this was an extremely imprecise time but i'm going to call it a tie. and i want to thank our panelists for this extraordinary discussion. thank you very much. [applause] >> wonderful job. >> today the supreme court ruled 72 that a colorado bakers free exercise and religious freedom rights were violated colorado civil rights commission. after he said he broke state law and refuse to create a cake for a gay couple. watch the oral arguments for this case tonight at 9:15 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> the u.s. senate returns from its weeklong work period today to take the first of

severaldistrict court nominations. more nominations along with the debate on an educational department nominee . senate is expected toconsider spending bills for 2019, finding energy and veterans affairs department .live coverage now of the u.s. senate here on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray.

eternal god, we thank you that although we plan our course, you determine the success of our journey. we praise you for the many amazing gifts you provide for our pilgrimage. lord, inspire our lawmakers to commit their plans to you, trusting the unfolding of your loving providence. may they not depend only on persistent self- reliance, but draw upon the supernatural strength and wisdom you desire to give them.

today, fill this chamber with your presence and power. we pray in your strong name. amen. the presiding officer: 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. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington d.c, june 4, 2018, to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable

joni ernst, a senator from the state of iowa, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: orrin g. hatch, presidet pro tempore. mr. mcconnell: madam president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: the senate will begin this week by voting on three more of the president's well-qualified nominees for the federal judiciary. first on the slate is magistrate judge robert wier, selected by president trump to serve as a district judge for the eastern district of kentucky. judge wier's sterling credentials and the support he enjoys from the legal community suggests he'll excel on the federal bench. he graduated at the top of his class at the university of kentucky college of law followed by a successful career in private practice. in 2006 he became a magistrate judge. in 2014, his colleagues unanimously reappointed him to a second term. judge wier has the intellect,

skill, and experience to take on this role and i'll proudly vote to advance his nomination later today. following judge wier, we'll consider fernando rodriguez for the southern district of texas and ann are marie exxon. in each case they will be up-- we'll be upholding our responsibilities to consider candidate. last week brought another headline about our growing economy. in the month of may the u.s. economy generated 2323,000 new jobs, unemployment has fallen to 3.8%, its lowest level since april of twau. and the proportion of american adults who are employed is as high as it's been at any point since the financial crisis. now we know these economic

indicators can sometimes be noisy, but consider them alongside all the other signs we've seen over the past year. since president trump was elected alongside a republican congress, the numbers of americans who say they're optimistic about finding a good job has jumped 25 percentage points. and small business owners report in record numbers that they're optimistic about prospects of hiring new employees. the bottom line is clear. under the policies of this unified republican government, american workers, families, and business owners are achieving economic growth that is unmatchedn recent memory. it's dn by a 21st century tax ce that lets americans keep more of their own money and encourages job creators to invest in our nation's workers. it's made possible by historic regulatory reform which has leveled the playing field for american consumers and small businesses, from farmers and

ranchers to community bankers, the burdens of an out-of-control regulatory state are being lifted. so after a decade of stagnation, republican policies have gotten washington out of the way and freed american workers and job creators to do what they do best, build a dynamic economy that is literally the envy of the world. but as impressive as some of these statistics may be, i think it's important to keep in mind that these stories are at the end of the day human stories. more than one million new jobs have been created just since we passed tax reform last december. that's not an abstract number. that's one million opportunities for young workers who are just starting out and need to begin climbing the first rungs of the economic ladder, or of mid-career professionals who were sidelined by a tough

economy and can now suit up and check back into the game. these aren't just economic statistics. they are american member who have new chances to support their families and build their lives, with the support they did not have under the previous administration. i'm glad we fought and continue to win major accomplishments for american families that we represent. 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: robert earlier robert earl wier to be united

states district judge for the eastern district of kentucky. mr. mcconnell: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. cornyn: madam president. the presiding officer: the majority whip. mr. cornyn: are we in a quorum

call? the presiding officer: we are. mr. cornyn: i ask that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: madam president, this week we'll be taking up the national defense authorization act which congress has passed for 57 con sengtive -- consecutive years to support and guide our country's military. earlier this month the armed services committee voted overwhelmingly 25-2 to advance this are important legislation to the senate floor. so when i hear people say that there's no bipartisan consensus for anything in washington these days, i think that's belied the fact and certainly in this case by our bipartisan commitment to provide that support and guidance for our nation's military. there are 1.8 million americans around the world on active duty to the -- in the united states military, according to the department of defense. the united states has 737

installations overseas and the department of defense is the world's largest employer. supporting all these people and the facilities that they occupy is a herk leian task and the defense authorization bill is one very significant way that we do just that. it's how we make sure that all of our american service members are trained, equipped, and paid, that our alliances are strengthened and military facilities are properly modernized an maintained. when you have an all-voluntary military, it is important to do all of these things, including quality of life to prepare our warriors for hopefully an avoidable fight, but when it's unavoidable to prepare them for that conflict. in texas, there are roughly 200,000 military men and women stationed in places like fort

hood, and ellington field. these are the people i think about when we take up this defense authorization bill. they rely on us to deliver what we have asked them to do. to give them the tools, training, and equipment we have asked them to do. that goal is increasingly difficult because the world is a very complex and dangerous place. the array of national security threats facing the united states is more complex and diverse than at any time since world war ii. our leadership at the pentagon says that the strategic environment has not been this competentive -- competitive since the cold war. america no longer enjoys the competitive edge that it once had over our competitors and adversaries. secretary mattis and department of defense have crafted the national defense strategy that

was delivered to congress earlier this year, laying out its strategic goals. this was a critical first step, but now that the strategy must be implemented. the defense authorization bill will align that strategy with the resources necessary to implement it, the investments, the policies, the authorizations with the new orientation articulated in that strategy. the secretary of defense will reevaluate the highest priority missions for the department of defense, the roles of the joint force, and the capabilities required to complete these missions. all told, the defense authorization in its current form will support $716 billion for our national defense. to those who think that price is too high, i would say there is no option. there is no nation in the world that's as capable of keeping the peace and deterring aggressors around the world.

