pelosi, to watch them travel during a break. the call to mention here. that was supposedon to be a firt leg of a trip that was going to afghanistan. obviously it was and secure mission on a military transport that was not advertised. she was going to go to brussels to talk to nato leaders first, enter office explained the reason they're going to stop in brussels involved, the pilots actually were required to have a rest before the went on to afghanistan under the cloakto of security. i don't want the caller to believe that nancy pelosi travel was traveling to europe -- >> the u.s. senate is about to gavel in to start their day. lawmakers were originally scheduled to be in session. we believe this "washington journal" segment. senators are working on a east policy bill, a measure of the senate has been working on for over two weeks.

mitch mcconnell is preparing the senate to consider the latest proposed by president trump to reopen government and provide border funding. live coverage of the senate. will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. god of endless mercy, you alone hold power over the nations. we humbly ask that you may soften our hearts so that we might see the path away from discord and toward unity. as hundreds of thousands of federal workers brace for another painful payday, remind our lawmakers that they can ease the pain. lord, in this hour of need, we

cry out to you and ask you to send your wisdom into this chamber so that our senators might comprehend and act in accordance with your will. we pray in your merciful name. amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication

to the senate. the clerk: washington d.c., january 22, 2019. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable rick scott, a senator from the state of florida, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: charles e. grassley, president pro tempore. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader is recognized. mr. mcconnell: i understand the bill at the desk is due a second reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the title of the bill for the second time. the clerk: h.r. 268, an act making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2019, and for other purposes.

mr. mcconnell: in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule 14, i would object to further proceeding. the presiding officer: objection having been heard, the bill will be placed on the calendar. mr. mcconnell: well, mr. president, here is what happened this weekend with respect to the continuing disagreement over the funding of the government. two things happened over the weekend. on saturday, the senate was in session, and members of both parties came here to the floor to speak about the urgent need

for a bipartisan compromise to reopen the federal government. for the sake of federal workers who need certainty, and for the take of the american people who need their nation's government fully online. mr. president, also on saturday, president trump rolled out a bold comprehensive offer to do just that. it would break through this stalemate that would reopen government swiftly and deliver on a number of other policy priorities that are seen as important to both sides of the aisle. so that's where we are on day 32 of this partial government shutdown. that's where we are as this new week begins. we've heard members of congress on all sides demanding a resolution to the impasse and a plan to quickly restore full funding to the federal

government. we now have a plan from the president that would do exactly that and quickly while incorporating both the bipartisan work of the appropriations committee and bipartisan proposals on current immigration issues. the opportunity to end all this is staring us right in the face. that's why we'll vote on this legislation on the senate floor this week. all that needs to happen is for our democratic friends to agree that it's time to put the country ahead of politics, take yes for an answer, and vote to put this standoff behind us. to be clear, mr. president, the proposal outlined by president trump that we will consider here in the senate is the only proposal, the only one currently before us that can be signed by the president and immediately reopen the government. first and foremost, it's the

only proposal that would reopen the government fully and immediately. but it's not merely a continuing resolution. it wouldn't kick the can down the road. instead, it would fulfill congress' responsibilities without footnotes, without caveats, without hitting the snooze button. this measure would wrap up last year's historic progress on appropriations. it would pass all seven remaining regular order funding bills and deliver supplemental funding for disaster recovery. importantly, it's also the only proposal that would deliver a comprehensive investment in our nation's border security. to be clear, that's comprehensive by the standards of border patrol experts themselves, the men and women actually on the ground. the bill would provide funding for each of the c.b.p.'s top ten

priority investments for border security, including a substantial investment in enhanced surveillance technologies, funding for the recruitment and training of 750 new border patrol agents, and $5.7 billion for the construction of a physical barrier along the highest priority areas of the southern border. in addition to these measures, similar to the ones that earned strong bipartisan support in the past, the legislation would take significant steps to modify certain areas of immigration policy. for example, it would grant three-year lawful status for certain currently enrolled daca recipients and individuals under t.p.s. these are areas where congressional democrats have expressed vocal interest. now they are included in a comprehensive proposal to open the government, fulfill our promise to federal employees, and address the humanitarian and

security crisis at our southern border. it's a proposal that the president will support, as i have stated consistently over the past month. that fact will earn it consideration here in the senate. a fully reopened federal government, certainty and stability for federal employees once again. the bipartisan appropriations legislation this body worked out together, the full investment in border security that the experts on the ground say they need, and changes to our immigration policies that are similar to the ones democrats have themselves been fighting for in the past. to reject this proposal, democrats would have to prioritize political combat with the president ahead of federal workers, ahead of daca recipients, ahead of border security, and ahead of stable and predictable government funding. is that really a price that democrats want to pay to prolong

this episode, which they say they want to be over and done with. is their plan truly to throw federal workers, daca recipients, customs and border patrol and indeed all americans under the bus just to extend this run of political theater? so they can look like champions of the so-called resistance? well, that's what some leading democrats tried to assert right out of the gate before they had even really studied the president's new proposal. speaker pelosi came out right away and tried to rally her troops. she immediately described the president's proposals as unacceptable, unacceptable. well, that's not exactly surprising considering that just a few weeks ago, the speaker went out on a limb and declared that physical border security is on its face an immorality.

an immorality. well, mr. president, not every democrat seems to see it that way, and how could they? one democrat from the state of washington admitted the wall is not in itself a bad idea. it's been done. another from illinois asserted if we have a partial wall, if we have fencing, if we have technology used to keep our border safe, all of that is fine. and one of the speaker's fellow members of the california delegation said we'll support border security. all of its elements, including fences. so this is just a small sampling of house democrats' actual views about the merits of border security. these quotations don't even begin to touch all of the democrats' demands that we reopen the government right away and their past calls to bring

more certainty to individuals affected by daca and t.p.s. so on one side of the scale, we have all of my democratic colleagues' declarations that we must reopen the rest of the federal government and get federal workers their paychecks. we have their statements and past votes that show they believe that securing our border with some physical barriers is a good thing. and we have their stated desire to help out a number of individuals with a more certain immigration status. that's one side of the scale. all that's on the other side is the far-left political animus toward the current occupant of the white house. so, mr. president, it seems to me it's about time to get serious. even "the washington post" editorial board, which is no fan of the president, and does not support every piece of this

