[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> the u.s. senate is meeting today to continue debate on president trump's pick for agriculture department general counsel. the confirmation vote scheduled for 12:15 eastern. senators will also vote on limited confirmation debate on the nominee for deputy commerce

secretary. senators will break after the vote for the weekly party lunch meetings and back at 2:15 eastern to continue confirmation debate. the house at 2 eastern, eight bills including a senate passed bill to reauthorize the coast guard through 2019. now to live coverage of the u.s. senate here on c-span2. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. almighty god, awe and wonder grip us as we think about your love, wisdom, and power.

thank you for choosing us to serve you and country. guide us in our work and strengthen us for every challenge. bless our lawmakers. give them the wisdom to make a commitment to integrity. may they refuse to deviate from right paths, seeking always to accomplish your purposes on earth. use them to help those whose hopes are crushed, who live on life's margins with no expectation of better times to come.

remind our senators each day of their accountability to you. may they press on with the duties of this day with hope in their hearts. we pray in your holy name. amen. the president pro tempore: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to our flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

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 and resume consideration of the following nomination which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, department of agriculture, stephen alexander vaden of tennessee to be general counsel.

mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that following the cloture vote on the kelley nomination, the senate recess until 2:15. further, if cloture is invoked, all time during the recess count postcloture on the nomination. the presiding officer: without

objection. mr. mcconnell: the senate returned from our thanksgiving recess and got back to work. since the election earlier this month, there have been plenty of procrastination about -- prognostication about what the new congress will bring, but i would rather focus on the one we're still involved in. this congress has more business to complete before the end of the year. even after two historic years of accomplishments for the american people, there are still important items left to check off our list. yesterday evening, we voted to advance the nomination of stephen vaden, the president's choice to serve as general counsel for the department of agriculture. mr. vaden has strong legal experience, degrees from vanderbilt and yale, and he comes with an upbringing on agriculture. he grew up on his family's farm in union city, tennessee, and according to the tennessee farm

bureau, it shows. as my friend, senator alexander, referenced yesterday, that organization wrote that vaden has a passion for agriculture that can't be taught but that is necessary for the job of general counsel. it's hardly surprising then that this nominee received bipartisan support at the committee level, including the support of the ranking member. what is surprising is the fact that since clearing the committee, mr. vaden's nomination has languished for 351 days, waiting for senate democrats to end their obstruction. long, even by the standards of this congress. so i hope that each of my colleagues will join me in turning the page and voting to confirm vaden later today. following the vaden nomination, we will turn to consideration of karen kelley to serve as deputy secretary of commerce. she is a graduate ofville november. she built a 35-year record of expertise and investment -- in

investment management and strategy. she currently serves as under secretary, a position to which she was unanimously confirmed by the senate and oversees the department's statistical programs through the u.s. census bureau and the bureau of economic analysis. and ms. kelley is already acting in the role to which she has been nominated. through this service, ms. kelley has earned the respect and esteem of her colleagues at the department. secretary ross has said he is thankful to have such a qualified individual fill the position. i hope my colleagues will join me in voting to advance her nomination today with a strong bipartisan vote. as we look over the record of this 115th congress, a number of our biggest accomplishments remain possible with significant bipartisan support. from landmark opioids legislation to major improvements in veterans' medical care and services to our tremendous progress on appropriations and a lot more. our remaining work will require more of that bipartisan spirit

when it comes to closing out appropriations confirming more nominees and other subjects as well, so let's continue the momentum and keep moving forward. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. leahy: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. leahy: i ask consent that the call of the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. leahy: mr. president, this friday, november 30, at noon, vermonters will be gathering to see a large crane carefully hoist a carved statue of the god he is of agriculture atop the newly gilded dome of the vermont statehouse in montpelier. i was born in montpelier, and i am proud of this because it is going to be a great moment for our state, for everyone involved in the project which has captured not only the attention

of vermonters but those who have been following the project from great distances with the help of social media. the new version of this statue replaces the original statue that was removed last april after too many severe vermont weather took a toll on the wood figure. since that time, vermont artists jerry williams and chris miller have been hard at work creating the new siris. they chiseled the final mahogany figure. marcelle and i and my sister mary had the pleasure of visiting the vermont granite museum a few months back to witness mr. miller at work. i'm the grandson of two stone carvers. one, my grandfather, immigrated

to vermont from italy. and so, it was a thrill to see how mr. miller used the original tools of the trade. he took raw wood and he turned it into the fine details we now see from the flowing robes to the distinctive veins in her hands. it was really remarkable to see this hunk of wood turn into a real person. now, both artists learned their techniques by studying in the studio of stone carvers, a special art that requires intense dedication, patience, skill, and practice. we're so fort national that artists such as these carry on tradition that make vermonters proud. it reminds me of a time as a

child when i'd go in and watch stone carvers at work where my father was born in berry, and watch them turn stone into pieces of pure art. here they're turning wood into an incident, and the reason they're -- it's being made out of wood instead of stone for the substitute -- statue is that wood would weigh less. i grew up from the vermont statehouse. ceres was always in our sights -- walking to school, coming back from school, being out with my brother and sister, my parents. we'd always see ceres. she is a strong figure, one that's befit to the state where hard work is so closely linked to our lives.

in the last few months, every time i'm home in vermont, i go by the statehouse and i see without ceres it's been odd because that's always been part of my life. so this vermonter, vermonters like my wife marcelle, and others are going to be glad to have her back. so i'd ask consent that a november 10 article from the "berry vermont artist" profiling these two consul p terse be entered into the record it is -- two consul sculptors be entered into the record at the end of my remarks. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. leahy: i'd suggest the absence of the army. -- i'd suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call: mr. cornyn: mr. president? the presiding officer: majority whip. mr. cornyn: i'd ask consent the

quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: mr. president, next friday marks an important deadline in funding the federal government. while we've been effective in passing appropriations bills that have funded 75% or so of the government, there's still a small but important portion left to be negotiated before we break for christmas. and part of the debate will be how we go about securing our border, especially as recently several large caravans of men, women, and children have left their homes in central america and made the long, dangerous trek to the united states via mexico. the truth is that the caravans occur on a daily basis. of course, most of that hadn't penetrated the consciousness of the american people because it took thousands of people enmass in a big caravan to actually get their attention and get the attention particularly of the

president of the united states. but i bet it would surprise most senators and most members of the house to know that in 2017 alone, there were -- excuse me -- 396, 396,000 people detained at our southern border, almost 400,000 people. so this -- these caravans, whether they're the large massive caravan like we see in tiawana or the mini caravans that occur daily in places like the mcallen sector for the border patrol, this is a big and important issue. but funding is only one piece of the puzzle when it comes to border security and the migrant crisis. i would like to say that i was encouraged by a story that i saw in "the washington post" dated november 24 entitled "deal with mexico paves way for asylum

overhaul at u.s. border." this article goes on to talk about a policy of mexico where the mexican government has actually provided work permits and offered asylum to central american cans transiting mexico. some of them have taken the government of mexico up on those, but many of them want to come to the united states understandably and the problem is how to deal with these large number of asylum seekers. and this development, if it proved to be accurate, i think represents an impressive change in policy on the part of the government of mexico in a very constructive sort of way. i want to congratulate secretary nielsen, the secretary of homeland security and secretary pompeo and the entire trump administration for undertaking this delicate and difficult negotiation, because this really represents a change in the way

the government of mexico regards the migrant crisis. in other words, it's not just our problem, they regard it as part of the solution to this challenge. but the truth is, we can't look at this issue like we're looking through a soda straw. i had reporters yesterday ask me, what about what's happening at the bridge in tiawana as if that was the whole story. we can't narrowly focus on just one part and refuse to see the full picture. and that's what i want to talk about here briefly. we won't secure our borders. we won't solve the migrant crisis or improve our asylum system by simplistically looking at the problem. we need to look at this as symptoms of a far more serious problem. this is especially true as the issue of migrants illegally crossing or borders is not new. it's been happening for a long time. it's only recently that there has been no new net migration