and, in fact, the number one responsibility of the federal government is to provide for our common defense, and all of the rights that we enjoy in this great country of ours flow from the freedoms that are protected by our men and women in uniform. and we've seen what happened in the last few years when america has taken -- has receded and retreated from its leadership role. we don't have to fight all of these fights on our own, but as general mattis says, it is appropriate for americans to fight by, with, and through our allies, which is the strategy we're using now rather than placing boots on the ground in many of these locations. one important piece of the bill is bolstering recruitment and reextension of the armed forces. a second important piece included in the markup of the ndaa is legislation i introduced called the children of the

military protection act. this will close a jurisdictional loophole affecting military installations when minors commit criminal offenses on base. because it is a military base, the federal government has the jurisdiction, but frequently federal prosecutors don't have the time or the resources to prosecute the cases until they fall through the cracks. this legislation will allow federal prosecutors to relinquish jurisdiction to the state in these instances, allowing state-level authorities to take up the case when the federal's finite resources prevent them from doing so. i'm proud to join with senator king, the junior senator from maine, in this effort. this is a bipartisan priority that members of both side of the aisle should rally behind. our children on military bases must be protected at all costs. when they are assaulted their assailants should not escape

justice because of loopholes in the law. although the federal government may tains jurisdiction over military base -- maintains jurisdiction over military bases, as i said, it does not always assert its prosecutorial authority. they have prosecuted 15% of juvenile offense cases. that is it not enough. we have got to give local prosecutors the authority they need to go after these cases on our bases with the agreement of the federal authorities. so i look forward to my legislation being a part of the ndaa when we vote on it perhaps as soon as next week. there's one final aspect of the defense authorization bill that i'd like to touch on and it involves how we address future threats to our national security. i've spoken quite a bit on the floor about the threat that china poses to the united

states, and they are not even coi about it. their is to grow the economy. and this provision in the bill that -- well, let me talk a little bit about the threat. i've spoken about that threat but let me quote the chairman of the house armed services committee who recently said in the endough pacific region why the united states faces a threat armed with nuclear weapons and also a long-term strategic competitor. of course, by competitor, my friend, congressman mack thornbury is talking about china, the competitor and the belligerent threat he identified was north korea. that's why this year's defense authorization bill among other goals prioritizes military readiness in the region and strengthens our key partnerships

there. it promotes security and stability in the pacific through exercises with our allies and supports taiwan's defense capabilities. even more importantly, the defense authorization bill will include legislation i coauthors along with the senior senator from california, mrs. feinstein known as the foreign investment risk review modernization act or firma. it will allow us to better intercept threat posed by national security when its companies masquerade as normal corporate actors but in fact they are an arm of the communist party and the leadership in that country. as has been well documented, china is intent on, number one, stealing our intellectual property and when they can't do that, strategically investing to get access to both the intellectual property and the know-how to be able to take advantage of all the research

and development expenditures we made here in our country and to short circuit that in developing their equivalent. our legislation will modernize the review process on the committee of foreign investment in the united states and make sure we're better protected from these sophisticated threats and help us maintain our technological edge in the national defense realm. but as i said earlier the defense authorization bill is important for reasons that hit much closer to home. in years past, this bill has authorized needed improvements that our million -- at our military facilities. it's given our troops a much needed and much deserved pay raise, and updated advanced aircraft ships and ground vehicles. these, too, have implications in all of our states and texas is no exception. so when i vote on the defense authorization bill, i'll be thinking about service members back in my state and in addition to all those who serve in remote locations overseas.

we need to get the defense authorization bill across the finish line for them and for our country. madam president, i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. schumer: madam president? the presiding officer: the democratic leader. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the quorumming dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: madam president, first let me welcome you and all of my colleagues back from another productive state work period. i traveled a good deal around my state, spoke at a bunch of graduations and found it fun and productive. you learn a lot. and so i'm glad to be back but glad we were out in our states. now first let me address the president's recent comments on the russia probe, then on negotiations with north korea and then on health care. russia -- this morning the president tweeted that he, quote, has the absolute right to pardon himself, unquote. and that, quote, the appointment of a special counsel is totally unconstitutional. president trump, you went 0-2 on

the constitution this morning. first, of course, no president has the morning hour to pardon himself herself. if they did the presidency would function above and outside the law. counter to the very founding principles of our country. we don't have a king. we are a nation of laws, not men. that's what the founding fathers created america all about. they didn't like the monarchies, but if a president can pardon himself, it's virtually a monarchy, at least as far as the president is concerned. if the presidents had the power to pardon themselves, we'd no longer be a democracy. as the department of justice legal counsel wrote four days before nixon resigned, quote, under the fundamental rule that no one may be a judge in his own case, the president cannot pardon himself. this is virtually indisputable. and does the president get to choose what he can pardon himself over? theft?