compromise proposal, had this to say about democrats' outright refusal to negotiate. this is "the washington post." to refuse even to talk until the government reopens does no favors to the sidelined federal workers and contractors. a measure of statesmanship for a member of congress now is the ability to accept some disappointment. accept some disappointments, and shrug off the inevitable attacks from purists if it means rescuing the lives of thousands of deserving people living among us. "the washington post." even if the post believes my friend, the democratic leader's total refusal to negotiate has grown very stale, you have yet to believe many of their own members are starting to feel the

same way. the president has made a comprehensive and bipartisan offer that would accomplish everything democrats have said needs to be accomplished right now immediately. it's a strong proposal. it's the only thing on the table. and later this week, we'll vote on it. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of the motion to proceed to s. 1, which the clerk will report. the clerk: motion to proceed to s. 1, an act to make improvements to certain events and security assistance provisions, and so forth and for other purposes. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call: quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: democrati c leader. mr. schumer: are we in a

quorum, mr. president? the presiding officer: we are. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: well, mr. president, the trump shutdown is now in its 32nd day. essential government services are straining under the lack of resources. airport security, food safety, our federal courts, our national parks. the economy is taking a serious hit. it's even been revealed today that f.b.i. investigations, law enforcement are being curtailed. and, of course, 800,000 public servants dedicated to their jobs and their country continue to languish without pay. the personal financial crisis president trump is inflicting on these patriotic americans is worsening by the day. he's hurting the 800,000 dedicated public servants, the millions who depend upon them, and the entire country. this must stop.

the government shutdown must end. president trump and leader mcconnell need to come to their senses and reopen the government. instead, over the weekend, president trump made a televised address to outline an immigration proposal that's going nowhere fast. it's clear that the president has realized he's put himself and the country in an untenable position. everyone knows the president said he would be proud to shut down the government. everyone knows that he and leader mcconnell are the only obstacles to opening it back up. across the board, the polling shows it. even a good chunk of republicans are getting disillusioned with the president and the republican senate because they persist in keeping the government shut down, banging their -- demanding

that they get their way, or else. so the leader's attempts which i just heard on the floor here, the leader's attempts to blame democrats for the shutdown are futile. they are -- you know, they are so far from reality that no one takes the leader seriously when he says it. the american people know that president trump is responsible for the shutdown, and now they have learned that leader mcconnell is a coconspirator in the shutdown. so the president, realizing he's hurting, hurting with the public, hurting the economy, underlining the fact that his presidency has far too much chaos and too little order, direction, and certainty, the president had to make a proposal to try and shake things up. it was not a good-faith proposal.

it was not in good faith to end the shutdown. the president's proposal is one-sided, harshly partisan and was made in bad faith. the president single-handedly canceled daca and t.p.s. protections. he did it himself on his own a while back. now offering some temporary protections back in exchange for the wall is not a compromise. it's more hostage taking. when the president says i'll give you daca and t.p.s. partially, even though he created the problem on his own, in exchange for the wall, it's like bargaining for stolen goods. the president didn't offer the daca protections in good faith. the president's team sold the daca protections as the bridge act, a temporary fix originally proposed by senators durbin and graham. turns out the actual legislation is even more limited than the bridge act and would barely restore the protections that

president trump himself took away. "the new york times" reported that steven miller, the architect of the president's harshest policies on legal immigration, intervened to narrow the daca proposal as much as possible. when steven miller is crafting the policy, you can be darned sure it's not a compromise. and worst of all, we found out this morning that the legislation includes incredibly partisan changes to our asylum system that makes it nearly impossible for migrants to claim asylum at our border. a dramatic change in what america has been all about. a dramatic turning around from what america has always had as its symbol, the statue of liberty. the asylum changes are a poison pill if there ever was one and show the lack of good faith that

the president and now leader mcconnell have in trying to make a proposal. the president and his team have tried to spin this proposal as a reasonable compromise with concessions to democrats. that defies credulity. nothing, nothing could be further from the truth. there were no serious negotiations with democratic leaders or any democrat to produce this proposal. let me say that again. there were no serious negotiations with democratic leaders or any democrat to produce this proposal. the president didn't ask what democrats needed in a bill to achieve our support. he simply laid his proposal down on the table and proclaimed it a compromise. you can't have a compromise when one side declares this is what we want and this is what you want. you can't have a compromise when one side is determining not only what they want in the bill but

what we want in the bill without even seriously negotiating with us. that is not how negotiating works. that's not the art of the deal. what we have here is just another one-sided partisan proposal from the president, and contrary to the president's claims, it hardly represents a softening of his position. if anything, it's even more radical. first, president trump said give me the wall or i'll shut down the government. then president trump said unless you give me the wall, i'll keep the government shut down. now president trump is saying give me the wall and make radical changes to legal immigration or i'll shut the government down. no one, no one can call this new effort a compromise. the president's proposal is just wrapping paper on the same partisan package and hostage-taking tactics. you take off the wrapping paper and it's the same partisan,

narrow, unacceptable package that cannot pass the house, that cannot pass the senate. so far, there's only one piece of legislation that has a chance at arriving at the president's desk, and that is for the senate to take up and pass any of the appropriations bills already passed by the house. these bills are noncontroversial. there are no surprises or poison pill riders. in essence, what's in those bills was supported by republicans already, and each of them would reopen the government and allow us to continue our discussions on border security. the sooner leader mcconnell allows a vote on those bills, the sooner we can end this pointless shutdown and reopen the government. mr. president, president trump, leader mcconnell, the american

people, 800,000 workers are asking and waiting for you to act. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. boozman: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from arkansas is recognized. mr. boozman: i ask that the quorum call is rescinded. the presiding officer: without objection.

mr. boozman: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of h.r. 430, which was received from the house. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: h.r. 430, an act to extend the program of block grants to states for temporary assistance for needy families and related programs through june 30, 2019. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. mr. boozman: i ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. boozman: 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. boozman: i ask unanimous consent that the motion to

reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. boozman: thank you, mr. president. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from from virginia is recognized. mr. kaine: are we in a quark? the presiding officer: we are. mr. kaine: if i could ask that it be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. kaine: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 6, h.j. res. 1, making further continuing appropriations to the department of homeland security. i further ask the joint

resolution be considered read a third time and passed, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? the objection is heard. mr. kaine: thank you, mr. president. the presiding officer: the gentleman is recognized. mr. kaine: mr. president, i rise to discuss the continuing effects of the shutdown of part of the american government on american workers and the american public. i want to begin by discussing the effect of the shutdown on the coast guard. following that, i'll discuss a visit that i actually just paid to a restaurant at 7th and pennsylvania avenue that is opened for the pups of offering free -- for the purposes of offering free food to federal employees and their families during the shutdown. finally, i will address the proposal offered by the president on saturday to find an agreement on border security and immigration issues. to begin with the coast guard.

