wages are down and i know you believe in free markets, that things balance out in a competitive world and if the wages are down, that indicates we have a soft labor market, not a tight labor market. wages go up when there are not enough employees, and businesses have to pay more to get good employees. and it's gone down from 2007, as i said, from 55,000 median income for american families to 50,000, adjusted for inflation. this is a very unusual de-china. i'm not sure we've ever seen this, except maybe the great depression. so this is a matter we need to talk about some more. so watching american corporations fire american workers while appealing for more

immigration is a disheartening spectacle, mr. byron york says, and i think that's true. another associated press article rarecently said this, "backlash stirs in the united states against more foreign worker visas." "but amid cause for expanding the nation's so-called h-1b visa program, there is a growing pushback from americans who argue that the program has been hijacked by staffing companies that import cheaper, lower-level workers to replace more expensive u.s. workers, or keep them from e getting hired in the firpin the first place." "it is getting pretty bad when you can't compete for jobs said

a veteran computer programmer in boston. you hear references all the time that these big companies can't find skilled workers. i'm a skilled worker." how about this paper. "the stem crisis --" that's science, technology, engineering and mathematics." there are not enough stem graduates to fill the job needs. this article says this "the stem crisis is a myth." oche ed by robert sharet, contributor he hadder ifer for the institute for electrical and electronic engineers magazine. "companies would rather not pay stem professionals high salaries with lavish benefits, offer them training on the job or guarantee them decades of stable employment.

so having an oversupply of workers, whether domestically educated or imported, is to their benefit, in part because it helps keep wages in check. viewed the other way, about 15 million u.s. residents hold at least a batc bachelor's degree a stem discipline. but three-fourths of them, 11.4 million, work outside stem. if there is in fact a stem worker shortage, wouldn't you expect more people with stem degrees to be filling those jobs?" i think that's correct. and what about the people who immigrate to america and they come here and they do it lawfully and they're entitled to take a job and they go out to get a job and somebody else is brought in to take that job from them? what are they going to do? the economy can absorb a certain number, but in this low job-creating economy we're in

today and have been in for a number of years, you can't justify huge increases in the number of workers we bring to the country, especially when wages are falling. here's another one. "the myth of the science and engineering shortage." op-ed by michael titlebalm, research associate at harvard law school. "a compelling body of research is new available from many leading academic researchers and from respected research organizations such as the national bureau of economic research, the rand corporation, and the urban institute. no one has been able to find any evidence indicating current widespread labor market shortages or hiring difficulties in science and engineering occupations.

"he goes on to write, "from offering expanding attractive career opportunities, it seems that many but not all science and engineering careers are headed in the opposite directi direction: unstable careers, slow-growing wainl wages, high f jobs moving offshore or being filled by temporary workers from abroad." i'm afraid that's the undisdisputed reality. wish it weren't so. i wish we had a growing economy that was creating a lot of jobs and we needed a lot more high-tech workers and their wages were going up, but it's just not so. here's an another july 11, last week, in "cnn money." headline, "businesses want immigration reform." why? because they can't find enough workers. that's the answer -- that's what they say the answer is.

and this article notes a few things. "the tech industry faces a backlog of working visas for high-skill workers, a long wait for green cards at top universities means the u.s. is losing tavmen talent. microsoft founder bill gates and others like c.e.o.'s at yahoo melissa maher and facebook's mark zuckerberg press leaders in washington for immigration reform." and they have this statement in and their reasons for demanding that congress provide more workers. "two-thirds of construction companies have reported labor shortages, according to the associated general contractors of america, who's pushing for immigration reform." so two-thirds of construction companies reported labor

shortages. well, what do we know about that? here's an article from the economic policy institute, an in-depth study posted may 5, just a couple of months ago, by ross eisenbrey. what does it say? this is a headline. "there are seven unemployed construction workers for every job opening." there's a chart. this isn't some promoter, some lobbyist, some media person putting out a statement saying we have a shortage of workers. this is an academic study. whand does it say? ash and what does it say? no sign of labor shortages in construction: there are seven unemployed construction workers for every job opening."

that's where we are. what we need as a nation is to construct an immigration policy that serves the interests of the american people. professor borjas at harvard, perhaps a most astute and in-depth student of labor and immigration of anybody in the entire world, written a number of books on it, did an in-depth study using census data and department of labor data, concluded that from 1980 to 2000, as a result solely -- he identified and separated out the impact of immigration on people's wages. it was a net decline of working americans' wages of 7%. the impact of this large flow of immigration in 1980 to 2000 reduced wages. i wish we could bring in more. i'm not against immigration. we're not talking about reducing

our million number per year. i just say that the myth is that we have this great shortage of labor. it's just not so. and as wages would increase, they'd find even more workers that could take some of these jobs and still be able to raise a fathers be able to buy an automobile -- raise a family, be able to buy an automobile, and maybe buy a house and educate their children. so today i'm going to issue a challenge to majority leader reid and every single one of our 55 senate democrats who voted unanimously for this gang-of-eight bill. with microsoft laying off 18,000 workers, come down to the senate floored and tell me that there's a shortage of qualified americans to fill stem jobs. come down and tell us, do you stand with mr. bill gates or do you stand with our american

