they absolutely know it. and they whisper about it all the time. >> so here is the question from the audience. the term social justice is also a loaded term. whitney sorts of topics come up. many times it is perfect scented with the full broad scope of freedom. is there a less jaded way. it's what some people view as conflict. the sun is coming in next we will leave the last few minutes of this form on free speech on college campuses. watch the entire program. the senate coming into work on a couple of nominations

today. live senate coverage here on c-span two. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal god, you are holy. we rejoice because

we are sustained by your strength. we receive honor because of the victories you bring to our lives. bless our lawmakers. keep them from stumbling or slipping, as you increase their faith in you. use them to fulfill your purposes on earth, bringing release to captives, sight to morally blind, and freedom from the oppressed and downtrodden. may they make our nation and world better for the glory of your name. lord, we praise you for your glorious power.

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

the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader is recognized. mr. mcconnell: i ask further reading of the quorum call be dispensed. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: let me start with a quote, mr. president. i'm going to fight this nomination with everything i've got. well, that was the democratic leader on television mere hours after judge brett kavanaugh was first nominated to the supreme court. others pledged their opposition before he was even named. before they'd reviewed a lick of evidence, before they'd heard a minute of testimony. democrats already made up their mind and chosen their tactics.

delay, obstruct, and resist. whatever it took, whatever the truth really was. they were going to do whatever they could to stop this qualified, experienced, and mainstream nominee. democrats have signaled for months they'd put on whatever performance the far left special interest demanded and throw all the mud, all the mud they could manufacture. it's not like they didn't warn us. but even by the far left's standards, this shameful, shameful smear campaign has hit a new low. i'll get into the specifics in just a moment. but i want to be perfectly clear about what has taken place. senate democrats and their

allies are trying to destroy a man's personal and professional life on the basis of decades' old allegations that are unsubstantiated and uncorroborated. that, mr. president, is where we are. this is what the so-called resistance has become. a smear campaign, pure and simple. aided and abetted by members of the united states senate. eight weeks ago democrats on the judiciary committee received a letter from dr. christine blasey ford with an uncorroborated allegation of misconduct. she had requested the matter be handled discretely and confidentially.

the responsible next step would have been alerting the full committee so a confidential, bipartisan investigation could begin. committee staff would have followed their standard practice for investigating background information. senators could have questioned judge kavanaugh in their meetings or in closed session while respecting dr. ford's request for confidentiality. oh, but democrats didn't do any of that. they sat on dr. ford's letter for seven weeks. seven weeks. kept it secret. they did nothing. then they threw professor ford's wishes overboard and leaked it to the press. our colleague from delaware has himself indicated that either the ranking member's office or

the democratic committee staff likely leaked the document. as i've noted, we know the chain of custody of the letter went through the democratic side of the judiciary committee. so, mr. president, does this sound like democratic senators take their responsibilities seriously and want to get to the truth? or does it sound like a choreographed smear campaign that ignored dr. ford's request for confidentiality in order to inflict maximum damage, maximum damage at the last minute on judge kavanaugh and his family? this is an allegation of misconduct which all four supposed witnesses either flatly contradict or are unable to back up. in addition to judge kavanaugh, the other three supposed

witnesses have said they have, quote, no knowledge, no knowledge. no reaction -- no recollection. no recollection. and no memory of the alleged incident. it's not just one alleged witness disagreeing with the allegations. it's literally every person who was supposedly there. one of those supposed witnesses said she does not even know judge kavanaugh. so all the witnesses that dr. ford says were present at the party have told the committee on the record and under penalty of felony, under penalty of felony, all confirmed they do not remember any such party, do not know judge kavanaugh, or have never seen him do anything remotely,

remotely like has been alleged. and this unsubstantiated allegation stands entirely at odds with everything we've heard about judge kavanaugh's character from those who worked with him, socialized with him, dating all the way back to high school. but democrats wouldn't let a few inconvenient things, like a complete lack of evidence or an accuser's request for confidentiality to get between them and a good smear. it's despicable. and the contrast with the completely professional conduct of chairman grassley could not be starker. as soon as chairman grassley learned about this allegation, he handled it through proper channels. he immediately began gathering the facts. his office promptly conducted a