from mexico because of improved economic conditions there, and we've seen the flood of people coming up from noncontiguous countries like those in central america. but of course it started with the softening of our borders and the disregard of our nation's immigration laws, and it's continued with the rise of crime and corruption across-countries in central america. we need to secure our borders to be sure. you would not think that would be a controversial statement, but apparently some of our colleagues view our efforts to secure our borders with ridicule. they act as though this is not a problem, that this was something all about the midterm elections. well, the midterm elections have past. the problem persists and we need to do something about it. we do need to partner with mexico, as i mentioned a moment ago, but also the central

american governments to fight against the cartels and gangs that are terrorizing these countries and affecting ours in such a negative way, in a way that will help address this little migrant crisis that we're seeing symptoms of on the ports of entry in tiawana, for example. in tiawana about 5,000 immigrants have made their way there and more are on the way. the truth is every time someone successfully penetrates our border by exploiting gaps in our immigration law or by illegally entering the united states, it'sen encouragement for -- it's an encouragement for more people to do exactly the same. and anybody who thinks a caravan of 5,000 migrants coming from central america is the last caravan that will attempt to penetrate our borders is engaged in a flight of fantasy because human nature ought to tell us that if it's successful, there are going to be more right behind them.

so we need to deal with this. we need to deal with the crisis, what the tiawana mayor has called a humanitarian crisis. that reminds me of what president obama called the crisis of unaccompanied minors coming from central america a few years ago when he was president. he called it a humanitarian crisis as well. and we need to work together to try to solve it. we know that this group of migrants isn't entirely made up of innocent asylum seekers fleeing poverty or violence in their home countries. truth is, we haven't really been able to vet the people in the caravan, and that, of course, is one of the goals of our legal immigration system, being able to look at people as individuals and determine, do you have a criminal record? have you been deported previously for illegally entering the united states? so it is true, i'm confident, that this mass of people does include people like criminals

and other migrants who intend to exploit gaps in our immigration laws and some who have already been deported one or more times from the united states for violating our immigration laws. i believe the united states is the most generous country in the world when it comes to legal immigration. we naturalize almost a million people a year and we're the better for it. we've always considered ourselves a nation of immigrants but not uncontrolled illegal immigration. that's a recipe for chaos and danger. we are also -- we have always been a nation that believed that some order and the rule of law was important when it came to naturalizing people and becoming part of the great american people and we always provided refuge for those who fled their countries based on persecution because of their religion or their race or political

orientation or their nationality or because they belonged to a particular group. we expect those who enter our country to respect our sovereignty and the rules and laws of the united states government. there is a process for coming into the country legally, and that is the process that should be followed here. i might say when a mob of migrants tries to break through the border barriers in tiawana, it is fundamentally in addition to everything else i've said, fundamentally unfair to people who've stood in line and tried to enter the country legally and waited their turn, to break to the head of the line and try to enter by force. unfortunately, there are organizations who exploit our generosity and use our borders as a transit corridor for all sorts of illegal activity, including drugs and human

trafficking. and believe me, if you look at the trial that's occurring in manhattan today, al chopo, you can learn a bit about the complex, big lucrative business that being head of a drug cartel entails. unfortunately, transnational criminal organizations, another word for cartels, have overrun some of the legitimate governments in central america and it's no wonder that people are fleeing. and therein lies the root of the current problem. the cartels and the gangs have figured out that it's quite lucrative to traffic migrants to the united states based on what i've read, it's maybe $6,000 to $8,000 to pay a drug cartel, one of these transnational criminal organizations, to transport a person from central america to the united states.

that's a pretty good lucrative business. unfortunately, it's illegal and dangerous, too. but this is exactly the same business model that's used to transport drugs into the united states. last year, according to the center for disease control, 72,000 americans died of drug overdoses in the united states. 72,000. about 50,000 of those were opioid-related. some of those were fentanyl, a synthetic opioid. some of those were prescription opioids. but a significant portion of it was heroin, and 90% of the heroin that makes its way into the united states comes from mexico. this is the dirty business of the cartels, these transnational criminal organizations. trafficking migrants and children and women for sex and illegal drugs, they are commod

di agnostic -- commodity ag nossic. whatever will make them money, they will engage no matter how cruel, how dangerous. they have no morality whatsoever and no regard for life at all. the cartels know that we are a generous country, and they take full advantage of the gaps in our border security and immigration laws. and as long as we fail to address these issue, we are complicit in making these cartels richer and by our own inaction, we are facilitating their illegal and dangerous enterprise. so this is not just a problem about illegal immigration or drugs or smuggling. it's about all of these issues combined. and it starts with the rein of the cartels and gangs in countries like mexico and

central america. gangs like ms-13 and bore crow-18 in central america that threaten the stability of the people who live in those countries. they fill an endless circle of supply and demand and separate in a vacuum of power and impunity. but their terror does not stop at their border or at our border. like the mob we've seen on tv, they're crashing through borders and threatening our border communities. they are interrupting legitimate trade and commerce through the ports of entry. we saw that the port at san accede -- san acedro was shot done because they couldn't control the mob and conduct legitimate trade and traffic at the same time. and so it has a very real prospect of threatening to disrupt not only the u.s. economy and jobs but that of our mexican colleagues as well.

i think that is part of what has gotten the government of mexico's attention because their lifeblood is trade with the united states. and if that is prevented because of the mobs of people coming across trying to break through barricades and entering our country illegally, then that threatens that lifeblood and their economy. my home state of texas shares a 1,200-mile common border with mexico and about a 40% of my constituents are of hispanic origin. the communities along the texas border are vibrant and they rely upon the millions of dollars of legitimate trade that pours through those ports of entry. texas is home to 29 air, land, and seaports of entry. that's more than any other state in the nation. and about half of the u.s.-mexico trade moves through a texas port of entry. but as the volume of commerce

crosses our border has tripled in the last 25 years, customs and border protection has struggled to keep up with the staffing needs. the infrastructure is old and is being exploited, too, by particularly drug traffickers who move their high-value cargo through the ports of intrai. texans who live and work in those regions know they can't afford the cartel's continued exploitation of our flawed system, so we need to look at how we can address the thousands of migrants looking to cross our borders and the cartels who explore it are lost while still protecting legitimate trade and travel. any solution we find must try to strike a balance between compassion for the migrants and respect for the rule of law and fundamental fairness to those who have -- are doing it the right way. i've taken, of course, numerous trips to the border to meet with

the board patrol and heard from many of them on this issue. when migrant caravans cross our borders, customs and border protection not only have to deal with this massive humanitarian crisis, but they have to ensure that the cartels can't take advantage of opportunities opened up by the fact that border patrol is now consumed with trying to process children and families through the ports of entry in accordance with u.s. law. the cartels know that and they take every advantage by trying to take -- by moving their drugs through the ports of entry or through -- between the ports of entry because they know the birth border patrol is otherwise occupied with paperwork and other distractions. we need to work more closely with our allies in next and central america to keep commerce

alive, which as i said is the lifeblood of the economy. by helping in central america, we can begin to address the root problems that have forced many to flee. at the same time we need to secure our borders and protect free trade. as i said, if our ports of entry are clogged with thousands of migrants, legitimate trade comes to a standstill. that not only hurts our economy, particularly in border communities along the u.s.-texas border, but also our southern neighbor in mexico. the fact of the matter is the united states cannot alone bear the burden of this mass migration. we need our partners in central america and mexico to work with us to find solutions for these migrants, which is another reason why i was encouraged by the article i mentioned in "the washington post" talking about the remain in mexico program as one way to begin to address some piece of this migrant crisis.

