enough said. [applause] if you want to see some of the films that i have mentioned that they are really worth to go out of your way to see or order them on netflix. thank you very much. [applause] . . . . the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. almighty god, the sovereign lord of nations, empower our lawmakers

to be as faithful to others as you have been to them. may they be willing to show patience in dealing with the shortcomings of others in the same way that you have shown them mercy and long-suffering. help them to seek to respect the beliefs and ideas of others, being tolerant even to those who they may disagree. give them the wisdom to refuse to do to others what they would not want done to themselves. lord, we commit this day of labor to you, totally committed to work for your glory.

we pray in your holy name. amen. the president pro tempore: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to our flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: majority leader. mr. mcconnell: there's a simple reason why nearly every kentuckian looks forward to march. college basketball. i'd like to take a moment to recognize several teams that are already making the state proud by winning their conference tournaments. this weekend the women of the university of louisville won their first ever a.c.c. tournament title finishing the regular season with a record of 29-2. the cardinals are currently ranked third in the nation led by a.c.c. coach of the year jeff waltz and a.c.c. player of the year asia derr. these talented women are looking to add yet another title. so are the murray state racers.

their men's team won the ohio valley conference championship and earned their first ncaa tournament appearance since 2012. they'll look to build on the longest winning streak in the nation. also in louisville the knights men's team earned their second straight conference championship and a two seed in ncaa division two tournament. thomas moore college both the men's and women's teams are celebrating conference championships which earned them spots in the ncaa division three tournaments. lindsey wilson college won its conference title and is heading to the division one tournament for the first time since jansing -- advancing to the fabb four in 2013. union college, the men's team clinched their fifth consecutive conference title and the kentucky christian lady knights took down the mideast region title as well. i would like to congratulate all these conference-winning kentucky teams, their coaches,

and of course their dedicated fans. on another matter, today we'll vote on the nominations of three mortal lented individuals whom the president has -- more talented individuals whom the president has asked to serve as federal district judges. karen scholer, tilman self for the middle district of georgia and terry doughty for the western district of louisiana. these are three excellent nominees and i would encourage all of our colleagues to vote in support of each of them. and one final matter, mr. president, it's been 73 days since president trump signed historic tax reform into law. it feels like it's been longer than that because practically every day another major national employer announces a new commitment to invest in american workers because of tax reform. every day we hear about more local businesses realizing new savings and putting it toward

equipment, expansion, and employees. every day we hear how bonus, rising wage, expanded benefits and lower taxes are giving middle-class families a whole lot more breathing room. but every day we're reminded that some of our friends across the aisle are still desperately, desperately trying to minimize this good news. democratic leaders have tried to say these new jobs raises bonuses and business expansions amount to no more than crumbs. i'll leave the final verdict to the hardworking families across the country, including the many kentuckians that i hear from. in the meantime, the economic data are painting quite an optimistic picture. last week the labor department announced that weekly jobless claims had reached a 48-year low. let me repeat that fewer americans are filing for unemployment today than at any time since 1969. the labor market is tightening.

employers are competing for talent and workers and their families are coming out on top. in january america's real disposable income rows more quickly than it had -- rose more quickly than it had since april 2015. that's the biggest jump in spending money available to american families accounting for tax rates and inflation in nearly three years. that's more money to save for a home purchase or a college fund. it's more to save for retirement or to spend on a family vacation. u.s. consumer confidence is higher today than it's been since the year 2000. last week news broke that u.s. manufacturing is expanding at the fastest pace since 2004. look, it's not complicated. the bill passed by republicans in congress last year was designed with a very simple philosophy in mind. that when we put more of

america's hard earned money back in their own pockets, they'll know what best to do with it. when we level the playing field and take weight off the shoulders of small businesses, they'll help their communities thrive. and when we welcome investments from entrepreneurs and job creators instead of discouraging it, the economy will respond in kind. the idea was simple enough but as we're already seeing because republicans in congress and the president were able to overcome lockstep partisan opposition on the other side and get tax reform across the finish line, that simple idea is having an extraordinary impact. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the following nomination which the clerk will report.

the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, karen gren scholer of texas to be united states district judge for the northern district of texas.

mr. durbin: mr. president? the presiding officer: the assistant democratic leader. mr. durbin: is the senate in quorum call? the presiding officer: the senate is not in quorum call. mr. durbin: thank you, mr. president. i ask consent to speak as if in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: mr. president, today is the day. march 5, the deadline imposed by

president trump on those who are being protected and allowed to stay in the united states under the daca program. it was last september 5 when president trump held a press conference. the attorney general backed him up and said that's it. the protection that is currently given to 780,000 young people in america allowing them to stay in this country and pursue their dreams will end on march 5 of 2018. today. 780,000 who were brought to the united states as infant, toddlers, children, and teenagers who've lived their lives in this country, gone to school, never had a serious run-in with the law, went through criminal background checks, came up with a $500

filing fee, and were given permission under an executive order of president obama to legally stay in this country for two years at a time. during that period they would not be deported and they would be allowed to work. who are these young people? well, they are known as the dreamers, although president trump hates that term. they are known as the dreamers because they represent young people who went to school in america, stood up in their classroom every day and pledged allegiance to that flag. this is the only country they have ever known. this was to be the country of their future. but at some point in their lives, a member of the family sat down and said we have got to have a serious conversation. you see, we never filed the papers when we brought you to this country as an infant, and right now, you are undocumented in the united states of america.

what that means is that any minute, there could be a knock object -- on the door, and you and perhaps your entire family would be asked to leave. i introduced a bill called the dream act 17 years ago. senator hatch was my exphorn when i introduced it. the purpose of the dream act was to say to these young people, we'll give you a chance. although you are illegal in the eyes of the law of the united states, undocumented, we will give you a chance to earn your way to legal status, give you a chance someday to be a citizen of the united states. it won't be easy. no helping hand for you. you want to go to college, there will be no federal assistance for you. you're going to have to make it on your own. you'll have to work, work harder than perhaps the person sitting next to you at the desk in high school. see if you can do it. and if you can, we'll give you your chance.

that's what the dream act said. it's passed with a majority vote in the senate many times, but they never quite made it to 60 votes which it needs to become the law of the land. president obama, when he was a senator here in this chamber, was my colleague from illinois. he cosponsored the dream act with me and so the day came when he was elected president and i wrote him a letter. dick lugar, republican of indiana, joined me in that letter. he had been a supporter of the dream act when he served in the senate. we wrote to president obama and said can you do anything as president to give these young people a chance, to spare them from deportation? he worked on it for a year, and then president obama came up with something called daca, a program that by executive order gave these young people their chance. 780,000 of them went through the background check, paid their

filing fee, and proved that they were eligible, and they were spared for two years at a time and allowed to stay in this country. during the course of the campaign, president trump said many strong words about immigration. we remember them well, it's hard to forget, words about the wall, words about mexican rapists, on and on. but he seemed to have a soft spot in his heart for these kids. many times, he would talk about, you know, we have got to give them a chance. they're different. the very first time i met president donald trump was minutes after he had been sworn in. it was at a luncheon here in the capitol. i went up to him and said, mr. president, congratulations, and i want to thank you for the kind words you have said about the dreamers and those who are protected by daca. he said dick, don't worry about those kids. we're going to take care of those kids. that's what the president said

on january 20, 2017. i brought it up to him several other times, too. it's an issue that's important to me, but more importantly, it's an issue that's critical to the future of these young people. but then what happened on september 5 of last year, just nine months after the president was sworn in? he held a press conference and said that's the end of the president clinton's for these young people -- end of the protection for these young people. as of the end of that, no protection. then he challenged congress, do what you are supposed to do here in the house and the senate. pass a law that will protect these young people. a number of us took up the president's challenge. we had a bipartisan effort, six of us, three democrats and three republicans, and we worked through some really hard issues on immigration and on these young people. i want to salute my colleagues

who were part of that. lindsey graham, south carolina. cory gardner, republican of colorado. joined with myself and michael bennet, democrat of colorado, bob menendez, democrat of new jersey, and we put together an approach which gave these young people protection and a fighting chance to prove that they deserve to stay in america. we felt pretty good about it. the president called a meeting in the white house on january 9. i remember these dates, i will always remember them. january 9 of this year, with about 24, 25 members of congress, democrats and republicans, house and senate, and he held an open press conference for an hour. it was unusual, rarely done in the white house. and we talked about daca and we talked about dreamers, and we talked about what was going to happen next since the president had given us a deadline of

today, march 5, to do something. and the president outlined what he wanted to see, and then he said in front of the television cameras you send me the bill and i will sign it. i'll take the heat on this one. that was january 9. so a number of us, the six that i mentioned earlier, came together immediately that same day and said let's finish this bill, let's get it in his hands as quickly as possible. by january 11, two days later, we were ready. we had reached a compromise, and it truly was a compromise. parts of it i didn't care for at all, but that's what you do around here if democrats and republicans are going to produce something that might become a law. we called the president, we met with the president. senator graham, myself, and a number of others, and he totally rejected what we had done. in fact, the president went on to reject five other bipartisan

proposals to try to solve this problem. the same president who said on january 9 of this year, you send me a bill and i'll sign it turned down bipartisan option after bipartisan option. he just said no. we had a vote on the floor of the senate. it's been about three weeks ago now. and it was a vote on four different proposals to deal with this challenge. not one of those proposals received 60 votes. the one that i had hoped for, the dream act, the simple dream act that i had introduced was put together by senator coons and brought to the floor. i remember it had 52 votes, needed 60 votes. fell short. the bipartisan compromise the six of us had put together with the president's opposition ended up with 54 votes, six votes short of what it needed to pass.