transcribed interview of judge kavanaugh in which under penalty of felony he unequivocally denied the last-minute allegation. and the office received statements from all the other supposed witnesses that they either directly contradicted the story or denied knowing anything about it. what's more, chairman grassley ensured that dr. ford could be heard in a forum of her own choosing either here or in california, either in public or in private, either with the staff or with the members. he's gone above and beyond to accommodate her request. thanks to him, we have a fair and open hearing scheduled for thursday. dr. ford will be able to state her allegation under oath and judge kavanaugh will be able to respond. but the smear campaign didn't

stop there. that was just act one. just act one. according to the reporter of this second allegation, the accuser, quote, came forward because senate democrats began looking and now they're calling for even further delays and further obstruction over a second decades' old allegation that is so thin and so unsupported that "the new york times" refused to enrun a story about it. this claim is so dubious that the "new york times" passed on the story after looking into it. here's why "the new york times" declined to publish. quote -- interviewed several dozen people over the past week in an attempt to corroborate her story and could find no one, no

one with firsthand knowledge. not one person with firsthand knowledge.to support the allegation, but rather multiple on-the-record denials again. the "times" also reported that the claimant said she herself is uncertain of her claim. that's "the new york times" whose credo is all the news that's fit to print. and it found this latest last-minute allegation not even fit to print. oh, but that hasn't stopped judiciary committee democrats from shoveling it into their smear campaign and demanding for further delays. they kept this one secret from republicans, too, by the way.

evidently, several democratic offices knew of this allegation for at least a week, but like with dr. ford's claim, they sat on this one, too, so the committee could not take any proper action. they just wanted it to wind up in the press. another orchestrated last-minute hit on the nominee. and now they're acting like it's a legitimate reason to delay things -- to delay things even further, as though they hadn't already announced themselves that they are completely opposed to this nomination anyway. as if they hadn't already promised the far left they would lead the fight to bring this nomination down, whatever it took, whatever the cost, whatever it took, whatever the cost. let's put aside this last-minute unsubstantiateed smear.

that's return to the facts. let's have a fair hearing on thursday, hear -- on thursday. here are the facts that we do have. hundreds of men and women who have known brett kavanaugh across his life have written or spoken out that he is a man of strong character and tremendous integrity. numerous witnesses testified before the judiciary committee that he's a trusted mentor, a loyal friend, and a lifelong champion of women. more than 75 women gathered last week to share their decades-old knowledge of judge kavanaugh as a, quote, responsible guy who treats us with kindness and respect and a true gentleman in all aspects of his life. and separately, of course, it remains beyond reasonable dispute that judge kavanaugh's legal brilliance and excellence on the bench make him one of the very most qualified supreme court nominees in the history of our country.

all of these facts are quite clearly on one side. maybe that's why the democrats are so panicked. maybe that's why they are so willing to try to bring down this nominee. in the meantime, a good and honorable man and his family are receiving death threats. they are the subject of smears. and are facing senate democrats who say he has no presumption of innocence because they don't agree with the judicial philosophy. well, before the week is out, both judge kavanaugh and dr. ford will testify under oath before the judiciary committee. chairman grassley has made sure the facts will be heard. judge kavanaugh and the american people deserve nothing less. and i want to make it perfectly clear, mr. president. judge kavanaugh will be voted on here on the senate floor.

up or down on the senate floor, this fine nominee to the supreme court will receive a vote in this senate in the near future. now, on an entirely different matter, last week, our efforts to restore regular appropriations hit another milestone. the president signed into law our first appropriations package. it will fund critical efforts in energy research and security, waterways, and infrastructure projects, and improving care at the v.a. earlier this month, the senate passed the conference report that will fund the departments of defense, labor, health and human services, and education. we anticipate the house will take up that package this week and work continues on other important legislation. soon we'll act to provide long-term stability and reforms to the federal aviation

administration, the transportation security administration, and the national transportation safety board. we will also take up america's water infrastructure safety act which will bolster the efforts of the army corps of engineers and make commitments to improving water quality and advancing hydropower. most immediately, we'll continue to process the president's well-qualified nominees. today we're considering jackie wolcott to serve as u.s. representative to the international atomic energy agency and u.s. representative to the united nations in vienna. i would urge all of our colleagues to join me in voting to confirm her. now, on one final matter. over the senate's history, we have welcomed many brave men and women who have served in uniform in our ranks from the earliest days of our republic when veterans of the revolution laid down their arms to serve as legislators, the senate has been the home of patriots who know the true meaning of service and

