the presiding officer: the republican whip. mr. cornyn: mr. president, aid ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be re-snded. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: mr. president, i want to make some remarks about the ongoing humanitarian crisis that's occurring on our southern border in texas, and i've spoken on it a umin of times. before i do that i want to say a word about a decorated u.s. marine corps veteran an award winning journalist and courageous seventh generation texan by the name of austin tyce. in 2012, austin went to syria as a civilian. he went to report on the brutal civil war that has now claimed the lives of more than 170,000 syrians. it caused a huge refugee crisis

in turkey, lebanon and in other countries in that region. it has destabilized that entire region. but austin was a strong believer in the freedom of the press and the importance of letting his fellow country men know what was happening in the syrian civil war. during his time in syria, his works were published in "the washington post," the mcclatchy news, among other news outlets. then on august 14, 2014, he was kidnapped and no one has heard from him since. his family is understandably very concerned about his well-being and his whereabouts. it's been nearly two years and his family and friends still have no idea where he is, who is holding tim or what -- who is holding him or what they might want in exchange for his freedom. i once again call on the obama administration to do whatever

they can through the resources that the federal government has to locate and safely return austin tice to his family. and i say once again to austin's family, we haven't given up. we will never give up until we find your son and bring him safely home. mr. president, on another topic, a month ago president obama gave an interview with abc news in which he was asked about the massive influx of unaccompanied minors coming mainly from central america, but cross america's southwestern border, most notably in the state of texas where we've seen 57,000 unaccompanied children just since october.

unless any of my colleagues think this problem is just going to go away, let me just remind you that some of the projections are that if we don't do anything to deal with the causes or deal with the remedy to this growing humanitarian problem, it's going to get worse. indeed, some estimates are that as many as 90,000 unaccompanied minors will come this year alone, and the number could well rise to 145,000 next year. and indeed, that would tend to track the historical trend that we've seen, both the combination of the impression that the obama administration is less than serious about enforcing our immigration laws as well as this loophole in the 2008 human trafficking law that's being exploited by the cartels and it's helping them make money. this is part of their business model because they charge by the head, by the child, by the person, and then they bring them

up through these smuggling corridors from central america through mexico into south texas, and it's a great business model for them. the problem is it's a horrific experience for the immigrants who subject themselves to the tender mercies of the cartels who care nothing about them as human beings, who rape the women, kidnap the migrants, hold them for ransom. and we know because of the perils of that journey on the top of that train called the beast, that many migrants are severely injured, some losing limbs, others losing their lives, and other people being killed or dying from exposure as a result of this perilous process up from central america. so to my friends and colleagues who think that doing nothing is an option, people are losing their lives. people are being injured. women are being assaulted. these migrants are being held

for ransom and kidnapped. this is not a compassionate response to just allow this to continue, but that's what illegal immigration looks like in 2014. because people who come into the country legally, obviously they don't have to turn themselves over to the cartels. these transnational criminal organizations that traffic in drugs and people, they are despicable, and they will prey on these migrants and those who want to come to the united states. but as long as it happens outside of a legal system, they're going to continue to be victimized. so the president said about a month ago on abc news, he said the problem is under the current law, once these kids come across the border, there's a system in

which we're supposed to process them, take care of them until we can send them back. that's what the president of the united states said a month ago. and of course, he was referring to a 2008 law that i've referenced earlier and that we've talked about a number of times, this was a law that passed by essentially unanimous consent and affirmation. there was a human trafficking law. but unfortunately what we didn't know at the time is that the creative minds of the cartels would learn to exploit a loophole in the law which treats migrants, particularly unaccompanied children, from noncontiguous countries differently than we treat migrant children coming from mexico. and specifically what happens is they are released after being processed by the border patrol, and they are given a notice to appear for a fewer -- future court setting but they are released into the custody of a

family member, many of whom are not legally present in the united states themselves. and what we found out from experience is many of them simply don't show back up for their court hearing, but they take advantage of the fact that we don't have sufficient resources committed to making sure people do appear, and so they melt into the great american landscape, and they have essentially succeeded in coming to the united states outside of our legal immigration system and staying here. and as long as this magnet continues to exist, this loop home continues to exist, they will keep coming. but of course the president was referring to this human trafficking statute that has become an effective magnet for illegal immigration, and it's not just children. i've talked to secretary johnson, the secretary of homeland security, yesterday morning, and we've seen a huge surge in parents with young children as well. and they are exploiting the same

loophole because we don't have adequate detention facilities to keep them safe pending any court hearing and pending repatriation back to the, their country of origin unless they have a valid claim for asylum or some other claim for immigration relief. so this loophole in this 2008 law is effectively a part of now the cartel business model. and we have colleagues here who think the compassionate response is to do nothing to close that loophole, which i hope they will come to understand, it is the opposite of compassion to allow this loophole to exist and to allow the cartels to continue to use these children and other migrants as a commodity and smuggle them into the united states. it's also overloaded the capacity of many of our local communities who have big hearts and want to treat these