constituents? it's long past time we had an immigration policy that truly served the needs of the american people. that's the group to whom we owe our loyalty and our duty and our first responsibility. that's who elected us. that's who in our constitutional system ultimately judges us on our performance. the united states let in 40 million new immigrants, legal and illegal, since 1970. 40 million. many wonderful, wonderful people in that group. the share of the population today that is foreign-born has quadrupled, gon gone up four ti. after four decades of large-scale imgrairks i immigrat not time, colleagues, that we slowed down a bit, allowed assimilation to occur and the middle class to be restored?

i thank the chair and would yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. leahy: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. leahy: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. leahy: mr. president, i ask consent the call of the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. leahy: mr. president, there comes to the floor oftentimes things of for tent for the nation, but the distinguished senator from vermont and i want to talk about one of the most significant people vermont has ever known. i would like to yield to my distinguished colleague from vermont and we'll go back and forth. mr. sanders: i thank senator leahy for yielding. the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. sanders: without objection, mr. president, what i would like to do is submit a statement from senator leahy and myself into the record celebrating the 90th birthday of one of the great governors in the history of the state of vermont, phillip hoff.

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sanders: mr. president, every now and then there are figures who come along and play a profound and transformative role in the period in which they are living, and phil hoff is one of those people, and we're here to celebrate his 90th birthday and the work that he has done in vermont and around the country and the life that he and his wife joan have lived, which has done so much for the people of the state of vermont. phil hoff was the 73rd governor of the state and was in many ways the founder of progressive politics in our state. it is now recognized -- and we say this proudly; i know not

everybody necessarily is as proud of it as we are, but vermont is now one of the more progressive states in the united states of america. we've been a leader for the rights of working people, for the environment, for women's rights, foi gay -- for gay righ, for kids. we're proud of that. but none of that would have happened, we would not be where we are today if it had not been for the work of phil hoff, who was governor of our state and was elected in 1962. i have a lot more i want to say. let me begin the discussion by saying we in vermont are extremely fortunate to have one of the great governors of his time, a real visionary time who led the beginning of making profound changes in the state. i would yield back to the senior senator from vermont, senator leahy. mr. leahy: thank you. mr. president, my distinguished

colleague from vermont is absolutely right. vermont changed remarkably when governor hoff was elected. prior to that time the governorship of vermont was basically a part-time office, seen now and then when the legislature was there but not so much otherwise, and things went along pretty much on auto pilot. phil hoff changed that and really brought vermont to the 20th century. you know, i think because the two are somewhat intertwined, i was a volunteer for the presidential campaign of then-senator john f. kennedy in 1960. i volunteered in his campaign, but i wasn't old enough to vote for him. i remember the first election i was able to vote in was the vermont governors race in 1962.

i cast my first vote for phillip henderson hoff, and my family was thrilled when he won that election. he became the first democratic governor elected in vermont. my parents and marcel's parents were so fond of phil hoff and his wife joan, they thought the world, and i was happy the other day in seeing both phil and joan at the birthday celebration when he talked about my parents and marcel's parents. i told him i wouldn't be where i am today without governor hoff. i was a young lawyer in his office. there had been a real problems in the state's attorney's office in the county, about a quarter of the state's population. the state attorney announced he

was leaving, and governor hoff called me to his home on a friday afternoon and said i want you to be state's attorney on monday morning. i gulped and said yes, sir. he said clean up the backlog of cases that accumulated in the office. i said, yes, sir. do that for a year and come on back. i said yes, sir. the one place i didn't do, i didn't go back to the firm. i enjoyed being there so much i stayed there. i stayed there with admiration for phil hoff because he changed the state of vermont. he made it exciting to be in government in vermont. he made it exciting to be part of the fabric of vermont. and i've always, i've always appreciated that i've always appreciated my time with him, especially the mentoring he did of me because had it not been for him, i could tell you, mr. president, i would not be standing here today as the

president pro tempore of the united states senate. and i yield back to my friend from vermont. mr. sanders: way back when, in 1968, as a young man, i got a job at the department of taxation in a small building on state street across the street from the statehouse, working for the administration of then-governor hoff. it was a very important experience for me and helped me shape some of my views which i carry today. what i wanted to say, mr. president, also is to tell you that phil hoff's career of public service began during world war ii, when he put his studies on hold and joined the navy, eventually joining in the submarine service. he served on the u.s.s. sea dog in the pacific theater, going on a number of combat tours in the dangerous waters near the main islands of japan.