sacrifice. some of our colleagues have even decided to pull double duty, continuing to serve in the reserves while suffering the slings and arrows here in the senate. today we have a unique opportunity to honor one of these colleagues. earlier this month, news came that our friend, the junior senator from alaska, had obtained the rank of colonel in the u.s. marine corps reserve. dan sullivan has spent the last quarter century as a marine, earning the defense meritorious service medal and serving on active duty in afghanistan. those of us who serve here with senator sullivan are hardly surprised that someone so squared away has risen to this milestone. today, his promotion is recognized in a special ceremony here in the capitol where i understand senator sullivan's father will pin on his new rank. i know this body will join me in congratulating him and thanking

both senator sullivan and colonel sullivan for all of his service to the nation. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. and under the previous order, the senate will be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. mr. hatch: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. hatch: mr. president, i appreciate the majority leader's remarks in a wide variety of ways. what a great leader he is. we all should pay very strict attention to the way he handles himself and his seriousness about our united states senate. mr. president, last night, senate democrats continued their smear campaign against judge brett kavanaugh with a thinly sourced article accusing judge kavanaugh of conduct that no eyewitness can even corroborate.

rather than bringing the matter to the attention of committee investigators, democrats coordinated with members of the media to drop the story in the most dramatic and damaging way possible. this continues senate democrats' pattern of playing hide -- hide the ball after they spent six weeks sitting on a letter regarding alleged conduct while judge kavanaugh was in high school before leaking it to the press. senate democrats will stop at nothing to prevent judge kavanaugh's confirmation. as reported by the author of last night's article, the individual in the piece came forward only because senate democrats, quote, came looking, unquote, and even then the individual went on the record

only after, quote, six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney, unquote. a former democratic elected official. "the new york times," which declined to publish the allegations when approached, reported that it had interviewed, quote, several dozen people in an attempt to corroborate the story, unquote, and could find, quote, no one with firsthand knowledge, unquote. the "times" further reported that the individual in the story had contacted former classmates herself in an effort to corroborate the story and had, quote, told some of them that she could not be certain mr. kavanaugh was the one who exposed himself, unquote.

unsurprisingly, senate democrats are now using last night's article as an excuse to call for further delays. this follows the same approach they have taken since judge kavanaugh's nomination was first announced. no innuendo has been too low. no insinuation too dirty. everything is an excuse for delay, no matter how unsubstantiated. it does not matter that no other eyewitness can even confirm that judge kavanaugh was at the party in question. it does not matter that every other individual alleged to be present denies any memory of the event.

they delay. nothing new to us. it should be clear that democrats are engaged in a coordinated effort to stop judge kavanaugh's nomination by any means possible. as i have said before, every accuser deserves to be heard. moreover, a person who has committed sexual assault should not serve on the united states supreme court, but the way my democratic colleagues have approached these allegations makes clear that the driving objective here is not the truth, but politics. rather than working with republican colleagues to investigate dr. ford's allegations, they sat on them for six weeks until the eve of judge kavanaugh's confirmation vote, and then leaked them to the press. rather than bringing last night's allegations to the attention of committee investigators, they back

channeled them to the media and then denied any involvement. such underhanded tactics are not fair to judge kavanaugh, are not fair to the individuals in the stories, and are not fair to the american people. senate democrats are demeaning both the senate and the supreme court through their partisan games and transparent attempts at character assassination. we will hear and should hear from dr. ford on thursday, as planned. then we should vote. there should be no more frivolous approaches towards the united states senate or towards this confirmation process. mr. president, i yield the floor. and i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

quorum call: kentucky kentucky mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from louisiana. mr. kennedy: thank you, mr. president. i ask that the quorum call be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. kennedy: mr. president, i want to start by offering my heartfelt sympathy to those battered by hurricane florence over the past several weeks and are still feeling the aftermath of that storm. fortunately, people in louisiana, mr. president, know

more than a little bit about the damage to life and property that these natural disasters can do. the road to recovery may be long, but we've got your back. that's the message that i want to give to our fellow americans who were in the path of hurricane florence. don't give up. you're going to want to the. don't. failure is not falling down. failure is not getting back up. mr. president, i'd like today to talk a little bit about the national flood insurance program . weatherrering a hurricane is difficult enough without the added burden of having to do it without insurance. our national flood insurance program isn't doing its job,