my friend, henry quexar, who represents border communities in south texas, likes to say we should focus back on pushing back our borders. i think that's right. border security ends at our borders but it starts in central america and mexico. this week, incoming president of mexico lopez oberdur will be sworn in. i hope to be at that inauguration on saturday, december 1, in mexico city. soon to be president oberdur has said he is committed to dealing with the violence in mexico brought about by the cartels and gangs, and i know the united states shares a commitment also to working with this new government in helping to reduce that violence. our two governments should

continue to work closer together because our interests are alive. both of our countries want security, and we want the prosperity that comes from legitimate trade. both of our countries want to see a decrease in the cartel and gang violence. our relationship should -- is an important one, and it must continue to be nurtured and evolve because the gangs and the cartels surely will continue to adapt. by partnering with governments in central america and mexico, we can help those countries bolster their economies and provide security for their people and restore the relationship between their communities and law enforcement to one that's built on trust so their people can feel safe again in their homes. i stand ready, mr. president, to work with others on this issue, but neither i nor my republican colleagues can do it alone. this will take a full bipartisan effort. and it's going to take a more serious approach than i have

seen in some press accounts where people want to focus as if with a soda straw on one narrow aspect of the problem when it's much more complex and much more dangerous than that. so i would invite all of our colleagues to join us in enforcing our laws and securing our borders and protecting our economy by securing free and fair trade. those who say by enforcing our laws that you were somehow anti-immigrant are engaged in a slanderous lie. it's just simply not true. immigrants who come to the united states legally, who have waited patiently in line deserve the respect and deserve the reward of their complying with the laws on the books. to suggest that somebody who jumps to the head of the line and violates our laws who has no

respect for our safety and security of our border communities, who wants to facilitate the business model that the cartels have by moving poisons -- poisonous drugs or migrants or employment or traffic and children and women for sex, they have no regard for our border communities and for the rule of law or for those migrants who come to the united states legally and appropriately. this is not a one-time crisis. you can't be against human trafficking but for allowing migrants to be used as human commodities and freely enter our country illegally. it's the same people bringing them into the country. you can't be against the opioid and drug addiction crisis, but for allowing the cartels to exploit our borders by exporting their poison. you can't sit back and say you want to help migrants fleeing

their countries but not engage in bipartisan solutions. you simply can't have it both ways. so i hope this humanitarian crisis, as the mayor of tijuana is calling it and as president obama called it a few years ago when we saw this flood of unaccompanied minors coming across our borders from central america, i hope we will take another look at this and deal with it with the seriousness and the gravity that it deserves. i look forward to working with my colleagues, both in the house and the senate as well as the administration and our partners in central america and mexico to find solutions that address the migrant crisis without abandoning the rule of law or opening our borders or encouraging others to ignore our immigration laws. mr. president, i yield the floor.

mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the minority leader. mr. schumer: are we in a quorum? the presiding officer: we are not. mr. schumer: thank you, mr. president. now, first, i'd like to talk about the unfortunate news we heard from general motors. yesterday, general motors announced it was closing five factories and laying off 15,000 workers. the news is a gut punch, a gut punch to workers in ohio and michigan and maryland. our hearts go out to them and their families. many of these people have labored for decades. many of their families have worked at g.m. i know this from our g.m. plants in new york. and to lose your job when you put so much into it. you wake up in the morning and say my job is to make the best car possible. a gut punch or worse. we need to do more, a lot more to encourage investments in american jobs, in american infrastructure, to bring back manufacturing.

what we don't need is more rhetoric from the president who has made a whole lot of promises but unfortunately failed to deliver for these workers. here is what president trump said last year about manufacturing jobs in ohio. quote -- they're all coming back. don't move. don't sell your house. we're going to fill up those factories. we're going to fill those factories up or rip them down and build new ones, unquote. here is what else he said -- if i'm elected, you won't lose one plant. you're going to have jobs again. you won't lose one plant. i promise you that. president trump promised people in the campaign we would not lose one plant. a lot of people voted for him for that reason. guess where he said we won't lose one plant. guess where president trump promised the people we won't lose one auto plant? warren, michigan. that is where one of the plants is now slated to close. the words are a painful reminder

of just how bankrupt many of president trump's promises turn out to be. remember carrier. the president swept into office promising that carrier would stay open thanks to him. he did a big rally. six months later, carrier laid off hundreds of workers in indiana and moved their positions to mexico. this is what the president does. big, bold, impossible promises without much care for the results. instead of overpromising, the president should roll up his sleeves, work with g.m. to prevent them from cutting the jobs. the american taxpayer has supported g.m. through tough times. last year, the republicans handed g.m. a windfall of $150 million in their tax bill. g.m. could bring back money from overseas. they said they would do it, and

employ people. they are bringing back money from overseas, but they are not employing people. that's what american companies are doing. g.m. pocketed the tax break we gave them and are closing up shop anyway with a nary word from the president until the facts. i see my friend from illinois here. we democrats believe you don't give big tax breaks to big companies unless they do something for their workers. not stock buybacks, but employ people, train people. pay them a good wage. give family leave. the president gives corporate america wealthy big corporations just what they wish but does nothing to protect workers except talk a lot. so i would say to my friends in new york state and throughout the midwest and throughout america, working families, the kind of people i came from, when are you going to understand that

this man sells you a bill of goods, that this president talks a good game but never delivers on his promises? that's what americans and working americans in particular should understand about president trump. the awful closings yesterday are terrible. they're a sad symbol of a president who has failed the american working people and given them a lot of hot air and no real gains. corporate america, the wealthy, they are doing great. working people, average americans, people who sweat, nothing. losing jobs. we need more from this congress than another tax cut for the wealthy, and the american worker needs more from president trump and empty rhetoric. just yesterday, he says well,

there will be new plants. how many people are going to believe that? he has been saying that for two years. climate. last week, the trump administration released an important report on climate change warning of dire consequences by 2050 -- devastating storms, hundreds of billions of dollars of damage, a massive drain on the economy. the fact that this administration released the report on black friday is wrong. it's an obvious attempt to bury the findings. but guess what, mr. president and the administration? those findings, even though you released them on the friday after thanksgiving, they are not buried. they're on the front page of every newspaper. and, of course, while his own administration issued a very strong report on climate change, his own administration o'he says i don't believe it.

i've said it before and i i'll y it again. president trump and the republican party are like ostriches when it comes to climate change -- burying their heads in the sand as the world changes and as more and more of america and american workers are put in danger. now, the trump administration itself has reported on how devastating the costs of their policies will be for future generations of americans. and this report is going to live day after day, month after month, year after year. this is not a one-day story. this is conclusive evidence by the president's own administration of how bad climate change will be for incomes, for families, for workers, for farmers, for cities can't run away from it anymore. it's about time they faced the reality and worked with us to do

something before it's too late. but this report will be in the news again and again and again. it will serve -- it will bolster those who are going to court to prevent the administration from undoing many of the things the previous administration did on climate change. it is a turning point, a very significant turning point, in the war -- which it is -- to keep our globe from getting far too hot for everybody's comfort. now, on mr. farr -- the pending judicial nomination of thomas farr for a seat in the even district of north carolina. in his legal career, mr. farr has repeatedly defended efforts by north carolina's republicans to undermine voting rights generally and disenfranchise african american voters specifically. this man was chief cook and

bottle washer of the state that probably did more to prevent people and particularly minorities from voting than any other state. so bad that the discriminatory congressional maps drawn by the republican legislature, which mr. farr defended, were struck down by the very conservative supreme court. mr. farr defended north carolina's absurdly restrictive voter i.d. law, also passed by the conservative republican state legislature, and they tailored the their election laws to disadvantage african american voters after requesting race-specific data on voting practices. the law was one of five changes to registration and voting, all of which -- all of which disproportionately affected african americans. that wasn't a coincidence. that was designed. mr. farr called the provisions,

which a federal judge said targeted african americans with surgical precision, a minor inconvenience. and, finally, farr was a lawyer for the reelection campaign of jesse helms, senator helms, and may well have had pre-knowledge of a mailer sent over-wellcomeing to -- overwhelmingly to black voters with the purpose of intimidating them from voting. partisanship should not matter in this debate. voting rights is sacred. it is part of our soil on which the tree of democracy is nurtured. and it shouldn't be a democratic issue or a republican issue. taking away the voting rights of americans, of whatever race, creed, or color, of whatever party, of whatever region, is a despicable act. it cuts against the very thing that generations of soldiers have died for -- the right of democracy, the right to vote.

every senator here, including our republican friends, should be disturbed that mr. farr has been involved, often directly, in multiple attempts to disenfranchise minority voters. what sticks in the craw is we're voting on mr. farr only because republican senators, when we democrats, when we were in the majority, still respected the blue slip, and they blocked two nominees, both african american, both women, to represent a jurisdiction that's 27% african american and doesn't have a single african american judge, even though a quarter of the people are african american. i don't care what the ideology is here. and then, adding insult to injury, putting on the bench someone who would disenfranchise people, particularly people of color. it's a disgrace. this morning i called stacey

abrams and andrew gillum, both of whom were hurt by attempts to limit voting rights, and they issued the following statement together. quote, when it comes to the trifecta of voter disenchan friesment, voter suppression, racial gerrymandering and restriction of voting rights, thomas farr sadly is one of the most experienced lawyers in the country. farr's record of hostility for civil rights disqualifies him-to-him for a lifetime appointment to h. that will allow him to codify his ideology into law. i couldn't agree more. i urge my republican colleagues to see the better part of reason, to let, as abraham lincoln said -- we all know what it did -- let the better angels of their nature appeal to them, not just the political machine that says this guy helped us get elected, even if he took away voting rights, people, let's put

him in. the great chief justice john roberts allowed a lot of this to happen when he authored the shelby -- which took away -- the shelby decision which took away protections. he said there wasn't much discrimination anymore. clearly there is. 19 states have rolled back voting rights since shelby. mr. roberts tries to portray himself as a middle-of-the-road call the balls or strikes person. he's very far from that. that's why people see the sorts as so political. one final point, and i apologize to my completion who are waiting here -- to my colleagues who are waiting here. and it will be a brief point, when i can find it. yeah, right-wing violence. i want to comment on the report by "the washington post" yesterday on extremist violence. the report found that, quote, over the past decades, attackers

motivated by right-wing political ideologies have committed dozens of shootings, bomb, and other acts of violence. this is their language -- far more than any other category of domestic extremists. we all abhor violence, whatever it's origin. i've spoken out against it. but the conclusions of this report should put an end to the republican fearmongering -- president trump's fearmongering about the so-called democratic mobs -- democratic mobs. the hard questions need not to be put first to democrats. hard questions need to be asked of president trump. there is a question that looms -- is president trump's rhetoric -- is his rhetoric -- encouraging right-wing violence that we've seen in the past few years, the number-one cause of domestic violence? that question needs to be answered. i yield the floor.

mr. durbin: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from illinois. mr. durbin: mr. president, ron cher now is well-known as an historian and prolific writer who has written biographies of some of the most amazing people who lived in our country. one, of course, the founding father george washington. another, which received acclaim, even on broadway in new york, a well-known biography of alexander hamilton, which inspired mr. miranda to write a musical, which was probably the most successful musical of our time. but mr. chernow has also written another book which i am making my way through carefully, the biography of ulysses grant. it is about 900 pages long. which is a heavy book to carry from one living space to another as a u.s. senator. but well worth the effort. it tells the story of this man who came to lead the union army to victory in the civil war and

ultimately to become president of the united states. and as i've read this biography of ulysses s. grant, i couldn't be help but be struck by the fact that one issue emerged after the civil war, which was probably one of the most challenging of all. it was the issue about the right of african americans to vote in the south after the civil war. the so-called period of reconstruction. i also commend to those who are interested in the issue this book by carol anderson entitled "one person, no vote." carol anderson is a professor at university of georgia, she also wrote another book entitled "write rage. requestings "but this book "one person, no vote" describes efforts at voter suppression and their impact on our democracy. professor anderson was kind enough to ask me to write the

forward to this book. i was happy to read this book because it went into detail about what happened after the end of the civil war when african americans were legally and constitutionally declared to be citizens of the united states and then set out to exercise their right to vote. initially there was some success, but over time the white populations in the south started suppressing that right to vote, passing laws that demand literacy tests of those who would show up to vote, constitutional tests, poll taxes and the like. and over time it dramatically diminished the african vote in the south and that diminishment led many blacks to pick up and leave in the great migration north. their departure to the north was to benefits of states like illinois, where many thousands of them came to find work and the opportunity to exercise

their freedom. how important is this right to vote in well, in the words of john roberts, the chief justice of the supreme court, in 2005, he said the right to vote is preservative of all other rights. preservative of all other rights. that fundamental to our democracy that we allow those who are eligible to step forward and to express their will when an election is called and to choose the candidates of their choice. over the period of time after the end of the civil war, there were extraordinary efforts taken to suppress the right of african americans to vote. i say with some embarrassment but in reality, those were largely promulgated by people who described themselves as democrats in those days. they were the ones large lay in control of the political -- largely in control of the political infrastructure of the south who did their best to limit the right of blacks to participate. one of the areas -- or one of

the note worth events this this history -- north worthy events in this occurred in mississippi when they passed the mississippi plan, in carol anderson's words, a dizzying ah.h. ray of newfangled voter registration rules and good character clauses, all intentionally racially discriminatory but dressed up in the genteel garb of bringing integrity to the voting booth. this famed legal innocence was legislative evil genius. she goes on to explain how this so-called mississippi plan became a template for other southern states to try to find ways to pass local and state laws making it increasingly difficult for individuals to vote particularly african americans and people who did not have great wealth. it was a success for many years, and the participation of black voters did i minored dramatically as a result of it.

-- diminished dramatically as a result of it. i know it sound like a history moment. we are facing this issue again in a vote we will face this week in the united states senate. there is a nominee for the eastern federal -- federal court in the eastern district of north carolina named thomas farr. mr. farr's participation in voter suppression is well-documented. in fact, the congressional black caucus has described mr. farr as, i quote, the preeminent attorney for north carolina republicans seeking to curtail the voting rights of people of color. mr. farr worked as legal counsel for the 1990 campaign of nor jesse helms. that campaign engaged in well-documented, deeply disturbing tactics aimed at suppressing the black vote in north carolina. as an example, the helms campaign sent out over 100,000 postcards to mainly african

american voters warning that they might be ineligible to vote for residency reasons. the postcards from the helms campaign, which mr. farr worked on as legal counsel, warn that the black recipients might be arrested for voter fraud if they came to the polls to vote. now, mr. farr initially told the judiciary committee on which i serve that he did not participate in any campaign meetings in which this mailing was discussed. however, news reports then indicated that mr. farr did in fact participate in an october 1990 meeting that included discussion about the very mailing which i have described, the challenged voters -- that challenged voters' residency. mr. farr, this nominee for for a lifetime appointment to the federal court in north carolina, later admitted participating. he told the raleigh news and

other observer in 2009 that mr. farr was involved in the scheme as it was being developed, end of quote. mr. farr also represented north carolina in litigation over a notorious voter suppression law that the fourth circuit struck down in 2016. so his experience in this earlier helms campaign was not confined when it came to voter suppression. by 2016, he was at it again. the fourth circuit found that the law which mr. farr represented in the court had, quote, targeted african americans with almost surgical precision and that the legislature had, quote, enacted the law with discriminatory intent. mr. president, that was the very law that mr. farr defended before the court. this man who now seeks this lifetime appointment to the federal bench has not just a

history, but a pattern of voter suppression. this phrase that the law that he was defending targeted african americans with almost surgical precision has probably been repeated more than any i can remember in recent memory. additionally, mr. farr represented north carolina in litigation related to racial gerrymandering in violations of the naft voter registration act. it is particularly troubling that mr. farr has been nominated for a judgeship that, as the minority leader mentioned earlier, was denied during the obama administration when they submitted two african american nominees. the republican senators from north carolina kept the seat vacant, would not allow an african american to fill it -- president obama tried twice. they objected to the nominees. republicans held this seat vacant for years clearly with the intention to fill it with

someone like mr. farr. let me quote what the reverend william j. barber ii, a prominent civil rights leader in north carolina, wrote about thomas farr in tiem -- "time" magazine recently. i know far farr. i know what he stands for and how detrimental he will be to his constituents if confirmed. there are many conservatives in north carolina who can serve as federal judge who do not have the blemished record of advocacy for voter suppression which mr. farr brings to this senate. as reverend barber wrote in "time" magazine, and i quote, being a conservative is not the same thing as spending 40 years fighting to block full citizenship for all americans. given his decades-long history of supporting and defending

efforts for this right to vote i must oppose mr. farr's nomination. i must ask in this moment in time in the twenty first century as we still battle over the issues that divided this nation in a civil war, why would this senate stand and give mr. thomas farr a lifetime appointment to the federal bench in north carolina? what does that say about the majority in the senate, that we would give this man with his personal history and vote suppression this opportunity? the reality is this, and it's a grim reality. i believe the republican party has decided that demographics are not on their side, that the emerging minorities in the united states of america are not likely to vote their way. and so they have embarked on a national program to limit the rights of people to vote, a national program which i find disgusting. to think that the koch brothers

financed alec, the american legislative exchange and alec promulgates these state laws in an effort to continue to suppress the vote, carries on a sad and despicable tradition. back in the 19th century and the early part of the 20th century, it was the democratic party which i belong to, which unfortunately was the home for many of this, these bigots and many efforts of voter suppression. today sadly it is the republican party, the party of abraham lincoln, which is trying to suppress the vote of african americans with many overt and covert efforts. the appointment of thomas farr to fill this vacancy is as overt as could be. we know who he is, we know what he believes, we know what he stands for. and we know if he is given this lifetime appointment on the federal bench, he is likely to continue his lifetime history of trying to deny votes to those

who are african americans. this chamber that i stand in with some awe every time i enter it became the senate legislative chamber in january of 1859, even before the civil war began. it witnessed not only the departure of the southern senators who were loyal to the confederacy, it witnessed even union soldiers coming in and camping out here at times during the conflict when they needed a roof over their heads. it also witnessed the battles over reconstruction when the so-called radical republicans were determined to make sure that african americans would be given a fighting chance in the south. it witnessed the impeachment trial of andrew johnson, and it witnessed many other events that lead us to this moment in time in the year 2018. many of the debates that took place on this floor, many of the sentiments which were

debated back and forth over the decades continue to this day, to our generation, to our time, and to our senate. and when we bring thomas farr for a vote this week in the united states senate, i hope that the party of abraham lincoln, the republican party of the united states, will join democrats in stopping this nomination. can we send a clear message, a bipartisan message from the senate this week that thomas farr and the voter suppression which he's engaged in throughout his life, is as unacceptable today as it was in the dark days after the end of the civil war. that's our responsibility. this senator will be voting no on thomas farr. mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. merkley: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. merkley: the most important words of our constitution are its first three: we the people.

these words that were written in super sized font so that anyone standing across a room would know exactly what the vision of our constitution is all about. government of, by, and for the people, as abraham lincoln put it. not a nation by and for the privileged. not a nation by and for the powerful, but for the people. unfortunately, we see too much today of our government being taken over by the powerful. we see the use of gerrymandering, which is totally corrupted the distribution of power in the house of representatives just down that hallway. we see the use of voter suppression in state after state. my colleague from illinois just pointed out the man up to be a judge here in the united states of america was a key advocate, a key participant, a key architect of voter suppression

should deeply trouble every member of this body, because if you believe in the vision of our constitution, you would be a full-on advocate for voter empowerment, not voter suppression. you see this playing out in all kinds of different policies. we see it playing out in 2017 when the powerful drove through this body $1.5 trillion theft of federal resources and distributed it to the richest americans. that's what happens in corrupt countries far overseas. but it happened right here, right in this chamber, a theft of $1.5 trillion out of our treasury distributed through that tax bill to the richest americans. i can tell you after having done

360 town halls in my home state, 220 of them in very red counties, no one's ever come up to me, not from the left, not from the right, not from the center and said i have a great idea. let's raid the federal treasury and distribute it to the richest people among us. yet that's what we see with government by and for the powerful, as demonstrated right now here in this u.s. senate and the house of representatives down the hall. i'll tell you where else we see it. we see it in the neglect of our responsibility to care for our beautiful blue-green planet. all across the land we're seeing a devastating consequences of carbon pollution and the heat that it's trapping and the consequences that it's driving. and yet, here in this chamber,

on this most important responsibility, we do absolutely nothing. in fact, we make it worse with the majority serving as simply the implementers of whatever version of fossil fuels, special favor, special interests policy they can possibly think up. more and more for fossil fuels, more and more damage to our country. this certainly is a situation we are in where we are seeing our land pillaged and polluted for profit. now it's a battle we've been waging for many years, but this last week we had a powerful reminder of just how much trouble we're in. just last week, last friday the trump administration released a fourth national climate

assessment and what it has to say is frightening and is shocking. and realize, this is not some environmental group. this is not some left-wing think tank. this is the trump administration releasing this report. this is what it has to say. it says that our climate is changing, that its impacts are being felt all around us because of human activity and the carbon pollution being released into the atmosphere from the burning of fossil fuels. this report was written by 13 federal agencies and it reiterates this point time and time again, and it has the following sentence -- and i quote -- "the earth's climate is changing faster than at any point in the history of modern civilization, primarily as the result of human activities."

this is a statement from the trump administration's 13 agencies that came together to alert us to exactly where we stand. what does it mean in real terms? well, it means we're going to see many more extreme hot days and very far fewer cold days. we're going to see more extreme weather events like the record-breaking heat waves, like the extensive wildfires out west, like the intensified and deadly hurricanes that have been crashing on our shores. and we're going to see the impact in our economy. the report estimates that within our children's lifetime, climate chaos will cost our nation upwards ofhalf a trillion-dollar each year in crop damage, lost labor, extreme weather damage to public infrastructure.

and it will lose another $1 trillion each year in lost wealth from real estate along our coasts, because of rising sea levels and because of the more powerful hurricanes that remind us of michael and harvey and irma and maria the last two years. and we'll see an impact on winter tourism because of lower snowpack in the mountains, which means less skiing, less snowmobiling. back home in oregon when the snow level drops, we see a dramatic drop in snow tourism. we don't just think of it as tourism. we also just think of it as our joy of being able to go and participate in these activities in our beautiful cascade mountains. and of course that smaller snowpack, it means warmer, smaller streams, not too good

for fishing. and it certainly means less water for irrigation. the report, again the trump administration report, estimates that in parts of the midwest farmers will be able to produce h less than 75% of the corn they produce today. a similar impact on soybean yield and corn and soybeans make up the vast majority of the 127 million acres of the midwest agricultural production. that area in fact is one of the most intense areas of agricultural production in the world, responsible for $76 billion in economic activity a year. so when it takes a big hit, the economy of the midwest takes a big hit. and that means a lot of farmers losing their farms. and then we have the health impacts. they are laid out in this

report, again, the trump administration report. and it lays out that there will be an estimated 2,000 additional premature deaths per year from extreme temperatures and unsafe breathing conditions. within our child's lifetime, the report says, chicago could look like phoenix, with up to two months of over 100-degree days. scorching temperatures can make fee nicks practically inhabit able for up to five months of the year. water borne disease as well as ailments related to air contamination from wildfire smoke. this isn't some future challenge, it's a challenge we have today. in both of the last two summers, a good portion of my state was covered by smoke from wildfires and the result was a lot of

people had breathing difficulties, had more intensified breathing difficulties, a good number ending up in the hospital, a lot of asthma was triggered by that smoke. a lot of folks canceled their outdoor activity during the time of year when we value the opportunity to be on the beach or mountains, on the hiking trails, in the lakes. and certainly we saw economic consequences. many of our outdoor concerts and venues, including a festival had to cancel performances. i talked to the owner of a furniture store who said he was impacted because of the smoke smell. and certainly our wine producers were concerned with what that might do to the taste of oregon's fantastic wine, world best, best on the planet pinot

pinotnoir. who will bear the brunt of these health emergencies? is it the powerful and privileged who are driving the policies to keep burning as much fossil fuels as they possibly can to turn their multimillionaires into multibillionaires? no, the powerful and privileged living in their debated communities with their air filtered and air conditioned mansions, they will protect themselves and move to where the impacts are the least. but who will bear the brunt? the young and the old whose immune systems are more susceptible to programs. low-income americans and middle-income americans who can't afford to move to where the consequences are less, whose jobs are most likely to be impacted by the economic consequences of climate chaos.

now, i know that president trump wanted to ignore his own report, and so i put it out on -- and so he put it out on black friday because he figured the day after thanksgiving is the day when the fewest americans will pay attention, and really that's why on the floor right now draw attention to this report, the trump report on the devastating of the consequences of continuing to burn fossil fuels. everything we saw laid out in this national climate assessment from the trump administration was echoed by the international report from the intergovernmental panel on climate change released last month. that report summarized that within the next 12 years -- we're not talking 12 centuries or 12 decades -- 12 years we are going to feel intensified

effects of climate chaos on top of what we already experienced. and that international report, that international governmental climate change was put together by 91 researchers in 41 countries. they summarized we passed the one-degree centigrade warming mark, which is almost two degrees fahrenheit. they said we're well on our way to the two-degree mark, which is catastrophic chaos. if you were in the middle of the fires in oregon or in the middle of the fire in paradyes, california, or in the path of hurricanes maria, irma, or michael, you might say we already have climate chaos, but they are using a term to talk with an amplification of what

we're seeing now. they are ringing a five-alarm fire bell to say this is the moment to wake up. wake up, america. you're a democratic republic. you're supposed to be able to respond to the challenges that come before us, and we have a massive challenge, devastating consequences of carbon pollution. you must stop oning carbon, find a path to change -- stop burning carbon, find a path to change how we operate in transportation, how we operate in generating electricity. address this issue. hold every hearing. summon every scientist, ring every bell, and get to work. that's what these two reports are saying to us. so colleagues, if you're sitting here asleep at the switch, you're not doing your job. if you're sitting here advocating for the fossil fuel industry, you are worse than not

doing your job. you are helping to damage the land across this great nation for all americans. so wake up and get to work. this isn't a democratic issue or a republican issue, blue county or red county. in fact, the biggest impacts are felt in our red counties where the foundation of the economy is farming, fishing, forestry, and every one of those is being impacted by this effect. so we, as representatives in our democratic republic with our we, the people, constitution, it is our job to operate for the people, not for the powerful, not for the privileged. so i am introducing a resolution that recognizes and accepts the findings of these reports, acknowledges the expertise from

91 scientists in 41 countries or 300 scientists in 13 federal agencies, the combined effort of these two reports that says we are in trouble and we must act and we must act in partnership with the world. we need to act here and we need to say to the president of canada, you want to be a climate leader, you are claiming to be a climate leader, why are you tripling the pipeline to the tar sands? we need to say to the leadership of australia, your coral reefs are dying, the great barrier reef has died in the last ten years, why are you doubling down on coal? we lead in to say to japan, don't base your energy future on liquefied natural gas, which is simply another fossil fuel strategy. we need to say to germany, why

do you want this gas pipeline from russia as a foundation for your energy future? let us all be in this together. because if any nation acts by itself, we can't change the course, the big course, the big picture of the damage that carbon pollution is doing. we have to work together, and that means we now pivot and say let us recognize that renewable energy is now the cheapest energy. it's less expensive to generate a kilowatt hour of electricity from renewable energy, from solar wind than it is from fossil fuels. so let's not just realize carbon is doing all of this damage, let's also recognize that the strongest economy will be built on the cheapest energy which is renewable energy. so we have every reason to act. let us remember that we are founded as a we, the people,

vision and let's honor that vision. thank you, mr. president. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from california. a senator: mr. president, a key component of our democracy is access to the ballot. the supreme court acknowledged in reynold v. simms, that the right of sunch is a fundamental matter in pa free -- in a free and democratic society since it is a preservative of other basic civil and political rights. any alleging fringement of the right of citizens to vote must be carefully and meticulously scriewt insidessed. i always -- scrutinized. i always say your voice is your vote, your vote is your voice. and in the mid-term election we saw there were powerful voices

in our country willing to go to incredible lengthses to deny americans their right to vote. it is outrageous that some voters in georgia had to wait four hours to vote and a candidate for governor was the one responsible for overseeing his own election. that native americans and their identities were not accepted and i.d.'s not accepted at polling places in north dakota. that nearly 20% of north carolina early voting locations were closed this year. five years ago in shelby county v. holder, the supreme court gutted the voting rights act. congress is the only body that has the authority to restore and should now thereof be taking steps to restore and strengthen the voting rights act. ms. harris: should be taking steps to expand early voting and automatic voter registration. why? because the more people who can

regularly participate in our democracy, the more our government will be responsive to the people we are elected to represent. and yet instead of congress acting to strengthen access to the ballot, the senate is considering thomas farr for a lifetime appointment to the district court of the eastern district of north carolina. a nominee who has consistently and for decades put limits on the ability of americans to exercise their constitutional right to vote. just look the a the facts. mr. farr defeated and actually defended north carolina's 2013 voting restrictions law, a law that would have required photo i.d.'s which disproportionately impacted black voters. at the same time, they prohibited certain i.d.'s such as student i.d.'s or public employee i.d.'s. this law also reduced same-day

registration and early voting, a law that was so clearly unconstitutional that the fourth circuit described the law as targeting black voters with, quote, almost surgical precision. the fourth circuit went on to call it, quote, the most restrictive voting law north carolina has seen since the era of jim crow. the facts also include that mr. farr represented the north carolina legislature in multiple challenges to its 2011 congressional and legislative redistricting. this was an attempt to draw congressional boundaries in ways that disadvantaged black voters for partisan gain. those maps were later struck down as unconstitutional and racially discriminatory. mr. farr has also repeatedly represented powerful employers against the rights of workers

and customers to be treated equally. for example, he represented a rental car company that allegedly imposed additional requirements on black customers. he also represented a pharmaceutical company against allegations of gender discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation. now, to be clear, attorneys are not charged nor should they be with the views of their clients but when such a significant part of your decade's long record involves defending clients charged with discrimination around defending laws that undermine the right to vote, it is reasonable to question whether that individual can be a fair and impartial judge of similar cases. and mr. farr's public comments raise questions about his judgment as well. for instance, he has compared the decision upholding the

affordable care act to the dred scott decision. now, for a reminder, dred scott, a case that said african americans could not be citizens, plesy, with upheld the constitutionality of segregation. both now universally considered shameful decisions. the idea that a decision upholding the expansion of health care for millions of americans is remotely comparable to these rulings should be utterly offensive to anyone who knows anything about america's history. these are statements of an idealogue, not even someone who understands that their interpretation of these rulings should be something that people will, if they are not careful, rely on. so these are the statements of an idealogue, not an

even-handed, unbias judge. the people of north carolina deserve better. and let's be clear about who many of these people are. more than a quarter of the population covered by the eastern district is black, nearly 27%, yet there has never been a black federal judge serving the eastern district of north carolina in the court's 146-year history. in 2013, president obama nominated jennifer may parker, an assistant united states attorney and chief of the appellate division of the united states attorney's office. and she is black, and she was appointed to this vacancy, a position senator burr had previously recommended her for. but that nomination was blocked. in 2016, president obama nominated patricia timmons

goodson, a justice who served on the north carolina supreme court, who is also black. that nomination was also held up. as a result this is now the longest judicial vacancy in the federal court system. and instead of two highly qualified women, senate republicans want to fill this vacancy with someone who is an anathema to so many of our communities, and in particular communities of color. so i would echo the north carolina naacp which said that, quote, if this nomination is confirmed, it represents an historic insult to justice and to the people of north carolina. now i know there are folks who might consider the odds of stopping this nominee and throwing the towel, but the way i see it, if it's something worth fighting for, it's a

fight worth having. if it's something worth fighting for, it's a fight worth having. and this fight against thomas farr is a fight worth having. because thomas farr is far from what we should accept in a nominee, and i know we can do better and we must do better. i yield the floor.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from south dakota. mr. thune: mr. president, the 115th congress is drawing to a close, and we've accomplished a lot over the past two years. our goal for this congress was simple. make life better for the american people. and a big part of that was

getting the economy going again. after years of economic stagnation under the obama administration, american families were feeling the pinch. growth was sluggish. wages were stagnant, and opportunities were few and far between. for too many families, getting ahead had been replaced by getting by. we were determined to change that, and so we took action. we passed an historic reform of our tax code that put more money in american families' pockets and made it easier for businesses to grow and create jobs and opportunities for american workers. and now we're seeing the results. robust economic growth, the lowest unemployment level in almost 50 years, a record number of job openings, growing wages, near record confidence among small businesses, and the list goes on. in human terms, mr. president,

that means more opportunities for american workers looking to grow and advance. it means more options for americans searching for a job. it means bigger paychecks and better benefits for workers and less worry for families. i'm proud that tax reform is making life better for american families and grateful to senator hatch and our colleagues in the finance committee for the incredible work that they did to get this historic reform through congress. tax reform was our biggest economic achievement this congress, but that's not the only thing that we've done to help american workers. along with the white house we've lifted burdensome regulations and we enacted legislation led by senator enzi and senator alexander to prepare students for the workforce by improving career and technical education programs. we also enacted senator crapo's legislation to give main street lenders relief from burdensome

dodd-frank regulations. on the national security front under the leadership of the late senator mccain and senator inhofe, we have reinvested in our nation's military to ensure that our troops are equipped not only for today's mission but to meet the threats of the future. we passed the largest pay increase for our troops in nearly a decade. and we delivered real reforms for our veterans through the v.a. mission act. this legislation held by senator isakson streamlined the v.a.'s community care programs to help ensure that veterans receive efficient and timely and quality care. once fully implemented it will also expand caregiver assistance to disabled pre-9/11 veterans, an overdue benefit for generations of our heros. we also modernized the veterans benefits administration appeals system to develop a quicker, more responsive system for veterans. on the health care front this congress, we passed the support for patients and communities act

to address the nationwide opioid epidemic. this was the product, a product that contained policies championed by multiple committees and multiple senators, and i'm grateful for all the work that my colleagues did to advance this important initiative. we also repealed obamacare's individual mandate tax which forced patients to buy insurance that they didn't want and couldn't afford. we passed legislation led by senator johnson to give terminally ill patients access to experimental care. and under the leadership of senator hatch, we passed the longest extension of the state children's health insurance program in the program's history. another major achievement this year has been the tremendous number of good judges we've been able to confirm to the federal bench. senator grassley has done an incredible job of moving these judges through the process and presiding over the confirmations of two supreme court justices. the federal bench will be

stronger for many years because of his work. mr. president, senate republicans have accomplished a lot in the 115th congress, and we're excited to get to work in the 116th. our agenda will stay the same, growing our economy and expanding opportunities for american workers and protecting our nation. now there are those who wonder how much congress will be able to accomplish in the next two years. after all, we're facing a divided government. we have a republican president, and the american people voted for a republican majority here in the senate. but they also voted for a democrat majority in the house of representatives. but, mr. president, divided government doesn't have to spell the doom of productivey. over the last 30-plus years some of our greatest legislative accomplishments have been the product of divided government.

the 1986 reagan tax reform, 1996 welfare reform, the balanced budget act of 1997, national security legislation in 2002, the 2012 legislation to help working families by making the bush tax cuts permanent, a major reform of the v.a. in 2014 ; all important bills, all the product of divided government. so, mr. president, i know that it's possible for the republican senate and the democrat house to achieve big things in the 116th congress. and senate republicans are ready to work with our democrat colleagues. now it's up to the democrats to decide whether they want to work with us. democrats have spent a lot of time over the past two years trying to relitigate the last presidential election. but if they want to get anything

done in the 116th congress, they're going to need to move past 2016. tying up the house with partisan investigations of the president or running a presidential campaign from the senate floor is not a good use of anyone's time. we need to focus on the american people's priorities, like helping working families and increasing opportunities for american workers. that's what senate republicans will be focused on in the next congress. and, mr. president, i hope our democrat colleagues will join us. if they are willing to work with us, i know that together we can achieve big things for the american people. 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:

a senator: mr. president. mr. thune: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. the presiding officer: under the previous order, all postcloture time is expired and the question occurs on the nomination. 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 ayes are 53, the nays are 46. the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is

considered made and laid upon the table and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. 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, do hereby bring to a close debate on the nomination of karen dunn kelley of pennsylvania to be deputy secretary of commerce, 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 karen dunn kelley of pennsylvania to be deputy secretary of commerce shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

are there any senators wishing to vote or change their votes? if not, the ayes 62. the nays are 37. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, department of commerce. karen dunn kelly of pennsylvania to be deputy secretary. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate stands in recess until 2:15

we are learning vice president mike pence will join republicans during their meeting. the senate expected to gavel back in at 2:15 eastern to debate more of president trump's nomination. as senate leaders come out to the cameras before returning to the floor, we will bring it to you live on c-span 2. during this break, we are going to take you live to the white house for a press briefing with spokesman sarah sanders, set to start any moment now. we will have live coverage when it gets under way. while we wait for that, a look at this morning's "washington journal." >> we welcome back ken blackwell to the program, senior fellow at the family research council, also a conservative columnist and former ohio secretary of state. mr. blackwell, since this is our first chance to chat with you since the 2018 election, i wonder what your reading of the election was. what message did voters try to send to washington three weeks ago today? >> well, i think there was a major choice before the voters

and that was did they choose gridlock or did they want cooperati cooperation, to get something done across party lines. so i think what they did was they sort of evened the playing field. we saw the republicans take a couple seats advance in the senate, and the democrats won just shy of 40 seats in the house and took over control of the house. as a consequence now, the onus is on can the two parties find some common ground. i would hope that common ground includes criminal justice reform, making sure that we deal with the challenge of drug pricing, that we come together and figure out a way to improve

and refresh our infrastructure. there's plenty of work to be done. but look, at the end of the day, i believe that the parties will, in fact, have to really work hard to find their common ground. their instinct is to go into combat and to ready themselves for 2020. there was a clear -- there's a clear message here that the american people don't want gridlock. i think that what they want is clarity and cooperation. and the challenge will be will the parties hear the call, the clarion call of the voters. >> we spend a lot of time on this program focusing on what the house democrat agenda will

be when they take the gavels of the various committees on capitol hill in the 116th congress, but i wonder what role you see the house republicans playing next year in the minority. how do they stay relevant? is this a house republican minority that is any less divided between freedom caucus and leadership under a minority leader, kevin mccarthy? >> look, i think that there were moderates that lost, that if anything, there will be a clear, conservative voice coming from the house of representatives. i think the minority leader will be the megaphone for the interests and concerns and the policy initiatives of his caucus, his conference. so look, the democrats have made

it clear that what they're going to do is, you know, investigate, investigate, investigate, and i think that they will probably -- there's a great chance that they will overreach, much like the republicans overreached in the late '90s, and that will come back to haunt them. i hope that there is not that overreach and that we find some, again, some common ground consistent with the interests and the advance of this nation. look, the president has some simple objectives at the beginning of his administration. accelerate economic growth, make sure that we create an environment that would bring back $2 trillion to $3 trillion

that were parked offshore. he did that through dealing with the complicated regulatory environment. he thinned it out, he made it more coherent, more capital and investment friendly, and the other thing that he did is that he cut taxes. so as a consequence, we have now seen that flow of capital and we saw accelerated economic growth and job creation, and that is important for all of us to focus on. republicans and democrats. there is still mrplenty of worko do. the infrastructure. the president also ran on making sure that our borders were secure and that we could stop the unchecked flow of folks who would do us evil and who would, in fact, bring not only criminal behavior to human trafficking

and the flow of harmful drugs, but that he would also use the securing of the borders to underline a respect for the rule of law. look, at the family research council, we believe that, you know, in the primacy of the individual and our political system and the centrality of god in the life of this nation. there has been a clear and consistent pushing of god and faith out of the public square, and when that happens, it creates an environment for the expansion of government in our lives. what has made us unique as a country is the fact that god has been central and as a consequence, individuals don't depend on big government, but the cradle of liberty has been

the family. so we want to make sure we have constitutional governance that there is an environment where people can practice their faith in the public square, and that we understand that the primacy of individual liberty really does turn on putting a harness on the reach and the scope of government. that's what we believe, that's what we work for, and i think that the president actually embraced that agenda and therefore, we are working in league with the president to create that sort of environment, that sort of opportunity, for americans and american families. >> ken blackwell joining us until the bottom of the hour this morning on the "washington journal." taking your calls on phone lines, democrat 202-748-8000.

republicans, 748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. we will get right to calls. james, mississippi, democrat, go ahead. >> caller: mr. blackwell, you just seem like a man who i wish we had more of in office. but as far as trump being down here yesterday, i'm just north of where he was at yesterday, and i wouldn't drive down the road to go see him anyway. the thing about it is i just don't understand why so many people around here claim to be christians and stuff and i understand that, and that's great, but seems like trump is so against, the way he acts and lies about stuff, you know, somebody said something about asking for forgiveness or something and he said he didn't

have nothing to ask forgiveness for. i don't understand how these people can be christian but back somebody who seems to be in opposition of the way that christianity, you know. anyway, i appreciate you being on this morning. you seem like a nice man. i wish we had more people in office like you that come together and bring together with folks. >> thanks for the call. mr. blackwell? >> look, we are all fallen and we all work -- at family research council we start out with a daily devotion and today, we are focusing our attention on genesis 33. i will let you go to your bibles to read about that. we go in prayer because we understand that there is often a gap in what we profess to

believe and how we behave. we ask god to put us on the straight and narrow, and a path of righteousness that helps us to close that gap, to get our behavior in line with those things that we profess to believe. and all of us, you know, every now and then, fall off of that path and we ask god for his guidance and his strength to pull us back. look, at the end of the day, the president understands that nations, you know, profess one thing and then behave another, and what he has done is he's embraced an agenda that puts us back on a path that respects religious liberty, that respects liberty in general, respects the fact that in a capitalistic society, you need capital and that's why he has created an environment to not only attract

capital, but create jobs to put americans back to work so they can maintain their independence. so his agenda is an agenda that i think is right on track. his embrace of a clear agenda of appointing justices to the supreme court and judges across the federal system that respect the fundamental fact that the constitution puts a harness on the reach and the power of government to optimize individual liberty and as a consequence, i think this president, as he struggles day in, day out like we all do, to bring his personal behavior in line to what he professes to believe, he has embraced a policy agenda that's in keeping

with what has made this united states of america the most prosperous and the most diverse democracy in all of human history. >> about 15 minutes left with you, mr. blackwell. a lot of phone calls. robert is next in tennessee, republican. go ahead. >> caller: thank you for the opportunity. mr. blackwell, i think that you are very much an extremist in terms i don't think the african-americans are in the republican party as you. goldwater once said i never want people to tell me how to live my life and yes, we want democrat ins the party to vote for us but we don't want the left democrats. you have some very extremist views from the people whom i know and i'm a black man and a republican. i have been in this party all my

life and i'm 70 years old. so i come from a state that we have always had liberal senators, from howard baker and lamar alexander and one we did have who didn't know what he was doing is bob corker. obviously your pitch about the party, i think, is wrong. i think you need to go back to the evangelicals because they are the most dangerous part of our party. >> mr. blackwell? >> look, let me take a step back. i have had the privilege of being the mayor of my hometown and so i have had the opportunity to walk the streets, to talk with folks, to be very much a part of their lives. but i also have been blessed to

have had the opportunity to represent our nation at the united nations as the u.s. ambassador to the united nations in charge of human rights, and so i had the opportunity to interact with representatives from 193 other nations, and i have always been clear on a couple of things. and i don't think that this is extreme, and i can bring it down to a current challenge. in the 193 nations of the united nations, they are all defined as a nation state by their borders. their borders define them. as a consequence, all of those 193 nations work to control their borders. i don't think it's radical for the president of the united states to want to protect our borders. there are a lot of folks who believe in open borders, but if

you embrace that thinking, that in fact undermines the notion that there is a nation state defined by a concrete border and governed by the rule of law. so where the caller thinks that that's a radical notion, he has a funny definition of radical or radicalism. i actually think what was radical is a notion that we could have voters without borders or a nation without borders opening ourselves up to all of the criminality and disorder of a country that is lackadaisical about its borders and the rule of law. we are the most diverse democracy in all of human

history. we have had open arms for those who want to find opportunity here. but we, in fact, since the existence of our nation, we have controlled the borders and we have determined who, in fact, comes in and can pursue citizenship and life in this country. there has not been an administration that has given in to this notion that we should, in fact, have open borders and a complete collapse of the rule of law. that's not radical. that's common sense. >> as we have noted, you served in state and public office in ohio, plenty of calls from ohio for you this morning, including tommy in akron, a democrat. go ahead. >> caller: good morning from wintery portage lakes, ohio. i have been waiting a few years to talk to you, mr. blackwell, on a q & a. i want to pose this question to you. i heard you quoting out of

genesis and the old testament. when you're at the pearly gates and st. peter pulls out the book of life and asks you about the time where you and former governor bob taft were corrupt, in fact, he's the only sitting governor ever to be indicted on a felony charge, how will you answer the corruption charges, or will you use president trump's mantra, it's all fake news? i will take your answer off the call. >> mr. blackwell. >> thank you, sir. i think i have gone through the lookingglass. i was elected by the voters of the state of ohio for a term as treasurer and two terms as secretary of state which means that i had hit my limit. we were term limited as secretary of state. look, i don't know what the caller is talking about in terms of my corruption. let me give you an idea of how

things really do get turned around. i see radicals and leftists and extreme partisans say well, ken blackwell in 2004 was responsible for long lines in franklin county, which is the county where our state capital is, and that, in fact, was some form of voter suppression. well, nobody ever goes to find out that the secretary of state, they said that i did that because i misplaced or didn't place enough voting machines in certain precincts. the reality is that the secretary of state does not make that decision. bipartisan boards of elections make that decision. and that year, the head of the franklin county board of elections was a democrat labor leader. they made the decisions as to where those voting machines, you

know, were located. i will tell you that they didn't have a bank of voting machines. they had to make a decision based on past practices and voting populations or turnout. they did the best that they could. but this notion that all of a sudden for convenience that it was the secretary of state -- >> later this week the president and first lady will travel to argentina for the g20 summit. president trump's participation in the g20 summit is a key opportunity to reiterate his commitment to domestic and global economic growth and prosperity. to cement a relationship with other world leaders and advance a global economic system based on fair economic competition and free, fair and reciprocal trade. while at the g20, the president and the delegation will interact with many leaders, including bilateral meetings with the president of argentin