while in naval training in new london, connecticut, a friend of his set up a blind date with a connecticut college student. her name was joan brower, and she and phil would be married after the war, a marriage that would last for six rich decades. i know senator leahy and my wife, jane, know the hoves very- hoffs very well, have known joan in her years in education. she in her right has been a very important figure in our state. after phil hoff's graduation, he became involved in democratic party politics and did that despite the fact that he grew up in a republican family. senator leahy will remember that way back then there were a group

of what they call the young turks, younger democrats who came into a very conservative republican legislature and most of them were under 40, many of them were veterans of world war ii. and they moved forward to try to bring about some long-needed change in the state. their experience in the legislature motivated phil hoff to run for governor in 1962. and as senator leahy indicated, if my memory is correct, he was the first democrat elected governor since the civil war. is that right? mr. leahy: mr. president, the senator is absolutely correct. it was a cataclysmic change in the political landscape of vermont. mr. sanders: for more than 100 years -- i think many people don't know this -- the republican party dominated vermont politics, controlling

both houses of legislature and the governor's office. this is a funny story. even in the landslide presidential election of 1936, when f.d.r., franklin delano roosevelt, won a huge landslide victory, vermont joined maine as the only state in the country to vote against roosevelt and vote for alf landon, and thus came the well-known expression, as goes maine, so goes vermont. and what phil hoff helped do is lead vermont out of a one-party state, badly in need of reforms, and brought that state in many significant ways into the second half of the 20th century. and i yield back to the senior senator from vermont. mr. leahy: mr. president, i thank my colleague from vermont. he and i share so much affection for phil and joan hoff.

and i can tell hundreds of stories. but the difference he made in enthusiastically bringing people together in our state with the realization that we need to catch up with the rest of the country in so many ways, bringing high-tech industry into vermont, working so hard to make sure everybody had an education, a good education no matter what part of the state they lived in. and then the personal things. i was expieted -- excited as a young state's attorney one day getting a call that one of the old politicians in burlington died, a wonderful man, french canadian descent and they were going to have a mass for him at the cathedral, and the governor wanted me to ride with him to the mass.

i got in the car, and i said, governor, i've only been state's attorney for a very short while, and i can't tell you what an honor it is to be with you. he says, honor? honor has nothing to do with it. he said i'm episcopalian. you're a catholic. they put me in the front row. i never know when i'm supposed to stand and when i'm supposed to sit, and so you've got to make sure i do it right. i had been an altar boy for shears, and i was in sheer panic when i walked in that church that i might have the governor do something wrong, but we made it through. more importantly, though, we had issues. became very serious issues affecting the reputation of vermont, and phil hoff would bring people together across the political spectrum and sit in his office and say how do we make things better for vermont? never for him. it was for vermont.

and i think of the changes in our state, and i remember my parents and marcel's parents talking about the dramatic changes, changes for the better. and every time they would, they would go back to one name: phil hoff. and i was so glad to hear senator sanders speak of joan hoff, mother of their wonderful daughters. she really was vermont's first lady. she was almost as recognizable, in fact more places more recognizable than her husband. highly respected. people, men and women ought to be able to model their careers and their nature after her. and i'm glad the two are still together, are still healthy and are still the best of vermont. and i feel honored to be able to

speak of them here. i yield the floor. mr. sanders: let me just mention, senator leahy talked about the influence that governor hoff had on the state. let me give you some examples of what he did. senator leahy will remember that in the early 1960's, we had the situation in vermont where the vermont state house of representatives, people were represented by every town. i lived for a while in the town of standard, vermont, which had maybe 100 to 150 people. they had the same vote in the legislature as burlington, vermont, the largest city in the state, which has 40,000 people. under phil hoff, what we moved to in the state with the supreme court ruling dealing with apportionment, proper apportionment, we moved to one person, one vote so that the legislature of the house began to reflect the population

locations of the state and not just every town. in addition to that, when phil hoff was governor of the state, he successfully insisted on repealing vermont's poll tax. now, we think that's ancient history. what the poll tax said was in order to vote, you have to pay a certain amount of money, which obviously is discriminatory for lower income people. that was repealed under hoff's era as governor. he understood and his wife understood how important education was, and what they did is quadruple what governor hoff did is quadrupled state aid to public schools and organized the three state teachers colleges into a new revitalized state college system that better met the needs of vrmt's students, and that system endures to this day.

we have a very strong system of state colleges in vermont, and that began under the hoff era. under governor hoff's leadership, vermont's judicial system was modernized and always a path breaker and an advocate for justice, phil hoff led the way to vermont becoming one of the first states in the country to abolish the death penalty. no aspect of state government was beneath his notice, and he took vermont forward in many ways, including terminating the outdated overseer of the poor system, and that was something that he changed as well. he established the vermont district court state court system, the judicial nominating board, the vermont state housing authority and the vermont student assistance corporation, a program which today plays a very, very vital role in making sure that young people in vermont can get a college education. what was also -- and senator leahy knows this better than