mr. president, if it's so expensive that people can't afford to buy it. and, unfortunately, that's precisely the case for many of our people in north and south carolina. in spite of a robust economy, four million new jobs in 20 months, 4.1% growth -- gross domestic product g.d.p. growth, in spite after robust economy, in spite of a booming population in our country, fewer people in the carolinas can afford to ensure their -- insure their properties today that than in the year 20, and we should be ashamed of that, mr. president. experts estimate that fewer than 10% of the households affected by hurricane florence have flood insurance at all. 90% do not. making matters worse, in north

carolina today there are 3.6 fewer nfip policies in place than there were in 2013. over that same period of time, north carolina's population has increased by 620,000 people. south carolina tells a similar story, mr. president. today there are 1.2% fewer policies than in 2013, despite south carolina having 350,000 more people. this is the exact same story, exact same story that we saw in texas last year, where 80% of homeowners in the eight hardest-hit counties had absolutely none -- no -- flood insurance. that's four out of every five people, mr. president. why don't people have flood insurance? well, there are a variety of

reasons, but because the costs are out of control and middle-class families have little choice but to just roll the dice is the main reason. and why is that? because congress keeps playing games, mr. president, and people don't have faith that the nfip will be around to pay off. also because some people want to get a sound bite more than they want to help ordinary americans protect one of of their most valuable possessions, and in most cases their most valuable possession -- their home. and if those people want to reform the program because they want to save government money, which is a laudable goal -- and some do -- they're going about it the wrong way. the reality, mr. president, is that the national flood insurance program is the only

place -- the only place -- where people can turn to insure their home and their belongings. 98.5% of all nfip policies are in counties or parishes with a median household income below $1 see,000. -- below $100,000. so this argument that we often hear that, well, the national flood insurance program is just a subsidy for wealthy people and their beach homes is nonsense, mr. president. it is nonsense on a stick. 62% of all the people enrolled in the nfip program are in counties or parishes with a median household income below the national average of $53, 895. and last year many folks so the premiums for their homes and businesses increase between 8%

and 25%. as you know, mr. president, floods are the most common and, unfortunately, the most costly natural disaster. and if your home takes on water, your homeowners insurance is not going to help you. let me say that again. if your home floods and you have homeowners insurance, you will not be covered. homeowners insurance does not cover the cost of a flood. and if you don't have insurance, fema's disaster dollars aren't going to foot the bill for a full recovery. they aren't. and even if you're eligible for federal disaster assistance, a loan, for example, or a grant, it'll be years before you'll see those funds.

what are flood victims supposed to do in the meantime, mr. president? they can't just simply sit on an empty lot and wait. life goes on. mr. president, hurricane florence is just one in a long line of storms that have devastated american families, and i'm not just talking about massive hurricanes like katrina and rita and sandy. unnamed floods in the spring and summer of 2016 ravaged 56 of the 64 parishes or counties in my state. mr. president, in parts of my state in 2016 we had folks who endured 20 inches of rain in two days. and i don't care whether you live on pike's peak, if you get

20 inches of rain in two days, you're going to flood, even if you are not near a bod of water -- near a body of water. that's just a fact. and in the waning of hurricanes harvey and maria, i thought my colleagues might have seen the light and might -- would have come to the table to discuss a long-term, sustainable and reasonable bill to reform the nfip, but that, unfortunately, couldn't be further from reality, mr. president. congress has not only refused to debate comprehensive flood insurance program reform, but the program nearly lapsed. congress has had well over a year to lay out a plan and yet it still refuses to do so because one or two members want to hold up progress. unfortunately, mr. president, ordinary people like the good people of north carolina and

south carolina and virginia and louisiana and texas are feeling the pain of those politics. recovering from a natural disaster is more than putting up drywall. it's about communities coming back safer and stronger and better prepared. the nfip is an indispensable part of that effort to rebuild. but a flood insurance program isn't useful if it's too complicated to understand or if it allows bad actors to take from hardworking families. we need rules for the flood insurance program that make sense. we need government websites that a normal person can navigate. we need quicker decisions by bureaucrats and a faster process to get disaster dollars to the people who need them. most importantly, though, mr. president, people need to be

able to afford the flood insurance. i understand the national flood insurance program is running a deficit. as you can see, we've had an extraordinary number of storms, and i understand that. it needs to be put back in the sound fiscal shape. but, mr. president, by raising the price of the product so high that people can't afford the insurance is not going to achief that. it's going to undermine the entire purpose of the flood insurance program. what we have to do, i would suggest, mr. president, is strike a balance between fiscal stability and longevity of the program and affordability for the people who are supposed to be served by it. we have no choice but to get the program fiscally stable but also we have no choice but to get premiums under control and reform is the only path forward. the status quo is not working,