and then the president's proposal, his own immigration proposal, came up here on the floor of the senate. now, you know there are 51 -- pardon me. 49 democrats and 51 republicans in the senate. the president's proposal came up and got 39 votes. 60 votes in opposition. it was a rejection by his own party, and the democrats in the senate. so here we are on march 5. the deadline is here. no bill has passed the senate. the house, the house won't even consider the measure, will not take up any version of the measure. and what's at stake? 780,000 young people protected by daca, which officially by president trump's order ends today. they have one ray of hope, perhaps two. two courts have said we're going to u.s.s. spend this abolition

of daca -- suspend this abolition of daca until we hear the arguments of the president's authority and the constitution. so there is a temporary, and i underline temporary injunction in place while these cases are pending, but i can tell you as a member of the senate and as a lawyer, no one, no one can predict how long that protection will last. is it a matter of days or weeks or months? at best. and that's what these young people live with, this uncertainty. this humanitarian crisis in this country -- and i call it that -- was created by president trump on september 5. he has failed to agree to six different bipartisan proposals to solve the problem he created, and now these lives hang in the balance. well, who are they?

who are these young people? i was with one of them earlier today. her name is anna flores. anna grew up in aurora, illinois, went to the public schools there, a very bright young woman. brought to the united states at the age of 5 from mexico by her parents. she is undocumented in america and lives under the protection of daca. what did she do with her life? she went to the illinois institute of technology. it's one of the best in the nation. she won a civil engineering degree there. clark dietz is an engineering firm in illinois that stepped up and said we want that bright young woman on our staff as an engineer, and they hired her. and i met her for the first time today. she is a wonderful person. she struggled against the odds all of her life. she is protected by daca, the program that officially under president trump's edict ends

today. will we be a better state, illinois, a better city, chicago, a better nation with this young lady and her engineering talents at work for us? of course. there's no question about it. why in the world would we ever want to deport someone who has gone through our educational system and excelled like this young lady? she is not the only one, by any means. this is a photo here of elizabeth vilkis. she is the 109th dreamer that i have spoken about on the floor of the united states senate. brought here to the united states at the age of 7. she grew up in yonkers, new york. as a child, she heard about stem subjects, science, technology, engineering, and math. she decided to make that her life's work. she excelled in math and science

and decided she would be part of the future of this country when it came to these important subjects. she says, and i quote, from that point forward when i heard about stem subjects, i made pursuing a career in stem my responsibility as an american. during high school, elizabeth was a member of the honors society, the key club, architecture, construction, engineering program, editor of the yearbook, played on the volleyball team. she graduated high school with an advanced regents diploma. she was then accepted into the honors college at city university-new york city college. remember, these dreamers, these undocumented students don't qualify for federal assistance to go to school, as most kids do. they have to find another way to work and save the money or take private loans. she received the community service award from the school of engineering four years in a row for her work organizing

engineering education programs for low-income students. she received the student leader award for her work with an engineering student association. she was named volunteer of the year four years in a row for managing the month robotics competition. i have seen those robotics competitions. a lot of young people in high school do some amazing things in these competitions, and it launches a career and a life in the stem subjects. elizabeth graduated with a double major in mechanical engineering and political science. she worked as an engineer for samsung for two years. then she founded a nonprofit organization focused on creating funding opportunities for early stage technology start-ups. today elizabeth's nonprofit has over 700 members. to date, they have raised over $8 million to grow their tps. she wrote me a letter, and elizabeth said, to me daca is

the opportunity to give back to the united states and my family the way i dreamed of since i was 10 years old. it's the ability to help solve the stem talent shortage after 15 years of preparing for it and being told it was impossible. it's the part of saying no to going back to the shadows and yes to serving as a role model for young girls across the country who aspire to be engineers and entrepreneurs. people like elizabeth are the reason more than 400 business leaders signed a letter to congress urging us to pass the bipartisan dream act. the letter says, and i quote, dreamers are vital to the future of our companies and our economy. with them, we grow and create jobs. they are part of why we will continue to have global competitive advantage. it would be a personal tragedy for us to deport elizabeth

vilchis, but the decision of president trump to abolish the program that protects her makes that, sadly, a real possibility. if this injunction by the court is lifted, that moment there could be a knock on her door, perhaps on the door of her company that hires her or her engineering firm. and she can be told that her time was up. under president trump, she has to leave the united states of america. president trump has created this crisis. instead of working toward a solution, he has rejected every bipartisan effort that has been sent his way to save the dreamers. what will happen next? do we have to stand by and watch as these families are divided, as talented young people like elizabeth and anna are deported?

is that what we're all about? is that what the president meant when he told me we'll take care of those kids? that's what it's come down to. it is the sad reality that all across america hundreds of thousands of these young people now live in fear of deportation. they should be living, as elizabeth said, outside the shadows and part of america and its future. what can we do about it? i'm at a loss unless and until this president accepts the responsibility to help solve the problem he created, i'm afraid we'll never be able to rally the necessary republican votes to make this a reality. it's up to president trump. part of the world that i come from in the middle west there is a saying that i'm going to clean up a little bit, and it goes something like this: any old mule can kick down a barn door,

but it takes a carpenter to build one. this president has kicked down daca, kicked it down in the dirt. and this is the day, the deadline that he set. the question is, does he have the will or the heart to rebuild it? mr. president, i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator for utah. mr. hatch: i ask unanimous consent that not withstanding rule 22 and the order of march 1, the confirmation vote occur following the cloture vote to s. 2155 with all other provisions of the previous order in effect. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. hatch: mr. president. i enjoyed listening to the minority whip, and i don't believe the president is as heartless as he's indicating, but the president does want american laws to be observed. and there are ways of getting

that done, and i think he's doing some of that to see that it's done. i happen to empathize very much with senator durbin from illinois and have long been a supporter of the dreamers. mr. president, one week ago today i stood here and urged my colleagues on both the left and the right to lay aside their differences and work together to prevent future tragedies like that in parkland, florida. it has been nearly three weeks since the number of 17 students and staff at marjory stoneman douglas high school. while time will continue to march on, our resolve to do something about school violence must grow only stronger. over the past three weeks my colleagues have put forth a number of legislative proposals. some are recycled versions of

earlier proposals while others proposed creative new ideas. some enjoyed broad bipartisan support while others have not been widely embraced. we have seen much discussion and debate, but little legislative progress. to break the impasse, we must unite on the issues where we agree. let today be the day that we come together to take a meaningful step toward legislation that has the potential to prevent school violence, save lives, and restore the sense of peace and security that all children should enjoy when they walk through the doors of their respective schools. today i come together with my partners on both sides of the aisle to introduce the students, teachers, and officers preventing school violence act, or stop school violence act.

