opportunity to do exactly that. we are not asking people to do anything extraordinary -- extraordinarily, certainly not something they haven't done before which is to vote on a language that's included and it's been the lava land for 39 years that they have voted on before. we are not asking them to change the status quo. we are just asking them to focus on the victim. so as ms. gaitan with the coalition against trafficking women said some of -- senate democrats are choosing a phantom problem over real victims. shame on us if we allow that to happen. shame on us. we can do better. these victims deserve better. the people we work for in the 50 states around this country, they deserve better. shame on us if we don't get this

problem solved and if we don't pass this piece of legislation. this bipartisan legislation and get it to the president's desk where he would gladly sign it. mr. president i would ask unanimous consent have a unanimous consent request for committees to me during the day session. they have the approval of the minority and majority leaders and i would ask is that these request the return be printed in the record. >> is there objection? without objection. >> thank you mr. president. i yield the floor. >> mr. president? our republican colleagues say they are here fighting for women. if that were the case then they wouldn't have snuck into this bill a provision that hurts women, all right? that's not just me saying it it's a story in the "washington post" and i ask unanimous consent to place into the

record. >> without objection. >> in early january e-mail review by the poster republican judiciary committee staffer sent to democratic staffers summary of changes to the previous version of the bill in seven bullet points. guess what? they left out the change they made to women's reproductive health. now i have been around here a long time and i thought there was trust in this body but don't stand up here and say it's a phantom problem when the "washington post" confirms it. they have the e-mail that proves this change was made and was not told to the democrats on the committee. if it had been told to the democrats on the committee we would have worked this out. and he wants to fight for women, take this out. take this provision out that harms that victims of trafficking.

you want to help the women? bring up loretta lynch for confirmation a fantastic woman qualified held up by the republicans longer than any other attorney general nominee ever. if you want to help women those are two ways to do it. solve this problem. don't stand up and say it's a phantom problem when the "washington post" saw the e-mail e-mail. look we know the bill before us has an extremely worthy goal. we want to help victims of human trafficking but i want to ask rhetorically how does that help women who have been brutally trafficked when you don't let them access their legal right to end a pregnancy that resulted from their enslavement? a woman is enslaved.

she becomes pregnant. shouldn't she have the ability to get the same kind of health care as any other woman but no in this bill they say she can't use the victims compensation fund for that legal right. republicans are doing this all over the place. they attach immigration to the homeland security bill. they are threatening to attach the keystone pipeline to a highway bill and now they include abortion and a human trafficking bill. and then they tell us we are seeing phantom problems? i don't think so. they have been in charge for eight weeks and all who we have seen is they are taking hostage after hostage after hosted legislatively to get their way on their philosophy. roe philosophy. roe v. wade is the lava lamp it if they don't like it when don't they just propose doing away with it? let's have that out.

this bill singles out an an hurts from poor women and women who have been the victim of a heinous crime, whitman to face deplorable conditions, ripped out of their homes taken advantage of, treated brutally. women who many times are forced into pregnancy by their captors and in an unprecedented manner because of slipping language into this bill the bill imposes abortion restrictions on private funds private funds that have been collected from the criminals and the perpetrators are the perpetrators of these unspeakable acts. don't these women deserve better? shouldn't these victims have access to services that are guaranteed by the constitution and? now my friends on the other side don't like it. they want to tell women what to do.

they want to get into the most personal decisions that women and their families make. you know what? let them do that for their families but if they want to change the lava lamp roe v. wade and tell women they are criminals and doctors make them criminals too then why don't they just have the courage to bring it to the floor directly and not sneak it into a bill and have these staffers write a note to their colleagues saying of go they are silent. we didn't do anything on that. i will tell you something there is one advantage to being around her long time. you have a sense of what used to be decent around here. when your word was your word in your bond was your bond. thank goodness we have proof. we have proof that the republicans left this out of the memo in which they told the

judiciary committee the changes that were made. we have proof. don't call this a phantom problem. because we have got it in writing. this is a clear path injecting these unrelated extremely politically charged provisions in two key pieces legislation. i have not seen it. nice to have a little bit of an understanding around here that if we agreed on a piece of legislation we keep out the poison pills. we wouldn't put them in the bills whether they were written by democrats or republicans. and we know at the end of the day what happens. everybody gets hurt because nothing gets done. and i have to just say if this is the new way it's going to be around here it's a bad way for the people. we should be working on a bill that protects the victims of the

most heinous crime, human trafficking, protecting our society's most vulnerable people. and making sure they are denied denied -- not denied of their rights. the republican provision that was added here in secret and tried to be kept quiet would hurt every single woman we are trying to help. they inserted language that was not in the same bill last year that was supported by democrats and republicans. they added the new language quietly hoping nobody would notice and we would march down there. i put my name on this bill by the way. because my staff trusted the republican staff when they said there wasn't any change in abortion language. how awful it was for my staff that they said to me senator we feel terrible. we took their word and i got my