mr. president. when congress established the nfip, we made a promise 0. we promised five million americans -- that's how many policyholders we have -- including half a million people in my state and 350,000 people in north and south carolina. we said we'd be there to help should disaster strike. and it's high time, mr. president, that the united states congress show people that we meant it. mr. president, i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator is recognized. a senator: i ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. the presiding officer: without objection,so ordered. mr. boozman: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, september is national rice month. in arkansas this is certainly a reason to celebrate. my home state has the proud distinction of being the nation's leader in rice production, producing about half of the u.s. rice crop in america. arkansas rice producers not only provide a safe, reliable food source that helps feed the world, but also helps drive the state economy. arkansas rice farmers support nearly 15,000 jobs and on average contribute $2.3 billion to the state's economic output. rice milling operations and

market linkages in arkansas account for more than $3 billion of total output of goods and services. these are impressive numbers for an integral component to arkansas' economy and part of the reason why the industry was recognized by governor asa hutchinson who signed the rice month proclamation in early september. as a leader in production, arkansas rice farmers have a unique role in the industry and the ongoing research in support of its continued success in the state, the university of arkansas system division of agriculture's leading research unit is a leading research entity on rice production. its rice research and extension center is recognized worldwide for developing solutions to the challenges facing producers, establishing techniques, and best practices that help advance

the rice industry. the strong partnership between education and industry is crucial to leveraging the investment made in rice research. this cooperation helps improve the rice crop and increase farmers' yields as well as make rice production more efficient. this collaboration is also seen in conservation efforts. rice farmers are leaders in sustainability. over the last two decades rice producers have been able to increase their yields by more than 50% with improved quality while reducing land use by 35%. energy use by 38%, and water use by 53%. in addition to being good stewards of the environment, rice farmers provide critical habitat for ducks and other waterfowl. organizations like ducks unlimited formed relationships

with rice farmers through the rice stewardship to improve conservation practices that help shape the habitat for waterfowl. flooded rice fields have become great locations for hunters when these outdoorsmen visit arkansas to take advantage of our natural resources. they pump money into our local economies. as a duck hunting destination is critically important that we protect waterfowl habitats in arkansas so we can continue to attract sportsmen and women to our state. congress can help our rice farmers continue these good practices by passing a farm bill that includes a robust conservation title. during my annual ag tour in arkansas last month i visited with research and rice industry leaders that shared with me how the farm bill can work better for them. we can improve crop insurance to make the policy work better for our rice farmers.

they need a strong farm safety net, and they ask that washington protect the markets they have and also work to open up new markets like trade with cuba. i'm proud to craft and promote policies that help our rice farmers, and i will continue to be an advocate for the industry. this month is the perfect time to celebrate the rice industry and the many positive contributions that it makes to arkansas. and with that, mr. president, i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the democratic leader. we are in a quorum call. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: now, madam president, in the confirmation of any supreme court nominee, it's the senate's job to carefully and thoroughly review the nominee's credentials, beliefs, backgrounds, and suitability for the position. once confirmed, the supreme court justice is not subject to review or to term limits. it's a lifetime appointment with immense responsibilities and powers. we have to examine any supreme court nominee in light of those facts.

dr. christine blasey ford has come forward with a credible allegation that judge kavanaugh was guilty of sexual misconduct. i believe her, but regardless of what you believe, she deserves to be heard in a deliberate and impartial manner in a way that's dignified and respectful to both sides and to her, with as much independently verified information gathered beforehand, and now, of course, there are additional allegations about judge kavanaugh's actions that should be examined. there's one simple way to get to the bottom of this, without the he said, she said, without the finger pointing and name calling. a quiet, serious, thorough background check by the f.b.i. that's the logical way to go. the f.b.i. is not biased. the f.b.i. is professional. it's a crime to lie to them so people have a large incentive to tell the truth. reopening an f.b.i.

investigation is a routine practice for judicial nominations. it's happened over and over again when new information comes up. and it only takes a short time to complete. it should be quiet, serious, and get the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. if my republican friends are so concerned about this process being chaotic, they should want the f.b.i. to handle these allegations because the f.b.i. can conduct this investigation soberly, effectively and discretely. in fact, there is really only one way to get to the bottom of these allegations and prevent the nation from being thrown into further turmoil, an independent background check by the f.b.i. so on the one hand, our republican colleagues decry the turmoil, but on the other hand they avoid the careful, best, serious way to get at the allegations -- background check investigation by the f.b.i.