migrants, particularly the children, with compassion, but they've become overwhelmed. and we see as these children are being warehoused in other parts of the country, many communities, we're starting to see the backlash because while people have big hearts and they believe that we ought to try to help people in need, particularly children, they're realizing that ultimately they are the ones that are going to have to pick up the tab for health care, for education and the like. and they're worried are we actually going to be able to simulate these immigrants, which has always been the american way. and the way we've done that is through legal immigration and an orderly immigration process, one that complies with the rule of law. and we are a nation of immigrants and we should be proud of that. but we should not be proud of this uncontrolled flow of people coming into the country exploiting this gap in the 2008 law, making money for the cartels, exposing these migrants

to horrific treatment, some of who don't even make it here. we should not consider that compassionate. it is not. it's the opposite of compassionate. so we ought to try to do something to fix it, and we have it within our capacity to do so. earlier this week the white house domestic policy council director, cecilia minoz said the administration was absolutely interested in reforming this law to create a more efficient repatriation process for the unaccompanied minors. good for them. i hope that's, i hope that's the case. but unfortunately, i get the sense that the people who understand this gap in this 2008 law, this flaw or this loophole have not been able to win the argument with the political folks at the white house who don't want to be seen repatriating these children back to their home country because

they're worried about the upcoming election. well, secretary of homeland security jeh johnson has repeat lid emphasized to me in private and to us in public the need to change this law and establish a more efficient system of removal to one's home country. now to be sure, there are going to be valid claims for asylum. and if you're a victim of human trafficking, you can get a t visa, they call it so you can cooperate with law enforcement in the united states. and if you're like the young boy who i saw in mcallen, texas, two weeks ago who when we asked him where are your parents, he said they're dead. that young boy could qualify for a special immigrant visa as a minor child having been abandoned or who is being an orphan. so there are ways that valid claims for relief can be processed, but right now these claims are not being made because people are just melting

into the great american landscape and they keep coming. so jeh johnson understands this. cecilia minoz understands this. the president has said he understands it. and it's also been bipartisan, the recognition. the senior senator from missouri, senator mccaskill, has acknowledged this. the senior senator from delaware who happens to be chairman of the homeland security committee, senator carper; the junior senator from west virginia, senator manchin, publicly acknowledged it, as well as representatives in the border district in arizona and the number-three member of the house democratic leadership. all of them have acknowledged what the problem is and what we need to do to fix it. so let us review. president obama has described the border situation as a crisis, and i agree with that. it is.

he's described the 2008 law which i've talked about as a problem, which it is. leading republicans and leading democrats and senior members of the administration believe that reforming this 2008 law is part of the solution. it would help resolve the crisis, which it would. so they've called upon congress to make the necessary changes, which we should. so at a time of intense political gridlock here in washington, we actually do have some bipartisan agreement on what we need to do to help address the problem. and yet, none of these critical reforms can happen in the united states senate unless the majority leader allows a vote on the bill that i anticipate will come over from the house which will contain a solution to this problem that we've seen a

bipartisan group of political leaders contend is necessary if we're actually going to address it. but so far my impression is the majority leader is not going to allow us to have that vote. indeed, the majority leader, the majority whip, and the chairman of the judiciary committee have all said that they reject the need for changing this 2008 law that i've described. and the majority leader has gone so far as to say the border is secure. well, it may look secure from nevada, where he's from, but it's not secure from texas, where i live. and it just defies reality. and i wish the majority leader, and i wish the president would actually come visit the border, visit these processing centers, meet these children, congratulate the border patrol for doing a great job under very difficult circumstances.

but so far they've declined. well, i hope they will reconsider. senator collins, the senator from maine, is getting a bipartisan codel going down to mcallen on friday, and i look forward to accompanying her on that trip. but if you'd make that one trip, at least one trip, you'd learn for yourself that the border is not secure. this isn't a trick. sometimes i get the feeling that some of my friends in the senate think that we're going to always claim the border is insecure and so we're never going to do the other parts of immigration reform that they want to do or that need to be done. as a matter of fact, the president in 2011 notably said, well, people won't be satisfied until we create a moat and fill it full of alligators. he ridiculed those who said the border is not secure. yet last year alone, 414,000 -- excuse me, 414,000 -- that's

right -- people were detained on the southwestern border. 414,000, from 100 different countries, 100 different countries, most of them admittedly from mexico, south america and central america. but if you are in falfurrias, texas, where they have a border patrol stop where many migrants are let out of the vehicle by their coyote, which is a human smuggler, and forced to walk around this checkpoint in 100-degree-plus weather, not only will you find that some of them die from exposure -- and you can imagine coming from central america or south america and coming in that hot weather under those conditions. some of them literally die. so what's happened is the border patrol has established rescue beacons, they call them, where if the immigrant says, i got to