the coast guard is a branch of the united states military with a proud history. there are 42,000 active members of the coast guard. there are 7,500 reservists, 8,500 civilian employees, and nearly 50,000 coast guard retirees. all are affected by the shutdown. most working without pay and others, particularly civilians, furloughed without pay. in addition, the shutdown jeopardizes payments to the 50,000 coast guard retirees. virginia has a significant coast guard presence, especially in hampton roads in northern virginia. virginians perform all the missions that the coast guard is entrusted to perform, search and rescue, drug interdiction, military missioned, law enforcement. the coast guard honor guard that covers funerals and ceremonies all over the world is based in virginia. so is the unit that provides

it's services, including cutters that are currently at sea like the u.s.s.berthel, which deployed out on sunday. the coast guard, as the president knows, but it sometimes is a little bit confusing, not just to the public but even to the military, is that they're unique in the shutdown because they are a branch of the military, but they're budgeted through the department of homeland security, not the department of defense. d.o.d. was funded by the work that this senate and the house and the president did, appropriations bills that were signed earlier in the year. so every other branch of the military is currently funded. the d.h.s., however, is not funded. so the coast guard is the one military branch that's not being paid. this is creating some enormous, enormous issues that my coast guard members in virginia have been sharing with me. just one, for example -- a coast guard cutter, the

u.s.s.berthel, which deployed sunday out of alameda, california, on a military mission as part of paycom in the -- pacom in the certain pacific. everyone on the coast guard is deploying and the families are there and they're deploying for multiple months and they're saying goodbye to their families, but their families who live in and around alameda, they're going to have to keep paying rent bills while their coastie, as they call themselves, is deployed and yet they're not being paid. even though this cutter will be have evidence in missions together with navy ships whereby -- will be involved in missions together with navy ships, the coasties are not being paid. you can imagine, mr. president -- and this was described to me -- has been described by my coast guard members in virginia -- there's some sizable equity issues in this. the coast guard likes to recruit among those who want to volunteer to serve their country. and they've stayed they have

been able to ruecruit even steven with the marines, the navy, the army and the air force. they can recruit even steven. they offer a lot of similar opportunities to serve and similar abilities to advance in rank, and so they feel like in recruiting for it's professionals -- for i.t. professionals and others, they can do their very best. however, something like this really affects their ability to recruit. as somebody knows well, in a shutdown, the d.o.d. is likely to be funded. all the other branches of the military will be funded but the coast guard will not be. it affects recruitment significantly, and it affects retention. i heard a number of -- i've heard a number of stories from coast guard members in virginia. just this morning somebody who's been -- who's a young coast guarder in their first two years said this. this was a direct quote -- i

skip dinners now so i can buy food for my dogs. i have dogs. i care about my dogs. to buy dog food is important for them, and so i'll do breakfast and lunch, but i skip dinners to buy food for my dogs. i had two coast guard members tell me about challenges to pay rent. one in the private sector and one actually -- one in the private sector and two, interestingly enough, were living on military bases. let me describe each. northern virginia is not a cheap praise to live. and so this is a coast guard member in northern virginia and the -- when the shutdown started, he was not being paid, he came to his landlord and he said, landlord, can you give me an extension? i'm serving my country in the coast guard. the landlord, which is a regional firm that has many apartments, came back and said this -- it was an effort that kind of sounded friendly. they said, listen, we will let you pay half the month's rent on

the 15th and half at the end instead of one big rent check a month. we will do that but you have to agree to rewrite your lease to allow us to evict you after 15 days rather than after 30 days. and he said, look, i am a he a young guy. i don't know that much but i have a grandfather in the real estate business is. i showed him this proposal and he shade -- he said, hold on a second. it would be better that you keep your current lease and even borrow money from family than to resign a lease allowing you to be evicted after 15 days. i think you and i, mr. president, would say, what kind after landlord would take someone serving their country and try to accelerate the ability to evict them because of the shutdown. that is in fact happening and it is not a small landlord, either. that one surprised but, but i will say there was another one that surprised me more.

two of the coast guard members that i have visited visited witn northern virginia lives on military bases, one in want co-and one at fort belvoir, the army base in fairfax county on military housing. so you would think that this landrecord is would be a more understanding landlord than maybe a private-sector landlord. but when the shutdown happened, in each instance they went to their landlord and said, hey, look, we're not being paid. and in each instance, they said, what do you mean you're not being paid? you are a he living on a military base and everyone is being paid. what do you mean you're not being paid? you have to pay your rent. the military in charge of military housing was not aware that because the coast guard comes up through d.h.s. they're not being paid. and so they're having trouble with their landlords even though their landlords are part of the military who should understand this.

that same challenge is affecting one of these service members whose child is in a child development center on the base at quantico, not being able to pay, you would think that a military child development center might understand. but in fact that is not the case. other coast guard members have told me about an additional challenge. the coast guard relies on civilians be, just like all of our other military branches rely on civilian. the civilians are hit very hard by the furlough. one facility in virginia civilians are in charge of maintaining more than 40 buildings that are old and need some t.l.c. -- boilers that need to work in january and other physical infrastructure that have needed. ment that work is done by private contractors who are furloughed. so that work, which is critical to them being able to operate the installations, is hard to get done. the i.t. functions of the coast

guard take advantage of the civilian expertise of people in northern virginia, too. i was described by one coast guard member a job offer they extended to somebody to come work for the coast guard but they made the job offer just a day or two before the shutdown happened. so now they can't hire the individual. they're trying to convince the individual to just hang on, don't take another job. i.t. jobs are plentiful in northern virginia. they are worried that they are going to lose a critical employee. one of the coast guard individuals i talked to basically put it this way -- it's embarrassing, it's psychologically embarrassing. we signed up to help others, not beg for charity. -- at food banks or restaurants for federal employees. and just talked about how hard it is, in a way, this is something we should all be willing to ask for help. we all need help in our life. but somebody who has signed up