as outlined on the senate floor last week, the bill will make the department of justice grants available to fund four initiatives. last week i outlined those four initiatives, and today i would like to describe then in even greater detail. first, the bill would provide grants to be used for evidence-based training to prevent student violence against others and self, including training for local law enforcement officers, school personnel, and students. one kind of training this bill would fund would prevent many incidents of school violence. over the last 25 years, research has revealed that in seven out of ten acts of gun violence, a friend or someone else was told that an act of violence would be committed before it happened. in one study it was reported that in four out of five school

shootings, the attacker had told people of his plans ahead of time. we must ensure that everyone in the school ecosystem is educated to recognize the signs of a potential threat. we must likewise, students, teachers, and administrators take action and follow up when they see warning signs. by having a culture in which students and teacher understand the importance of reporting possible acts of violence the bill will save lives and keep our commitments to our communities and keep our communities safe. second, the bill will fund evidence-based technology and equipment to improve school security and prevent school violence. after shooting at columbine high school nearly 19 years ago, i authored legislation that made

the department of justice grant funds available for metal detectors, locks, lighting, and other deterrent measures to secure our school's program which ran from 2002 to 2011 was the only federal safety school program that exclusively provided direct funding for the purchase and implementation of security technologies to improve school safety. the legislation i am introducing today will reauthorize and build on that program to provide funding for improving school infrastructure improvements consistent with school's individuals needs and industry best practices. while we certainly don't need to turn our schools into fortresses, we must do more to protect our children from harm. third, the bill will provide

funding for the development and operation of evidence-based school threat assessment and crisis intervention teams which may include evidence-based training for school officials in responding to mental health crises. these multidisciplinary teams based on existing staff of school personnel, administrators, law enforcement, and mental health professionals can implement proven evidence-based approaches like the virginia student threat assessment guidelines. these guidelines which have been documented to be effective in field tests and controlled studies provide schools with a safe, structured, and efficient way to respond to student threats of violence. used at thousands of schools across the country, these are the types of proactive, preventive solutions that should be available for all schools.

fourth, the bill will authorize funding for continued are coordination with local law enforcement. these four initiatives do not operate in isolation, but together are a comprehensive approach to improving school security and reducing student violence. training students and teachers to identify and report warning signs is critical to stopping acts of school violence before they happen. as we saw in parkland, many folks identify warning signs is not enough -- many folks identifying warning signs is not enough. there must be a progress, or a process for acting on this information when it is brought to the attention of school administrators or law enforcement officials. the school threat assessment and crisis intervention teams that could be funded through this bill will ensure that schools

have an effective procedure for evaluating and responding to potential threats of school violence. unfortunately, no amount of prevention will ever be able to stop every act of school violence before it happens. for those hopefully rare instances where we cannot intervene ahead of time, this bill ensures that funding is available to assist schools with commonsense infrastructure school improvements to harm the schools and make it more difficult for attackers to succeed. and through each step of this process, local law enforcement has an important role to play in partnering with school personnel to prevent and respond to incidents of school violence. states are already taking the lead in these areas to ensure that our schools are safe and

secure. last week i highlighted the safe utah smartphone app, a statewide service that provides realtime crisis intervention to youth through texting and of course a confidential tip program. since the app was unveiled in 2016, 86 planned school attacks have been stopped. utah and other states across the country are rolling out proven solutions that prevent and reduce student violence. we must respect the leading role of the states in this space and we must do what we can to ensure that proven evidence-based solutions are available to protect all students nationwide. the stop school violence act will complement and magnify those efforts at the state and local level.

with the requirement that states and localities contribute to the cost of these programs, my bill will authorize $75 million in fiscal year 2018 and $100 million each year for the following ten years. in total, that's more than $1 billion to secure our schools and train our students, teachers, and law enforcement. many of my colleagues have called for reforms and restrictions related to firearms, something this bill does not address. these are important discussions, and i look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues on these and other issues. in the meantime, we need to work with what we have, and what we have is the stop school violence act is good commonsense legislation that can save hundreds of lives. now i will not pretend that my bill is a catchall solution to

the problem of school violence. it's not. but it is a start. indeed, this bipartisan proposal is the catalyst to a critical conversation that will take place in the weeks and months to come. for far too long we've allowed politics to get in the way of real reform. far far too long we have been holed up in our partisan foxholes, ducking the difficult issues of the day in hopes that the problem of school violence would solve itself. for far too long we have clung to our rhetorical weapons. but now is the time to lay though weapons aside -- lay those weapons aside. now is the time to reconcile our differences for the good of our nation and for the good of our children. as i said last week, now is not the time for tkpwraouplt but -- for argument but for action. rather than let the perfect be

the enemy of good, i implore my friends on both sides of the aisle to come together for the safety of our children rather than resorting to recycled talking points. i ask my colleagues to heed minority leader schumer's call to, quote, pass real legislation that makes a difference. unquote. i thought that was a good statement. mr. president, i wish to emphasize that the singularity and the opportunity we have in front of us. my bill represents a respite from the anger and acrimony that far too often pervades our politics. it is a symbol of the great good we can accomplish when we come together in common cause. already dozens of my colleagues from both the left and the right have signed on to support this bill. the stop act is just the start we need to prevent violence in our schools. so let's come together to get

this done, and i hope we can. mr. president, i suggest the absence of a quorum. mr. president -- i'm sorry, i didn't see. mr. president, i yield the floor. i withdraw that and yield the floor. mr. schumer: mr. president, i thank my colleague. the presiding officer: the dc circuit leader. mr. schumer: i hope when he is here there is no absence of a quorum. anyway, it's very -- it's nice to hear my part in my colleague's words. i also want to mention a few things about the same issue. it's been nearly three weeks since the shooting at stoneman douglas in parkland florida. the majority leader hasn't committed to any floor time to the debate on the issue of begun safety. no time to debate universal background checks, a policy that

over 90% of americans support, including the vast majority of gun owners, no time to debate protective orders to allow law enforcement to disarm individuals who have shown credible signs to being a harm to themselves and others, especially after parkland, no time to have debate on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines on the floor of the senate. kids who survived the horrific shooting are speaking up and speaking out and demanding that we address this issue head on. i met with them. they are fine young men and women. instead of just cursing the darkness after what they went through and the losses of friends and colleagues they suffered, they are trying to light a candle, urging us to debate and doing something real, and yet, the majority leader is moving to a banking bill today with no promise of time to consider a package of

commonsense gun safety measures. we need to debate them on the floor. we can't just try to do one little bill by u.c. with no debate or put it into some other big bill. this needs a national debate. it's the issue that's consuming america, and for the senate to turn its back and do nothing, try to just slip some minor measure through, that doesn't work. last week, america watched president trump whipsaw on gun safety issues in a matter of days. we all felt pretty good, all of america when the president met with the bipartisan group, he seemed to be open to tackling gun safety in a national way in a nationally televised meeting. but then the next day he met with the n.r.a. behind closed

doors and seems to have once again backed off. it's a show we've seen before and it's getting old. too many times we have watched the president say the right things when the cameras are on but refuse to follow through the moment they are switched off, oftentimes doing a 180-degree reversal on his position. on the issue of gun safety, just like immigration, we could find a bipartisan consensus. it's possible -- very possible, but it requires the president of the united states to show some leadership, some followthrough, some consistency, otherwise congress will do what it has done after every mass shooting for the past decade, nothing, and those brave young students will be here in a few weeks having watched congress do nothing again. what a bad mark that would be, lowering the even low ratings of

this body. now on another matter, the republican tax bill. over and over we've heard the republican mantra that their tax bill was aimed at giving americans a boost, and yet every analysis showed that when you looked at the actual policy, the vast amount of it is going to the richest one% -- 1%. one study showed that 83% of the benefits of the republican tax bill go to the top 1% of earners. don't worry our republican friends say, that money will trickle town to workers -- down to workers, but trickle-down economics has never worked. it has failed time and time again. our republican colleagues are even afraid to admit that the majority of the tax cuts, most of them, are afraid to admit that a majority of the tax cuts go to the very wealthy. they simply say it's helping the

working people, but their mechanism, trickle down is something they won't utter in public. instead of giving wage increases or investing in new equipment or research, the most popular use of the savings from the tax bill for corporations is corporate share buybacks. that is from the big corporations. already big corporations have announced more than $200 billion in share buybacks this year. we've just -- we've just started march and already corporations are on pace to spend over $1 trillion this year buying back their own stock. the problem here is that share buybacks don't really help workers. they don't really help grow the economy. they are a quick way for a big corporation to take more of their stock off the market, raising the value of the shares. who benefits? well, corporate executives, they

own lots of these shares, and wealthy shareholders who hold the vast preponderance of the shares. as one economist told bloomberg, quote, you're not going to get the macroeconomic benefit the administration thought it was going to get from the tax cuts. it's going to go to the areas that don't stimulate growth. unquote. namely buybacks, dividends analysis by just capital, which "the new york times" called one of the most detailed accountings to date about how companies are spending the windfall from tax reform, finds that just 6% -- 6% of capital allocated so far is going to employees, while 58% is going to shareholders in dividends, share buybacks or retained earnings. 6% for the workers, nearly 60% to share buybacks or other big

corporate benefits. it today the joint economic committee, led by our wonderful ranking member senate heinrich pointed out if you distributed the savings that one big km, berke -- company, berkshire hatha way, you could give a $1,000 bonus to 29 million americans. it's amazing. that's the equivalent of every employee in arizona, indiana, kentucky, mississippi, ohio, and west virginia combined. the public's beginning to realize what's going on here. they see that they are putting their children and grandchildren into deep debt, not to benefit themselves, the workers, to benefit corporate leadership, owners of shares, the vast

preponderance of whom are in the top 10% of american wealth. corporations are not putting that money where they should, not putting the vast preponderance of the money where they should. raising the salaries of workers, increasing productivey of the company -- productivey of the company, no, it's that quick hit, stock buyback. it goes to show how beneficial tax reform could have been if it were aimed at the middle class and those struggling to reach it. instead the republicans made a conscience effort to give corporations and wealthy americans the bulk of the tax cuts and promised it would trickle down to everyone else. unfortunately, past is prologue, corporate america is doing what's best for corporate america while working america is getting left behind. i yield the floor.