i -- also rather extraordinary about phil hoff is he understood the change -- positive change cannot take place in vermont unless change was taking place throughout the country, and in that area being the governor of one of the smallest states in the country, this man showed extraordinary courage, and he said you know what? that war in vietnam is not good for vermont, it's not good for america. it was one of the first public officials as i recall senator leahy to speak out, and that took a whole lot of courage to speak out against the war in vietnam. and he took it a step further. and here you had lyndon johnson at that time who i think will go down in history except for that war in vietnam as one of our great presidents. and phil hoff said you know what? maybe we need a change in the white house and maybe we should be looking at somebody like bobby kennedy rather than lyndon johnson. but i know, senator leahy, you were involved in some of that as

a young man. mr. leahy: i was and i recall, mr. president, when phil hoff came out against the war in vietnam and he was in the minority in that. no member of the vermont congressional delegation had voted against the war in vietnam. they voted for all the increases in it. he was in some ways a lonely voice, but he did come out against it, angered lyndon johnson who was then president, but then he supported robert kennedy, as did i. i remember the two of us meeting one of your predecessors on the runway, mr. president, one of your predecessors on the runway at the airport in burlington, vermont, senator edward kennedy to go and speak to a group he and governor hoff, myself and

others on behalf of robert kennedy, bobby kennedy. i remember the look of sorrow on governor hoff's face as he stood as one of the honorary pallbearers at robert kennedy's funeral. but even after that, he continued to push, to make vermont a better state. i think -- i realize we have others waiting for the floor, but i just want to say again vermont is a wonderful state that has a -- that is a beautiful state, it is a progressive state. senator sanders and i have both said it would not be what it is today were it not for phil hoff. we have all tried to follow in those footsteps. but he led the way. sometimes an overused expression, but i think in this case every historian would agree with us. mr. sanders: let me just concur

with senator leahy. i will take this opportunity to wish governor hoff a very happy 90th birthday. we see him quite often -- jane and i see him quite often. we just bumped into phil and jane. we look forward to continuing that relationship. as senator leahy just said, we are very proud that vermont is a leader in so many areas in terms of social justice, in terms of environmental sanity, in terms of protecting the needs of ordinary people. that transformation and those efforts did not come about by accident, and certainly one of the great leaders in moving us in that direction was the man we honor today, and that is phillip h.hoff. we wish him the very, very best. mr. leahy: we wish a happy birthday to a true giant of our state. i yield the floor. mr. sanders: and with that, mr. president, we yield the floor.

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania. mr. toomey: thank you, mr. president. since we are not in a quorum, i rise today to speak on a bill that -- that i have introduced. it's senate bill 1596. it's the protecting students from sexual and violent predators act. i want to thank my cosponsors on this legislation. this is a bipartisan bill.

senator joe manchin and i have introduced this together, and i'm grateful to senators mcconnell and inhofe for their cosponsorship. this bill was inspired by a terrible story. it's a story of jaicial bell. it -- of jeremy bell. it begins at a school in delaware county, pennsylvania. one of the schoolteachers molested several boys and raped one of them. prosecutors decided they didn't have enough evidence to bring a case, but the school was aware of what happened, and so they dismissed the teacher for this outrageous behavior. but then amazingly the school also decided that they would help this teacher get another job at another school so that they could be rid of him. they did exactly that. in fact, passing along the letter of recommendation helping this predator get a job at a school in west virginia.

the story ends in 1997 when that teacher, by then a school principal, raped and murdered 12-year-old jeremy bell in west virginia. justice finally caught up with that teacher. he's now -- he's in jail, serving a life sentence for the murder, but for jeremy bell, that justice came too late. mr. president, the very sad truth is that jeremy bell is not alone. every day seems to bring a new report of children robbed of his or her innocence by someone they should have been able to trust, someone their parents told them they should obey. the numbers are absolutely terrifying. and worse still, the numbers are growing. on april 10 of this year, i came to this floor and spoke about the need to pass this legislation to protect our kids from predators in the classroom, and i explained then that since january 1 of this year, at that

point 130 teachers had been arrested across america for sexual misconduct with children. mr. president, here we are just over three months later and that number has more than doubled. since january 1 of this year, 275 teachers have been arrested in america for sexual misconduct with children. 275. these are teachers. that's more than one per day so far this year. and let's be honest. these are the ones that we've caught. these are the ones that have actually been arrested. these are the ones for whom -- against whom there is enough evidence that they have actually been arrested. how many more are out there that haven't been caught or for which the evidence isn't yet sufficiently clear? the damage that these predators are doing is enormous.

it's far beyond what any numbers or my words can express, so i want to let some of the victims speak for themselves. i will tell you a brief story from shannon. shannon is from nevada. she was raped by a teacher. the teacher was later convicted of sexual assault and sentenced to life in prison. nine years later, this is what shannon wrote, and i quote -- "when i was a senior in high school, mr. peterson approached me and said i would need to go to night school if i wanted enough credits to graduate on time." and of course he taught one of those coarses, a computer class. i was 17, and he raped me four times over the course of a year. he said he would fail me if i ever told. he also hit me, made threats against me and my family, so i didn't. i held it in for a year and a half. in the end, 66 people offered to testify against peterson. his first victim dated back to

the year i was born. some of those who spoke were parents. their daughters had complained at the time but nothing was done. that made me very angry. still does. i learned that a handful of teachers and two principals knew about him, and his teaching license had been revoked in michigan years before and no one knew why. i'm different now because of what happened. i have to watch people all the time, analyze them. i can't be carefree. now i have a 7-year-old son and two daughters, ages 3 and 1. i will home school my girls. so when you see the number 275, remember shannon and remember that so far this year there are 275 others like her. or gary, gary of south carolina is one of at least 29 boys abused by a teacher named mr. fisher over that teacher's