when their goal is to help others, they were just being candid and saying, it is really hard to go ask others for help for food. when the coast guard can't do missions like on the honor good, can't go to funerals at arlington or honor occasions or when they can't do some of the other numberses they're supposed -- functions they're supposed to, then the jobs fall heavier on the other services. they talked about not just the degradation of their own work but the fact that others have to pull extra weight for them. here's what a coast guard employee said to me -- i am paid as an officer to motivate and to lead. so that's what officers do. we try to motivate and to lead. i shouldn't have to stand before a group of coasties and offer a class on how to file for unemployment insurance. and yet that is something that he is now being told that he has to do. so many of the coast guard members mentioned what other

federal employees -- this is almost a cliche line that i'm now hearing from everybody. i get i'll figure it out for myself but i worry about my shipmates. i worry about someone else. so many of the federal employees are struck. finally a general question: why would anyone sign up if they knew they would be treated this way? some of the coast guard members authorized me to use their names and let me tell a few of their stories with their first names attached before i move into talking about my visit to the pop-up restaurant just a few blocks from here, just seven blocks from here. katherine from fairfax county, i'm directly affected by the senseless government shutdown. i retired from the u.s. coast guard in 2006. since the u.s. coast guard is an organization of the department of homeland security, all u.s. coast guard personnel, active

duty, civilian employees are being afflicted. today i went to my local credit iewn branch to apply for an assistance program. i was embarrassed and saddened to take this action to maintain personal health and security. my heart goes out to the members of of the coast guard. lisa, from ashburn. we suffered a flood during hurricane matthew that wiped out our savings. we have a daughter in college. i'm not sure we can manage if we miss more than one paycheck as we also assist my mother who had a stroke. praying this is over sooner than later. this is over sooner than later. sue from loudoun county, my coast guard son and his family live in kodiak, alaska, and are not getting paid. senator murkowski gave a speech

about the coast guard and the coast guard presence in kodiak on saturday. risking house and senate life is unpatriotic -- risking his life is unpatriotic. these men and women work for us. they should be paid and not told to have a yard sale to make do. mary from williamsburg, my husband teaches safe boating classes and has used his boat as a vessel to assist in search and rescue in sector of hampton roads. with the shutdown he can't do any of the boat safety activities to help the coast guard keep our waters safe. it's ridiculous to shut down the federal government but it's dangerous to curb the lifesaving activities of the coast guard and their invaluable volunteer auxiliaries. he cannot volunteer. he cannot volunteer because of the shutdown. trinity from suffolk, my father works in the u.s. coast guard in

portsmouth. even though my father has not gotten a paycheck, hamilton university still -- hamton university still wants their paycheck. gary, my son went to sea to protect our coastline, enforce our laws and rescue those in need. over the years he missed countless holidays, birthdays and anniversaries with family and friends. now there is no respect for his sacrifices and service. finally samantha from herndon, my husband, a civilian employee of the coast guard, we're having to pull money from savings and change our spending to make sure we can make it through the month. we worry about paying our mortgage and keeping the lights on. a wall will not help border security and heferred people are paying -- and everyday people are paying the price for the pointless standoff. these are few of the letters i heard from coast guard members. there are many more. i want to talk about a visit i just made.

i encourage everyone in congress to do this. there is a pop-up restaurant at 7th and pennsylvania opened by an organization called chefs for feds. chefs for feds is an organization started by jose andres as a chef to deal with emergencies. they went to puerto rico and served millions of males to people affected by hurricanes there. they've done similar work in california to deal with the communities affected by wildfires and indonesia to deal with communities affected by hurricanes -- by earthquakes and tsunamis. so this is an n.g.o. that focuses upon helping people in the midst of disasters. now they've opened up a restaurant at 7th and pennsylvania. this is the first man-made disaster that they are trying to figure out a way to help. it's a restaurant that opened last tuesday.

any federal employee or family member can come. 6,000 to 8,000 people have come every day. open from 11 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. today was a day where they expanded services. they opened up broadly a cook cook -- coat closet, a food bank, a place where moms can go to get diapers, which aren't cheap, feminine products, which aren't cheap. you know, basic pharmaceutical, you know, things that aren't cheap. and so it's a combination of a restaurant and sort of a broader social services ministry. chefs for feds is an interesting group. they have other nonprofits that are involved, the d.c. diaper bank, martha's table which is a really effective faith-based ministry to hungry and homeless people. i showed up there at about 11:45, and it's cold today. and i showed up to go thank people and work as a volunteer.

and it was a line like you see in pictures of the depression. of hundreds of people waiting outside. the restaurant is kind of short. you go in, you get a line, you're offered a sandwich or soup and fruit or maybe an iced tea and utensils, people are coming in and eating quickly and leave. you can take a sandwich for a colleague at work or for somebody at home if you need that. but it looked like one of those signs, photos that you might see during the depression. the volunteers are chefs and restaurant workers around virginia who got their own issues and challenges to deal with, but they're helping. many of the volunteers are furloughed federal employees. if you're being lokdz out -- lod out of your job they still want to help others. probably the biggest group of the volunteers are furloughed federal employees. i met a volunteer from richmond

who drove up to help today. there were other volunteers that are just concerned citizens, not federal employees, but just heard about it and came. i met one of the volunteers who was kind of a supervisor in the kitchen. his name was tim, easy for me to remember. he was here from ventura, california. he knew nothing about this group until his house burned down in california, and they came to his community to offer meals and with his whole house destroyed, he started to volunteer to help others. and when he heard about the shutdown, even as he's still dealing with his own issues in california after the wildfire, he's come to help run the kitchen operation there. today they not only expanded to the clothes closet and diaper distribution, they announced a whole series of other restaurants and similar pop-up operations they're going to do around the united states. they looked where there is a high density of federal employees and they announced 15 to 20 other locations around the country where they are going to

now start serving. mr. president, it was something to see this long line of federal employees waiting out in the cold to get into that restaurant just the length of the line made a real impression on me. it was emotional. it was interesting that so many were law enforcement in uniform. park service, people from the f.b.i., and other agencies, and clearly law enforcement in uniform waiting in the cold to come in and get a sandwich. there were parents with their children, young children, being frurd -- furloughed it's hard to afford child care. what do you do with your three-year-old? they had their children in arms. it looked like something from the depression but we're not in a depression. our economy is strong right now. our stock market is up right now. so it's one thing to see that kind of a line when you're in a