get some help, they can actually hit the button on this rescue beacon and the border patrol will come find them and make sure they get some medical care. those rescue beacons are in english, they are in spanish, and they are in chinese. i assure you that there are not many native chinese speakers in brooks county, texas. so the point is, to anybody who will listen, the border is not secure. it is a national security challenge in addition to our other issues. and i would just ask them to talk to general john kelly, head of southern command, who says right now 75% of the illegal drug traffic coming from central and south america into the united states, they just have to sit and watch because they don't

have the adequate resources to stop it. and it is the same cartels that are smuggling those drugs that are the criminal organizations that are smuggling the people. they are trafficking in human beings, and they will transport any commodity, any weapon, any person, anything into the united states as long as they can make money off of it. it is just the way they do business. well, it's enormously frustrating to hear the majority leader dhair the border is secure -- declare the border is secure in spite of the facts and the bipartisan acknowledgment that we need to fix this 2008 loophole in order to help solve this problem. but there are people who show some courage, people like secretary johnson and other democrats who have said, despite the majority leader's pronouncement, we should do something. we should actually solve the

problem, and we have it within our ability to do that. but i want to particularly acknowledge the courage of my friend and colleague, henry convecuellar, from laredo, texaa proud blue dog democrat. he reminds me almost every time i see him. he has partnered with me in legislation which would actually fix this flaw in the 2008 law. and if we could just get a vote on it here in the united states senate, maybe we'd have a chance to fix the problem and to do what the president acknowledged was the problem in the first place. well, i'm hopeful we can achieve a breakthrough, but we've got about two more days here that we'll be in session before the august recess. my constituents back home don't understand why in the world we would leave without fixing this problem, without addressing this humanitarian crisis, because they see the numbers like we see

the numbers. they are going to continue to grow. the crisis will get worse unless we act in a sensible sort of way. well, the only way we're going to get at that breakthrough is if we get some leadership here in the senate, and the majority leader allows a vote on either what the house is going to send us on thursday or allow an amendment, which i would be proud to offer, which has broad support here in the senate. but leadership requires more than just giving a speech or an interview and then heading off to the next fund raiser. it requires thoughtful, persistent engagement and a willingness to spend political capital. we know all this is controversial. we get that. but it strikes me that when you're giving attacked from -- when you're getting attacked from the right and the left, that means you're probably doing something that could at least have the poe teption for being a

bipartisan -- potential for being a bipartisan consensus, which we know is the only way anything gets done here, because none of us get everything we want. i would love it if i could get everything i want, but that's not democracy. that's not our system. that's not our constitutional form of government. so i would hope that the president would tell the majority leader that he believes this 2008 law is a problem, as he said a month ago on abc news. and i would hope that he would offer support for his own secretary of homeland security, who i know understands the nature of the problem but, unfortunately, i fear he's being outvoted by the political advisors at the white house -- not the people making public policy. so the folks in my state, particularly in the region of south texas and the rio grande valley are watching and waiting and hoping that washington will act to resolve this ongoing crisis. but we can't act unless the

majority leader allows us to act. that's the nature of this institution. and he won't allow a vote unless president obama steps up and leadleads. in order to do what he has acknowledged is the right thing to do and which we must do in order to address this problem. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from arkansas. mr. pryor: mr. president, i want to speak today just very briefly about medicare. before 1965, as the presiding officer and many others know in the chamber, nearly half of america's seniors had no health insurance at all, and medicare made certain that seniors had access to affordable health ca care, and it has lifted millions

out of poverty in this country. seniors earn their medicare benefits -- they're not given to them. seniors earn their medicare benefits through a lifetime of hard work because, as we know, all of our working lives a portion of every single paycheck is deposited and is guaranteed for benefits for when we turn 65. this is a bedrock commitment. we pay into it, and it should be there for all of us when we reach the age of 65. today we celebrate the 49th anniversary of medicare, but i would encourage my colleagues to hold the bole loon balloons ande because, over the past few years what we've seen down the hall in the house of representatives is a group of house members who try to continually chip away at the promise of medicare. they want to turn medicare into a voucher system. they even tried to raise the

eligibility age. these proposals, in effect, shift the cost onto those who can least afford to pay it. it will increase out-of-pocket expenses for our seniors on things like wellness visits, cancer screenings, and lifesaving drugs. these plans will allow insurance companies to cherry-pick who they want to cover, setting off a premium spiral that would leave sicker seniors with higher premiums and higher costs, leaving many american seniors without the indicator that they need. and, again -- without the care that they need. and, again, the care that they have earned. these proposals coming out of the house undermine the integrity of the program. it is important for us in the senate to not allow them to put the health and financial security of our seniors in

jeopardy. that's why i've introduced the medicare protection act. it's a responsible, commonsense solution t prevents budget schemes that would reduce medicare benefited and restrict eligibility, and it sends a strong message that medicare should not be dismantled, privatized or turned into a voucher system. the promise of medicare is one that we must keep. the senate should pass the medicare protection act, and i would aask that we keep medicare strong -- and i would ask that we keep medicare strong and affordable for today's seniors and for future generations. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i applaud and commend my friend from arkansas. this is very visionary legislation, and i support what he's doing. and we're going to do everything we can to move afford on this legislation. we would do it more quickly, except we have a few problems with the people over here, so we're going to do our best to move afford with this.