37-year career. now the teacher is serving 27 years in prison today. two school principals were sued for allegedly covering up the abuse. here's what gary wrote about his experience, and i quote -- "i was 9 when it started. the abuse was frequent and long term until i went to college. i knew there were others, too, but until it all came out, i never knew how many. you feel so guilty, so ashaped, it's frightening now to look back and see how calculating fisher was. i did everything i could to get kicked out of school. i was in the guidance counselor's office all the time. finally, in the tenth grade, i got myself kicked out for cheating. by the time i went to college, i was drinking all the time. i was terrified to quit because then i would have to feel. but i couldn't drink and do school, so i entered rehab. i was 18. it took me a year and a half, and i have been sober since. my life is good now for the

first time. you can survive it, but you have to deal with it. i always felt that what the school did was far worse than what fisher did. fisher was sick, an evil monster, but the school just calculated the damage to its public relations. we kids were dispensable, which is a whole other category of evil." end quote. so when you see the number 275, remember derrick and remember that there are 275 others like him that we know of already this year alone. so what can we do? well, my bill is a first step at addressing this. it's called the protecting students from sexual and violent predators act. it's pretty simple, really. it requires a mandatory background check for existing and prospective employees and it requires that those checks be periodically repeated.

there are five states that do no background checks. the second thing that my bill would do is it would apply to all employees of a school, employees or contractors who have unsupervised access to children, not just teachers, so it would include bus drivers and coaches. there are 12 states that currently do no checks at a on contractors. and the legislation would also require more thorough background checks. it would require that school districts check four major databases, both state and federal. in my own state of pennsylvania, for instance, if an employee has been a resident of my state for two years or more, then only the state databases is checked, and we just don't find out what this person might have done in another state at a different time. the legislation also would prohibit what has tragically

developed its own name. the name is passing the trash. this is the phenomenon of when a school knowingly recommends one of these predators to another school. as outrageous as that sounds, it actually happens. some of these schools and school districts so want to be rid of this problem, this embarrassment, that they actually facilitate the person moving on to some other place where, of course, these predators just strike again against some other children. that would be banned under this legislation. in addition, there would be a prohibition against hiring these kinds of predators. schools would not be able to hire any person who was ever convicted of any violent or sexual crime against a child if they were convicted of a violent or sexual crime against a child, and there are a number of other felonies that would also preclude being hired by a school if you're going to have access to children, that would include homicide, child abuse or neglect, crimes against children

including pornography, rape or sexual assault, kidnapping. in addition, a person who has been convicted within the past five years of a felony physical assault or a battery or a felony drug-related offense from five years from the time at which those crimes were committed, the person would be precluded from being hired in a position, in a capacity where they would have supervisory responsibility over children. now, the enforcement for all this, mr. president, is the only way that the federal government can and should enforce policies like this on school districts and schools, and that is if a state refuses to adopt these provisions, then they would lose the funding that they get from the elementary and secondary education act. that is, one of many but an important one of the federal government funding streams for k-12 education, and no state wants to lose that source of funding, and so i think states would respond by adopting this

very commonsense series of measures to protect their children. now, i should say this is a bill with very broad support. so broad in fact that in the house the companion legislation passed unanimously. there was not a single dissenting vote. they voted earlier this year and it passed unanimously. we have bipartisan support here in the senate, as i mentioned. i'm joined by senators manchin as well as mcconnell and inhofe. it's supported by child advocacy groups -- the national children's alliance, the children's defense fund, the national center for missing and exploited children all strongly support this legislation, and i appreciate their support for it. it's also supported by prosecutors, the association of prosecuting attorneys, the pennsylvania district attorneys association. as a matter of fact, there were five district attorneys from southeastern pennsylvania alone

from different political parties who wrote an op-ed, a very persuasive op-ed arguing why this bill is necessary based on what they see every day in their jobs as prosecutors. and i want to thank those district attorneys. seth williams from philadelphia county. tom hogan from chester county. david heckler from bucks county. and jack whelan from delaware county all weighed in in favor of this legislation. and finally, there are teachers groups that support this as well. the american federation of teachers supports this legislation. it's the -- the pennsylvania school board association does as well. mr. president, i don't think i would be going far out on a limb to suggest that probably a future majority of americans support this legislation, because one thing i know for sure as a parent. a parent of three young kids. my kids

are 14, 12 and 4. and there's one thing that's the most important thing as parents that i know. and that is our children be safe and be secure. now, when you put your kid on a school bus, you expect that that child will be in a safe environment all day long. on the school ride, while they're in school and on the way back home. and, frankly, we owe it to parents as well as to their children to do all that we can to ensure that they do, in fact, have a safe environment, as safe as we can make it, for their kids. 275, mr. president, that's the number. that's the number that should give us all pause. it marks 275 tragedies that we know of already this year. 275 childhoods that are shattered. 275 families torn by grief, betrayal, self-blame. and it marks a failure on our part. this kind of child abuse can be prevented.

