point in a recent letter and he has importantly committed to work collaboratively with the states, as has been the case in all 12 extensions or expansions of this program since the great recession to do this. we have repeatedly extended this program, there have been periods of time where there has been a gap between extensions and they've had to look backwards, these state administrators and secretary perez is committed to do all he can and have all the efforts of the department so this can be implemented successfully. i'm confident it can and he is confident it can. but there are four basic assertions made that i want to address. first, the states indicated that while they're struggling with antiquated computer systems that make it hard to implement changes quickly. the states have received over the past five years, $345 million to modernize their unemployment insurance systems. that's federal money going to states so they can fix their

computer systems. so this is not exactly an era we've neglected in terms of helping them modernize their computer systems. and program changes that we've made in the past, i was part of the effort in 2012, to extend unemployment compensation benefits, we've made significant changes. we reduced the total number of weeks from 99 to approximately 73, we've made other changes in the program, how to be implemented and we provided these resources to do that. so we're talking not today about some complicated new system, we are simply extending the existing system. we're not changing the tiers, we're not changing any of the calculations that they have to make, and indeed, that is one of the reasons why i've been arguing consistently for a straight extension, not altering the number of weeks that qualifies for tier one or

tier two or tier three but simply take the system that was in place on december 28 and just fund it retroactively to help those who lost their benefits and prospectively as far forward as we could go. and let me point out as i was making this request before december 28, i would have hoped we could have moved in december or at least early in january to go ahead and extend this system so that there would be absolutely no disruption whatsoever for the states or for the recipients. but it's been a difficult and long process to get here. and frankly without the collaboration and efforts of many of my colleagues and particularly as i've indicated my republican colleagues, senator heller and collins and portman and murkowski and kirk and my democratic colleagues

including senator broork who is -- booker who is here, we wouldn't be here. but we wouldn't have all these implementation problems had we acted in december. second, there was a concern that one provision relating to federal funding for the program could be read in an overly broad fashion so that the agencies, the state agencies which will be so confused and complicated they couldn't function. out of an abundance of caution we worked to address this. we revised the legislation that we had proposed to clarify the position, particular provision so it could not be misconstrued. in so doing we made it crystal clear the prohibition on the use of federal funding is limited solely to eligibility determination to insuring millionaires do not receive emergency unemployment benefits. and third this is related to the millionaire issue, is that there was some concern that it would be difficult to administer

this provision. well, in our legislation we have a pretty straightforward requirement that individuals certify their income in the proceeding year wasn't more than $1 million. this is a simple certification that i think can be accomplished rather efficiently and quickly by the agencies. and the secretary of labor has committed to issuing guidance to help states with implementation. as the department does when any new statutory provisions is enacted and as i said before the secretary has assured all of the states that he is going to work to expeditiously and efficiently give them the tools to implement this program as soon as the congress passes it and the president signs it. and finally there was a concern about the retroactivity. that challenge as i said before is one i and others pressed so hard to get this done prior to december 28 of last year. but even so, states were able

to successfully work with the department of labor during previous lapses to provide this aid to unemployed workers. we've had these situations before where there has been a disruption of benefits and then we've renewed the program weeks, months later. and the department of labor is confident that these challenges can be overcome. and, frankly, mr. president, all these administrative challenges for the states seem to me to pale in comparison to the challenges faced by our constituents who are in a job market where in some places there are three applicants for every job, in a job market where if you've worked for 25 years, you're about 50 years old, and you're competing with 25- and 30-year-olds who have gotten recent educations, maybe they have more high-tech skills, computer skills than you had in a market that's rapidly becoming more

technologically oriented in terms of labor demand, and they are facing severe challenges. and these resources are not lavish, i mean the idea for someone with -- would not work because they're getting $300 a week is difficult, i think, to imagine for many people, particularly the people who have records of work for 10, 20, or 30 years. and what they're doing with this money is putting it right back in our economy. they're trying to hold on to their homes, many, we've heard stories about that. they're trying to put gas in the car. people have contacted me indicating that they use it to keep their phones working because without a phone, they can't get the callback for the job interview to go and find the job. so this is something that i think has to be considered in my book weighs much more heavily than administrative issues which the secretary of labor assures us will be dealt with, can be

dealt with, and he will work with the states to make sure it's done effectively. let me conclude by thanking republican colleagues who joined with us. they have been extraordinarily thoughtful, collaborative. they have really contributed in a atmosphere of exchanging ideas, of thoughtful consideration. it is a model, i think, of how this organization, this senate should work for frequently and i thank and commend hem them. they have done a great service for their constituents and for the economy and for the country. and indeed ultimately, many of americans will benefit through their great contribution. so i will hope as we come up to

these procedural votes we can move forward and then we can move this expeditiously and then we would hope that the house would respond appropriately and we can give some hope and give some confidence to people who are struggling to find jobs in a very difficult economy. with that, mr. president, i would yield the floor.