mr. cornyn: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator for texas. mr. cornyn: mr. president, this week we'll be voting on an important piece of bipartisan legislation that recently passed out of the senate banking committee, led by our colleague chairman mike crapo, it is called the economic growth regulatory relief and consumer protection act. the bill is to right side the community and independent banks and that stifle their ability to loan money to people who need access to credit in order to start a business or to grow a small business. under the current law, famously known as dodd-frank, these smaller banks are often treated just like the largest banks and financial institutions in our economy, but than doesn't make any sense at all.

main street, we need to remind some of our colleagues, is not wall street, and so the bill would make changes to reflect that important distinction. i can't tell you how many of my small bankers in texas have told me they had to hire additional personnel, not to make additional loans, but to comply with the onerous regulations coming out of washington, d.c. of course, unfortunately, we've lost over 2,000 banks nationwide since 2010. 2,000 banks have gone out of business, either as a result of a merger with a larger bang that could sustain the costs of these regulations, or those who have given up and said we can't cut it because of the costs and we're hanging up our spurs. so in texas 165 bank charters have vanished during that same time frame, 26% reduction.

like i said, some of the decline is due to mergers with larger banks, but there have also been a number of bank failures many we all heard about too big to fail, but some institutions were deemed, essentially, too small to save. they were the ones left behind and forgotten under dodd-frank. because of the regulatory burden some small banks just said enough is enough and opped to -- opted to get out of the lending bins business all together. you know -- business all together. you know who gets hurt? it's the married couple who wants to borrow money to buy their first home or, as i said earlier, a business that wants to expand and hire more people. those are the people who ultimately get hurt. in this bill we're considering this week, we're trying to change that situation. no less than former congressman

barney frank, the original author of the law, has emphasized a point that we need to remember, the bill we're voting on needs to keep in place rules and regulations that were imposed on large wall street banks after the financial crisis. in other words, the big banks on wall street were the ones who helped contribute to the financial crisis and they are the ones that will continue to be regulated under dodd-frank, but the community and regional danks that were -- banks that were the collateral damage to the recession in 2008, following the big financial crisis, they will see some needed and welcomed relief. rigorous and stress testing of large financial institutions will continue. congressman frank it would be wholly inaccurate to claim otherwise. so when some try to distort the bill's purpose and the provisions in the days ahead, i think it's important to keep that in mind and don't buy what

they are selling. this bill will mostly, as i said, affect small community banks which don't fall under the same category as the titans of global financiers. the committee said, hey all of you who have suffered under dodd-frank, how can we reduce the burdens you face. those are the kinds of questions all of us need to ask back in our states. after extensive negotiations at all levels and after hearing from not just financial entities great and small, but also from consumer groups, the result is the bipartisan legislation that we will soon consider on the senate floor. the bill was formerly introduced by a group of ten democrats and ten republicans, and you don't get much more bipartisan than that. i know the senator from idaho, the chairman of the committee, has had productive discussions

with my friend and fellow texan, chairman hensley, on the house side who heads up the committee on the house side. while it will help banks, and mid--sized banks, they will also ensure that key consumer protections remain in place. some of these protections will increase for consumers who have fallen on hard financial times or victims of fraud, veterans and seniors particularly will benefit. federal reserve chairman jer reason powell says it will provide significant regulatory relief and oilts predecessor janet yell n -- yellen said it was a move in the right direct. i would like to go further. we should nonetheless pass as much as we can and help america's local lenders build small businesses and strengthen our local communities. so let's get this bill, which is

supported by a variety of stakeholders, including the texas independent bankers association, let's get this bill across the finish line this week. i want to especially congratulate and thank our colleague from idaho for all of his hard work and hope that all of us can emulate that hard work on a bipartisan basis and get this bill across the senate floor and ultimately to the president for his signature. now, madam president, i'd like to shift gears a moment and discuss a matter that my friends back home in texas are talking about a lot, and that's the benefits of tax reform. i happened to walk out here just as the democratic leader, the senator from new york, was saying that tax reform was not working. well, i note that his message seems to be a little out of sync with the news, which reported today in part that the number of americans applying for unemployment benefits is at its

lowest level in more than 49 years. in other words, our economy is finally growing again, and it's working again for the people who needed the jobs and needed the income that are provided by the tax cuts and jobs act. sometimes i wonder whether our democratic friends who took great political risk by voting uniformly to a person to oppose the tax cuts and jobs act, sometimes i worry that they worry that it wil -- particular, miss pelosi, the democratic leader of the house, who said that minority leader in the house said that these were crumbs, crumbs. well, i think she'll be proven wrong. and that will be to the great benefit of all of the people of

america. so everyone remembers this was not an easy lift. we passed the first tax reform in more than 30 years. but the immediate consequences of the bill have been transformative. in other words, we just did this in december, but we've already seen encouraging signs. my constituents in texas know as well as anyone. just ask a man by the name of scott mcdonald who called my office last week. scott owns a residential roofing company in burlisson near dallas. it's called f-wave. its mission is to create the best roofing shingle the world has ever seen, period. that's scott's dream. you know what scott told us over the phone? he said his 47 employees are really feeling the positive impact in their paychecks. he said, there are a lot of happy people around here. people are happy because of the reduced tax rates now that the

i.r.s. has updated its withholding table, people saw in february the first boost in their take-home pay they've seen in a long, long time. scott also said that the positive climate has created a lot of incentive for his company to invest and grow. if you think about it, looking at what's happened to the stock market and more importantly what it's done to 401(k) and pension plans and people's savings, there's a lot of enthusiasm and new found confidence in the american economy. and that's an unequivocally good thing. and scott sees that at his place of business. and he said it creates a lot of incentive for his company to invest and grow. and that's good for the people who will benefit from those jobs. he's looking to hand out bonuses when the company's fiscal year ends at the end of this month and he's hoping that a new facility the company is building will create jobs for as many as

500 people. you heard me earlier. he said 47 people work there now. he's hoping this new facility will create jobs for as many as 500 people. so scott, we appreciate your story, and we're glad you took the time to share it. back home in texas, we're trying to keep track of all the tax reform successes. there are so many, sometimes it's hard to keep up. in west texas, el paso electric has just announced homeowners will get new refunds on their electric bills due to the lower tax rate. that is, seniors, people on fixed incomes will actually see their utility bills go down because of the tax cuts and jobs act. what great news. and right outside of san antonio, my friend, representative will herd that represents that area, tells us that jeff and mary marsh, the owner of two coffee shops that he represents are particularly

thrilled. they're passing along the tax savings directly to their staff of 11 employees in the form of increased hourly wages and benefits packages and bonus programs. and they hope to upgrade their systems and equipment and expand with a new location, too. madam president, stories like this sure don't sound like armageddon. that's the term that house minority leader pelosi used to describe the tax reforms last year in addition to calling it crumbs. she called it armageddon and crumbs. well, i'm not sure how those two go together but she and other democrats did their dead-level best to scare the living daylights out of the american people and to tell them that this would not work and it would actually hurt them. i heard the democratic leader, my friend from new york, senator schumer, just out here talking about how money that's being brought back from overseas wasn't being invested properly here in the united states.