for some reason, both the white house and senate republicans are blocking an f.b.i. investigation and questioning its purpose. let me ask our republican friends, president trump and america this question. if president trump and senate republicans are so certain the allegations against judge kavanaugh aren't true, why aren't they welcoming the f.b.i. to look into it? leader mcconnell, you spent five minutes pointing your finger at democrats. that shows someone who is in a pickle. that shows someone who has dug in a deep hole. if you really believed these allegations are part of a despicable smear job, leader mcconnell, why don't you call for an f.b.i. investigation? what are you afraid of? what are you hiding? what is judge kavanaugh hiding? nobody knows, but people who want the truth will find a truth

teller. people who don't want the truth will run away from a truth teller and instead point fingers of accusation and wild, untethered allegations. that's what leader mcconnell is doing. it's not a great moment. i know he prizes his role as ramming through these right-wing justices. that's part of his legacy. i don't think america will see it that way a few years from now when we see their rulings. there will be huge backlash if kavanaugh should get on the court and they should rule the way they have ruled in the past. but that is not the search for truth. that is the search for a russia job to avoid the truth. it should not happen. think about it. the white house is blocking an impartial investigation of dr. ford's allegation. chairman grassley is setting arbitrary deadlines for dr. ford to testify, dictating the terms

of her appearance, denying her and the minority the right to call other witnesses, which always happens at hearings, including an alleged eyewitness. there was someone in the room. by press reports, he's backing up kavanaugh. why are they afraid to have him testify? or at least he is saying he doesn't remember. we're hearing chairman grassley now wants to bring in outside counsel to conduct the questioning as if dr. ford were on trial, as if republicans are afraid to question dr. ford. this is so unusual, but it shows a fear on the part of our republican friends that something bad and truthful will come out. madam president, chairman grassley and leader mcconnell -- if chairman grassley and leader mcconnell continue down this road, we are heading for a hearing that is

far from what a serious fact-finding inquiry should look like, far from respectful to dr. given the circumstances, the american people should ask, particularly those who support judge kavanaugh, they should ask who is more credible. dr. ford -- the american people should ask who is more credible, dr. ford who wants the f.b.i. to investigate her allegation because she is confident it will corroborate her account, or our republican friends who are running away from any objective fact finding and truth. remember, it's dr. ford who not only wants the f.b.i. to look into this, she took a volunteer lie detector test, and she knew she was inviting harassment and ridicule and abuse for coming forward.

she has gotten death threats. she has had to move out of her house. she feared her life would be upended, and it is. she still had the courage to do this. we certainly owe her some dignity and a fair hearing, not the kind of rushed, almost kangaroo court-style hearing where the members on the republican side are afraid to even ask her questions and confront her while they are say things behind her back. who is more credible? is it dr. ford who is willing to submit to all this or republicans in the white house who are stonewalling an f.b.i. investigation into the facts? who are refusing to call other witnesses to dr. ford's hearing, including the alleged eye witness, republicans or democrats? it's an easy, easy answer to all of these. so when leader mcconnell rails

and rants about democrats, he is setting up a straw man, he is afraid of what might come out, what the truth is, it seems to me. we have heard judge kavanaugh's defenders say this happened 36 years ago, it shouldn't matter. we have heard new tortured formulations of that shop-worn excuse boys will be boys. now, i don't agree with any of those voices, any of those excuses, but let me address those who think that, the people who think this was a long time ago. boys did this. let's not hold someone 30 years later accountable for it or let's not at least stop his advancement in his career. one obvious answer is the supreme court. but i would ask those who believe that kavanaugh is not being treated fairly to examine one more point, his credibility. whether you think what happened 36 years ago is enough to -- to

remove him from consideration of the supreme court as i do or whether you don't, credibility of a supreme court nominee is extremely important. judge kavanaugh has unequivocally denied this. he didn't say like, mr. judge, i can't remember. maybe i had too many to drink. my recollection isn't great. he unequivocally denied it. and this comes on top of the fact that judge kavanaugh's testimony had real issues of credibility. is judge kavanaugh again denying the truth because his confirmation to the united states court hangs in the balance? the credibility of judge kavanaugh, his previous testimony, given how he skirted the truth at the very minimum on issues like appointment of