we've got the tools to prevent this and to prevent so many children from being harmed. again, last year the house acted unanimously to protect children from these sexual predators. this is something we could have done a long time ago, mr. president. we just shouldn't be letting -- we certainly be letting a new school year begin really in a matter of weeks without doing something about this shameful number and without making sure that this number doesn't continue to grow. so i hope we'll be able to bring this bill to the senate floor and i hope we'll have very, very broad bipartisan support for it here in the senate as we already have in the house. and i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. graham: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from south carolina. mr. graham: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: yes, we are. mr. graham: i would ask unanimous consent to terminate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. graham: i believe the body has come to agreement on my resolution along with shore menendez -- along with senator menendez standing behind this conflict with israel with hamas. as i speak, apparently there is a ground action going on by the realize in gaza. from my point of view, do what you have do to defend yourselves. i can't believe they've actual whraited this long. i can't imagine what the american response would have been if one rocket had come from our neighboring nations toward

our country. we would not be so restrained. a two-state solution seems it be a very reasonable approach. the problem with hamas is the president of the senate -- as the president of the senate knows, the presiding officer, is that hamas doesn't recognize israel as an entity. pretty hard to negotiate with somebody who doesn't recognize you exist, unti and tell their schoolchildren that you don't exist and the hatred that comes is not conducive to peace. the resolution pass i unanimously by the senate on the very night that israel decided to use ground force is appropriate and very symbolic. the senate does not see a more equivalency here. as prime minister netanyahu said, israel uses missiles, helped in collaboration with the united states to produce the technology called iron dome, to

defend civilians. hamas uses civilians to cover their missile program. making human shields of their own people. that says really all you need to know. so i am pleased that in a bipartisan fashion, unanimous in nature, the united states senate is on record supporting the state of israel in this conflict, understanding their justification for defending themselves, and that there is no moral equivalency here. to my israeli friends and allies, we wish you well. i expect that you will continue to defend yourselves against a terrorist organization. to the palestinians who have formed a unity government, you need to break away from hamas. there will never be peace until you marginalize the terrorist organization called hamas, until

you reject what they stand for and the way they have behaved. and finally, to those who wish for israel to give land up and withdraw from territories, please remember, that's exactly what israel did in gaza. they withdrew all their forces, and what have they dpot nonreturn? tens of thousands of rockets. so those who are push ago peace plan in the mideast between the palestinians and israelis, i hope you'll remember security for israel has to be the centerpiece of any peace dealment andeal.and how can youe when one of members of the palestinian government hamas has fired thousands of rockets caring less where they fall? they could care less if it falls on a kindergarten or a military base. they just care to kill israelis. israelis have killed civilians,

but they go the extra mile in time of war and conflict to minimize casualties. they tell you that we're going to bomb you. they pass out leaflets, they tell people to leave. that says a lot about the israelis. so the united states senate is in israel's camp in a bipartisan fashion. i yield the floor. i notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: would the gentleman -- would the senator withhold? would you withhold your request? mr. graham: i am sorry. i withdraw my request. mr. rubio: are we in quorum? the presiding officer: we are not. mr. rubio: i ask to speak in morning business for 15 minutes. the presiding officer: without objection, the senator from l ifful is recognized. mr. rubio: thank you, mr. president. i want to continue 0en this topic. of course in the last few hours we've now had word of the

potential for some ground operations now occurring in gaza, and this is addressed to those who are watching and will watch this message in florida about what's happening. i know the world has become a messy place in the last few hours. we have an incident that occurred over the skies of ukraine with a malaysian aircraft and we don't know all the details of what occurred there. that may further complicate our view of the world in this chamber over the next few weeks. but let me address for a moment what's happening in the middle east. when i was elected to the senate, about a few days later, the first trip i took was to israel. it was a country that i had long admired, , had strong links to e united states and to florida in particular. the former ambassador to israel is from florida. so there are strong links between florida and israel. i was amazed on that trip by how far that country has come, a

nation doesn't really have oil or the kind of massive resources from an energy perspective that other countries in the region do. yet a country that is flourishing because of their investment in technology and innovation. there is a book called "start-up nation" that chronicles the amazing miracle of israel and what they have achieved. but the one thing that strikes you about israel as you fly over it is how narrow it is. at its narrowest point, it is only nine miles wide. that is country that was forged, by the way, in the aftermath of the holocaust, with the notion that never again about the jewish people never have a place to go to call their own. that still remains the guiding principle behind the country and its defense forces. and we should view iting within that context as we view what's occurring now in that region and part of the world. literally, israel is surrounded by enemies. they've had the stability in the last two decades of peace agreements with jordan and egypt, but look everywhere around israel and you see them