as if it was the government's money. the whole point is this is not the government's money. this is the money earned by the people and the businesses that take the risks and that we need to succeed so our country succeeds and will continue to grow so the american dream it remain alive. it's almost as if they think that any money saved as a result of the tax cuts and jobs act is somehow stolen from the clutches of the federal government who knows how to spend that money better than they do. well, i certainly have a different view. i guess our democrat colleagues were not totally off base in mentioning arm get don -- armageddon because the tax cuts did spell doom for the progressive rationale and excuses for not cutting taxes and making our team more competitive globally. it really was armageddon when you consider what it did to their outrageous arguments. our reforms have exploded the

notion that the only way government can ensure prosperity is with higher taxes. again, it's based on this crazy idea that the money you earn is not really yours to keep. it's the federal government's and the government will only let you keep a certain amount of it. when we cut tax, actually somehow is not money that's yours in the first place. it seems like it's completely reverse logic. but the bill's well documented effects have killed the ludicrous claims that we've heard before christmas, that americans who faced stagnant wages for years really wouldn't benefit from the raises or the companies are incapable or unwilling to actually give those raises out or invest in their business and create new jobs. i wonder what the critics have to say about all this now. they've mostly been quiet since the good news started rolling in, although i guess listening to my friend from new york,

they've not given up entirely. i wonder what they have to say to organizations like the health care services corporation which operates blue cross blue shield in my state. thanks to the tax cuts and jobs act, it's announced a $1.5 billion initiative to make health insurance more affordable. that comes as more good news to men and women like those in my state who have struggled to pay for health care. this $1.5 billion initiative to make health care -- health insurance more affordable. i wonder what the naysayers have to say to this one lady in particular. i'm thinking of somebody from lewisville, texas. she recently contacted me and preferred not to be identified. originally in my remarks i was going to mention her name but out of respect for her privacy, let me just tell her story and leave her name out of it. she had surgery a while back and had to borrow money upfront to pay for it. this on top of her student loans

stressed her out. she was pretty anxious. she was wondering how am i going to pay for those bills? well, in her note that she sent to my office, she said she's extremely grateful for the reduced taxes because now she brings home an additional $125 in each paycheck. $125. those $125 help her pay the bills she was so worried about. so i hope our friends across the aisle who opposed this bill uniformly, every single one of them voted against it, i hope they'll listen, listen not to our claims but rather to the evidence and realize this $125 to this woman from lewisville, texas, is not crumbs. it's the difference between living in fear that she won't be able to meet her obligations and living in peace knowing that

she's going to be able to meet those responsibilities. her story is america's story, too, and it's a snapshot of what's occurring across the economy. federal reserve chairman jerome powell said last week that some of the head winds that the u.s. economy faced in previous years have now turned into tail winds, and the economy continues to pick up steam. i've already mentioned the lowest number of people making unemployment claims since 19 -- well, actually in the last 49 years. but when you look at consumer confidence, when you look at the stock market, when you look at businesses willing to invest in new plants and equipment and you see the benefits of employers competing for labor, one of the benefits of seeing inemployment -- seeing unemployment so low and the economy growing again is that employers are going to have

to start bidding up for the workers that they need in order to do the job. and what that means is that wages which have been stagnant for so many years are now going to grow again. so in addition to the lower rates, people will have more take-home pay. they're going to see more take-home pay in addition because of the increased wages. they're going to be able to demand for their hard work. so these are great and positive signs, but we've got to keep telling the good stories because they so often get drowned out by the scare tactics and the hyperbole that comes from those who seem to be afraid not that this won't work but rather that it will work, and they will have been proven terribly wrong. madam president, i yield the floor. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. nelson: madam president, i ask that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: mr. nelson: madam president, it has been almost six months since hurricane irma struck florida, and it's been about a month since we passed the most recent disaster supplemental appropriations bill, and that finally included money for florida's fisheries, citrus growers, and communities across the state that we've been fighting since day one since the storm passed. well, today i spoke to the secretary of commerce, wilbur ross, and i asked him to immediately release this critical funding to help the people of our state.

florida's fischer -- fishermen are waiting for help. hurricane irma caused extensive damage to vessels, facilities, docks, equipment, and gear, especially down in the keys. and many in the spiny lobster industry lost all of their traps. the disaster supplemental appropriations gave noaa $200 million for federal fishery disasters like the one secretary ross declared in florida. where's the money? well, let's talk about the broader impact to the oceans. did you know that florida's coral reef track is the third largest barrier reef in the

world? it's a reef that starts south of key west, goes all the way up the coast, all the way almost to fort pierce. the coral supports the spiny lobsters and the stone crabs, which are served in the restaurants around the country. this industry is so important to florida's economy. and what the hurricane did, hurricane irma, tos sed all -- tossed all manner of debris around. one county spent $2 million to remove waste, roofs, bicycles, trailer homes, boats, and appliances, but the debris was also swept into the water which

is threatening the corals and into the canals where it blocks transportation. i want you to take a look at this picture and you will see here is one of the canals in the keys. look what's sitting in the canal, a whole mobile home lifted up from this moanl home -- mobile home park on this side of the canal, and there it is in the water. take a look at this. so, you see what's in that canal? you see out here? that's the ocean. this canal's coming right in. now, what happens is this debris gets eventually some of it goes

out there in the atlantic, it gets near the reef, some of it submerges, the wave action is sending it back and forth, and you can imagine any one of those pieces of debris knocking constantly in to delicate coral that is already diseased, that is already overheated because the temperature tire of the water rising, and you can imagine what is happening. and so that -- whether it's a mobile home sitting in the canal or whether it's all of this junk that's sitting in a canal and eventually goes out, this is what we need help with. well, it's been over an month since we passed -- over a month since we passed the disaster

supplemental appropriations bill, why isn't it flowing? that's why i called the secretary of commerce this morning. i told him, mr. secretary, my question -- request is very simple. just get the own out. it's appropriated. it's there. i said, mr. secretary, will you please crack the whip on noaa so you can get this money out and we can get this place cleaned up as well as those coral reefs protected from the damage that they are already undergone. and then i said, and what happened in this storm is all of those fishermen, whether it is for lobster or whether it is stone crab traps, they were all swept away. the poor fishermen, they p don't have any traps -- they don't have any traps.

they need help too and that's what this disaster appropriations bill is for. but, mr. secretary, you've got to crack the whip on them to get them going. now, unfortunately, this is not the only issue that we are facing because florida's citrus industry suffered over $760 million in losses from the storm. why? because the trees were full of the fruit that was going to be picked within just a few weeks. so along comes the storm, the winds are severe and in southwest florida some of the citrus crops were lost 100%. in fact, the winds were so high

that they ended up uprooting citrus trees. as you got further north into central florida, the groves there lost 50% to 60% of their crop. the citrus industry just cannot survive those kind of losses, and that's why we have a disaster appropriations bill for, $760 million in losses from the storm, the rest of florida agriculture took a big hit, and it's a total estimate of $ 2.5 billion in damages. and in february, we finally came through with the $3.8 billion for the u.s. department of agriculture of that money

$2.6 billion was supposed to go directly to farmers and ranchers. well, it's march and these folks haven't seen a dime. and so, after i talked to the secretary of commerce, wilbur ross, i put in a call to the secretary of agriculture. i have called several times today. i have yet to connect with him, but if any of his staff is listening, there is a -- bottleneck at the usda preventing this money from going to the families that desperately need it. and i will continue to call secretary purdue to do what i asked secretary wilbur ross to do, crack the whip on his

organization to get the money flowing, because that's what we passed the supplemental emergency appropriation for. now the federal agencies need to get the money out the door. this is so frustrating because the administration knew that congress was discussing a disaster supplemental bill way back when hurricane harvey hit in august on texas, and then irma hit, and then maria hit. now, six months later, most of the federal agencies are just starting to dust off their pencils and figure out how they are going to allocate the funding. what is wrong with you all? people are hurting. they are going bankrupt. you've got to get that money out. so you can imagine how you'd

feel if your family's entire citrus crop had been wiped out and you had been holding your breath waiting for disaster assistance funding which finally came over a month ago and then you were told by the folks in the agency, in this case usda, you were told you were going to have to wait for several more months until usda figures out how to get you the money. no wonder people are fed up with bureaucracy. additionally, many of our cities and counties have yet to see any reimbursements from fema for hurricane irma. in fact, many have yet to be fully reimbursed for hurricane matthew, which was almost two years ago, and it struck an

unbelievably -- all those hurricane matthew counties that were devastated up and down on debris removal, all of the counties and the cities front lode loaded -- front loaded, paid for the removal, the state of florida didn't turn it in on time, and of course what we had to do to cover the state of florida's mistake was to plead for fema, forget the mistake, it's the local counties and cities that need the money. and so what's happening of not getting the money out is totally unacceptable. so while we are still waiting for reimbursements from these storms, can we expect these local governments to prepare for the 2018 hurricane season that will start in just a few months,

right around the corner? so, madam president, let me say it again, this is unacceptable for the slow-walking, the foot dragging that's going on in getting the money out the door. i'm going to keep pounding on this until the folks in florida start getting the help they need and deserve. madam president, i yield the floor. mr. nelson: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. nelson: since i see no other

senator is now seeking recognition, i thought i would take the occasion to bring the senate up to date on what is happening down in florida in the aftermath of 17 people being gunned down at marjory stoneman douglas high school. as we know, we've seen those students speak out with a boldness and with clarity. rarely have we seen not being intat dated -- intimidated at all as to what needs to be done. as a matter of fact, in the aftermath of the shooting, while some of the funerals were still going on, since our florida state legislature is in session, the students went over the course of two weeks up to the

capital city of tallahassee, held individual meetings with state legislators, had a recall yif outside -- had a rally outside the capitol, insisting that maybe, just maybe this might be a time that the state legislature would confront this issue head-on, that in fact there was something to the fact that a weapon originally developed for the military, an ar-15, the semiautomatic version of a military weapon, could do such damage and quickly go about killing so many people. it was 17 in the case of the high school. just two years earlier it was 49

in orlando at the pulse nightclub. and in between we had seen several mass killings with high-powered military-style assault rifles also in texas as well as 59 people being gunned down in las vegas. mr. president, last week i talked about the assault weapon, and i have since had constituents in florida over the weekend ask me to come back and say on the floor of the senate the difference in the damage, the mayhem, the carnage, the slaughter that occurs as a result of an assault rifle as compared to a handgun.