mr. booker: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. mccain: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent further proceedings under the quorum call be suspend. the presiding officer: without objection. the senator from arizona. mr. mccain: thank you, mr. president.i flies support of the pending -- mr. mccain: thank you, mr. president. i rise in support of the pending legislation before the body. i urge the vote of all of my colleagues.

this legislation is a bipartisan effort led by senator menendez and corker, the chairman and ranking member of the foreign relations committee and is very important. today the people of ukraine will be watching the united states senate and later the united states congress as to whether we are going to give them initially support that they need after their country has been dismembered by vladimir putin in a blatant act of aggression that cannot go unresponded to, in my view. a long time ago, on 15 march, 1938, adolf hitler made a speech to the sr vianese people.

in the background is a statue of arch de carl. the crowd in the square heldenplotz numbered several hundred thousands. hitler's words on that day about the obligation that he had to take care of the german speaking people and the german population in austria is eerily reminiscent when we look at the speech that vladimir putin made as he announced the absorption of crimea into russia. i am not predicting that we will have a world war iii. i am predicting that unless we act and act vigorously -- and a lot more than this legislation today -- vladimir putin will be dramatically encouraged to take further aggressive actions, whether it be in eastern ukraine, whether it be moldova,

whether it be the baltic countries, where he's already put significant pressures. or will we send the message to vladimir putin that the cost of further aggression will not be matched up with the benefit? have no doubt about the ambitions of vladimir putin and that is to restore the russian empire. and all of the illusions we had about him should have finally been dispelled and he must be treated for what he is -- a k.g.b. colonel that repeatedly stated that the worst thing that happened in the 20th century was the dismemberment of the then-soviet union. and what vladimir putin understands is strength. in the words of ronald reagan, "we can achieve peace through strength." this legislation is a good start and it's important that we get it done as quickly as possible.

but we have to understand, he will never be our partner. he will always insist on being our adversary and -- and he will continue, if unchecked, to continue that vision of his expansion of the old russian empire. i predicted that vladimir putin would go into ukraine because he could not give up sevestopol base and access to the mediterranean. i do not know exactly what vladimir putin will do in eastern ukraine as we speak, but there has been a buildup of forces, of russian forces, on the border of ukraine and russia. this should disturb all of us. all of us should be disturbed and all of us should recognize that the kind of signal he gets in response to his latest aggression will in many ways dictate his future behavior in the coming days and weeks.

and there are many steps we need to take. we have to support ukraine. we have to give them the economic assistance that they need. we've got to ensure that the march elections in ukraine occur on time, freely and fairly. we have to make ukraine -- meet ukraine's request for immediate military assistance. military assistance is their first priority. and what did this administration do in response to their plea for ability to defend themselves? send them m.r.e.'s. that's the same thing we did in syria. we now have an m.r.e. doctrine that when a country is under threat, such as syria and -- and ukraine and other countries are, we send them m.r.e.'s. we need to send them defensive weapons, which we should have done to georgia back when -- in the bush administration when vladimir putin annexed south assecia and abkazia.

and his troops are there today. we have to give them the military assistance short term and a long-term military assistance program of training and equipping. which, by the way, we do with about 50 other countries in the world. it's not a breakthrough. and when my friends and colleagues in the administration say it would be provocative, what does it take to be furthe further -- the text time tha next time thae vladimir putin, is it going to be alaska? we've got to support countries such as moldova and georgia. moldova is not a member of nato. transetria is occupied by 1, 200 russian troops as we speak. we see the same scenario taking place in moldova as we have seen taken place in cry me a crimea. the baltic countries are under

pressure and in increasing pressure from russia, particularly from -- quote -- "where the russian speaking population is," especially in latvia and estonia. we've got to expand sanctions under the magnisky act, target corrupt people, push for an arms embargo russia. prevent defense and technology transfer. use the upcoming nato summit to enlarge the alliance. move -- move the process for georgia into membership action plan. expand nato cooperation with ukraine. conduct significant contingency plan within nato to deter aggression. defend alliance members, especially along the eastern flank. strategically shift nato military assets eastward to support deterrence. all of these and more need to be done. and i want to emphasize, that does not mean russian boots -- american boots on the ground.