murder? who knows? the president does not have the right to pardon himself. that's for sure. second, of course the appointment of the special counsel is constitutional. never mind the fact that president trump's own republican appointees made the appointment of the special counsel. this is far from the first special counsel to investigate a serious matter concerning the president. again, if the president were beyond the reproach of any investigation, there would be no check on the president's conduct. the president could engage in rife corruption, self-dealing, without consequence. surely, surely that's not what our constitutional system envisions. that's not the structure of america that the founding fathers set up and we have followed for more than 200 years. so the president's tweets are silly, farcical, even absurd. they're not legal arguments to

be treated seriously. rather, they seem to reveal increasing desperation on the part of the president. president trump has he escalated his criticism of russia probe from smearing the special counsel and his team and hawking outrageous conspiracy theories to attacking the very legal architecture of our country. special counsel mueller has already issued more than a dozen indictments. he's secured several guilty pleas from top trump campaign officials. the probe is not only legitimate, it's finding violations of the law on the part of the trump campaign and others. so as long as president trump was in his tweets this morning, you have to wonder, why is he asserting the right to pardon himself? why is he questioning the constitutionality of an investigation in the first place? for a man who constantly proclaims his innocence,

president trump is doing an all ofly good impersonation of someone who believes he has something to hide. it's hard to think of another explanation for the increasingly ridiculous and far-fetched legal theories peddled by the president and his lawyers. now, the pundits and the analysts in the media are debating whether it makes smart, strategic for president trump to sit down for on interview with the special counsel. they're asking the wrong question. the president's strategy and political interest shouldn't be the basis for whether he sits down with the special counsel. if the special counsel requests an interview with the president as part of his investigation, the president should agree to provide testimony. if president trump has done nothing wrong, as he so often and so loudly claims, he should have nothing to fear by sitting down with the special counsel. now on another matter, north korea -- over the last few

weeks, we've seen an off-again, on-again routine from the trump administration when this comes to the potential summit between presidentrump and kim jong-un. now that the meeting wil seemingly proceed as planned, we want to make sure that the president's desire for a deal with north korea doesn't saddle the united states, japan, and south korea with a bad deal. we're all hoping the president succeeds. we're all rooting for peace. we very much hope they'll be able to achieve a strong and enduring agreement, because the danger of a nuclear-armed, icbm-equipped north korea is very, very real to the united states. but the president needs to be willing to take time to construct a good deal. and if he finds that one is not achievable, the president must be willing to walk away from the table. in a letter to the president, senator menendez and i strongly

urged the administration to ensure that any agreement with north korea meets five key principles. first, north korea must dismantle or remove every single one of its nuclear, chemical, a -- and biological weapons. second, north korea must end the production and enrichment of uranium and plutonium for military purposes and permanently dismantle its nuclear weapons infrastructure. that means test sites, all nuclear weapons, research and development facilities, and enrichment facilities all have to be destroyed. third, north korea must continue to suspend all ballistic missile tests. fourth, north korea must commit to anytime, anywhere inspections for both its nuclear and ballistic missile programs, including all non-declared suspicious sites. if inspectors reveal any violation, we must be permitted

to implement snapback sanctions. and lastly, any agreement between the united states and north korea must be permanent. if president trump meets with kim jong-un and reaches a deal that meets these principles, he will have made the world a much safer place. but if he tries to reach a deal with kim jong-un just for the sake of reaching a deal and if the agreement fails to live up to the principles we've laid out, then he'll have been bested at the negotiating table yet again. these five principles are the lens through which senate democrats will evaluate any deal with north korea. if the deal doesn't live up to these standards, then the president should not expect democratic support in the senate if he intends to lift sanctions. finally on health care -- today health insurancers in the state of -- health insurers in the

state proposed a rate increase of insurers in my state are requesting a rate increase of 24%. following rate increases in virginia, maryland, vermont, and oregon, these increases confirm what we already know to be a trend. the policies of the trump administration and congressional republicans are driving up health care costs for millions of americans. president trump promised the american people that health care would be, quote, far less expensive and far better. they once again have failed to deliver. instead of far less expensive and far better, americans have gotten health coverage that is far more expensive and will be far worse. and it is a direct result of republican policies and president president trump's actions. president trump has deliberately sowed major uncertainty in the

marketplaces. he'll start offering expanded junk insurance plans. each of those actions taken separately destabilized our health care system. taken together, these policies are causing chaos, skyrocketing rates and the return of dark days in which people with preexisting conditions face higher premiums, denied care and medical bankruptcy. on health care, like on many issues, president trump made bold promises but has failed to deliver the results that middle-class americans need and expect. on health care he has just swung at the ball and struck out. i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. whitehouse: i ask unanimous consent that any pending quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. whitehouse: thank you, madam president. the night spanning june 9 and 10 marks the anniversary of a key chapter in american history, one whose first shots spurred our nation on to independence from britain yet one unfamiliar to most americans today, which is why i come here each year to tell the tale of the gaspy raiders. i encourage my colleagues and

all students of history to explore this chapter of our history more in depth with an empire on the edge, or the attack on crown rule before the american revolution by steven park. here's the tale in brief form. it's 1772, tensions between england and the colonies have grown increasingly strained. rhode island is a sea faring trading colony without much regard for his maj city's -- majesty's taxes. the command of lieutenant dudington in rhode island waters. the gaspee's mission to interdict smuggled goods and force the payment of the crown's taxes.