you don't have to take it from this senator. you can talk to the trauma surgeons. you can talk to the radiologist in the trauma center. as a matter of fact, several articles in the past week have been written in various publications in both florida as well as the national press along with photographs to show the difference. and let me paraphrase the word of one of the trauma surgeons in broward county that attended to some of the victims. and this is what they say. on any normal night, they have to treat gunshots, particularly on a weekend. but if that gunshot is from a

handgun, say a 22 pistol, say a 9 millimeter pistol, the bullet will enter the victim. and unless that bullet goes to a critical oregon, such as the heart or, for example, to the blood supply going into the liver, that bullet will continue through and if it comes out the other side, it comes out with a hole the same size as when it penetrated the body in the first place. not so with a bullet from an assault rifle. because those weapons developed for the military are clearly for killing, the bullet first of all comes out at three times the

speed. three times the philosophy. therefore, when it hits its target, it hits with three times the energy. and often the bullet is designed that when it hits the target, it will tumble and, thus, just tear through and destroy any flesh in its path, including bone and organs. and, thus, the trauma center radiologist explains if a bullet goes -- if a handgun bullet, such as a .9 millimeter goes through the liver, they can usually save the life of the patient.

they point out almost all handgun wounds, they can save the life unless it hits a major blood supply like an artery or the heart. not so with a bullet from an assault weapon. the bullet enters three times the velocity, three times the energy, starts tumbling, ripping away flesh. if it goes, for example, to a kidney or to a liver, it pulverizes that organ and comes out the other side of the victim with a hole as large as an orange. now that's the difference between a handgun wound and a high-velocity assault rifle, whether it's semi all mattic --

whether it's semiautomatic or automatic, made automatic like what we saw in las vegas with the bump stocks that made a semiautomatic that was legal to purchase into an automatic rif rifle. it is because of that carnage that you have to ask yourself, would any american citizen want to have those kind of assault rifles loose on the streets for people who want to use them for dastardly purposes? and i think the answer is no. i think those who are hunters, such as myself, this senator

grew up on a ranch. i've hunted all my life. i still hunt with my son. but an ar-15 is not for hunting. it is for killing. and it is an understanding of the difference of these weapons that is causing the american people gradually to understand that these kind of weapons have no place on the streets of america. and you can imagine when you are the swat team, had they been there while the shooter was still inside, entering that school, trying to find the killer, knowing that what they were going to come up against was an ar-15 instead of a

handgun, that's a terrible thing. or you can imagine if there happened to be an armed guard with a pistol and he's going after the shooter but the shooter has an ar-15, that's not a fair firefight. a pistol against an ar-15, you can imagine who's going to win that fight. and, thus, these are the questions that the american people need to have answered as we are going through these discussions about what to do. and, thus, when these students all gather in washington in a hundred cities on march 24, a saturday, and they start marching in untold numbers, they

are going to be saying, isn't enough enough. haven't we come to the point that we ought to re-examine that the second amendment protects the right to bear arms but are these the arms that we want born on our street. mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. isakson: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from georgia. mr. isakson: mr. president, i rise out of a great sense of pride to exercise one of my responsibilities as united states senator, to speak on behalf of mr. self, a judge for the circuit courts for the northern district of georgia, for the state of georgia. the vote will take place not too long from now. i want to encourage every member of the senate to cast their vote for judge self.

he's now -- he's the whole package. he has a wonderful wife and family, four great children, worked in the private sector for years, accomplished many things in the private sector. he went to the university of georgia law school, graduated cum laude, summa cum laude from the military college of south carolina. went on to have a distinguished private career. then went to the superior court of the state of georgia and macon georgia, macon middle district. in that job on the superior court did something i'm very close to. he's a entrepreneur. he started the veterans court for the middle district of georgia today and for that judicial circuit. the veterans court is a court that's formed to help veterans who get astray from the law or have difficulties when they come home, either because of ptsb or t.b.i., the struggles of the battle they had, whatever problem they may have had from representing us on the battlefield. they trip and they fall. they need somebody to help get them up, make them do the right thing but also to get themselves

brushed off, look forward to a career and help them get that step forward. we do that with teenagers called casa where we turn people around who otherwise might go to jail, young kids. the veterans court takes those who have made the ultimate sacrifice, possibly risking their life for you and for me and for everybody else who might have fallen off just a little bit, we re-- when we bring them back into the judicial system, we get them straightened out and move them forward so they have a better life and rewarding career of their own thanking them for all the things they've done for us as veterans. as the chairman of the veterans committee of the united states senate, one who recognizes the value of the court system, for all of the things it does to administer justice, i particularly am proud and we have a judge who comes in here and has used entrepreneurial skills to deal with a problem our society has in the legal sense and court sense to see that our veterans are getting the help they need and our communities are getting the representation that they need. i'm also a football fan. i know football games are tough like making judicial systems are

tough. the southern conference. two years ago was selected to do the 2017 national championship game which is a testimony to his ability to call the balls and strikes from the field. he's a pretty good shot, too. he's a turkey hunter and likes to turkey hunt and likes the outdoors. most importantly, he loves the united states of america. he respects and loves the law for what it does. we're a nation of laws and not of men. he does everything in his capacity as an individual and as one of the bench to see that our country and our state, the state i represent, georgia, is a better state because of his service. so when each of you turn to vote in a few minutes for the confirmation of the flee judges that have -- three judges that have come before us today, when it comes to judge self, cast a vote for someone who is a legal entrepreneur for veterans, one who served with distinction in the state as a practicing attorney and on the bench already, one who will serve the united states of. the house reading clerk: very well in the years to come, -. i thank the president of the united states for the wisdom to make this appointment. with that, mr. president, i

yield back the balance of my time.

the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the yeas and nays are ordered. the presiding officer: the question now occurs on the schooler -- -- schler

nomination. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: have all senators voted? does any senator wish to change their vote? the yeas are 95, the nays are zero. the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table. the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. the question now occurs on the self nomination. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, tilman eugene self,

iii, of georgia, to be united states district judge for the middle district of georgia. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: have all senators voted. any senator wish to change their vote? on this nomination the yeas are 85, the nays are 11. the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table. the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: mr. president, late this afternoon senator thad cochran, the senior senator from mississippi, announced that he

will retire from the senate on april 1. he said that his health had been a concern. i saw senators visiting with senator cochran today, expressing their best wishes to him, and for good reason. senator cochran is a gentleman, first of all, he's a skilled legislator second of all, he's earned respect from colleagues on both sides of the aisle through his chairmanship on the senate appropriations committee and one-time chairman of the senate republican conference. and back in mississippi he's -- he was a pioneer in the development of that state's two-party system and the republican party. he and trent lott were elected to congress in 1972 and then thaad cochran became the first republican since reconstruction when he was elected to the united states senate.

he's been here ever since. he's a close friend. i admire him greatly. i will miss him greatly. but i especially admire his service. i wanted to say that before i made other remarks. now, mr. president, 16 years ago, president george w. bush announced that tariffs would be imposed on steel imports from several countries. the goal was to help protect the domestic steel industry. it was a good goal by a well-intentioned president who i supported, but it backfired. last week, president trump announced that he intends to impose new tariffs on imports of steel and aluminum for the same reasons. it's a good goal by a well-intentioned president, but i'm afraid it will backfire, just like it did for president bush 16 years ago. here is the problem, mr. president.