i repeat, it does not mean american boots on the ground. so the response by some of my colleagues and notices th and te commentary community is, "well, the american people don't want us to do it. 63% of the american people say leave it alone. 61% say don't get involved in any way." well, i understand that. i understand that. and there have been previous times in history where the american people didn't want to be involved and yet leaders stepped forward and leaders explained to the american people why the united states has to be involved. i notice that the president's approval rating on handling of foreign policy is sinking. i also understand the contradiction that over 60% of the american people don't want the united states engaged. that's because the american people haven't been told what's at stake here. nevil chamberlain in 1938, when

talking about czechoslovakia, said, "we're not going to send our young men to a country that they don't speak our language and we don't know." and, again, i am not predicting world war iii but i am predicting that vladimir putin will go as far as he thinks he can in order to realize his ambition, which he has stated on numerous occasions, to restore the russian empire. what does vladimir putin understand? strong alliances, reprisals, consequences for misbehavior. that's what he would understand. this legislation before us, which i hope is 100-0, will indicate the first steps we are taking in response. i wish that the president of the united states had not stated so clearly that we have now acquiesced to the absorption of crimea into ukraine. my message to the people ukraine is that in the cold war, it took a long time. but we will never give up, we

will never give up in our efforts to see that your country is fully restored. as guaranteed by a solemn agreement when ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons inventory. at the time, they were the world's third largest nuclear power. in return for giving that up, their security and territorial integrity, including crimea, was maintained. there are other countries that may have nuclear weapons. what lesson do they take from this? would vladimir putin have invaded cee minvaded crimea if l had nuclear weapons? that's an interesting point. the point is we have seen a blatant act of aggression. sometimes i'm astounded the media reporting overwhelming majority, 96% voted for russia to -- for crimea to be part of russia. my friends, 12% of the population of ukraine are people

who were deported by joseph stalin, half of them killed and they were allowed to come back. i -- i can guarantee you there's no one in that 12% of the population that would ever for to be part of russia. so it was -- it was a phony election. there were no observers. and i -- and i know of -- of a poll taken a few months ago that showed 53% of the people in crimea wanted to be part of ukraine. but the point is -- but the point is here, today we are beginning a path i hope to, one, recognizing vladimir putin for what he is and what his ambitions are; two, dedicating ourselves to supporting these countries, these fledgling democracies. it hasn't been that long since the end of the cold war, to help

them on the path as they move forward to democracy, particularly ukraine so that they -- we can help them rid that country of corruption, rid it of its dependency long term of energy supplies from russia. we can over a period of relatively short period of tim time -- months, if not years, but probably months -- arrange it so we can supply ukraine and other european countries with energy to have them independent of russia. finally, i have no illusions about what the europeans are going to do, very little, if anything. i have very little confidence in what this administration is going to do. so it's up to the congress. it's up to us to act and to act decisively and send a clear message. and by passing this today, hopefully with the house getting it done as quickly as possible, we send a message to the people of ukraine, we stand with you.

we will help you. we will do everything we can to see overtime the restoration of your nation. as we have in times of old. we stand with you and we stand for freedom. mr. president, i yield -- i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. corker: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. corker: i'd like to ask unanimous consent that we vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. corker: thank you, sir. mr. president, i rise today to speak about the bill we're going to vote on here at 12:15 relative to ukraine, and i want to say, first, it speaks to the best of the united states senate, where by working together we're going to end up with a bill here that sends a very, very strong signal to russia but also to ukraine in support -- and to the world -- and it is going to be done, i think, in an overwhelming fashion here today, hopefully later today here in the senate and in the house. i think it is exactly what we should be doing at this time. i first want to thank senator menendez for the way he marshaled it through the