depression. but when we're being told that the economy is great, to see that kind of a line, it made a huge impression upon me. so unnecessary. i do thank jose andres, i thank the volunteers, i thank martha's table, i thank others who are responding. as they pointed out to me, this is different than the others we've done because it is the only disaster that is manmade and unnecessary. jose looked at me and said shut us down by reopening government. you guys reopen and shut us down. we don't want to be open at 7th and pennsylvania. we want to send the volunteers home by having the government reopen. the president said that he was proud to shut down government. i defy any thinking and feeling person in this country to go to 7th and pennsylvania between 11:00 and 6:00 and look at that line in the middle of january and say you're proud. i have a lot of words that i

might attach to it. i don't think anybody could look at that, i don't think anybody would go in and work the line as i did -- just the faces, all grateful that others were there to provide some help, but many embarrassed, certainly for their country and sometimes personally. again, like the coast guard guard who said i don't like asking for charity. there were people who said yes, they were greatest but they were embarrassed and some angry for how they are being treated, and who can blame them for that. as i conclude, there is a way out. the way out i think has two steps. it's reopen government asap. and second treat the president's proposal from saturday seriously. i do believe the president's proposal -- and we've talked

about this, mr. president -- i do believe it is a proposal that deserves to be treated seriously. the proposal he has made, if it were just offered as a vote now with no opportunity to study it and improve it, i probably would vote against it. but it's a proposal that deserves to be treated seriously because it deals with four issues. it deals with the right investment and border security. that's an important issue. it deals with how to deal with dreamers. that's an important issue. how to deal with the t.p.s. program. that's as important issue. there is a fourth one. the process and potentially seek asylum in the united states. he didn't mention that during the speech. it is in the proposal. it's an important issue. what does it mean to take the president's proposal seriously? even if i have some points of difference on each of the four elements, i would not disagree with the assertion that each of the elements are really

important. we should be dealing with them. what does it mean to take the president's proposal seriously? if he means it seriously, if he means it seriously, then he should want us to address it seriously. i understand that the bill is 1,200 pages. i understand that it might be introduced today. i haven't seen it. i don't think it's been introduced yet. maybe it has and i was down serving lunch and haven't had a chance to read it. 1,200 pages is a big bill and these are big and important topics. what would be the way that we would engage democrats and republicans with this proposal to show the president we're taking it seriously? we would put it in a committee, the judiciary or appropriations committee. the parliamentarians would determine where it would go based upon how it's drafted, but it would likely be one of those two committees. the relevant committee obviously has a republican chair and a

republican majority body. that's fine. it has a republican majority on the committee. that's fine. but you would put it in the committee, and the first thing you would do is you would ask the administration to come up and explain each point. they put a proposal on the table. okay, $5.7 billion, how do you want to spend it? what does your t.p.s. proposal mean? what does your dream proposal mean? how do you propose to change the asylum laws? the administration would explain their proposal and answer questions about it. and then promptly, especially with the republican committee chair with some power over timing, promptly the committee could take the matter up and have a normal committee process with members able to make amendments. i'm not on either of the relevant committees, so this is easy for me to say. but, you know, if a democrat had an idea about here's a way to improve it, there's no chance that idea is getting passed without some republican votes because the democrats are in minority. but a democrat and a republican

should be able to offer ideas for how the proposal should be improved. and that can be done promptly. with a republican majority, the chances of the president's proposal hopefully with some improvements being reported out the floor is very high. and if it's reported out to the floor, we could have a similar process here with members being able to make amendments. and, again, no amendment is going to be accepted from a democrat without being able to find some republicans to say that's a good idea. no amendment will be accepted without a majority or a supermajority of this body saying that's a good idea, that improves the proposal. that would be how we would show president trump we take the proposal seriously. i have heard, and i know it's not yet completely decided, there is an effort we want to have a vote on it this week, we don't want to have a committee process, don't want to have amendments. we just want to have a vote this week. that would suggest that the proposal was not offered in

seriousness and the senate was not being serious about addressing it. i think the senate on this proposal should just be the senate, and we should count on committees which are helmed by republicans to try to promptly move this through a process where all get to put their thumb prints on and make it better. how much to spend on border security? for this senator, the dollar amount that the president proposed does not trouble me, as long as it's used right. i have voted for proposals to try to advance to the white house that had more than $5.7 billion of border security. our 2013 bill had 40-plus billion dollars over ten years. the bill we voted on in february had $25 billion over ten years. the dollar amount is not the challenge for this senator. the challenge is i want to make sure we use it the right way. when every member of congress who represents the border, all

nine say that just using the money to build a big wall is a bad idea, that should tell us something. when our border professionals say there are higher priorities than building -- than using all the money to build a wall, that should tell us something. but if the administration goes to the committee and presents their case and they have border professionals saying here's the ways to spend it and physical barriers are really important in this place or that place, they would really help us, i'm very open to that. i just don't want to waste the money, but the dollar amount is less important to me than the way money should be spent. that's the kind of thing we can negotiate and agree on. dreamers. the president terminated protection for about 1.7 million dreamers in september, two septembers ago. he then challenged us to find a congressional resolution. his proposal is to restore protections to about 700,000 dreamers for a period of three years. well, i'm curious.

700,000. why not the full 1.7 million whose protections you pulled? three years? why not four? but these are issues we could debate. these are issues where amendments could be offered and we could find, again, i believe, a compromise. the president is terminating t.p.s. programs for about 400,000 people from ten countries. he is proposing actually to restore about 300,000 of the individuals with rights under the temporary protected status program. i want to know why not all 400,000. what is it about some countries that you want to restore the protections you took away but you don't want to restore protections to the other countries? maybe there is a reason. maybe there is a good reason. but maybe there isn't a good reason. and we ought to have that discussion and offer democrats and republicans the ability to take some sandpaper to it and try to make it better. and finally, asylum. this was the issue that the president did not speak about in his speech but apparently the bill which i haven't seen as

dramatic changes to the processes for applying for asylum, possibly the standards for getting asylum. that is an important issue. we want to make sure that we do it right. there is international legal ramifications and there is also ramifications in terms of this statue of liberty nation. we want to make sure we get it right, but is there an openness to having discussions about asylum procedures? of course there is. so, mr. president, i would say that when president trump put a proposal on the table on saturday that dealt with border security funding, t.p.s., dreamers, and asylum, each of those issues are issues on which we ought to be having a discussion and we ought to be able to find some accord. and, frankly, if we can't find a pretty significant bipartisan accord here, the chances of there being one in the house is slim. so we ought to take the time to find it here. we ought to take the time to do that and do it promptly without people being needlessly hurt.