suresurrounded on people that ae intent on their destruction. we niece the case in gay disarks we know that's the case in the west bank, we know that that's the case with assad in syria and many of the elements fighting within syria. we know that's the case with hezbollah in lebanon, we know that's the case with iran and its weapons programs and its long-term ambitions. this is a country surrounded by elements that want to destroy it. it is in that context, by the way, that this is government in israel was involved in an intensive process of negotiation, brokerrered and let by the u.s. with the palestinian president abbas regarding a potential peace deal. some way of forging a solution, an answer to the conundrum of what to do with palestinian populations that would allow them to live peacefully, coexist side by side with the jewish state. and they entered into this

conversation despite the fact that it was never clear that abbas was able or had the power or the influence to make the sort of tough decisions that are going to be required for peace. in fact, they entered into this negotiation knowing that he may not even speak for owl palestinians, given the fact that hamas controls the gaza strip. they entered into this negotiation none nonetheless. they ent -- they entered the negotiation despite the fact that iran continues to pursue nuclear weapons to destroy israel potentially. they entered into these negotiations, because i say this to you unequivocally, i know of no nation on earth that wants peace more than israel does. so they entered into these negotiations. and what happened? what happened is what you also also -- what happened is what always happens to these

negotiations. the boss withdrew, once again took himself out of the talks and tried once again to seek membership, palestinian membership into all these sort of international organisms as a state, as a country of its own, knowing that that was a deal breaker, knowing if that occurred there could be no peace negotiation. that's the route he chose nonetheless. but then he did what i believe triggered this latest round of violence against israel, and that is he decided to form a power-sharing government with a terrorist group, a terrorist group by the name of hamas that to this day continues to deny israel's right to even exist. i want you to think about that for a moment. how could you possibly ever enter into a peace agreement with an organization whose very purpose is your destruction? and yet that's what israel is being asked to do. tragically, within several weeks of that new government being formed, three teenagers,

including an american citizen, were kidnapped and they were murdered. and then on july 7, hamas once again started raining down rockets on israel. to date more than 1,300 of them have landed, have been fired. the good news is israel has invested heavily in an air defense system which i was able to see during my second visit to israel in the early part of 2013. but 1,300 rockets is an extraordinary number, and that's what israel has been facing. now as american policy-makers, you ask what is our interest in this? and i think it begins with a unique relationship that exists between the united states and israel. it is the only vibrant democracy in that part of the world. it's alliance to the united states is unquestionable not just in international forums but all over this planet, israel is

consistently on america's side time and again in every one of our challenges. the cooperation between our countries are extraordinary. not to mention that israel as a nation stands for everything that we as a nation believe in. they have a vibrant democratic process. anyone who is familiar with israeli politics knows how much they engage in open and public debate and bringing their governments together to govern the country. so we have this extraordinary alliance with israel of incredible importance. that's why we care. that's the political reason. there's a moral reason behind it. and that is the right of the jewish people to have a country that they can live in peacefully, that truly never again will we face a time when jews have nowhere to go. and this is the committee -- commitment that we've made to israel that we must keep. and i must say that i am and have been deeply troubled at the attitude that this administration has adopted

towards israel. let me be clear, i don't come here today to create this into a partisan issue. i don't want it to be a partisan issue. in fact, one of the great successes of american foreign policy towards israel has been the strong bipartisan support that israel enjoys in the house and senate for almost every american president since israel's founding at the end -- at the conclusion of world war ii. but i am concerned about the position this administration is taking. i was concerned about the amount of pressure that the secretary of state was placing on the israelis to enter into a negotiation, a negotiation with the palestinian authority that didn't have the authority or the power to reach a peace agreement that they could possibly enforce, much less deliver on. i was concerned that that pressure was being put on them at a time when israel faced so many other challenges, the number one being the ambitions that iran has to acquire a nuclear weapon and long range rockets that could strike israel and eventually the mainland of

the united states. and i think it's safe to say that the relationship between the israeli government has never been worse towards an american president for more than two decades. and that has an impact on this region, and i think unfortunately it's had an impact here. i've also been concerned, by the way by some of this moral equivalence going on in some of the press and some of the e-mails i'm getting and some of the public statements i'm hearing some make in some corridors, not here in the senate but other places. this idea that both sides are to blame. that is an interesting concept but it isn't true. it is tragic that some civilians are dying in gaza, but the reason why civilians are dying is 100% hamas' fault. you see, this is an organization that puts rockets and military installations right next to nurseries and hospitals and civilian population centers. and you know why they do that? you know why they do that? they do that because they know that when they launch a rocket,

israel will respond by hitting that rocket launcher. and when that rocket launcher is disoid, -- destroyed so are the areas around it. then they can get the cameras to go in and say look what israel did. they wiped out a nursery or an apartment building. they do it on purpose. they know exactly what they're doing. they do it so they can get the kind of coverage that unfortunately even some american press outlets are buying into now. here's the bottom line -- and senator graham was alluding to this a moment ago -- before israel does extraordinary things with regard to this. they drop leaflets into population centers warning we're going to have to do a military operation in your region. please evacuate, please go somewhere else where you'll be safe. hamas doesn't do that. in fact, hamas deliberately targets population centers to terrorize the people of israel. and we should condemn it for what it is. there is no moral equivalency.