lieutenant dudington was an arrogant sort who was infamous for seizing cargo, flagging down ships only to harass, humiliate and interrogate the colonial sailors. according to gabriesweist, this roughon ravaged the coast for several months, destroying unoffending fishing vessels and confiscating everything he could lay hands on. rhode island seamen and traders -- a number delivered a petition seeking relief against the gaspee to chief hopkins, later a signer of the declaration of independence. on this occasion hopkins provided a legal opinion, saying that british officers were

obliged to present their orders and commissions to ron's -- rhode island's governor beforernitying local waters -- entering local waters. dudingston refused such a notion and threatened to hang any man who tried to oppose the gaspee. his first mistake in the winter of 1772 was to seize a sloop named the -- as daniel harrington wrote in the providence journal, the patriotic fervor sweeping the colonies seemed to elude nathaniel green until dudington snagged his fortune and reignited the righteousness that consumed him. after suing dudington for

stealing his ship and winning, green would join the revolutionary cause and rose in general washington's ranks to become the commander of the southern campaign of the revolutionary war. during the war, general corn wallace wrote to his wife, that damned green is more dangerous than washington. thank you very much, lieutenant dudington for igniting nathaniel green's righteous spirit. it continued until they reached the breaking point of june 9, 1772, when he set his sights on the vessel hannah. the gaspee ordered the hannah to stop and allow a search. on board the hannah captain benjamin lindsey refused and continued on his course to providence ignoring warning

shots fired by the gaspee. knowing that his hannah was later and had a shallower draft from the gaspee, lindsey went up the bay. the heavier gaspe kept up the chase of the hannah but ran aground off the waters of namqip point. the gaspee was fast on a falling tide. the captain sailed on the providence, along with the founder of brown university, rallied them at the providence's east side. they made a fateful decision. the british navy was the most powerful military force on the planet. the british crown was the most powerful political force on the planet. the rhode islanders managed to

strand one of the vessels, helpless in an outgoing tide. they resolved to attack. in the early moonless hours of june 10, several dozen men, perhaps benefiting somewhat from the refreshments of sabine's tavern, led by john brown and abraham whiple shoved off from providence with blackened faces around muffled oars to row through six miles of dark waters for the gaspee. as the boat surrounded the gaspee, whiple called out that dudington surrender his ship. ones witness recounted it in this form. forgive me for the language involved. i am the sheriff of the county of kent god damned you, i have a warrant to apprehend you, god

damned you, so surrender, god damned you. dudington refused this polite order. the determined rhode islanders forced their way aboard the gaspee and a struggle ensued. in the melee, dudington was shot in the groin around arm. it was written the attack on the gaspee caused the first bloodshed in the struggle for american independence and was the first resistance to the british navy. brown and whiple's men soon overpowered the british crew and took control of the ship. brown ordered one of his rhode islanders, a physician named john walney to tend to doddington's -- dudington's wounds. he abandoned gaspee for one final act of defiance to the crown and

riddance to the ship. the rhode islanders set the gaspee afire. now, the gaspee was a gun ship, and begunship -- gunship's store gunpowder, and it is kept below deck in a powder magazine. the gaspee burned until its powder magazine exploded, blasting into the rhode island night what remained of his maj he'sty's -- majesty's ship. word quickly spread of the rhode islander's daring raid. it was spread from pulpits and pamphlets up and down the colonies. the furious king george offered huge rewards for the capture of the rebels, a trial in england

was announced, but in characteristic impressive solidarity, not one rhode islander would step forward to identify a single one of the raiders. the royal threats broke vainly against the silent solidarity of the rhode islanders and the royals intos -- royal nooses hung empty. this is one part of a daring rhode island resistance, stretching months before the gaspee incident into that explosive night in the narragansett bay. his majesty's navy had not heard the last of whiple. in 1775, abraham whiple faced off against the british friget. the captain sent a note to

captain whiple from captain sir james wallace of the rose, you, abraham whiple, on the tenth of june, 1772, burned his majesty's vessel the gaspee and i will hang you at the yard arm. james wallace, to which note whiple replied, to sir james wallace, sir, always catch a man before you hang him. abraham whiple. by the way, rhode island john malar two centuries later built a replica of the h.m.s. rose which had a starring role in "master and commander" as captain aubrey's warship, the surprise. rhode island is proud of our role in sparking our revolution. we have made a tradition of celebrating the gaspee incident

with our gaspee day celebration and parade in warwick just ashore where the gaspee was led aground. the archives is stapling a new exhibit called gaspee raiders, pirates or patriots. king george was pretty sure about which, but we are sure about which. you can learn about the events of 1772 and experience it in virtual reality. much of the world does not remember the burning of the gaspee, but we do not forget. beyond our state borders more americans think of other events as catalysts of the revolutionary war. more than a year after the gaspee incident, up in massachusetts some boston worthies fortified their courage with strong drink and pushed tea bails off the -- bales off the

deck of a british vessel. that's not bad. i guess it ruined the tea, but personally, i think it's more impressive more than a year earlier to have blown up the british ship and shot its captain, but for whatever reason the boston tea party is the better known historical event. in fact, many of my colleagues having heard me give this speech tell me they never heard this story. maybe it's because massachusetts had two of our first presidents, the adams, and maybe after the war, rhode islanders went back to their farms and businesses. whatever the reason, seizing and burning and blowing up the gaspee deserves a more prominent place in revolutionary history. we are the state that first enshrined separation of church

and state in the new world. samuel slater sparked america's industrial revolution with his mill, and we drew first blood in the fight for american independence that night on narragansett bay. the gaspee affair is not a peculiar, drunken anomaly, it's part of a robust and early resistance by a proud colony, now a proud state. i thank you, and i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

mrs. feinstein: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from california. mrs. feinstein: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion. we, the undersigned senators in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of robert earl wier of kentucky to be united states district judge for the eastern district of kentucky, signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of robert earl wier of kentucky to be united states district judge for the eastern district of kentucky shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll.