committee. i was glad to work with him as rarchginranking member. i know that our original piece had the i.m.f. reforms, which i strongly support. it was evident that the i.m.f. reforms were not going to make it through the house and actually become law, and we all felt it was incredibly important that all of us speak in a united voice, again, to push back on russia's illegal actions in crimea, potentially in ukraine, but also to do those things that we really need to do to support the people of ukraine and our friends in the region. i think this bill does that. it passed out of committee with strong bipartisan support. my sense is today it's going to pass out of here with incredibly strong bipartisan support, will become law soon, and will tremendously reinforce the way our nation feels about russi wht russia is doing in such an illegal fashion, a fashion that

was outmoded centuries ago, and again to support the people of ukraine. i think all of us know that this bill provides economic support for ukraine. they're entering into an agreement, i think we all know, with the i.m.f. the rism i i.m.f. is going to be providing some loans to help them through the problems they have. they have tremendous corruption in their country. they use far too much energy in their country. they have massive deficits in their country. and through working with the i.m.f. and signing onto agreements ultimately there, they're going to be forced as a nation to move ahead and to orient themselves towards the stronger countries that are toward the west and operate in a more free, a more democratically free and certain any a way that would allow them to economically sustain themselves over time. what we do in this bill is also

provide additional loan support, which they will need. they are facing extreme difficulties. i think people know that recently they've agreed to charge their citizens twice as much for natural gas usage there, to try to get their budgets back in balance. but it's very important that we send this signal and this strength of economic help through this $1 billion loan guarantee, which is a part of this bill today. another important part, as you know, is sending a strong significant mall to putin in russia -- signal to pute fut pun russia. if what this bill allows us to do today is to show strong support for what the administration has already done but in addition to that to make these sanctions mandatory and actually add additional elements, should rush continue t-- shouldrussia continue to dos

they're doing in such a terrible way. i do want to say that i appreciate the executive order that the president signed the other day, that gave them the ability to put se sectoral sanctions. i understand the balance that is to be put in place with sanctions, where if you throw everything in but the kitchen sink on the front end, then russia has nothing to lose. so i want to calibrate those in ways that deters their behavior. i do want to say that i think the president's comments over the last several days in europe have seemed cautious, have seemed timid, and what i hope the administration will do very, very soon is to turn the value up dramatically and to actually send some strong sanctions into some of these sectors, into the

energy sector, into the banking sector. we don't have to do all of the companies in those ark arks buti thin--in those areas, but i thit would send a strong significant mall to their economy, continue to weaken their economy and show putin there is a heavy, heavily price to pay for the activities he's engaged in and may engage in further relative to ukraine itself. so i encourage the administration to step ahead stronger. the european union follows our lead, let's face it. if we act in a timid, cautious way, they're going to follow. we do about $30 billion worth of tradtrade annually with russia. the european union does $150

billion. it encourages them to do the same. i do hope wi do hope we'll turne up. i do hope we will go ahead and sanction some additional companies in russia. there are many state-owned enterprises there. we all know that. that's one of the problems with the russian economy right now. i think we all know they're really an autocratic petrostate. we know that again they're not doing well, that their budget is based on the fact that oil sells at $110 a barrel and that really that is mostly their economy. so what we need to do as a nation again is to -- we're supporting the administration in this bill, we're supporting ukraine with this bill, we're also authorizing some assistance to some of our allies in the region, authorizing it; we're also authorizing some democracy assistance. the bill has no fiscal areas

that are not paid for. this is a great piece of legislation. i do hope that senator reid over time will allow us to revisit the issue, because, let's face it, we created this piece of legislation about two weeks ago. the events in ukraine continue to unfold, and so i hope we'll come back again, as changes occur. i know there are many people in this body that are actually trying to put additional pieces of legislation into place, not only to sanction russia even more fully, not only to assist ukraine in other ways other than just economic ways, but also to use some of the strategic assets that we have as a nation, not only to benefit our economy but also to help our allies in the region so that they're not really subject to the economic extortion that we've seen russia trying to carry out with our

friends, also trying to carry out with ukraine, which this bill is all about. so again i want to close by thanking senator menendez. i want to thank senator reid for filing cloture on a bill that came out of committee immediately so we'd be in place today to deal with this. i want to thank senator mcconnell, wh who was able to work with senator reid and the house to deal with this legislate nifl a very creative way -- legislatively in a very creative way so that this can become law very quickly. i want to thank the house for cooperating with news this, because to have a -- with us in this, because to have a piece of legislation go out of here today and likely become law very soon is something that takes a lot of coordination. i want to thank the leadership over there for helping us make this happen in this way. and again i want to thank the administration for their focus on this. i hope that this bill will show strong support for some of the efforts that have already taken