i now move to proceed to calendar 848. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion to proceed. all those in favor sayfy. all those opposed, say nay. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. reid: i believe there is a cloture -- the presiding officer: and the clerk will report the motion -- sph he d. mr. reid: okay. sorry about that. the presiding officer: the judiciary, jill a. pryor of georgia. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: mr. president, there is a cloture motion at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: cloture motion: we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of jill a. pryor of georgia to be united states circuit judge for the 11th

circuit, signed by 17 senators as follows: reid, leahy, coons, whitehouse, murray, klobuchar, cantwell, reed of rhode island, nelson, warren, udall of new mexico, hirono, blumenthal, boxer, harkin, cardin, and schumer. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum under rule 22 be waived. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. reid: i now move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion to proceed. all knows in favor say aye. all those opposed, say nay. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. and the motion is agreed to. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent that following my remarks, senators couldn't, sessions, stabenow, and warble

be able to speak up to five minutes each prior to the cloture vote on s. 2569, with senator coons be first recognized. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. coons: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. mr. coons: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that akuna cook be granted floor privileges during consideration of the bring jobs home act. the presiding officer: without objection. coons coops mr. president, i hav--mr. coons: mr. chairman, i have never been more opt miss 12eubg about africa and for the united states' partnership with africa than i am today. every year i host a conference in my home state of delaware called opportunity africa that brings together delawareans and for instance, leaders from across our country and from the continent interested in building and strengthening new ties. every year it's grown in the participation, in the scope of issues we look at, and in the number of delaware businesses interested in the opportunities in this continent of 54 countries, and at this past

march's kfns, president clinton delivered the keynote. the hunger to build new relationships is undeniable. what's required of us is to think anew and dedicate ourselves to building partnerships of mutuality and that last. in this chamber, that will mean passing a reauthorized africa growth and opportunity act that does more to facilitate real two-way trade than the current law and to take up and pass the bipartisan power africa law that will strengthen investment in infrastructure in electricity across the continent and next week it means coming together with africa's government and business leaders to forge new relationships built on mutual respect. i urge my colleagues and my friends throughout the business community to seize this opportunity and focus on the bright future it could create. ian africa that can secure itsef and empower its citizens, this is the africa we seek.

that's an africa that we in the united states are uniquely suited to help its people build. we've already built a powerful foundation for partnership through our investments in public health and education, clean water, democracy, and good governance. after 50 years of the peace corps and more than a decade of pepfar, president bush's groundbreaking commitment to combating h.i.v. and aids. we are better regarded in africa than anywhere else in the world. from our universities to our businesses, to our military training and partnerships to the vibrant african diaspara community spread throughout this land, we have tools no other nation has. the opportunity for progress is extraordinaryment and by helping to -- extraordinary. and by helping to build a strong and sustainable middle class across this continent, american workers and businesses will have more people to sell their products to and more markets in which to invest. the more we partner with african businesses, the stronger they will become. genuine partnerships like this must be the foundation for our relationships with africa going

forward and we have a lot to gain as well. as many have commented in the last decade, six out of ten of the fastest-growing economies in the world have been in africa and that number will only rise. other countries have noticed the opportunity. china's exports to africa, for instance, have outgrown ours 3-1 since 2000, and five years ago, china eclipsed us as africa's largest trading partner. so it's no surprise that since 2000, china's hosted five summits with african heads of state. let's be clear, the chinese, in seeking opportunity for this century, will not mix -- will not miss the next china. so we have a lot of ground to make up. it's also critical we recognize that we shouldn't just mimic the ways in which the chinese are seeking opportunity in africa. they bring a policy of nonintervention in domestic affairs. we bring american values, a focus on democracy, on governance, on human rights, as well as the attractiveness of our technology, our resources and the relationship with our

diaspara community. mr. president, this week we've had remarkable opportunities for our president, our secretary of state, several of us from this chamber to meet with young african leaders as part of a program that brought 500 inspiring young african leaders to washington. next week we will welcome more than 40 heads of state from across the continent, a summit that i hope signals the next big step in building strong and sustainable partnerships throughout the continent. president obama, leaders from this chamber, leaders from the cabinet and from across america's corporate community will join together for three days to allow us to refocus our efforts on the continent, to seize this moment and to move forward. it's my hope that this chamber, that this congress will take advantage of the opportunity to enact the african growth and opportunity act on a longer reauthorization and to open it to bipartisan, to truly balanced trade and to pass the bipartisan power africa act, to significantly improve our