name off this bill. why on earth would anyone want to single out these victims of human trafficking and take away their constitutional rights? you know at least own up to it i say to my republican friends. you got caught. we have the e-mail. don't get up here and say it's a phantom problem. don't make the speeches about how democrats want to hurt women when you put a poison pill, hurt the very women you say you are going to protect dated in secret and call us out for it like we are doing something wrong. the american people were not born yesterday. they are pretty darned smart. and if i stop on the street out here they are republican or democrat or what their view is on abortion i said to them if a friend tells you they have made no changes to a letter you asked them to write and you took their

word for it and later found out they were something in that letter that they knew would hurt you would you be angry and say they probably would say i don't want to do with that person anymore. they can't be trusted. one thing i've learned around here is your word is your bond and the relationships we have with one another across the aisle are precious. they are important. so let's not make these phony arguments. let's fix the problem. let's remove the offending language. let's come together for once. let's pass a bill that helps these victims and then my colleague says all the groups want this bill anyway. let me quote from one of the project. quote the bipartisan support to address modern slavery should

not be held up by a separate debate on partisan issues. that is a direct quote. and if ever there was a partisan issue it's the right to choose. that's a partisan issue. then there is a letter from a national network for youth quote this legislation is desperately needed and we cannot let this moment pass us because of the addition of partisan division -- the invasive provisions that let me read that again. this legislation is desperately needed and we can't let this moment pass us by because of the addition of partisan divisive provisions. so again mr. president we are offering republicans a simple solution. remove the language, go back to the same language ahead and the bill last year which has broad support. if republicans do that today we could pass this bill today.

i know this is the democratic time to talk so i'm going to allow senator herb ryman to continue. we need to end this snake attack on women's health so we can get the victims of human trafficking as the services and support we need. we are ready and willing and able to sit down and work with our friends on the other side to drop this provision. the senate is not going to get things done if the republican majority continues to insist on putting politically charged extreme measures on bills that should pass with bipartisan support and i hope my colleagues will work with us. i certainly want to be able to trust the staffers again and trust my colleagues again and it would start with moving this provision and i would deal to my friend. i yield the floor. >> mr. president. >> mr. president i would like to associate myself with the remarks of my friend from california senator boxer and i rise today to speak against

attempts to turn this bill that justice for trafficking victims act into a political football. while there are many issues that made by this congress and certainly the issue of choice for women is one of them human trafficking should not be one of those divisive issues. this bill started off as a bipartisan bill but along the way a provision was added to the bill that brings me to the floor today in opposition to that provision. not only do i oppose the substance of that provision but i very much object to how the provision was added to the bill i'm been announced to the sponsors of this bill, like me. buried in this bill is a provision that allows the government to dictate a woman's health care options in this provision would limit choices for women who have been

victimized by human trafficking women who are often forced to endure rape and violence on a daily basis. that is what human trafficking is. so this is an unprecedented and i have to say appalling expansion of government's role in women's health care decisions. the provision is anti-women and anti-victim. mr. president this body should be working to help these victims of trafficking violence not playing politics with their lives. but that is not what we are seeing today read the truth is there are some in this body at a time and again put their own ideological agenda and they need to score political points ahead of consensus driven legislation. we have seen this before. just a few weeks ago congress

came close to shutting down the department of homeland security, the third-largest department in the federal government because a few members wanted to hold funding national security priorities hostage to score points against the present immigration actions. we saw it during the shutdown. we saw during the debate over the shaheen portman energy bill. we saw during congresses drawn out debate over the reauthorization of violence against women act. yet another issue that should be free of partisan politics. this body shouldn't let ideological ground setting divisive issues stall and kill bipartisan legislation that will make a difference for people particularly for the most vulnerable people in this country, victims of trafficking.

this bill is no exception to. a bill of human trafficking should not be a method of expanding the government's powers to dictate women's personal choices. women's health care decisions. i join my colleagues in urging the senate to stop using this legislation and others like it to advance an ideological agenda and help the women, men and children who are being trafficked across this country. i yield my time. >> joining us on the phone is simply following the story for "politico." she is on capitol hill. thanks for being with us. this story has been percolating over the last couple of days. explain what happened to day work as next week. >> basically what happened is it's this really bipartisan bill that fell victim to partisan politics.