and that's why i return to my original request. i hope we will take a step that will shut down the popup restaurant at seventh and pennsylvania, as the chefs asked me to do today. let's reopen government and shut down the restaurant that has popped up to serve those 6 -- 6,000 to 8,000 people a day who are being punished unnecessarily. with that, mr. president, i thank the patience of the chair and those in the chamber and yield the floor.

the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. president. on december 11 of last year, at a meeting at the white house, president trump said he would be, quote, proud, proud to shut down the government of the united states if he didn't get things 100% his way. and then 11 days later on december 22, president trump shut down the government. we are now 32 days into the

longest government shutdown in the history of the united states. and i say to president trump that is nothing to be proud of. the damage is growing by the day in every part of our country and across different sectors of our economy. it's estimated that the partial government shutdown is now costing the economy $6 billion every week. 800,000 federal employees are going without pay, and this coming friday will mark the second full pay period in which they get pay stubs with a big fat goose egg on them. hundreds of thousands of those federal employees are working every day without pay, and hundreds of thousands of them have been locked out of work and want to get back to doing the

business of the american people but are prohibited from doing so because of the government shutdown. and as a result of their inability to go to work, there are tens of millions of our fellow americans who are losing access to vital government services. there's nothing to be proud of in shutting out a whole sector of service contract employees and small businesses that provide support services to the federal government. i'm going to go into a little bit more detail in a moment, but small businesses around this country that depend on the small business administration for loans or because they do business with the federal government are getting absolutely clobbered. that is nothing to be proud of, mr. president. it's not anything to be proud of that so many federal employees

are not able to make their rent or mortgage payments, or the monthly tuition installment payments for their children's college education. or for other provisions they want to provide for their family. now, sadly, this senate is complicit in the shutdown. let me actually rephrase that. the majority in the senate is complicit in the shutdown because we have not been allowed a vote on two bills that are on the senate calendar that we could vote on today and would reopen the government. i have one of those bills right here. i brought it to the floor in the past. it's a bill that would open eight of the nine federal departments that have nothing to do with the homeland security department or border security or a wall. eight of the nine of them. this bill is sitting on the

senate calendar. we could vote on it today. and yet, the majority leader refuses to bring it up for a vote. and the great irony is this bill that is on the senate calendar contains provisions that have already been supported by the united states senate by overwhelming bipartisan majorities. a big part of this bill includes about four federal departments where we voted by 92-6 on the funding levels for the whole fiscal year until the end of september. in other cases, what's in this bill passed the senate appropriations committee on a vote of 31-0, and another on a vote of 30-1. so why aren't we bringing up these bills? now, the majority leader had said previously he wasn't going to bring up any bills in the

united states senate unless they were supported by president trump and by the democrats. you know what, mr. president? that's an abdication of the responsibility of this senate, as a separate and coequal branch of government. since when do we say to this president or any president we're not going to consider a piece of legislation on the floor of the senate unless you tell us ahead of time you're good with it. that's not doing our job. that's not fulfilling our constitutional responsibility. we have an obligation to do our duty as a separate branch of government and vote, especially when it's on a piece of legislation the senate's already voted on and already supported overwhelmingly on a bipartisan basis and would reopen the government. so instead of doing our job, we're going to contract out our responsibilities to the

president of the united states. but apparently it's going to get worse because now as i understand it the majority has changed his position, and now he will allow a vote on something in the senate chamber, but guess what it is. it's on the president's proposal. so now not only are we going to essentially say that we won't vote on something the president doesn't like, but now the one thing that the majority leader says we will vote on is what the president wants. what the president wants. well, you know what? i'm okay having a vote on the president's proposal, but if we're going to vote on that, my goodness, we should also vote on the bill that's already on the

senate calendar that has already received strong bipartisan support of the united states senate. so i do have a question for the majority leader. if we're going to be voting on president trump's most repeat proposal, are we also going to be able to have a vote on the bill that was already on the senate calendar that's already been supported by a bipartisan majority that would reopen the government right away? that's my question. because let's vote, and let's just see what happens. but let's vote on not just what the president of the united states wants to. since when does the president dictate what we do here in the united states senate? that's a question for every member. so we're voting but i'm not for what appears to be about to happen, which is just saying we're about to vote on what the president wants, and again contracting out our responsibilities to the white house. now, what we're seeing every day, as i said, is the growing

damage from this shutdown. and i mentioned that small businesses are really feeling the pain. there's a story in the "wall street journal" headlineed, small businesses' $2 billion problem. government shutdown leaves loans in limbo." and this is happening all over the country. what you're seeing is that businesses about and start-ups and the engine of our economy are not able to access loans through the small business administration. in fact, mark zandi of moody's athletics estimates that the shutdown sasse delayed the $2 billion in s.b.a. lending. jim emerson, the c.e.o. of an electrical components company in

tennessee just lettered that her lender shut down her $3 million line of credit. quote, our frustration is unbelievable, she said. this is the c.e.o. of an electrical components company in tennessee. quote, to keep us alive, i am borrowing from business associates who have worked with us for years. we're hearing other small businesses that are just starved for a lack of capital, others where the small business owners are personally guaranteeing loans. but for the most part there are many that are just not getting the capital they need to open up theirbitions, to sustain their business -- to open up their businesses, to sustain their businesses. and, as a result, they're laying off workers. and that is a growing consequence of this shutdown. now, i've shared on this floor many times some of the stories

of federal employees who work in maryland and the fact that they want first and foremost to get back to work. everywhere i go, even before people mentioned the fact that they're missing their paychecks, they tell me they want to get back to do the work for the american people. and then they do share really terrible stories, mr. president, about how the lack of pay is impacting them more and more day by day. but beyond the stories that you'll hear from federal employees who work in my state of maryland or senator kaine's state of virginia -- and i want to thank senator kaine for all his efforts to reopen the government. and of course federal employees in the district of columbia. the reality is that 80% of federal employees live outside of this region. they live all over the country. talking about coast guard, coast

guard officials; we're talking about t.s.a. officials; we're talking about homeland security officials; we're talking about people in federal agencies that are scattered across this country. a former marine, who is now an e.p.a. employee in kansas is the primary breadwinner for her family. here's what she had to say. quote, to have to go to your landlord and say, i i don't know how i'm going to pay you -- i've never had to do that. the president said, quote, people will make adjustments. the president said, quote, that he could relate. well, it's easy for the president to say. he is sort of jetting from the white house to mar-a-lago to trump tower. and so those words are hollow to