investment in infrastructure. the opportunities are limitless. mr. president, it is my hope that we will but seize them. thank you. with that, i yield the floor. mr. sessions: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mr. sessions: mr. president, today's "wall street journal," in an article that should send shivers through every member of this body, contains an article and a report on what the president is planning to do with regard to executive amnesty, using executive orders to do that which congress has refused to do. the article says this -- "for months, president obama has said there were limits to his power to protect people living illegally in the united states from deportation. now he is considering broad action to scale back

deportations that could include work permits for millions of people, according to lawmakers and immigration advocates who have consulted with the white house." the president has been meeting regularly with immigration activists and he's been promising them things he has no power to promise. he's promised them things that constitutionally he's not able to do. and this congress needs to say "no" to that, and we can do that by simply barring the expenditure of money in the future to execute such a scheme. congressman blackmun in the house has offered legislation, senator cruz in the senate has offered legislation that would do just that. but it's not in the bill that we are being asked to provide cloture on that will come up in a few minutes. the article goes on to say, just to stress the stark nature of

what is being considered, "the shift in the white house thinking came after house republicans said they wouldn't take up immigration legislatio legislation." so the president is saying that i have legislation and the house won't pass it; therefore, i'm going to do it myself. it's one of the most pathetic excuses for abuse of power by a court or a president that you can imagine. congress considered his legislation. he promoted it strongly. members on both parties have advocated for things like that. but the house considered it and rejected it. that's an action. that's a decision by the house of representatives. the president has no power to go beyond that. and i think this congress, this senate has a responsibility to

speak to that question and to avoid an issue. it goes on, the "wall street journal" today, "an announcement is expected soon after labor d day, an administration official said." they're going to announce this within weeks. the article goes on to say tha that -- that it could involve as many as 11 million people and the president said himself -- quote -- "he would fix as much of our immigration system as i can on my own, without congres congress." "without congress." i'll just use my pen. i'll just order my officers, who work for me, you know, the border patrol, it i, the i.c.a. offers, they work for me. i'll just tell them to do a, b and c. we'll just not pay any attention

to the fact that section 249 of the i.n.a., i believe, says that a person in the country unlawfully is not entitled to work. mr. president, how much time is left? the presiding officer: the senator has one minute remaining. mr. sessions: he'll just do that on his own. so this legislation that we're discussing moving forward to provides us no opportunity to even get a vote on this issue and certainly in its text does not fix this problem. let me just be plain, colleagues. there are times when we have to rise above politics. maybe somebody believes in amnesty and they'd like to see this happen, but we cannot acquiesce into having the president unilaterall unilaterao in an unlawful fashion. what the truth is, that the people who are refusing to bring -- bring language up of this kind and fix it, what they want to do is see the president

do this. they're for it. they're supporting it. and they reject any action so far, at least, to defend the rule of law, defend the senate, defend the entire congress' legitimate powers. it is just breathtaking to me. so let me again say, colleagues, we need to take action on this. this congress needs to speak. we cannot allow executive orders to be issued by a president that eradicates plain law. to do so is wrong. the american people are watching this. they are not going to be happy that this congress didn't take action. and expressions of concerns among senators really are not enough. we need to bring this up. and senator reid, i predict, is not going to allow it to happen and he's going to be supported

by every member of his democratic conference. and every member of the december i can congress and every member who supports him in this plan will be, in fact, involved and supportive of the president's plan. i thank the chair and yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: first i would ask if you would notify me after i've spoken for four minutes. the presiding officer: the senator will be so notified. ms. stabenow: thank you. mr. president, in a few moments we're going to be voting on a very fundamental principle and a very important bill that is literally about bringing jobs home to america. the question before us is, are we going to begin to change the incentives in the tax code, we're incentivizing jobs -- instead of incentivizing jobs who are shipping jobs overseas,

we're going to support companies bringing jobs home. this is a no-brainer. i think anyone listening to this debate, anyone across america who is focused in would say, why are you not even having a voice vote and everybody voting "yes" and go on to the next policy, conversions, that we need to be dealing with that will keep jobs in america? unfortunately, we had to go through a lot of procedures, motions to proceed. we're now having to go through a supermajority vote here to get to the final bill. i hope colleagues will join us in a bipartisan way to vote to get to the final vote on this bill so we can make it very clear we're on the side of american workers and american businesses. here's what we've seen in the last three years. in the last decade, we've lost 2.4 million jobs being shipped overseas. now, that, by the way, does not count the ones that are leaving on paper right now, which is a whole nother story,

mr. president, that is something that we need to be deeply concerned about and speaking out and calling people out on. but these are the jobs where they're packing up shop and they're moving overseas. and to add insult to injury, not only does a worker lose their job, the community lose the factory or the business, but we as american taxpayers foot the bill for the move. now, that is shocking. and when you explain to people that in the tax code, yes, when you pack up shop, you do all the moving, you ship your jobs overseas, you can write that off your taxes and we all pay for it, the the public looks at us e we're crazy. and they're right. and we have been trying to close this now for the last few years, and this is the opportunity in just a few moments to have that vote to get it done. now, what are we going to be voting on specifically? it's very simple. end the taxpayer subsidies that

pay for moving costs for corporations to ship jobs overseas. on the other hand, you want to bring your jobs home, we will gladly allow you to write off the costs of bringing jobs home. and on top of that, we will get an additional 20% tax credit for the costs of moving production back to the united states. now, the good news is, mr. president, we actually have companies for a variety of reasons that are moving jobs home and we want to applaud th them. there's a lot of reasons for that in a global economy. shipping costs, low natural gas costs that we want to keep low so that we have affordable energy and we continue to bring manufacturing back. we have a productive -- the most productive, skilled work force in the world. there are a lot of reasons why companies now are bringing jobs home.

but a lot of companies are right on the edge and they look at the tax code and they are making decisions about whether or not they're going to move overseas or stay, whether or not they're going to bring jobs home or not. the bill that we are voting o on -- and i want to thank senator walsh for his leadership. he has been a passionate advocate in talking about it from a montana perspective. and the two great "m" states are involved here, montana and michigan. we both understand deeply about the fact that you're not going to have a middle class unless you make things in america. the presiding officer: the senator has spoken for approximately four minutes. mrs. stabenow: thank you very much. we've got to make things and grow things. this is about making sure it's in america when we make things and grow things, so we have a middle class in america. but the reality is that we have to start in the tax code by

making it clear we're not going to enscene activize moving your jobs overseas. we are not going to incentivize somebody packing up -- and, by the way, oftentimes those workers end up having to train their replacement. we have many stories in michigan where the replacement worker's in another country, flown in our country, trained by our people to take their jobs. and then to add insult to injury, they pay for the move through the tax code. so we're -- it's very, very simple, and i'm going to turn things over to senator walsh to close out this debate. but we have a very simple message. you want to bring your jobs ho home, madam president? we're all in. you can write off the costs of that move and we'll give you an extra 20% tax cut. but if you want to ship your jobs overseas, you're on your own. i would yield the floor and turn to senator walsh.

mr. walsh: madam president, i rise today -- the presiding officer: the senator from montana. mr. walsh: madam president, i rise today to thank my senate colleagues for joining with american workers in voting overwhelmingly to consider the bring jobs home act. i want to particularly thank my colleague from michigan, senator stabenow, for her tremendous leadership and work on behalf of america's working families. the vote last week was a procedural vote but it was an important signal that job creation here at home can be a bipartisan issue. i am a strong believer in reaching across the aisle to promote good ideas. we're not here to represent our parties. we're here to represent our constituents. i made a promise to montanaans that i will support good ideas from anyone and any party as long as they grow our economy and create jobs.

unfortunately, since i joined the senate five months ago, what i have mostly seen in washington is the opposite. what i've seen in washington are people playing games. washington isn't broken because there aren't good ideas out there. washington is broken because not enough people reach across the aisle to find common ground. i have insisted from the start that the bring jobs home act is a bill that both republicans and democrats can get behind. we must not let partisan politics and gamesmanship jam up the process. madam president, the american economy is recovering from a long and deep recession. many americans are still out of work and are desperately seeking the stability and security that comes with a job and a reliable paycheck. i am committed to leveling the playing field for american workers. it's time for us to come together and show american workers that we are fighting for

them, for their jobs, for their family and for a better economy. i've heard from some of my colleagues who have commented on the floor that we should only consider the bring jobs home act in the context of comprehensive tax reform. that's not good enough. the answer to disagreements is not to do nothing. the answer is to start with manageable, commonsense reforms that everyone can get behind. montanans understand this. they know it is wrong that american workers subsidize a corporation's decision to pack up businesses in the u.s. and send our jobs packing. imagine an american worker whose final task before being laid off is to help shut down operations so his job or her job can be sent overseas. that's baloney. if congress can't come together to end that subsidy, then we deserve the low approval ratings that we're receiving.

millions of american jobs have been sent overseas in recent decades. too many large corporations have opened factories in companies like china or mexico while closing factories right here in the united states. we need to do what we can to stem the tide and reward companies that bring jobs back to america. the bring jobs home act will help do that. my bill closes the loophole that some multinational corporations use to claim a tax deduction for the cost of moving jobs overseas. it also creates a new 20% tax credit for companies that bring jobs back to the united states. these two parts complement each other. the first ends the incentive for shipping jobs overseas. the second encourages the return of jobs we have already lost. our tax code shouldn't reward outsourcing. what we need is more insourcing. many companies are considering bringing jobs back home today.