tariffs are big taxes, and they are big task taxes that raise consumer prices. these new tariffs may say temporarily a few jobs in plants that produce steel and produce aluminum, but they will destroy many more jobs in auto plants that use steel and aluminum. this is especially bad news for tennesseans because one-third of our state's manufacturing jobs are auto jobs with more than 900 plants in 87 of our 95 counties. so anything that latouretteens to destroy or damage auto jobs is of grave damage to tennessee. it will now be cheaper for some tennessee auto suppliers to move outside the united states to buy steel and aluminum there and

then ship finished parts back to this country. these new tariffs will hurt more than u.s. auto manufacturing. the president indicated this morning that a final decision hasn't been made. i hope that before he makes a final decision he will take into consideration the choices that companies such as electrolux are making which demonstrates that broad tariffs are bad for american workers and will cost americans jobs, not just auto jobs. here is one example of the damage the proposed steel tariff would do in tennessee to a home appliance manufacturer who uses 100% american steel. immediately after the tariff was announced last week, electrolux, europe's largest home appliance manufacturer, announced that it

was putting on hold a $250 million expansion in springfield, tennessee, just outside nashville. electrolux has made multiple investments in tennessee with plants in memphis as well as springfield. electrolux employs more than 1,000 tennesseans. the company said, quote, unfortunately this decision, the tariff decision gives foreign appliance manufacturers a cost advantage that's hard to compete against, unquote. note that electrolux said it gives foreign manufacturers an advantage. electrolux buys all of the carbon steele it uses in its tennessee plants from american steal mills. electrolux, which employs 1,000 people in tense making home

appliances, buys all of its carbon steel it uses in tennessee plants from american steel mills, yet it put its expansion on hold because it believes the tariff will make it hard for tennessee plants to compete with plants overseas. why? because the new tariff is expected to raise american steel mills -- excuse me. the new tariff is expected to cause american steel mills to raise their prices to match the newer higher price of imported steel. the result of the tariff, therefore, will be higher costs for electrolux and fewer jobs in springfield, tennessee, making home appliances with 100% american steel. instead, there will be more jobs overseas, making home appliances with 100% foreign steel. the new u.s. tariffs on imported

steel will have raised the price of all steel sold in our country, so appliance manufacturers with plants here in the united states will have a hard time competing with plants outside of our country. we should learn the lesson from 2002 when president bush imposed similar tariffs. again, a good goal of a well-intentioned president, but it backfired. according to one widely cited independent study, the tariffs raised consumer prices and, quote, more american workers lost their jobs in 2002 to higher steel prices than the total number employed by the u.s. steel industry itself, unquote. president bush's tariffs also led to retaliation as other countries threatened to impose new tariffs on american imports which would have cost even more u.s. jobs.

on friday, "the wall street journal" editorial board remind ed readers this, and i quote, steel-using industries in the united states employ some 6.5 million americans while steel makers employ about 140,000 americans. 6.5 million americans worked in companies that use steel. 140,000 americans worked in companies that make steel. transportation industries including aircraft and autos account for about 40% of domestic steel consumption, followed by packaging with 20% and building construction with 15%. all will have to pay higher prices, making them less competitive globally in the u.s. unquote. that was "the wall street journal." the backlash to the 2002 tariffs was so strong that president

bush terminated them early. i want to give the president, this president, president trump, credit for listening. he's invited a number of us who disagree with his advisors on trade. to the white house, he has listened carefully. so far, we haven't persuaded him. i hope that we still can. i thank you for listening. i hope you will continue to listen. it is unusual to have a lesson in american history so much like the action that he is proposing to take that was not good for the country, no matter how well-intentioned the president is or how good an idea it seems. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to include in the record a copy of "the wall street journal"'s march 2 editorial on tariffs, and since history can often serve as a guide, i ask

consent to include in the record two addresses i delivered on the u.s. senate floor in 2003 summarizing the disastrous effect president bush's proposed steel tariffs had on u.s. jobs. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. alexander: i thank the president. i yield the floor. mr. casey: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania. mr. casey: thank you, mr. president. i would ask consent to speak as if in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: thank you, mr. president. i will address two matters this evening. i would ask be consent initially to have both sets of remarks appear at different places in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: thank you, mr. president. the first is with regard to syria and the syrian civil war. i rise today as syria is about to enter its eighth year of conflict. we have witnessed seven years of displacement and violence, seven years of war crimes, seven years

of bashar al-assad's illegitimate grasp on power. to say that it is past time for assad to go or that it is past time for the conflict to be resolved dramatically underestimates the suffering, the horrible suffering and destruction the people of syria have experienced. in these seven years, almost 500,000 syrians have been killed, and more than 12 million have been displaced from their homes. this conflict has disproportionately affected children, as all conflicts do. according to save the children, inside syria, 7.5 million children have lived their whole lives knowing nothing but war. emotional and psychological stress has manifested itself physically. syrian children now face an increase in heart disease,

diabetes, and depression. these children are growing up in refugee camps with no end in sight. this means the loss of their childhood and of educational opportunities, and i don't exaggerate when i say that because of this war, an entire generation of syrians will be both displaced and disaffected in an already-volatile region. ignoring these children ensures decades of instability to come. in eastern gutha this past week, we saw the most recent example of the brutality of the assad regime. aided and abetted by russia and iran. while only just now making the headlines, eastern gutha has been held under siege by the syrian government since 2013. this neighborhood which had

supposedly been designated as a de-escalation zone has been bombarded by syrian government forces armed with russian weapons. in just a few days, 500 civilians have been killed, and that number is growing. years after the international community reached a consensus that assad had lost his legitimacy as the leader of syria, he not only remains in power but is more secure than ever. the united states has not only failed to exert moral leadership in the face of syrian suffering but has failed to show strategic leadership in the face of a tangible threat to u.s. national security. i have long called on both the obama and trump administrations, warning that u.s. interests were not being represented in syrian negotiations, but this has never

been more clearly illustrated than in november of this past year, november of 2017, when a picture circulated of presidents row han i, putin, and arduan shaking hands in russia after a round of negotiations to determine a potential resolution of the syrian conflict. i have to ask, is it now u.s. policy to let these three dictate policy in the middle east? rouhani, putin, and arduan? the u.s. was not there, nor were our european allies. the u.s. is failing our own interests by ceding leadership in syria to iran and russia, whose national security interests often directly contradict our own. and what do these bullying regimes want from syria? let's start with iran.

iran sees syria as an investment in its political infrastructure and its campaign for a regional hegemony. it is their, quote, land bridge, unquote, from tehran to beirut, a weapons pipeline, a training camp for hezbollah. it is a practice ground for a future war with israel. what about the russians? the russian government, led by mr. putin, has made clear that they believe all syrian territory must return to the assad regime and to the assad regime's control before political reforms can be considered. piewpt seeks a solution that shows that he is the arbiter of events -- putin seeks a solution that shows that he is the arbiter of events in the middle east. lately, foreign leaders, including prime minister netanyahu of israel, president rouhani, and king salman of

saudi arabia fly to moscow instead of washington. they see a russia that seeks to right the rules of international order and an america that sits back, too enmeshed in her own domestic political strife to lead. but this is not the america i know and that most americans know. the america i know does not believe that where you were born should dictate where you live or die, or if you spend your childhood in a refugee camp. the america i know does not stand by while enemy nations threaten to expand their spheres of influence. the america i know sees the complexity of our own foreign involvements, understanding, for instance, that isis cannot, cannot be fully defeated without considering the context of the syrian civil war. and the america i know supports its allies like israel that

share a chaotic border with a nation at war with itself. in 1963, president john f. kennedy spoke at the fort worth, texas, chamber of commerce on the challenges posed by the soviet regime. he said, and i quote, this country which desires only to be free, which desires only to be secure, which desires to live in peace for 18 years under three administrations, has borne more than its share of the burden and stood watch for more than its number of years. i don't think we're fatigued or tired. we would like to live as we once lived, but history will not permit it. the balance of power is still on the side of freedom. we are still the keystone in the arch of freedom, and i think we will continue to do as we have done in our past.