place. and again i do hope the administration will not undercalculate. i think this putin right now doesn't yet know himself what he's going to do relative to south and eastern ukraine. i don't think he knows. and i think he's watching us. i think he's calibrating what hess steps are going to be based -- it what his steps are going to be based on the pain that his own country will receive if they make the wrong steps. but i think it's very important that the president, again, send additional sanctions into russia, send additional signals in there that we send shock waves into their economy now. not everything that we have to throw at them, but some of it, so that they know if they take additional steps, real pain is on the way. this bill today, i think, supports those efforts of the administration. it supports ukraine. it pushes back on russia.

it supports -- shows support for allies in the region. it is a great piece of legislation. it is a first step. more should come. but i'm glad that we are where we are today. i thank all those involved, and like affor forward to a very stg vote at 12:15. with that, i yield the floor and notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: quorum call: quorum call:

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from new jersey. mr. menendez: mr. president, i ask that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. menendez: mr. president, i have nine unanimous consent requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. i ask unanimous consent that these requests be agreed to and that these requests be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. menendez: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i come to the floor as we are at a moment of truth and a moment of incredible

importance, and i want to start off by acknowledging the distinguished republican ranking member on the senate foreign relations committee, senator corker, for the spirit in which we've worked together to marshal forces to bring, i think, some critical legislation to the floor at a critical time in history. this is the type of relationship that we have had for the last 15 months in which, in a time, some time of partisanship here, every major of piece of legislation passed out of the senate foreign relations committee is passed on a strong bipartisan vote and i appreciate his leadership and his working with us. mr. president, let me reiterate what i have said on the senate floor. president putin is watching. he's waiting to see what we'll do, waiting to see if we have the resolve to act, waiting to see if he has the green light to take the next step. i believe we need to act now and

pass this legislation, and i welcome the plexibility the house has shown in its resolve to move this quickly upon receipt. and although i believe that our response to russia's annexation of crimea should have included i.m.f. reforms, that will not be the case, but we still need to act on this issue today. i hope that in short order we can have the i.m.f. reform legislation on the floor and take a responsible vote on an important issue. let's be clear why we are at this moment. let's be clear about what happened in the ukraine over the last several years and what is happening now as ukraine looks westward. former ukrainian president yanukovych was elected on a platform that advocated closer ties to europe. his first trip was to moscow.

for three years ukrainian officials negotiated in good faith with their european counterparts. they believed they did so with their president's support. ukrainian public opinion polls favored the conclusion of an agreement between the e.u. and the ukraine that would increase trade and cooperation, allowing more people goods, services and ideas to cross the border from the west. then on november 21, yanukovych flipped 180 degrees. he announced an end to talks with the european union and ukrainians felt bitterly betrayed. for 20 years ukraine has struggled to economically develop. they struggled to establish representative government. they struggled to achieve a stable way forward, a path of economic security and political democracy. the association agreement with the european union had promised a path towards those goals. the people were furious and they took to the streets.

they knew from personal experience what the world now knows, that yanukovych, his government and his family had stolen tens of billions of dollars from ukrainian taxpayers jeopardizing the solvency and independence of their country to support a lavish lifestyle while the public went without. the people who took to the maidan square in the freezing cold were simply looking westward. they believed the european union was their last best hope to break the cycle of corruption. they knew their future was being stolen. they marched. they took beatings from yanukovych's paramilitary forces not for a treaty but for the hope of a better, more honest and free ukraine than it promised. putin resorted to outright extortion to keep ukraine in his sphere of influence essentially offering to buy ukraine by offering yanukovych $15 billion.