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: senators the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? if not the yeas are 90, the nays are # -- are one. the nomination is approved. mr. brown: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. brown: thank you, mr. president. last winter this body passed a $1.5 trillion, that's $

$1.5 billion tax cut for millionaires, billionaires especially. more than 80% of the benefits are going to the top 1% wealthiest people by the end of this decade. two weeks ago congress passed another big giveaway to wall street, loosening taxpayer protection on big banks that received a combined $239 billion in taxpayer bailouts. we know wall street can never get enough handouts, and too many people in this body, too many people down the hall in the house of representatives, too many people in the oval office, too many people in washington never get tired of giving these handouts away. when the -- on the day president trump, -- president obama, almost a decade ago, signed wall street renoorm law, a -- reform into law, a top lobbyist said it's not over. those lobbyists went to work to

undo the rules we put in place to protect taxpayers and consumers. we are seeing the result of that lobbying in congress, and the agency that's are supposed to be policing our financial industry. last week the federal reserve announced proposed changes to what is known as the volcker rule. we put this rule in place after the crisis to stop big banks from taking big risks with americans' money. those complicated, risky bets were a big reason for the financial crisis that devastated our economy, that cost millions of americans their jobs, that cost millions of americans much of their savings and left taxpayers on the hook. lehman brothers invested in toxic mortgage-backed securities eventually leading to $32 million in trade losses. they took bank deposits, putting the u.s. taxpayer on the hook for those losses. hedge funds sponsored by bear stearns, which also took

americans' individual deposits, suffered massive losses. during the crisis merrill lynch, morgan stanley and citigroup also -- also lost big on bets backed by subprime mortgages. goldman sachs had to bail out a hedge fund. congress constructed the federal reserve to write strict rules to prevent that from happening again, to make sure banks use a taxpayer safety net to serve their customers, not bet against them. banks should be in the business of making investments in the real economy, not casino-style trade, using family's checking accounts. it took decades to p finalize the volcker rule which was completed in 2013 after the consideration of thousands of public comments. now they want to undo it all. the rollbacks announced last week would gut core components of the volcker rule.

"the new york times" said, quote, the balance of power will tip immediately to traders from regulators it shifts the power from watchdogs to the big banks themselves. from public servants looking to protect the public interest to executives making millions -- tens of millions, occasionally hundreds of millions of dollars in their trading. the proposed rule changes ask us to trust the banks regarding risky trades. go ahead. police yourselves. we know how well that turned out last time. the rule changes would allow banks to more easily place bets under the guys of so-called hedging. this increases the chances of another scandal like the london whale episode when j.p. morgan lost $6 billion on one bad bet. we want to make it easier for them to do it again with americans' savings accounts? why weaken the rules now?

it's not as if the banks are suffering under this rule. think about how the banks are doing now. the fdic released new data last month. banks increased their profits by 13% last year and that's before you account for the windfall from the tax bill. when you add in the tax bill, banks' profits went up 28% last year on top of the double-digit percent almost every year from 2010 and 2011 and 2012 and 2013 and 2014 and 205, 2016, and 2017. the banking sector brought back $-- bought back $77 billion worth of stock last year. last year the c.e.o.'s of the six largest banks got a raise, an average raise of 22%. these are c.e.o.'s that are already making millions and millions of dollars. keep in mind the average teller in this country, the average bank teller makes about $12.50 an hour. yet the c.e.o.'s of these banks already -- some of them making $10 million and $20 million a

year are getting a 22% increase. this isn't some dying industry crying out for help. if anything, it's an industry that needs a more watchful eye. the largest banks paid $240 billion worth of fines ten years ago after the collapse. wells fargo can't go more than a few months without a scandal. doit bank is struggling with poor management and inadequate capital. why put taxpayers and bank customers at risk? we have a pretty good idea why. just take a look who the administration has put in charge. the white house looks like a retreat for wall street executives. we have one former one bank manager -- as if -- the volcker rule rollback wrchts bad enough, he announced last week he wants to get banks into the business of financing payday loans. he wants to get banks into the business of financing payday loans. i think he has other plans to gut the community reinvestment act, a 40-year-old law that

makes sure banks serve their communities. randy quarles recently gave a speech saying just like we predicted, the federal reserve wants to loosen rules on foreign mega banks. these banks take are in this country like deutsche bank and san tan der and some of the big dampgs that clearly from time to time have used the public trust, we're going to loosen the rules regulating foreign banks in this country? he said last weeks changing the volcker rule were just the start. he said it was the first effort to weaken the rule. people like randy quarles, people who didn't spothe crisis the last time they were watchdogs when in government 1 years ago, people who profited off the very crisis they failed to prevent, these people may have forgotten what the risky bets did to so many families in this country. make they succumbed to the collective amnesia that affects more and more people in this town. families in my state haven't forgotten. workers' savings were wiped out. they watched college accounts and retirement savings shrimp and shrink, -- shrink and