the millions of americans who are actually really hurting. here's what this federal worker in kansas said. quote, we're trying to cut the grocery bill down to the necessities. i mean, we don't live extravagantly, so it is hard to cut out any bills. and her children noticed, she said. she said, quote, my son wants to sell art to pay our bills. right now all over the country we have federal employees who are trying to take on odd jobs to make ends meet. sometimes that takes start-up costs, which of course they don't have, because they don't have any income coming in the door. one story from cadillac, michigan, goes as follows -- deborah ann rabason, is a furloughed forest service worker. she says she's paying $100 to

get fingerprinted and get background checkled so she can get certified as a substitute teacher. she was down to eating one meal a day and didn't have the $100 to pay to get the fingerprinting and background check to get an odd job in order to bring some income while she wasn't getting her federal paycheck. she said that sheet left -- she said that she left to volunteer in exchange for grocery money and that, quote, i was a nanny in college. i am falling back on everything that i learned on how to survive. so, mr. president, as we can see as each day that goes by the pain grows, the pain grows for small businesses, the pain grows on families.

and the trump shutdown is also hurting our national security and creating growing harm to our national security by the day. the f.b.i. agents association put out a report today on the impacts they're seeing. one agent says, quote, i've been working 0en a longtime ms-13 investigation for over three years. we have indicted 23 m ms-139 gang members. since the shutdown, i have not had a spanish speaker in the division. we have several spanish-speaking informants. we are only able to communicate using a three-way call with a linguist in the another division. so the government shutdown is hurting the f.b.i.'s efforts to go after ms-13 gangs.

now, mr. president, i often hear president trump talking about the need to crack down on ms-13. and when it comes to ms-13, he's absolutely right. long before the president even started talking about ms-13, many of us in this body and in the house of representatives have been working to crack down on ms-13 gang violence. i think the president just discovered ms-13 when he decided to run for president, but many of us have been working on that issue for a long time. and yet now the government shutdown is undermining that effort. here's what another national security official says. quote, not being able to pay confidential human sources risks losing them and the information they provide forever. it is not a switch that we can

turn on or off. so here's another f.b.i. official indicating that the shutdown has shut off funds they use for critical informants to track down criminals. but apparently that doesn't matter to president trump. that effort is just another casualty of the shutdown he brought about. we're also seeing impacts on cybersecurity. "wired" magazine reported last week, quote, as the shutdown drags on, security risks intensify. the article notes that the new cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency at the department of homeland security is operating with a skeleton

crew, risking government websites and systems. quote, many websites have had their https encryption certificates expire during the shutdown, exposing them to potential snooping or even impersonator sites. and with most i.t. staff staying home, it seems unlikely that software patches and upgrades with being installed at their regular clip, potentially leaving them exposed to malware they'd otherwise be protected against. in other words, mr. president, since president trump has sent all these employees home without pay, they're not able to ensure that government computers are not kept up to date with the software they need to protect them against cyberattacks. and so this shutdown is leaving a lot of the u.s. government computer systems more

vulnerable. and when that happens, it makes all of us more vulenemy. -- vulnerable. in addition, the private sector that relies in many ways on a public-private partnership with cybersecurity resources from the national institutes of standards and technology, nist, says that they are not able to access that information at this point in time. those are just some of the more recent impacts that harm our national security. interestingly, though, mr. president, what we're seeing is that not everyone is hurting. it turns out that if you have friends in the trump administration, you may be able to get some relief. i think many of us were

interested last week when the mortgage industry was able to persuade the administration to bring back some employees in the i.r.s. back to work. here's what the mortgage industry said. quote, could you guys -- could you make these guys essential -- meaning some of the folks that they wanted to bring back at the i.r.s.. and, you know what? in response to the mortgage industry, the white house brought more people back. because according to the report, the shutdown was stalling an i.r.s. process to confirm borrowers' incomes before they could grant home loans. and that, of course, is a problem for the mortgage industry in making those loans. so the mortgage bankers association reached out to the department of treasury and suddenly the department of treasury said, oh, that's an

essential function. the mortgage industry wants it, we're going to bring back folks to process that information. the story quotes the chief executive of the bankers association saying, quote, i'd like to take some credit. our direct request got quite rapid results. now, mr. president, i'm glad that people are getting their income checked through i.r.s. validation so that they can get their mortgages. but the way to do this isn't to respond piecemeal to some powerful special interest. we shouldn't be playing favorites in this shutdown. and that's what we're seeing from this administration. the way to deal with it is obvious -- open up the government. so that we can resume these functions and here in the united

states senate the fastest and best way to open up the government is to have a vote. to have a vote on the bill that's on the senate calendar that's already received broad, bipartisan support here in the united states a senate. now, i want to talk a minute about homeland security. because i believe the presiding officer knows, mr. president, that the trump administration request for this portion of border security funding was $1.6 billion. that's what this their budget. you can go look on their budget online. they requested $1.6 billion. i serve on the senate appropriations committee, and the senate appropriations committee provided that request. provided that request for strengthening barriers. we did say that you can't use

that money to build that sort of new, huge wall the president used to talk about. but we provided $1.6 billion. and that was going to work out fine in the long run. and then of course in december the president said, oh, i need this $5.7 billion for a big wall. mr. president, i think all of us know who, you know, follow these closely that even before president trump was elected, we had 700 miles of barriers and fencing along certain strategic parts of the border. and we have provided funds to reinforce and strengthen some of those barriers. and so this is a totally manufactured issue by the president of the united states

in terms of all of a sudden demanding more funds than the president himself -- himself in his budget requested. so we should have a serious conversation on border security and immigration issues and we can have it now, but what we cannot do is continue to allow the country to be held hostage through this government shutdown. and as i said at the beginning of my remarks, it was the president of the united states who said on december 11 of last year, he'd be, quote, proud to shut down the government if he didn't get things his way. well, that's just not how things work, especially not how things work in an era of divided government. and so i appeal to my