what we saw on the floor earlier this afternoon was amendment shenanigans where each party took turns blocking amendments that each brought forward knowing dave wouldn't have to vote to pass. obviously mcconnell had offered a post but with the democrats controlling 46 votes it would go nowhere. that is where it was headed. in the big picture right now both sides want to get this done. it's an easy win for both parties. the great issue after the bruising fight we had on homeland security think both parties wanted to win but with this abortion provision in there and with neither side willing to budge with republicans calling democrats pretty much incompetent for not reading the bill and democrats calling republicans sneaky for elites allegedly sticking to provision

and although republicans dispute that. >> a lot of finger-pointing. we heard from senator cornyn saying this bill will help sex trafficking visions of victims and it truly saddens me. what did happen? did republicans insert something in the bill? did democrats not read the bill? what's the story? >> is a lot of hearsay but this is what we did know. the bill was released in early january and the so-called hyde amendment provision was in there there. it's a 68 page bill. it's not a long bill. democrats fully admit that their staffer should've read the bill. what happened was the bill was released in january. there weren't any changes that turned a bipartisan group and then i went to the judiciary committee who has jurisdiction over the issue on february 2602 weeks ago. i was at the committee hearing because this was the same hearing for attorney general

nominee loretta lynch. they went through a few changes here and there in the bill is headed to the floor. all throughout this democrats say they were not aware of this provision. it is written in the bill and an obscure way so maybe to the normal eye we don't see the word hyde amendment or abortion but to well-trained lawyers and congressional staffers it should've been noticeable. unfortunately democrats say they simply didn't read it and started realizing that the provision was in there for them that is unacceptable. republicans say first of all they have a hard time believing they didn't read the bill but however cornyn and other republicans say they did not speak the senate the last minute which is true. it was snuck in early in the markup it would have been spotted while in the process of going on. spin there all along they said.

democrats -- it's democrats responsibility and they say the hyde amendment has essentially essentially been a while the lanford for decades and he is correct because it's been a spending bill that congress has to take up every year saying no taxpayer funding for abortion can be provided. >> is in fact if you can parse the statement by senator durbin the bill on the floor has a provision in it that we were told would not be included. >> so what happened is that the democrats on the judiciary committee which dick durbin is a member of and also schumer who sits on the judiciary. there was an e-mail exchange between staffers and republicans had given a list of seven changes that were different from last year's version which under democratic control wouldn't have included this approach abortion

abortion -- and the hyde amendment was not included in that amendment at all. however the republicans say democratic folks were wearing also a means even if what wasn't said the responsibility lies with them to read the bill. >> so are we heading to monday? >> with both parties can't see other way that this goes and failing. >> seung min kim is joining us on capitol hill with her work on line available at political --.

>> king of kilo the second return address the european parliament this week and spoke about europe's role in combating terrorism. he also encouraged tolerance between christians and muslims. from strasbourg friends, this is 25 minutes. v. >> translator: his majesty the king of jordan abdullah the second. [applause]

[speaking in native tongue] >> translator: ladies and gentlemen on behalf of the members of the european parliament a very warm welcome to his majesty. this is your fourth visit to the european parliament as i never trust and confidence and friendship with the european parliament and the citizens of the european union. [speaking in native tongue]

>> translator: your dedication is very welcome here and we welcome the presence of both chambers of the jordanian parliament from the chamber of members of parliament. it is a particular pleasure that you have brought young jordanian students with you to parliament so it very warm welcome to all of you. [applause] [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: on behalf of parliament i repeat my sentiments. we want to pass our deepest sympathies and commiserations for the death of --

our thoughts are with the relatives and we wish them comfort. this was terrible news come in deep terrible pictures we saw of the death of this pilot. it's hard to imagine that people could commit such gruesome acts. it's a criminal and barbaric act carried out by the islamic faith and fills us with four. this is against all the values that we share. we see people fleeing from the islamic state and from the

syrian civil war. there are a million refugees in jordan now. we are very impressed by the generosity of the jordanian people. we appreciate the challenges the country is facing. [applause] [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: allow me to say to you and your people you have our full support and solidarity in this difficult time. we want to help support jordan on its way to political and economic reforms. you have started a path to reform. you have listened to your people's desire for change.

you have taken on board the freedom of human rights in the region. we have the alliance against the islamic state and jordan and the european union are partners. we want the jordanian people to be able to live in dignity and in a secure environment. and you have helped to contribute to this effort to bring security back to the region. your country is a leader now and hoping to combat the tara -- terror militias. you have acted with decisiveness against hate and extremism and be very much respect that.

it is a difficult time for minorities and all of the region but jordan is a tolerant country where people can practice their religion in peace and live in peace together. your participation in the memorial march in paris for the victims of the attack was a strong signal anything to the whole middle east and a very heartfelt thank you for that. [applause] [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: by sending out this message you have shown once again that jordan is against terrorism and on the side of peace, respect and tolerance. we have had an opportunity to discuss this previously. your efforts to create a peaceful solution to the israeli-palestinian conflict is

something we share as well. we want to let ourselves be guided by the standards and in these difficult times that we face together. we recognize our friends when they are difficult times and we are proud of jordan and its kin and we see them as true friends syllabary warm welcome to the european parliament and you have the floor. [applause] [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: in the name of god members and distinguished members