shrink, hopes and dreams were dashed. americans can't afford to go to the days when wall street gambles with their hard earned money. the crisis casts a long shadow over these families. four of ten adults today can't afford an emergency expense of $400. your car breaks down and costs $500, you don't have the money to do that? you're much of the american public, you go to a payday lender who charges you exorbitant interest rates. you go back, you go back because you can't get back ahead. one in four renters pay more than 50% of tear income to keep -- their income to keep a roof over their head, one in four renters pay 50% of their income or more to keep a roof over their head. one bad thing happens in their lives. a child gets stick. they miss work -- sick. they miss work for a few days. they can't make a payment because they've had a broken down car. all the kinds of things that can happen and they can be evicted and many of them are. more and more workers have irregular schedules and income that varies up and dn from

month to month. those americans we were sent here to serve. who side are you on? are you going to stand with hardworking americans or with risky wall street traders? we need to go home and listen a little more to the people we serve and a little less to special interests. that's how we create an economy that values work and it serves the common good, not falling all over ourselves in this body to serve wall street. mr. president, i ask that the following remarks be put in a different place in the congressional record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. brown: thank you, mr. president. last week american workers had a victory. boeing flight technicians in south carolina voted to join a union for the first time giving them a voice in their workplace and the freedom to bargain for the pay and benefits they've earned. it would make a tremendous difference in the lives of those workers. but we know take toor many americans aren't so lucky. tens of millions of americans have no voice in the workplace.

when they try to organize a union, they're almost always met with resistance from corporations at every turn. boeing fought these workers' efforts tooth and nail. the corporate leaders used every trick in the book to try to prevent these workers from organizing and for standing up and speaking with a collective voice. it took three tries for workers to finally overcome that corporate obstruction. their fight isn't over. boeing's appealing the result also of the election in a last desperate attempt to silence these workers. for too many workers hard work doesn't pay off. they're paid less. they have little economic security. corporate profits have gone up. g.d.p. has gone up. executive compensation has gone up. executive salaries have skyrocketed. workers simply haven't shared in the wealth they've created. more workers have no control over their own schedules. they work odd hours. they have no paid sick loave and no overtime pay. companies use temporary workers

and independent contractors to pay people less for the same work. in workers in the traditional payroll have often seen their wages and their benefits and their job security -- their wages and benefits stagnant, their job security whittled away. that's what happens when workers have no voice and no power in the workplace. very to change that because it's not corporations that drive the economy. it's workers. we know from -- we know from the way we write tax bills here. when we write a tax bill that focuses on the middle class and gives tax breaks to them, the economy grows because you build the economy out. when we pass a tax cut here overwhelmingly that goes to the wealthiest people and the largest corporations, the trickledown effect creates very few jobs. when workers can bargain for higher pay and better benefits that reflect the dignity of work that they do, we're all better off. that's how you grow the economy. this victory for boeing workers is a small but important step in the right direction. now we need to give workers all over this country the same power in tir own workplaces.

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

quorum call:

mr. merkley: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. merkley: i ask that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. merkley: thank you. mr. president, p i'm coming to the floor tonight to talk about the issue of immigration here in the united states of america. i think all of us are very familiar with the statue of liberty, a symbol that we know about from the time that we can begin to talk, a symbol that represents much of the history of our country, where so many of us coming from every corner of the globe have family histories that involve parents or grandparents or great-grandparents or generations ago fleeing persecution around the world. that sign, that welcoming sign, give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to

breathe free -- those words inscribed there on the foundation of the statue of liberty, representing the fact that when it comes to people fleeing persecution, america is a place ready to receive them. and this isn't just something that's woven into the history of our country. it's not just something woven into the d.n.a. of our souls as americans. it's also wove non-our laws -- woven into our laws, our international laws, and our international treaties for how to treat refugees fleeing persecution. and it works like this. a family that has been in horrific circumstances can come to the united states border and announce that they are fleeing persecution and wish to seek asylum in the united states of america. they are then given a court date to appear to present their case. and their case has to be

substantial. it has to be documented. and the court will decide whether or not it meets the test of whether they are legitimate fear for their lives and their children's lives, should they return to their homeland overseas. so that's the process. but we have a new policy, a new policy that was announced just in april and then amplified in a speech by the attorney general in may, last month. and this new process is to say, when those families come to the united states fleeing persecution, we are going to proceed to take the children away from the parents while they're awaiting adjudication, while they're awaiting their day before a judge to present their case of their affliction abroad. let me explain this in more significant terms. families that have experienced

trauma abroad are then subjected to trauma when they arrive on our border. this is the new policy that jeff sessions announced in april and gave a speech about in may. he called it zero tolerance, because he wanted to put a positive spin, that somehow those words carry positive weight. but met me tell you this. -- but let me tell you this. there is nothing positive about subjecting children to trauma who are fleeing trauma abroad. it is un-american. it's inhumane. it's absolutely in every moral sense wrong. and the administration knows it. they first started debating this policy when the president came into office early last year, in january and february.

they held these conversations and decided that it was way inappropriate for america to treat children in this fashion, subject these children fleece rsecution to -- fleeing persecution to trauma upon arrival in the united states of america. so they put them on hold for a year and a half or for a better part of a year. and then last summer they decided they'd experiment with it and have a pilot project, and so they started this process at a few locations of taking a family seeking asylum and ripping the children out of their parents' arms and sending them off to who knows where. the children didn't know where, the parents didn't know where, and the american people didn't know where because when stories started to come out about this, the administration denied it was happening.