colleagues, my senate republican colleagues, to work with us to find a way out. obviously the fastest way out is to vote on the bills that already have bipartisan support. we should have a conversation. but what i do find, what i do find, mr. president, to be a very sad reflection on this body is if we move forward and have a vote only on the proposal the president of the united states wants and not also a vote on the bill that previously had bipartisan support here in the united states senate, because that would send an awful message. it would send the message that the majority party has allowed an independent coequal branch of government to be totally hijacked by the president of the united states as opposed to

doing our job as a separate branch of government under article 1. if we're going to take the position that this senate with 53 republicans and 47 democrats are only going to vote on a proposal from the president of the united states, then we simply become a vehicle, an agent for the president. and that would be a great shame on this body. and so if we're going to have a vote on that bill -- and, again, i'm fine to have a vote on that bill. we should have votes in the light of day. we should have transparency and accountability. but what would be outrageous, if we say okay, we're going to vote only on the bill the president of the united states wants and not on another measure that has already received broad bipartisan support. that would be a dereliction of duty in the united states senate as a separate and coequal branch

of government. mr. president, let's end the shutdown. we have it in our power to vote now. let's do our job. the president can do what he wants, but let's do our job under the constitution. and let's do it and be held accountable by the american public. let's not use procedural devices to only allow votes on what the president wants and not votes on bills that we voted on before. so i'm hoping that this senate will do its job and do its duty and hold that vote to reopen government and not just on the president's proposal but on the other proposal as well. and in the meantime we should continue to have serious conversations about the most effective and cost-effective way to provide border security and

how we can deal with other immigration issues. but nobody should send the signal that shutting down the government is a good way to do business. i would hope that neither republican or democratic senators would want to send a signal to the executive that they're going to be rewarded for shutting down the government, now 32 days long, a real shame for the country and something that nobody should be proud of, no matter what the president of the united states says. this is nothing for anybody to be proud of. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: majority leader is recognized. mr. mcconnell: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are, yes, sir. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent r. ask unanimous consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that it be in order to move to proceed to h.r. 268. the presiding officer: is there objection in -- is there objection? without objection. mr. mcconnell: move to proceed to h.r. 268. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 15, h.r. 268, aen act making

supplemental ahe appropriations for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2019, and for other purposes. mr. mcconnell: i know of no further debate on the motion to proceed. the presiding officer: is there further debate? hearing none, the question is on the motion to proceed. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: i call up -- the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: an act making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2019, and for other purposes. mr. mcconnell: i call up the shelby amendment at the-esque did. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: mr. mcconnell for mr. shelby proposes an amendment numbered 5 to h.r. 268. mr. mcconnell: i ask the reading be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: mr. president?

the presiding officer: the minority leader is recognized. mr. schumer: i ask consent that the pending amendment be set aside and call up my amendment, number 6. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. the clerk will report. the clerk: mr. schumer proposes an amendment numbered 6. mr. schumer: i ask the reading be dispensed dispensed dispense. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i further ask consent that notwithstanding rule 22, it be in order to file cloture amendments a and 6 during thursday's session of the senate and the clotures filed on those amendments during thursday's session of the senate be treated as though they were filed during today's session of the senate and ripen at 2:30 p.m. on thursday, january 24 in the order filed. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask the senate resume consideration of the motion to proceed to s. 1. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: motion to proceed to calendar number 1, s. 1, a

bill to make improvements to certain defense and security assistance provisions and so forth and for other purposes. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it recess until 11:00 a.m. wednesday, january 23. following the prayer and pledge, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: if there is no further business do to come before the senate ask it stand in recess following the remarks of the democratic leader. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: thank you, mr. president. i thank the republican leader. the republican leader has just announced an agreement we've reached about the schedule for thursday's votes. two votes. and both of which will be amendments to the house-passed continuing resolution. first, the senate will vote on the president's proposal and then we'll vote on an amendment that is identical to the

underlying bill. now, the president said his proposal was a reasonable compromise. in fact, it is neither reasonable nor a compromise. there was no serious negotiation with any democrat about what went into the proposal. that's because the proposal was never intended to pass. it's only a thinly veiled attempt by the president to save face. anyone who looks at the legislation can tell it was designed to fail. in exchange for the wall, a the president offers only limited, temporary protections for daca and t.p.s., protections he single-handedly removed. so it's sort of like bargaining for stolen goods and then on top of that, he has proposed new, radical changes to our asylum system, without consulting any democrats, changes that convert our nation's -- that controvert our nation's most fundamental and precious values. i hope it will roundly be

defeated on thursday. the good news is, after that vote, we have a second amendment that could break us out of the morass we are in. the senate will proceed to an amendment to the house bill that is identical to the underlying legislation. in other words, for the first time, we will get a vote on whether to open up the government without any decision one way or the other on border security. the proposal also adds necessary disaster aid to several states that were recentry ravaged by natural disasters. people are sailing, isn't there a way out of -- people are saying, isn't there a way out of this mess? isn't there a way to relieve the burden on the 00,000 federal workers not being paid? isn't there a way to get government services open? first and then debate what we should do for border security. well, now there is a way. and that is the second vote that

will occur on thursday. it would renew all of the portions of the government until february 8, open them briefly but open them it will, allowing workers to get paid and to get their back pay. and it will allow us to then debate, without hostage-taking, without temper tantrum, without anything, how we can best do border security, get that done hopefully by february 8 and keep the government open. so if you're looking for a way to open up the government, this is the way. and i hope my republican colleagues, many of whom were circulating a letter that does basically the same thing as this proposal, without the disaster aid, to sign, to vote yes. the american people are looking for a solution.

i am glad that we will have a vote that will bring us near that solution, much close to that solution. and that is the second vote here, which will open up the government and then allow us to debate border security and, again, i urge enough of my republican colleagues to join we democrats in voting toker that proposal. it's already -- in voting for that proposal. it's already passed the house. it could open up the government. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate stands in recess until 11:00 a.m. tomorrow. >> the senate will be back at 11:00 a.m. eastern tomorrow, but they are awaiting moments of today's session. news that they will move forward to a couple of votes. one is the measure that introduced by president trump, his proposal to fund the border wall and reopen the government

with mitch mcconnell the majority leader introduced in that plan on the floor today. that will get about 2:30 on thursday afternoon as well a measure been passed by the democratic house. both of those measures will get side-by-side votes thursday in the u.s. senate. as always, live coverage is here on c-span2. it was a short session in the senate today. they came in at 1:00 about the republican and democratic leader laid out the position on the 302nd day of the government shut down. >> mr. president, here is what happened this weekend w