certain judges on torture, on miranda, and now he says this, an unequivocal denial. let's assume that after the testimony of dr. ford, most americans believe her to be true. how would we want to appoint judge kavanaugh because he would have objectly lied if they believe it is true? so there is the issue of credibility, beyond the weight that different people give what happened 30-some-odd years ago. beyond the wait whether people excuse or don't excuse the behavior -- i don't excuse it -- is the issue that looms credibility. is judge kavanaugh the kind of upright, straightforward individual we want on the bench? and do his flirtations with avoiding the truth in his testimony, is that -- is this

just another even worse indication that he does not have the judgment, the moral character, the credibility for a job that requires all three. so in summation, madam president, in the face of multiple allegations against judge kavanaugh, the f.b.i. should reopen the background check investigation, and we should conduct a hearing with the appropriate witnesses -- where the appropriate witnesses are called and respect given to both the accuser and the accused. anything less will be viewed by the american people and i believe judged by history as a stain on republicans in the senate and a stain on the integrity of the magesty of the supreme court. i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session for the en bloc

consideration of the following nominations which the clerk will report. the clerk: nominations, international atomic energy agency, jackie wolcott to be representative. united nations, jackie wolcott of virginia to be representative to the vienna office. the presiding officer: the senator from georgia. mr. isakson: all time is yielded back on both sides and call for a roll call vote. the presiding officer: without objection. is there sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote: the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? if not, the yeas are 75, the nays are 19. the nominations are confirmed. under the previous order, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table en bloc. and the president will be

immediately be notified of the senate's action. the senate will come to order. the clerk will report the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. 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 peter a. feldman to be a commissioner of the consumer product safety commission for the remainder of the term expiring october 26, 2019, signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: which 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 peter a. feldman of the district of columbia to be the commissioner of the consumer product safety commission for the manyder of the term expiring october 26, 2019, shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll.

vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: do any senators in the chamber wish to vote or change their vote? if not, the yeas are 76, the nays are 18. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, consumer product safety commission, peter a. feldman of the district of columbia to be a commissioner.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from south dakota. mr. rounds: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that all

postcloture time on executive calendar 938 be considered expired at 2:15 p.m. on tuesday, september 25. that if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. rounds: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to legislative session for a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. rounds: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of the calendar number 508, h.r. 2259. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 508, h.r. 2259, an act to amend the peace corps act to expand services and benefits for volunteers, and for other purposes. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. rounds: i ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time. the presiding officer: without objection.

mr. rounds: i know of no further debate on the bill. the presiding officer: if there is no further debate, the question is on passage of the bill. all in favor say aye. all opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the bill is passed. mr. rounds: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. rounds: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the consideration of s. res. 643 submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 643, honoring the memory of the victims of the brutal and senseless attack at a country music festival in las vegas, nevada, one year ago. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. rounds: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no

intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. rounds: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the consideration of s. res. 644 submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 644, wrecking the -- recognizing the significant contribution of the country music association, and designating september 25, 2018, country musk association association -- country music association day. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. rounds: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. rounds: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of s. res. 645, submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report.

the clerk: senate resolution 645, designating september, 2018, as national prostate cancer awareness month. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. rounds: i further ask that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. rounds: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10:00 a.m., tuesday, september 25. further, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning business be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed. further, following leader remarks, the senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the feldman nomination under the previous order. and finally, that the senate recess from 12:30 until 2:15 p.m. to allow for weekly caucus meetings. the presiding officer: without

objection. mr. rounds: if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m.e dispensed. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: let me start with a quote, mr. president. i'm going to fight this let me start with a quote,ve mr. president appeared i'm going to fight this nomination with got.

i was the democratic leader on television near hours after judge brett kavanaugh was first nominated to the supreme court. others watch their opposition before he was even named. before they reviewed a of evidence. before they heard a minute of testimony. democrats already made up their mind and chosen their tactics delay, abstract and resist. whatever the truth really was, they were going to do whatever they could to stop this qualified experience and mainstream nominee. democrats have signaled for months they put out whatever performance demanded and throw all the mud, they could

manufacture. it's not like they didn't warn us. even by the far left standard common is shameful, shameful smear campaign has hit a new low. i'll get into the specifics in just a moment. i want to be perfectly clear about what has taken place. senate democrats and their allies are trying to destroy a man's personal and professional life on the basis of decade-old allegations that are unsubstantiated and uncorroborated. but, mr. president, is where we are. this is what the so-called resistance has become. a smear campaign, pure and simple, aided and abetted by

members of the united states senate. eightee weeks ago democrats on e judiciary committee received a letter from dr. christine boughw a ford with a noncooperative allegation of misconduct. she had requested the matter be handled discreetly and confidentially. the responsible next step would have been alerting the full committee so a confidential bipartisan investigation could begin. committee staff what it followed their standard tractors for investigating background information. senators could have questioned judge kavanaugh in their meetings or in closed session for respecting dr. ford's request for confidentiality.