and it would have worked but for the uprising of the ukrainian people who realize that had this was a faustian bargain and that putin was the devil, not their savior. hundreds of thousands of ukrainians demonstrated for three months to call for the president's resignation. on february 22 of this year president yanukovych fled to russia and an interim government was installed in the ukraine. almost immediately russian forces took control of the crimean peninsula, a clear violation of international law. russia's own commitments under the budapest agreement and the helsinki final act. this demands a swift and coordinated and powerful reap responsible from the international community and from this congress. it demands a message to putin of our resolve and to the ukrainian people of our support. that message came in part on march 13 when the senate foreign relations committee passed by a bipartisan vote of 14-3 the

support for the sovereignty, integrity, democracies and economic stability of the ukraine. in addition to providing $1 billion in loan guarantees for ukraine to provide crucial support to stabilize ukraine's economy, this legislation authorizes assistance for democracy, governance and civil society programs as well as for enhanced security cooperation. it provides support for the ukrainian government to help recover assets linked to corruption by former president yanukovych, his family and other government officials. it imposes sanctions against those who are responsible for violent human rights abuses against antigovernment protesters as well as those responsible for undermining the peace, security, stability, sovereignty or territorial integrity of the ukraine. it imposes asset freezes and visa revocations on those

responsible for significant corruption in the ukraine and authorizes sanctions against any reduction official engaged in corruption in the ukraine or in russia. putin's cronies should recognize that putin may not be the right horse to be betting on any longer. finally, it sends a powerful message to russia that there are consequences for using force to annex sovereign territory against the established norms of the international community. mr. president, take one other moment to say i have read some editorials that suggest that ukraine is really not that important to us, that it's more important to europe than it is to us. what's our interest? well, let me offer a few observations of what's our interest as the united states. we have for some time been working to see the ukraine move to a democratic stable

government, looking westward, and in doing so strengthening a big part of eastern europe. at the end of the day in a way that strengthens the security of that region and the fiscal opportunities of that region. we look at the ukraine and we say to ourselves while they are not a nato member, but other nato allies, some of which i met with when i was in brussels this past week, who are nato members, are watching and saying what will europe and the united states do in the face of russian aggression? what is our ultimate security going to depend on? we are a nato member. we are under article 5 of nato's

treaty ultimately supposed to be protected because we are committed to the protection of all of our other neighbors under nato. and some of those countries actually meet the tpupl -- full responsibility they have to pay their quota for the collective defense. ukraine is not a nato member but they are looking at what the west resolve is in the face of this aggression as the possibility of russian forces moving farther west and saying, is nato going to stand up for me. and that agreement is one of the fundamental institutions that have created security on the european continent for which america twice, twice sent its sons and daughters abroad to ultimately guarantee that security. we need to ensure that nato continues to be a vibrant entity for the collective security of the united states and of europe.

this is another reason why we are interested. certainly i would just simply say, as i have said on the senate floor before, the world is watching. china is watching. and they're wondering what america and the west will do as they look at territories that they dispute with our allies in south japan and the south china sea and saying the west let putin get away with it, why should we not take those territories? there will be no consequences. or as we're negotiating with iran across the table to stop their nuclear weapons program, the iranians will look and say how much will the west really punish russia for this aggression? because if there isn't much consequence, then why should i not try to either get the maximum of this deal or not accept the deal at all? or north korea who wants to

advance even further its missile program, which already possesses nuclear capability, what is their calculation? and i could go across the globe, mr. president, describing that this moment beyond the ukraine, how the european union and the united states acts will send a very clear message to world actors. and that message hopefully will be one of strength because in doing so, we may avert the consequences of security challenges across the globe, avert the possibility that we will have to send our sons and daughters into harm's way if we act decisively, if we act with strength. and that is the opportunity we have here today. the world is watching, mr. president, and we must rise to the challenge, and passing this legislation goes a long way

towards that goal. that is both the opportunity and the responsibility before the senate today, and i urge my colleagues to speak with one voice. i hope that we get as near to unanimity as possible, as we have done in other times, for example, on the question of sanctions on iran. this is such a moment. if the senate speaks with one voice, i think president putin will understand the consequences of miscalculating further. and i hope that is the opportunity that we will avail ourselves of today. and in doing so, send a message beyond putin but to the rest of the world that we have the resolve necessary to rise to such challenges. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor and observe the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from nebraska. mr. johanns: thank you, madam president. i ask that the quorum call be set aside. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. johanns: i ask unanimous consent, madam president, that privileges of the floor be granted to the following member of senate crapo's staff. that would be hope jurkowsky. poeup without objection. mr. johanns: thank you,

madam president. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: quorum call:

mr. pryor: madam president, i ask that the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. pryor: and i'd ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the yeas and nays are ordered. all time has expired. under the previous order, the question occurs on amendment