our duty. unquote. so said president kennedy. he spoke to the paradox of our country then and now, what we continue to face if we are to remain the keystone in the arch of freedom, we cannot become fatigued by the responsibility to fight tyranny. these are the very issues that should receive public debate as part of a congressional consideration of a new authorization for the use of military force known by that acronym aumf. we undermine our own credibility when we continue to send our men and women into conflicts that congress has not authorized. secretary tillerson, our secretary of state, has indicated that he sees a need for a long-term u.s. military presence in syria. yet, many of us believe that there is no purely military

solution to this conflict. where is the strategy, we ask. i'd like to see the administration put forward a plan that encompasses all components of this conflict. military, political, and humanitarian. when we ask our men and women in uniform to put their lives on the line to protect our homeland and fight terrorism, we need to be willing to back them up by doing our jobs here in washington. just consider pennsylvania. pennsylvanians have made a substantial sacrifice in the past 17 years of war. 288 -- 288 of our brave service members have been killed in action in those 17 years. and almost 2,000 wounded in action in afghanistan and iraq. we owe it to these men and women to have a robust bipartisan debate about this strategy and a

vote -- a vote -- on an aumf. we should also vote on legislation to cut off financing for isis or any other terrorist organization in the world. i have a bipartisan bill to stop terrorist operational resources and money act with senator isakson. i have a bill with senator rubio preventing destable -- stabilizeation of iraq and syria. all of the components of a comprehensive strategy. so let's have a serious debate on this critical national security issue. we're not always faced with situations in which our moral obligation and our strategic priorities lead to the same conclusion. this is one of those rare

moments. so years from now, just as president kennedy said, that we do our duty to continue to be the keystone in the arch of freedom, including helping the syrian people, especially our children, be freed of assad's brutality and bombing. mr. president, i will move to the second set of remarks on a different topic. this involves the investigation that's underway by robert mueller. i wanted to restate my support for the investigations into russia's election interference as well as to condemn the partisan attacks on the independent investigation being led by robert mueller who has been an honorable public servant over many decades.

in 2016 our nation came under attack by a hostile foreign power. everyone knows that now. our election process, the bedrock of our system of government, was targeted by russian agents. they used a variety of measures to pursue their goals. the intelligence communities unclassified report, the unclassified report concluded, and i'm quoting here, quote, we assess russian president vladimir putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the u.s. presidential election. russia's goals were to undermine public faith in the u.s. democratic process, denigrate secretary clinton and harm her electability and potential presidency. we further assess putin and the russian government developed a clear preference for president-elect trump. unquote.

that's from the unclassified report of our intelligence community. so these brazen and illegal actions have already resulted in the indictments of 13 russian individuals and 3 russian companies as part of special counsel mueller's investigation. russia may not have used traditional military force against us, but actions they took present just as serious a threat to our national security. make no mistake, when a foreign adversary targets an american election, they have targeted america itself. yet, the president, his own campaign is being examined as part of the russian investigation, has refused to enforce sanctions against russia. he's refused to fight back against putin and his regime despite clear evidence that they attacked us. the president's failure to take action against russia

underscores the urgent need for special counsel mueller's independent investigation to continue unfettered. in this investigation, mr. mueller has already amassed enough evidence to have a grand jury indict russian operatives and high-ranking members of the trump campaign, including former campaign manager paul manafort, deputy campaign manager rick gates, other trump advisors like mr. papadopoulos and michael flynn have pled guilty to federal crimes. unfortunately, as this evidence has come forward, unwarranted, dangerous and partisan attacks on mr. mueller's investigation and on mr. mueller himself have accelerated. yet a brief glance at mr. mueller's lifetime of service reflects his commitment to serving the american people with honor, integrity, and courage that i think is unmatched by anyone i know in

washington. here's a couple of examples. as a young man, mr. mueller served with distinction in the vietnam war, was awarded a bronze star, two navy commendation medals, the purple heart and the vietnamese cross of gallantry for his leadership and exemplary service. mr. mueller received the bronze star for, quote, historic achievement. i should say heroic achievement. unquote, after leading his fellow marines through an eight-hour battle where under enemy fire, quote, second lieutenant mueller fearlessly moved from one position to another, directing the accurate counter fire of his men, shouting words of encouragement to them. he then skillfully supervised the evacuation of casualties from the hazardous fire area. unquote. and after that battle, he was promoted to first lieutenant.

just four months later he sustained a bullet wound when he responded to an ambush by enemy forces on marines in his command. for his heroic response, mr. mueller received the navy commendation medal with a citation praising him for rushing to save his fellow marines while, quote, completely disregarding his own safety. unquote. i see the distinguished majority leader s. if he wants to pick up here and i'll continue with my remarks after. mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i thank my colleague. i'll be very brief. i ask consent that my remarks not interfere in the record with the remarks of the senator from pennsylvania. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the consideration of the following nomination: executive calendar 397. the presiding officer: without

objection. the clerk will report. the clerk: executive office of the president, jeffrey gerrish of maryland to be a deputy united states trade represent with the rank of ambassador. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the senate vote on the nomination with no intervening action or debate, that if confirmed the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, the president be immediately notified of the senate's action and no further motions be in order and that any statements related to the nomination be printed in the record. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. the question is on the nomination. all those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nomination is confirmed. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate resume legislative session for a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today it adjourn until 10:00 a.m. tuesday, march 6. further, that following the

prayer and pledge, the morning hour deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date and morning business be closed. i further ask that following leader remarks the senate resume consideration of the motion to proceed to s. 2155 with the time until the cloture vote equally divided between the two leaders or their designees. further, following disposition of the doughty nomination, the senate resume consideration of the motion to proceed to s. 2155. finally, that the senate recess from 12:30 until 2:15 and that all the time during the recess, adjournment, morning business, leader remarks and the doughty nomination count postcloture on the motion to proceed to s. 2155. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. mcconnell: if there is floe further business to come before the senate i ask it stand adjourned under the previous order following the remarks of senator casey. the presiding officer: without objection.

mr. casey: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania. mr. casey: mr. president, i'll pick up with just a recitation of some of the record that special counsel mueller developed long before he was named to this position. i was going through a moment ago the recitation of his actions as a soldier, as a marine in combat. and then i have a few more parts of his record to review. mr. mueller not only fought courageously on the battlefield, but upon returning home earned his law degree. he continued serving his country throughout his legal career. after serving in u.s. attorney offices in both boston and san francisco for over a decade, he later served at the justice department leading the criminal division of the justice department under president george h.w. bush.

there, he oversaw cases ranging from the prosecution of panamanian dictator man well nol noriega to the lockerbie bombing. he then joined the d.c. u.s. attorney's office. and in this case the homicide division, working to hold violent offenders accountable for their crimes. three years later he became a u.s. attorney himself serving again in san francisco and earning a reputation as a dogged and fair prosecutor committed to enforcing the rule of law. in 2001, mr. mueller was nominated by a second republican president, president george w. bush, as the director of the f.b.i. he was then confirmed unanimously by this body. his tenure at the f.b.i. included leading the response to

the september 11 attacks, spear heading the bureau's efforts to combat cyber crime which has been widely praised in fact, in then as his ten-year term was set to end, we in the senate voted 1 hundred-0 to -- 100-0 to extend his term until 2013, another two years. though our political system has become more polarized, each time mr. mueller has been named or nominated for a new position, he has received unqualified praise from people across the political spectrum, and rightly so. when mr. mueller -- with mr. mueller's record as a war hero, a dedicated public servant and an expert in law enforcement it is hard to imagine anyone better suited to lead the investigation into russian interference in the 2016 election. there is no one in washington,

d.c. or, frankly, in all of america better prepared to do this job. serious congressional oversight of executive branch operations is always appropriate. howeve -- however the reckless partisan attacks on mr. mueller's investigation and on mr. mueller himself are not the same as congressional oversight. such attacks have made us less safe as a nation -- less safe. the political smears like those we have seen undermine our rule of law and strike at the heart of our democracy. they are a disservice to the brave men and women in law enforcement who put their lives on the line to keep all of us safe. as members of the united states congress, we have a duty to uphold the rule of law and the principles of fairness and independence that american

democracy is built upon. so i call on my colleagues on on the other side of the aisle to defend the integrity of mr. mueller's investigation and reject the politically motivated attempts to discredit the investigation and its underlying conclusions. i call on house and senate -- the house and senate majority to give us a vote on legislation to protect special counsel mueller's independence and ensure that he can continue his investigation free from interference. to ensure the integrity of our election and our democracy, we must make sure we never allow a hostile foreign power to interfere in our electoral process again. to do that, we must allow the special counsel to get to the bottom of what russia did in 2016 and whether it was aided by american individuals. that's what the whole

investigation's about, those two parts. history, of course, will be our judge. we will be judged about how we handle this crisis. we know that in 1787, when the constitutional convention had just adjourned, benjamin franklin was asked what kind of government the convention had chosen for our young nation. he responded that, quote, the convention had given us a republic, if you can keep it. unquote. democratic principles are only as strong as those elected to uphold them. i hope my colleagues will stand together and stand strong to preserve the rule of law in the institutions of this republic we've been given. and we must, quote, keep it, unquote, as franklin said. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the

>> with this whole? >> on the positive side, there is one less and the court gave some clarity whether or not there is authority whether it is a mix of commentary or not but also what is clear what is

troubling to me that is still not the expert agency that had any background with commentary the fcc is still the agency that does not come into play unless harm is done you can prove unfair or deceptive practices. those are high hurdles for the security system to be able to realize for the ftc

b5. [inaudible