and then more stories started coming out and more stories and then the administration said, we have a policy of in some cases taking children away from their parents in order to protect them from smugglers. now, i ask you, does that make any sense to anyone? a family here in the united states, a family that is together, the children have the stability and the security of being with their parents. they're no longer abroad. they're no longer in danger of a smuggler grabbing them or kidnapping them and the administration says, well, we're protecting the did cans by ripping them away from their parents from smugglers. it's obviously is up an incredibly phony story that no one would believe that story. so the administration started to wrestle with how to present this story. so they came up with this.

this zero tolerance. and this then, they really had to explain what they were dox they said, here's the idea, they said. we believe that if we impose this kind of affliction on the children and the parents, families won't come here seeking asylum. so that's what this is about. this is about hurting children in order to dissuade families pursuing their rights under american law and international law to ask for asylum here in the united states of america. this is not asylum granted to anyone. people have to prove persecution abroad and a huge likely threat of injury, damage, and persecution should they return. so now we have it. this is not a zero tolerance policy. this is a zero humanity policy. when i say that we're subjecting

these children to trauma, let me paint the picture for you. a family somewhere in the world that has stood up to the local drug cartel, the local drug cartel has killed one or two of the members of their family and threatened the rest, or gang raped a daughter in the family and threatened to kill her and then to burn down the family's house. that's the type of trauma we're talking about. so the family says we have to escape so we will flee, and they know that america has a statue of liberty. they know that america has received families over generations fleeing persecution, that this is in our tradition, so they knock on our door. these children already having gone through so much probably left their hometown and their house just running as fast as they could to escape before ty

suffered the injury they feared, and they arrive here and they think oh, we made it. we made it through the various challenges of fleeing halfway across the world to come to america. here we can be treated well safely and soundly. they know that if they can't prove their case, they are not going to get asylum, but they have come to present their case. and then what happens? these children who don't know our country, who don't know the language, who don't know anything about how our systems work are with their parents and then up comes an official and says i'm taking the children away. to where, the parents might want to know. no knowledge of where they will go. when will they be reunited? no knowledge of when they will be reunited. what happens to my children? what happens is the parents and the children start screaming because they are terrified of

being separated. that's what we're putting these children through, this trauma. and so yesterday i went to texas to try to see the facilities that are involved in this new policy. specifically, there are two key places. one is operated by the department of homeland security and one is operated by the department of health and human services. so let's take a look at homeland security first. i was given permission to visit this facility, and i very much appreciate having had that permission, and this is not a picture that i took because i wasn't allowed to take in a camera, nor is this a picture of the facility that i visited, nor is this a recent picture, but i'm presenting it here because this is what the big warehouse looked like that i visited. this is the general picture of what i saw. i saw a smaller room maybe about

the size of the senate chamber divided into a series of cages, and in these cages -- and maybe the cages are just to give you a rough approximation, maybe 15 feet by 15 feet with tons of people jammed in so that if they all tried to lay down, there wouldn't be room for them to do so. they have space blankets like the space blankets in this picture. in this room i'm describing, there weren't mattresses, but in this picture there are. i'll get to that in a moment. so some of the women crowded into some of these cages had children in their arms. others were by themselves. and this is a processing facility. and then next to this particular room is a much bigger warehouse room that looks more like this. a massive room, and it has bigger cages that look like these cages made out of fencing. i think about this one

particular cage that i stood next to for a little while that was full of young boys, and they were having them rhine -- line up to prepare to get food, and they had them line up by the shortest to the tallest. the littlest tyke must have been about as tall as this desk right here. and so, i don't know, maybe 4 or 5 years old, something like that, on up through 16 and 17-year-olds. so all these young boys. what you have to realize, these folks who were the families from not all -- some of them arrived as unaccompanied minors, but many of them came with their families as they sought asylum, and they had been separated from their parents. now, their parents might have been in another cage somewhere across this facility, but they wouldn't necessarily be able to see them. wouldn't necessarily be able to know where they are. and they certainly didn't know

what was going to happen to them. so that's the -- that's the detention side or the processing side of this. and after the children are separated, they are sent to a child's detention center, so that's the second step. let me go to another picture. i am standing here yesterday in front of a walmart, a former walmart, and above up where the walmart sign would be on it, it instead says southwest key program, and then it says casa padre. now, there is irony in that name. casa means house in spanish. padre means father, but there is no fathers there. there are no parents there, or so we're told, because i wasn't able to get inside to see. i had contacted, my team had

contacted the department of health and human services, asking permission to visit, just as my team had contacted the department of homeland security to visit the -- the prossing center. so one saidescessing center said yes. this detention center for children said no. i thought well, you know, as long as i'm down there in the vicinity, i'm going to go by and just ask again, because why would a facility want to have a policy of preventing members of congress from seeing what's going on inside? my understanding is everyone has been turned down to see what's inside this building. it's reported that there are a thousand children inside without their parents, a thousand children inside this walmart without their parents. i think the american people have a right to know what's being done with their taxpayer dollars