this is especially true in the manufacturing sector. the bring jobs home act could make the difference for some of those companies to reinvest in america and american workers. so today, madam president, i urge my colleagues to stand with america's workers to pass this bill. now is the time for leadership, to embrace good ideas that help create jobs in montana and all across america. madam president, with that, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion: we, the undersigned senators in in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate hereby move to bring to a close debate on s. 2569, a bill to provide inis en alternative for businesss to bring jobs -- provide incentive for businesss to bring jobs back to america. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent request the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on

s. 2569, a bill to provide an incentive for businesss to bring jobs back to america and for other purposes, shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators wishing to vote or wishing to change their vote? if not, the ayes are 54, the nays are 42, and the motion -- three-fifths of the senate duly chosen and sworn have not voted in the affirmative. the motion is not agreed to. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion. we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, hereby move to

bring to a close the debate on the motion to proceed to calendar number 488, s. 2648, a bill making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2014, and for other purposes. signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is: is it the sense of the senate that debate on the motion to proceed to s. 2648, a bill making emergency supplemental appropriations for fiscal year ending september 30, 2014, and for other purposes, shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rules. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators wishing to vote or wishing to change their vote? if not, on this vote the ayes are 63 and the nays are 33. three-fifths of the senators duly chosen and sworn have voted in the affirmative and the motion is agreed to. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations which the clerk will report.

the clerk: nominations, department of state, cynthia h. akuetteh of the district of columbia to be after to the gabonese republic and ambassador to the democratic republic of sao tome and principals upy. department of housing and urban development housing and urban development, erika lizabeth moritsugu to be an assistant secretary. metropolitan washington airports authority, richard a. kennedy of pennsylvania to be a member of the board of directors. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: i ask unanimous consent all available debate time with respect to the nominations in this series be yielded back. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. hearing no further debate, the question occurs on the akuetteh nomination. all in favor say aye. all those opposed say no.

the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the question occurs on the nomination. all those in favor say aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it, and the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the question occurs on the kennedy nomination. all those in favor say aye. all those opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. and the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the motions to reconsider are laid on the table -- made and laid on the table, and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action, and the senate will resume legislative session. ms. mikulski: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from maryland.

ms. mikulski: i have 12 unanimous consent requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of both the majority and minority leaders, and i thereby ask unanimous consent that these requests be agreed to and that these requests also be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. mikulski: madam president, i rise to speak on the pending business before the united states senate. the senate's just achieved cloture on the motion to proceed to the emergency supplemental funding bill, so let me explain to the people who are watching this either in the gallery or on c-span. the senate has creaky rules. these creaky rules were to make sure that we would cool the passions that would be raging in the nation on any given time so that we could duly give consideration, that debate would be diligent and we wouldn't be gripped by the fire of the moment or the passion of the

moment. and i appreciate that. but instead, what these rules now do is they take a lot of time for us to get to the meat of the matter, because what we're debating now is the motion to proceed to a legislation related to and supplementing existing funding to meet new emerging crises. the senate votes on a motion to proceed not only on the bill itself, but should we even go to the bill. so what we're debating now is should we go to the bill on the emergency supplemental funding bill? and you know what, madam president, i want to say yes, yes, vote on the motion to proceed. let's get on with with it. let's have a real debate with real issues. there's 30 hours that have been set aside to debate on whether we should proceed. i'm here to say let's proceed,

let's yield back our time and let's get on the bill. we have a lot of things we need to get done in the next 48 hours. i want to see this emergency supplemental funding bill be debated and voted on. we have three elements in this bill that need come -- that meet compelling need, need for our neighbors in our own country, need for our treasured ally, the state of israel, and also need for a crisis at the border where children literally are marching across central america in search of refugee status. we need to deal with all three of these issues. this bill, madam president, this emergency funding bill, is about neighbor helping neighbor. first of all, it's about our own country. wildfires are raging in the west. over the last year, 39 states have faced wildfires. right this very minute, eight

western states are coping with unbelievable wildfires. some of the largest fires in their history. and what happens? vast amounts of territory are going up in smoke. we're losing towns, businesses, homes. our firefighters are being worn out. our first responders, and they need help. this legislation will provide $615 million to these states facing this horrific arm geton-like emergency. in -- armageddon-like emergency. in addition to that, this legislation includes $225 million to replenish the rockets that are being used by israel, deploying technology called the iron dome. the iron dome is a missile defense system that is rejecting and destroying the rockets that

are being sent into israel by hamas. the following is working, but they are using up the rockets and they need to be replenished. then there is the humanitarian crisis at our border. here we have $2.7 billion to meet the needs of children seeking refuge in order to be able to deal with placing them while we determine their legal status, but also being able to fight the crime of the narcotraffickers and the human traffickers that are creating this surge of the children. this is a total emergency funding for 3.5 -- $3.57 billion. now, why do we call it an emergency? well, it's because under the law, you can't just say oh, this is an emergency. in order to get emergency funding, you have to meet the

criteria of the budget control act of 2011. the need has to be urgent. it has to be temporary. it has to be unforeseen. and it either is to prevent the loss of life or in the interest of our national security. all three of these areas of funding meet this need. now, under emergency funding, it means that there are no offsets. it means that we don't take from another important program being funded by the united states government to meet that need. so in order to meet the needs of iron dome, we don't take from other national defense money. that will replenish that. when we go to help the wildfires, we don't take from other important areas in agriculture or interior or in other bills.