now the situation has continued to spiral out of control, and it's reached the point where the news today now is that israel has begun to conduct some ground operations. and these ground operations that they're conducting has to do with the tunnel network in gaza that as early as this morning was used by hamas to try to infiltrate terrorists through those tunnels into israel to conduct terrorist activity and kill israelis. so put yourself in the position of this country. small and geographically isolated, surrounded by terrorist groups and some unfriendly countries, threatened by the prospect of an iranian nuclear weapon and being hit by 1,300 rockets in just the last week. they have no choice but to defend themselves, using all the power at their disposal. they have no choice. and not only should no one here be criticizing that, but we should be supporting it and aligning ourselves 100% on our

side. because what they are fighting for here, this is not some dispute over borders. this is not some geopolitical dispute about who owns what territory. israel is fighting for their very survival. on the other side of this conflict is a terrorist organization bent on their destruction. on the other side of this conflict is a terrorist organization in hamas, and truth be told, the palestinian authority whose schools teach children not just to hate israel, but to hate jews. and how could you possibly say you are for peace when your schools are actively teaching your children to hate another people? that's what's on the other side of this conflict. and so israel has no choice. they are fighting for their very survival. and i think that now more than ever, what they need from this country is a president and a u.s. government that aligns itself squarely on their side.

no double-talk, no fancy diplomatic language that you can read between the lines on. a very clear statement. in this conflict we are on israel's side, and we will support them with anything they need to ensure their stability and their survival. very clear language that makes it unequivocally clear, hamas is a terrorist organization, not a legitimate representative of the aspirations of the palestinian people, but a terrorist organization designed for the very purpose of destroying the jewish state. we need to make these things abundantly clear because otherwise we're going to see more of this in the years to come. if there is any daylight between the united states and israel, it emboldens israel's enemies. now i would say as bad as this situation is -- and it is terrible -- the biggest danger facing israel today is not just the 1,300 rockets that have come over from hamas. it is the threat of a nuclear

iran. and it is interesting that while we are having this conversation here today about the attack that israel is under, this administration is trying to get an extension of these talks with the iranian regime. i hope we clearly understand -- i said this before, i want to come here and reiterate. if iran is allowed to retain the capability of enriching uranium or reprocessing plutonium, they will build a nuclear weapon with that capacity. if you let them -- let me put it in plain english. if you let them keep the machines that you use to reprocess and enrich, they may not reprocess and enrich to weapons grade right away, but the fact they have the ability to do it, i guarantee you eventually means that they will. you know how i know that? well, one, because all you have to do is hear the speeches that they give. the second reason why we know that is because the other thing no one is talking about is iran isn't just spinning center

fiewdges. they are not just processing plutonium. iran is building rockets, long-range rockets, intercontinental missiles. and there's only one purpose for those missiles, and the only purpose that they have is to put a warhead on them with a nuclear payload. that is the only reason why you build missiles like that. you don't build missiles like that to deliver a conventional weapon. they are built for purposes of a nuclear capability. and i want you guys to though one -- to know one more thing. these rockets that they want to build, these aren't just rockets that can reach jerusalem or tel aviv. these are rockets that can reach washington, d.c. and my hometown of miami and new york city and the mainland of the united states. so if they build these missiles with that range and they develop the ability to enrich and reprocess, they're one step away, a half-step away from becoming a nuclear power able to

hold our country hostage and to carry out their ambitions of destroying israel. and that is the single greatest threat, as great as this threat is of hamas and it needs to be dealt with and dealt with die sigh civil, that is the -- decisively, that is the single greatest military threat facing israel. it is ironic that this administration is off in geneva trying to cut a deal with iran that allows them to retain an acknowledged right to enrich and reprocess. and that's going to prove to be disastrous. in my opinion, those negotiations will lead to nothing because iran is entering these negotiations believing they enter it from a position of strength. they believe this president so badly wants a deal that they don't have to give on anything. and, by the way, i don't know how you do a meaningful deal with iran on nuclear weapons that doesn't involve a conversation about these long-range rockets. that's exactly what they're

doing, with little to no consultation with the senate or any other policy-makers. so, i just came to the floor to reiterate my personal support for the state of israel and to reiterate how strongly i believe virtually every member of this body supports the state of israel, supports israel's right to defend itself, supports the united states alliance with israel, supports doing everything we must and can do to help israel defend herself. i think that's an important message to send out. and the last thing i would say is i would ask those who watched the speech or who will hear these words later, take time over the next few days and pray for israel. it needs our support there as well. that god will provide her the safety and security of her people now and in the years to come. mr. president, i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call: