helping in brookings and please help me now in thanking the panel. [applaus [applause]. [inaudible conversations] >> c-span where history unfolds daily. in 1979 c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies. and today, we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events in washington d.c. and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. and the senate about to gavel in. senators scheduled to vote later today on the nomination of brit grant, to the 11th

circuit court. also, in the senate today work on a four-month extension of the national flood insurance program. and a package of four federal spending bills for the fiscal year. and later in the week the senate may also work on the defense programs and policy bill. taking you live now to the floor of the senate here on c-span2. senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. sovereign lord of the universe, we pray today for our lawmakers. use them for your glory, providing them with wisdom to live with integrity. through their labors, enable us to live trusting in the unfolding of your providence.

lord, inspire our senators to glorify you, doing justly, loving mercy, and walking humbly on the path you have chosen. keep them in the circle of your unfolding providence. may they find delight in doing your will, as you remove from their lives the barriers of fear, hatred, and strife. help them to seek more fully to resemble the prince of peace. we pray in your holy 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., july 31, 2018. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable cindy hyde-smith, a senator from the state of mississippi, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: orrin g. hatch, president pro tempore. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved.

mr. mcconnell: madam president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i want to take a few moments to discuss the brave men and women who serve in the u.s. immigration and customs enforcement. i had the privilege of visiting the i.c.e. office in my hometown of louisville this last friday. this is a federal agency that was created following the attacks of september 11 is 2001. it is responsible for several key aspects of our homeland security. enforcing our immigration laws, combating terrorism, and

preventing people and goods from moving illegally throughout our country. and its record on these vital missions is staggering. in fiscal year 2017, i.c.e. recorded more than 105,000 arrests of aliens with known criminal convictions on their records. nearly 4,600 convictions for robbery, more than 3,700 for sexual assault, and more than 1,500 for homicide. so, madam president, we're talking about the men and women in law enforcement who confront all this in order to keep all of us safe. this is hardly a controversial mission. it's essential. we're lucky these agents are willing to serve. the nation is better off for it. so i wanted to pay these agents a visit in louisville and thank

them firsthand for their work because recently they've fall noon the crosshairs of some extremely vocal far-left special interest groups, groups who explicitly say -- now, get this, madam president. this is what they say. that our nation would be better off with no borders -- no borders -- and no immigration laws of any kind. that's what these people advocate. they're slandering i.c.e. agents. they're calling the agency, quote, an unaccountable strike force, executing a campaign of ethnic cleansing. and even a genuine threat to democracy. that's what they're calling i.c.e. agents. according to these left-wing groups, the threat to democracy is not -- not -- the violent catch and release who are illegally present in our country but, rather, the brave law enforcement officers who volunteer to take them on.

well, fringe political movements are nothing new. you can find a few americans who will argue almost any side of any issue. what is new -- what is new -- what does get my attention is when prominent, leading democratic politicians, including a number of our colleagues right here in the senate, adopt some of these extremist views wholesale and let the far-left talking points form the basis of their own policy positions. the junior senator from new york said recently that if democrats regain the house and senate, the first thing they should do is, quote, get rid of i.c.e. get rid of i.c.e. if the democrats get the house and senate. the senior senator from massachusetts pointed to replacing i.c.e. as the first

priority of a top-to-bottom rebuild of america's immigration system. the mayor of new york city calls the agency, quote, no longer acceptable. and a member of the united states house of representatives likened it to -- now, get this -- the gestapo of the united states. the gestapo of the united states? madam president, i'm really not sure where to begin in responding to this foaming hysteria. it's one thing for a few protesters and socialist hecklers to want open borders and the elimination of all immigration laws a dopt a slogan -- to adopt a slogan as silly, but it's something else entirely when the united states senators are so eager to please the left-wing extremists that they jo inthat chorus, denigrating

the u.s. men and women of law enforcement. well, this is the moment we're in. leading democrats taking cues from the open-border socialist crowd to end the interior of our country. talk about a political stunt -- the american people want nothing to do with these dangerous antics. my neighbors and constituents in kentucky certainly don't. so my fellow republicans and i will continue to privately stand with i.c.e., stand with the rule of law, and stand with all the american families who would rather have fewer drugs and less crime in the communities where they're raising their children. now, on another matter, we learned last week that second quarter real g.d.p. growth exceeded 4%.

that's the best quarterly growth rate in four years and one of the strongest reports since the great recession. earlier this month we learned that new claims for unemployment insurance recently reached it's lowest level since, listen to this, 1969. and the number of continuing claims week to week is lower than it's been at any point since 1973. so let me say that another way. notwithstanding almost half a century of population growth, fewer americans are applying for new unemployment benefits today than has ever been the case since just a few months after apollo 11 landed on the moon. and the last time this few americans were continuing to receive unemployment week to week richard nixon was president. no wonder -- no wonder analysts

are heaping praise on this economy. the "wall street journal" noted last week that recent reports indicate, quote, underlying strength that could tee up one of the best years in the current expansion. back in march, my home state of kentucky joined a list of 14 states that had reached the lowest unemployment rates in recorded history. the lowest unemployment rate in recorded history. while this united republican government has been in office. never before on record had kentucky's unemployment rate dropped as low as 4%. already in 2018 an estimated 14,000 kentuckians have found jobs at businesses of all shapes and sizes. wires meets in covington announced that we had a number

of projects that were seen as something we could consider doing down the road but because of tax reform it's possible to reinvest in the plant and in new equipment now. in ashland, brady industries expects to support a thousand construction jobs as it constructs a new state-of-the-art manufacturing facility and then 600 permanent jobs. they broke ground in june. not a single one of our colleagues across the aisle voted in support of this historic tax reform that's helping make these developments possible. so for them these data are telling an inconvenient truth. and the inconvenient truth is, the rest of america is not hiding from these numbers. americans are benefiting from these numbers. we're celebrating them and all the life-changing job

opportunities, wage growth, and small business expansions that they represent. i suggest 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: are we in a quorum? the presiding officer: we are.

mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: madam president, the senate has a duty and a responsibility to methodically review a supreme court nominee's record. that's why in past years, the senate has sent bipartisan letters, bipartisan to the national archives and presidential libraries requesting the necessary information on a nominee. democrats and republicans agreed that however you would ultimately vote, transparency, openness were principles we all shared. it appears that that bipartisan tradition has been tossed aside. it was fine for our republican friends when they were in the minority and president obama nominated members to the supreme court, but the double standard is glaring, enormous, and detrimental to america. now the republican majority has cast aside democratic wishes for openness and transparency and has made a partisan request for

only a small subset of judge kavanaugh's records. it is such a break from precedent that you have to wonder what are the republicans hiding about judge kavanaugh's record? what are they so afraid of that they tie themselves in knots, in a pretzel, to contradict everything they stood for when they were in the minority? today, every democrat on the judiciary committee has joined ranking member feinstein in making a formal request of the national archives to provide the exact same universe of documents provided during the confirmation of justice kagan. when i say the same request, i mean the exact same request. the judiciary committee has updated the letter to refer to judge kavanaugh, but in every other way, it is identical to the request that democrats and republicans made for justice kagan, that republicans insisted

on when she was nominated by president obama. by the way, it was senate republicans who insisted on this standard during previous confirmation. democrats, even though our nominee might be exposed, agreed because we believed in openness, and we're not hypocritical and say it's only good when we're in charge, not when you're in charge. we believe it works both ways. ranking member feinstein has made it clear that we don't need or want every single scrap of paper from judge kavanaugh's time as staff secretary, but to review none, none of the nominee's records for most of his senior role in the white house is an act of what might be called willful opacity. that's why we're not following the very sensible bipartisan precedent now. judge kavanaugh himself has said that his time as staff secretary was especially useful to him as a judge, and that his time in

the white house made him a better interpreter of statutes. i had hoped that the national archives -- i'd hope that the national archives will understand the dilemma we are in, the unusual circumstance we are in and ultimately i hope my republican colleagues will understand and that both the archives, either on its own or with republican acquiescence will make the right decision in the interest of transparency, consistency, fairness. to do otherwise is to forsake the senate's constitutional duty to provide advise and advice ann this -- advice and consent on this surpassingly important nomination. now, on another subject -- taxes. president trump and congressional republicans promised working american the moon and the stars with their tax bill. president trump said it would create, quote, a middle-class miracle and that everyone would get a $4,000 raise. remember that? president trump promised the american people that his tax cut

to the wealthy would trickle down or torrent down and everyone would get a $4,000 raise. if we asked americans from one end of the country to the other to raise their hands how many of them got a $4,000 raise, maybe the top 1% would, maybe the top 2%, but not most americans. wages are virtually stagnant. the promises the president made have not materialized. and when you measure wages against the costs of everyday living -- in other words, buying power -- how much raise you get versus how much things cost you, the bureau of labor statistics found that year over year, hourly earnings have dropped by 1%. in other words, the american consumer, the average middle-class person, even with this tax cut, has less buying power today than they had last year. president trump and republicans promised a $4,000 raise, but

average hourly earnings, buying power, the ability to live a decent life for far too many americans has gone down. talk about a sleight of hand. talk about an exaggerated if not dishonest promise. thr-z it is. while -- there it is. while averaging working americans continue to struggle to keep their heads above water, corporations are having a bonanza thanks to the republican tax bill. as the president's tweeted this morning, the tax break made the koch brothers richer. it made almost every multimillionaire greater. we don't begrudge that people are wealthy and doing well, but the middle class needed this tax break far more than the rich even though the rich had political power over our republican friends. and when the wealthiest lobbyists, big powerful

corporations say jump, the republicans say how high, ignoring the middle class. so in the trump economy, bill, wealthy corporations are cashing in, the top 1% are doing great and american workers are falling behind. listen to this, madam president. already this year corporations have dedicated over $600 billiog $700 billion -- to corporate share buybacks and debt repurchasing programs, goosing their stock price but doing little to help workers. these buy-backs help the c.e.o.'s, help the wealthy shareholders, do nothing for the workers of the middle class. there is also a new troubling pattern being brought to light of corporate executives selling off stock shortly after the stock price has been inflated. they do the buy-back, then they sell the stock and cash in. here's the pattern, the

republican tax bill gave american corporations a mammoth tax cut. american corporations used some of those new-found profits to buy back and inflate the value of their own stock. executives of those companies turn around and sell the stock at a higher price to pad their pockets. s.e.c. commissioner robert jackson studied nearly 400 examples of stock buy backs since the beginning of 2017 and found that after half of them -- half -- at least one executive sold shares in the next month. that's the -- that's american taxpayer money, president trump. that's the phoerpb you're takine taking from the american people and giving it to the wealthiest of the american people. the republican tax bill is robbing the american treasury to pad the pockets of wealthy executives and the richest americans. now if that wasn't bad enough, listen to what they want to do now. it was reported in yesterday's newspapers, the administration is considering doing an end run

around congress to give another $100 billion tax cut to the wealthy, mainly to the wealthy by cutting taxes on capital gains. the economy is already running hot on the artificial sweetener of tax cuts and deficit spending. another $100 billion in tax cuts for the rich isn't more gasoline on the fire, it's an incendiary device. at a time when the deficit is out of control, at a time when wages are flat, at a time when the wealthiest are doing better than ever, to give the top 1% another big advantage is outrageous. it shows the republicans' true colors. tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy, empty promises for everyone else. north korea. last night we received news that north korea has been continuing work at a missile facility north of its capital. previous satellite images have shown work ongoing at two other missile sites in the country.

clearly north korea is not suspending, let alone winding down its nuclear missile programs. and yet shortly after president trump met with chairman kim in singapore, president trump said north korea was, quote, no longer a nuclear threat to the united states. the juxtaposition of president trump's rhetoric and the facts on the ground are jarring. it would be funny if it wasn't so sad. president trump explains out of nowhere that the nuclear threat is over, and north korea is building more missiles that reportedly can reach all of the united states instead of just the west coast. north korea's nuclear program remains a grave threat to the region, and the united states. president trump can't wish it away. he can't place fantasy next to reality. north korea will not give up its nuclear program simply because president trump wants him to. now we're all rooting for

diplomacy to succeed, but if president trump is going to make progress towards the complete verifiable and irreversible nuclear denuclearizeation of north korea, he needs to grapple with the reality of the situation, not be in a dream world where he thinks his rhetoric is reality when it doesn't match the reality on the ground, the dangerous reality on the ground. finally, 3-d guns. in a short time, in just a minute or two from now, i'll be joining my colleagues to talk about an issue we've been worried about for quite awhile: ghost guns. over the past several years 3-d printing technology has advanced to a point where anyone with an internet connection is now able to print guns at home. a court order has barred companies from posting plans to print guns, but a few weeks ago inexplicable, the trump administration settled with gun activists to allow them to post detailed instructions, plans,

files, and 3-d drawings of weapons on the internet. and this starts tomorrow. so starting tomorrow, all you need is a little money, a couple of hundred bucks, you can download a print from the internet to make a gun at home. no background check, no criminal history check, no certification that that the person isn't adjudicated mentally ill. even terrorists could avail themselves of this technology to print an unlimited amount of home weapons. according to the "new york post," more than 1,000 people have downloaded plans to make ar-style 3-d printed guns and the ban hasn't been lifted yet. the idea of these ghost guns is as scary as they sound. we should be doing everything in our power to make sure this doesn't happen. and these guns can go through metal detectors, stadiums, airports. no metal, they're made of plastic only. now out of the blue this

morning, president trump tweeted he was looking into the matter months after his own administration caused the problem by settling with gun activists and allowing it to happen. from 2010 to 2017, you couldn't do this. it was an international agreement. the trump administration, because the gun activists were pushing, said go ahead and do it. and now a day before this happens, president trump is saying that he would look into the matter, although he said he'd consult the n.r.a., hardly the great advocates of gun safety in america. i wish president trump looked into this matter months ago or even last week and urged the justice department and the state department not to reach this settlement in the first place. it's another example of so many of the president showing up on the scene a day late and a dollar short to address a

problem his own administration has created. the president's tweet this morning gets to the basic incompetence of this administration. the left hand doesn't know what the right hand's doing, and it has real important consequences for the safety of the american people. so i look forward to joining my colleagues to talk more about this issue and what congress can do about it. 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:

quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. a senator: i ask unanimous consent, mr. president, to vacate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. the presiding officer: morning business is closed.

under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the following nomination which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, britt cagle grant of gentleman to be united states circuit judge for the 11th circuit. mr. wyden: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. wyden: mr. president, the senate is approaching the end of the debate on a significant piece of spending legislation that includes funding for the internal revenue service. that is why i've come to the floor this morning to discuss one of my amendments to this legislation which is based on a bill that i have authored entitled the presidential tax transparency act. it is long past time for the president's tax returns to be released to the american people.

this president has in effect thrown in the trash can a bipartisan 40-year pro-transparency tradition by refusing to release his tax returns in the course of the 2016 election. this was a tradition accepted by all liberals, conservatives across the political spectrum that dates back to the post-watergate era. the president ended it for reasons as flimsy as you can get. a made up story about the president's claim that you can't release your returns in the course of an audit. but now it's not just a matter of the president destroying a

four-decades good government campaign tradition. week after week, month after month, there are more questions that swirl about with respect to financial ties that might skew the president's decision making. about new foreign deals the trump organization continues to strike, violating the promises the president made to the american people, about foreign cash coming into his properties here in the united states, about the astronomical amount of cash taxpayers spend to fund the president's many visits to trump-branded properties, essentially forcing the american people to finance trump resort ad campaigns. the episode that left more jaws on the floor than perhaps any

other came a few weeks ago. that's when the president traveled through europe for what should have been routine meetings with our long-standing allies. instead, the president attacked our closest allies and put on a performance standing next to vladimir putin that few will soon forget. with a hostile dictator at his side, the president said the u.s. was, quote, foolish and he threw our intelligence officials under the bus and refused once again to accept the conclusion, that russia interfered with our 2016 election. the cleanup he tried to do a few days later, in my view, was laughable at best. following that meeting in helsinki, people across the nation were left to wonder, does vladimir putin have something on

the president? does the president simply prefer dictators and strong men to democratically elected leaders? or does putin have information or financial influence that he's exploiting. there is also the mystery of why this administration which seems to stumble from decision to decision springing into action to save z.t.e., a company that is a chinese serial sanctions violator and a tech company that experts will tell you is a threat to our national security. and, mr. president, in an open hearing of the intelligence committee, we have few in response to my question, the new point person for the whole questions, counterintelligence and counterterror said z.t.e. he

regarded still as an espionage threat. for all the president's tough talk about enforcing sanctions on countries that pose a threat to americans, letting z.t.e. off the hook after it violated sanctions against iran and north korea is just baffling. certainly shows signs of weakness. and the timing raised ie brows at the z.t.e. deal came right after the trump family secured valuable trademarks in a trump project in indonesia got a $500 million loan from a chinese state-owned company. these looming questions are yet another reason why the american people should not be asked to wait any longer to have a chance to see what every other president has offered in the last four decades. that is his tax returns.

the american people deserve to see those returns and see if some of the almost impossible to explain presidential judgments over the last few weeks are due to what may be in those returns. so let's be clear. the financial ties between the president, the trump organization, and russia could be well hidden deep within the trump web of business entities. releasing the tax returns at least is a start with respect to accountability and transparency in the long-held tradition presidents have followed. unfortunately for the interests of the american people, debate on the legislation before us now has been cut off. that means that my amendment which would call for the

disclosure of these tax returns and transparency and accountability just as we've seen decade after decade will not get a vote. but i intend to keep calling this legislation up for a full debate. i simply believe this issue is too important to ignore. there's a reason why we've had this tradition for four decades. this is, mr. president, this is the lowest ethical bar for a president. it's not a high one. it's the lowest ethical bar, and it's not being followed. members on both sides ought to be interested in protecting good government, pro transparency traditions that stretch back decades. mr. president, what a lot of people wondered is why is legislation necessary here. and i held off for months in 2016 even talking about

requiring this by legislation. i just hoped -- i just hoped that then-candidate trump would do voluntarily what everybody else has done for four decades. but when it was clear he wouldn't, i said i don't know of any other path to get the transparency and accountability the american people deserve other than through legislation like this. nobody in the congress ought to be in favor of keeping the american people in the dark about what is motivating the president's decision and certainly all of us, all of us ought to be concerned about protecting against corruption. helping russia undermine nato and letting sanctions violators repeat sanction violators off the hook puts american interests

in danger the public has the right to know the truth of what's behind those decisions and certainly a part of being able to make those judgments is having the chance as we've seen for four decades the opportunity to see the president's tax returns. mr. president, with that i yield the floor and i would note the absence of a quorum. i believe a vote is coming up shortly. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. cornyn: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority whip. mr. cornyn: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are. mr. cornyn: i ask unanimous consent that it be vitiated. last week the house passed an important piece of legislation, the reauthorization of the perkins act. it was sent to the president's desk for his signature and once that happens today, it will become the law of the land. i want to take a moment to talk about part of it because it has huge implications for my state and the united states. it's called the new hope act and

it builds on other steps we've taken recently to strengthen our nation's economy, and specifically it deals with this phenomenon of occupational licensing. state licensing mandates requires men and women to pay fees, complete training programs, pass exams before they can enter certain jobs and professions, but many of these licensing requirements are protectionism. they do nothing to protect consumers or ensure the public's safety. they simply protect the incumbent's interest and erect large barriers to entry. they make it more difficult for new folks to learn and practice new trades and preserve exclusive -- exclusive access to those for the means and time to jump through the financial hoops. this perpetuates the status quo and stifle new talent. oftentimes they are unnecessary

and certainly burden soment -- burdensome. when that happens, it needs to be ee limb natured. last week i met with people in the heating, cosmo technology and other industries and how this impacts their trade. around that same time the institute for justice ranked texas license requirements as the 17th most burdensome in the country. that's not a statistic i'm proud of. naturally we spoke about ways to reduce the burden on job seekers. that's where the new hope act comes in, which is part of the perkins reauthorization bill. it will have funds for career and technical education. it will give them the ability to eliminate licenses that's provide limited consumer protection or pose an unnecessary and sometimes -- if

you want to be a haridresser or an eyebrow threader or roofer or mortician, we should support you 100%, we shouldn't condone erections to barriers once you satisfied the necessary and important qualifications and training. there are certain training steps that are a good idea. i'm not suggesting that, but you shouldn't have to wait for years and waste thousands of dollars in order to get there, and that's what this bill is all about. i'm grateful to my democratic cosponsor, the junior senator from michigan, as well as the bill's champions over in the house, representative walberg and representative quair. i look forward to the president's signature. and i know once it becomes law, it will further enhance the positive economic climate that we've seen under this administration with the jaw

dropping announcement of last friday that the economy is burning so hot that the gross domestic product has gone up 4.1% in the last quarter alone. there are many steps to turning this economy around. one was the tax cuts and jobs act that we passed last year that's had transformative effects. so i'm optimistic that legislation like this, like the tax cuts and jobs act, will continue to get out of the way of the people who are creating opportunity and growing the economy and wages and take-home pay. mr. president, i would yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from south dakota.

mr. thune: mr. president, the confirmation process for judge kavanaugh continues, and so predictably does the democrat hysteria. it's the same old playbook. any supreme court nominee from a republican president is guaranteed to destroy the constitution, abolish our rights, and endanger the lives of the american people. i'm not exaggerating for effect. those are actual accusations from democrats and liberal interest groups. in the leadup to justice gorsuch's confirmation, one head of a liberal organization said that there was, quote, there is substantial evidence that if gorsuch's egregious views were to become law, americans' lives would be put at risk in untold ways. end quote. at the end of his tenure on the supreme court, americans seem to be doing okay, but thap didn't stop the former democratic

governor of virginia tweeting that, and i quote, the nomination of judge kavanaugh will threaten the lives of millions of americans for decades to come. end quote. then, of course, there's that other favorite democrat accusation that the constitution will be put in jeopardy if we confirm a republican president supreme court nominee. in the leadup to justice -- to judge kavanaugh's nomination, the junior senator from california said, and i quote, we're looking at the destruction of the constitution of the united states, end quote. mr. president, i've got to say that i find this accusation particularly hi layer ha layerus. if there is one thing we can defend on judge kavanaugh to do, it's defend the constitution. in fact, his respect for the constitution and rule of law is perhaps the distinguishing

feature of his jurisprudence. in a speech last year judge kavanaugh said, and i quote, as i see it, the constitution is primarily a document of majestic specificity, and those specific words have meaning. absent constitutional amendment, those words continue to bind us as judges, legislators and executive officials. end quote. later on in the same speech, judge kavanaugh noted, and i quote, because it is so hard and not easy to pass federal legislation, pressure is often put on the courts, and the supreme court in particular, to update the constitution to reflect the times. in the views of some, the constitution is a living document and the court must ensure that the kown adapts -- constitution adapts to meet the change youring times. -- changing times. he said, and i quote, for those of us who believe that the judges are confined to

interpreting the constitution and laws as they are written and not as we might wish they were written, we too believe in a constitution that delivers p and endures -- delivers and endures, but we believe the changes of the constitution and laws are to be made by the people through the amendment process, and where appropriate, through the legislative process, not by the courts snatching that constitutional or legislative authority for themselves. end quote. in short, mr. president, if there's one thing the american people can count on, it's that judge kavanaugh will uphold the constitution even when he doesn't like the result. he won't attempt to legislate from the bench or make the constitution say what it wants it to say. anyone who comes before judge kavanaugh can be certain that he will rule based on the facts of the case, the law and the constitution and nothing else, not his personal feelings, not his political opinions, not his

beliefs about what the law should be, just the plain text of the law and the constitution. that's the kind of judge that all of us, including the democrats, should want on the supreme court, the kind of judge, who in the words of judge kavanaugh, will decide cases based on settled principles without regard to political allegiance or which party is on which side in a particular case. the truth of the matter, mr. president, is that democrats aren't worried that judge kavanaugh won't uphold the constitution. let's be clear about that. they know very well that he will. what they are worried about is that he won't deliver their preferred outcomes. that his judicial opinions will conflict with democrats' political opinions. democrats aren't looking for a qualified supreme court justice, they are looking for a political

rubber stamp. for them the only good supreme court justice is one that will advance the political agenda of the democratic party. look at the democratic senator who denounced the nomination before the president nominated anyone. that's right. the democrat senator announced plans to oppose the nominee before a nominee was even existed. well, that's all the evidence that you need that democrats' opposition to judge kavanaugh is based not on any actual problems with judge kavanaugh but on democrats' ideological opposition to any nominee that will not be a rubber stamp for the democratic agenda. the confirmation process will continue, and i'm sure that the hysteria from democrats will continue as well. but the senate will move forward with the business of confirming

another outstanding judge of the supreme court. mr. president, before i close, i'd like to say a couple of words about the economic numbers released last week. on friday the commerce department announced that the economy grew at a rate of 4.1% in the second quarter of 2018. that is tremendous news. getting our economy going again has been a huge priority for republicans since president trump's election. we've eliminated burdensome regulations. and in december of last year we passed a comprehensive tax reform bill that put more money in americans' pockets and fixed some of the problems in the tax code that were keeping businesses from growing and creating jobs. and now we're seeing the results, robust economic growth, low unemployment, near-record optimism among small businesses,

soaring business investment, and more. and what does all this mean, mr. president? it means more jobs and better wages for hardworking americans. it means more opportunities and it means more economic security and a better life for american families. mr. president, i'm proud of the economic progress we've made over the past year and a half, and i'm going to keep working with my colleagues in congress to advance policy takes will expand economic opportunities for americans even further. so we can continue to create those good-paying jobs and those better wages for american workers and american families. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate will proceed to legislative session and resume consideration of the house message to accompany s. 1182 which the

clerk will report. the clerk: house message to accompany s. 1182, an act to require the secretary of the treasury to mint commemorative coins in recognition of the 100th anniversary of the american legion. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the cloture motion, the motion to refer, and the motion to concur with amendment are withdrawn and the question occurs on the motion to concur in the house amendments to the senate bill. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators wishing to vote or change their vote? if not, the yeas are 86. the nays are 12. the motion is agreed to. under the previous order, the under the previous order, the earlier today senators passed an extension of the national flood insurance program. right before the deadline which was due to expire tonight at midnight. they will return at 2:15 p.m. eastern to vote on the nomination for the 11th circuit court which is based in atlanta. a vote to limit debate on a package of spending bills for the next fiscal year. those are interior and a barb, financl