this will help not only meet the need but also not place an additional burden on other communities. now, i'm going to talk about the urgency. this firefighting is really needed now. when you listen to the senators from the western states, when you see the photographs, literally, literally parts of our country are going up in smoke. now, the forest service agency that actually is in charge of dealing with this will run out of money in august. and as i said, last year, these wildfires burned in 39 states. when you look at iron dome, hamas, this violent terrorist organization that actually rejects israel's right to even exist from their tunnels are showering israel with these

rockets, and iron dome, arrowhead and david sling are a missile defense system designed to help them. the short outclose missile defense system is iron dome. it will make sure that we replace the interceptor rockets that are being used to protect them against this showering of rockets. the israeli embassy spoke to my staff yesterday. we have got over 2,000 hamas rockets fired just in the last week, so israel needs to replenish itself. then there is the issue of the surge of unaccompanied children presenting themselves at our border, asking for refugee status. in order to really be able to meet this crisis -- and they're coming in thousands. 59,000 kids have come this year. we know that the immigration and

customs service, if we don't meet this emergency funding, will run out of money in august. border patrol, border patrol will run out of money in early september. now, that doesn't mean that the border patrol agents or the immigration customs enforcement agents will stop working. it means the department of homeland security, 22 agencies, will take money out of existing funds to fund this. so it means that they could take money out of federal emergency management just as we're going into hurricane season, just as we're in high tornado season. we could be taking money out of fema to put it in border patrol unless we do this emergency funding. we've got to do it. health and human services runs out of money in august. they are the ones that when the children present themselves while their legal status is being determined must be taken care of in a humane way, the

american way. we don't treat children in an abusive manner. it means we will feed them, we will clothe them, we will shelter them, we will meet any emergency health needs that they have, and we need to do that while we determine their legal status. my bill, the supplemental i have presented, helps accelerate the determination of their legal status. my legislation and this supplemental spending actually provides more immigration judges, legal representation for the children. that's so that we can quickly determine do they have a right to asylum while we are also taking care of them. we need to be able to do that. but, madam president, i would hope that others would get the briefings that i have, visit the border the way i did to find

this out. the reason we have a crisis at the border is because we have a crisis in central america, and this legislation provides the money to do this. oh, yes, people say, you know, root causes like poverty have been going on for years, senator mikulski. this doesn't only deal with poverty. we want to go -- we want to go and work with the governments of central america to really go after the narcotraffickers, the human traffickers and the coyotes engaged in smuggling. why do we want to do that? madam president, if you ask these children where are the hometowns that you are from, they will give us the names of little cities and little towns, and if you look at their poverty rate, their poverty rate in these communities have been

consistent for a number of years. that's a sad circumstance. but if you look at the crime rate, the murder rate, the recruitment into violent gangs, the recruitment into human trafficking with the threat of death or torture, that's where these kids are coming from. we have got to go after the criminals in central america and not treat these children like they are criminals. we cannot treat children in this country like they are the criminals. go after the real criminals in central america, using our assets, working with the assets in central america to do this. they have programs and they have plans. honduras is a great example of what they are trying to do. they need our help. if you don't want the crisis at our border, deal with the crisis in central america. and that also deals with our insatiable, unending, vociferous

appetite for drugs. the drugs have created the narcoterrorists. once you start selling drugs, you are willing to sell women and children like commodities. and if you are willing to sell women and children like commodities, then that's where the vile, repugnant practice of human trafficking and human smuggling and even human -- a new form of slavery, sexual slavery begins. now, these children are on the march. when we talk to these children, they are terrific children. they are brave. they are gutsy. they don't -- you talk to the boys, they don't want to be parts of gangs. they want to get out, they want to get out, so they start this long march from their home country through mexico to make it to the rio grande and on rafts and swimming and so on, they make it to our border. you talk to the girls, the girls want to go to school. the girls want to get an

education. they don't want to be recruited into these vile, vile circumstances. so these are earnest, hardworking children who want to have safety, who want to have a future, and we want to be able to see do they by interviewing them qualify for refugee status, and if they don't, they will have to go back home, but if they do, they get to stay here. so they deserve the protection under the law. so we need to pass this legislation. this bill is a funding bill. it doesn't include immigration legislation. we say those kinds of things can either be brought up in another way, another method here, but this is a clean funding bill. when i say clean, it means it has no legislative language