in treating children, and maybe going inside you would see very clean mattresses and children playing games. it's a reputable nonprofit, as i understand it, that is operating this place, but what are the stories behind those children? and then how long are those children there before they are shipped somewhere across the country to a foster home? they have no idea what they are going to. they have no idea how they'll be treated. they have no idea when they will see their parents again. this is significant, unnecessary trauma being inflicted on children. and it's wrong. and for the trump administration to try to keep what's going on inside here secret is unacceptable. members of congress nd to be able to visit not with two and three weeks notice so that the

children can be shipped out, maybe the place can be cleaned up. you have to have some chance to visit and see what it really looks like. how are the children really being treated, not when it's rearranged to give you some false impression. and the members of congress need to be able to talk to the children, to hear their stories, to understand what they're going through. so i'm calling on the administration to end this secrecy of these child detention centers. apparently, there are a number of these across the country, but we don't even have that information. we don't even know for sure how many children are in this former walmart. we're told approximately a thousand. here is one thing we know. we know because the department of homeland security hold us this that they separated 658 children from their parents at

processing facilities in a 12-day period in may. that's over 50 times a day children being ripped out of the hands of their parents, producing enormous trauma. and trauma not just for the child. trauma for the parent. i'm a parent. i have two children. they are no longer small tykes, but i can only imagine having escaped horrors overseas and then coming and having my children torn away from me out of my arms, to have my children snatched by an unknown force, sending them to an unknown place . it is important for members of congress on reasonably short notice to be able to see what's going on in this building. so i knocked. there was a sign up here. this picture. is what appears in

it had a phone number. if you want inside, call this number. first i said can i talk to a supervisor. i was told no. they pointed me to this. i called up. they said they would send out a supervisor to talk to me. and i waited ten minutes. i called them again. they again said a supervisor would come out. so i waited, and then a supervisor did come out, but he didn't want to talk to me. what he wanted to do was talk to the policeman that he had called. cop cars had rolled up. he explained to the cops that he didn't want me on the property, and i explained that when i had called up, they said the supervisor would be happy to come out and talk to me, and i had been waiting for them. in that sense, it was an invitation to be there. and i also pointed out no one had asked us to leave the property. but that invitation came -- to leave the property came soon

enough thereafter. clearly, the supervisor is under instructions not to share anything about how many children there are, about what's going on inside, any kind of activity, and this is coming from the highest levels. when i was at the processing center, they told me that they were simply doing what they are being ordered to do from d.c. so there it is. the attorney general and the president have created a new policy, a policy we have never seen in the united states of america of abusing children, putting trauma to children as leverage to try to dissuade people from actually exercising their rights under our laws and under international law to present their case for asylum. here is the policeman coming to talk to me. here is the supervisor suggesting to them that perhaps he didn't want to have a conversation with a senator trying to understand what was

going on inside. you know, we have had various cases in our history of child snatching. there was an article today in "the new york times" that was about child snatching during slavery where children were ripped out of the arms of their parents and sold to faraway plantations never to be seen again. the article went on to talk about child snatching with native american tribes where children were ripped out of the arms of their parents to be sent off to who knows where. it is not an acceptable practice of any kind. it is morally bankrupt. it is harmful. we do not harm children in the united states of america in order to increase our leverage to dissuade people from asserting their asylum rights and getting an asylum hearing. we do not do this until now. it is morally bankrupt. it is so beyond wrong that the

administration is wrapping it in secrecy, not allowing the press to see it. and i'm talking without cameras. not something to violate the children's rights to see inside what's going on. not to allow policymakers to see it. when something is wrapped in secrecy like that, you know it's wrong, and the administration knows it's wrong. so i call on my fellow members here in the senate to make it very clear to the administration that it's unacceptable. that every member of this body and the house have every right to visit detention centers or any other immigration facility to see what is happening so that we can debate it here. and we should hold a hearing with our help committee, our health, education, and labor committee about what's going on with the organization for refugee and resettlement and what they are doing in detaining these thousands of children. the reported numbers are that in one month, the number of children detained by our government, ripped out of the

arms of families seeking asylum has gone up 20% in -- and some 10,000-plus children being held at centers like this, foster homes, other halfway houses and so forth around this -- around this country. we hav -- we have a responsibility to get to the bottom of what's going on and to put an end to it. thank you, mr. president. a senator: mr. president, i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call: mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader of the senate. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule 22 at 11:00 a.m. on tuesday, june 5, all postcloture time on the wier nomination be considered expired and senate vote on the confirmation. if confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president be immediately informed of -- notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate resume

legislative session for a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak 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, june 5, further, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed. i further ask that following leader remarks the senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the wier nomination under the previous order. finally i ask that the senate recess from 12:30 until 2:15 p.m. to allow for the weekly conference meetings. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: if there's no further business to come before the senate, i ask tha

>> i do think it is very important that as the administration, the fcc congress considers infrastructure like proceedings and other concepts that broad band is and has been determined to be a matter of important infrastructure to our country and to our national policy. that's a change because typically we think of infrastructure as roads, bridges, railways etc. which are all very important and need to be -- need to be helped, but you cannot survive today as a business, as an individual, as someone working from home in our economy without having a robust

broad band experience. >> watch the communicators tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span 2.

>> tuesday testimony from education secretary betsy devos on president trump's 2019 budget request for her department. she will speak before a senate appropriations subcommittee. that gets underway live at 10:15 eastern on c-span 3. later usa gymnastics president and former michigan state university president will discuss sexual abuse of athletes during their tenures. he will testify before a senate commerce subcommittee. that will be live at 3:00 p.m. eastern also on c-span 3. earlier