they sat on dr. ford's letter for seven weeks, kept it secret. they did nothing. and then they threw professor ford's wishes overboard and leaked it to the press. our colleague from delaware himself indicated either the ranking member's office for the democratic committee staff likely leaked the document. ..

>> no recollection. no memory of the alleged incident. but there is one not remembering that every single person who was there.

one of those deposed witnesses says she does not even know judge kavanaugh. so all the witnesses doctor ford said route the committeee have told the committee under penalty of that only one - - of felony they do not remember a party or do not remember him or have never seen would do anything remotely, remotely that has been alleged. and this of substantiated statement is at odds from his character from those that work with him dating all the way back to high school. but democrats would not lead if you things like a complete lack of evidence or their

wreak accusers request for confidentiality to get between them and a good. smear it is despicable. and the contrast could not be starker. >> to unequivocally deny the allegations. and the office received statements that they either directly contradicted the story so what's more chairman grassley could be heard in a forum of her own choosing

either here or a california public or private with the staff or with the members. to go above and beyond to accommodate the request. to have a fair and open hearing scheduled and to state her allegations that judge kavanaugh can respond. but the smear campaign does not stop there. according to the reporter of the second allegation to come forward because senate democrats were calling for even further delays that is so

unsupported that the new york times wrote a story about it. the new york times passed on the story entirely after looking into it. this is what the new york times declined to publish. "interviewing people to the attempt to corroborate her story but could find no one, no one with firsthand knowledge. not one person. not one person to support the allegation but more on the record denials against. the times also reported the claimant she herself is uncertain of her claim. that's the new york times.

and you find this last-minute allegation not even fit to prin print. but that doesn't stop the judiciary committee democratsli for shoveling in a smear campaign. there is one secret from republicans with the democratic offices knew of this allegation so the committee could not take proper action. and then a last-minute hit on the nominee.

so as if they did not already announce themselves opposed to the nomination anyway. or whatever it took. whatever the cost. so let's put aside this unsubstantiated smear. let's have a fair hearing h on thursday o and here are the facts that we do have. hundreds of men and women who have known brett kevin all his w life and is a man of strong character. numerous witnesses testify to thee' judiciary committee as a trusted mentor, loyal friend and a champion of women. more than 75 women gathered

for a responsible guy for kindness and respect. and his legal brilliance and excellence on the bench makes them the most qualified supreme court nominees in the history. maybe that's why the democrats are so panicked and they are willing to bring down this nominee. but in the meantime. well receiving death threats. in facing senate democrats who has no presumption of innocence because of the

judicial philosophy. that they will testify under oath before the judiciary committee to make sure the facts will be heard and i want to make it perfectly clear mister president that judge kavanaugh would be here voted on the senate floor up or down. nominated to the supreme court in the senate in the near future. and on an entirely different matter, last week our efforts of appropriations hit another milestone and to fund critical efforts and research as infrastructurevi projects

including care at the va. and with the department of defense and we anticipate the house will take that up this weekon and with other legislation. and to provide long-term stability and the national transportation safety board. it also takes up the infrastructure to boost the army corps of engineers. land continue to process the glorified nominees to serve as us representative. and to the united nations and

all the colleagues to join me to confirm.in now on one s final matter we have welcomed many brave i men and women serving in uniform when they lay down theirf arms as legislators to know the true meaning of service and sacrifice. so they even decided to pull double duty while suffering the slings and arrows here in the senate we have a unique opportunity earlier this month our friends the senator from alaskaps from the us marine corps reserve i spent the last quarter-century as a marine to serve on active duty.

those who serve here with senator sullivan are squared away today his promotion is recognized as a special ceremony here in the capital where senator sullivan's father know the body will join me to congratulate him and think both senator sullivan and colonel sullivan on his service to the nation. >> under the previous order the leadership time is reserved and would be in a period of mourning business senator speaking up to ten minutes each. >> mister president. >> the senator from m utah. >> listing to the majority leader's remarks