course, the first thing that came to mind was bill of rights. especially freedom of speech because that is something that's just so ingrained in the american identity and it is a topic that has been at the forefront, especially of the past two years in terms of the press and in terms of our increasingly divided political climate. so how could we not approach this subject and apply it to what does it mean to be an american. >> see the top 21 winning entries on c-span in april and you can watch every winning student cam documentary on-line at student cam.org. >> the senate is meeting on this thursday to continue debate on emergency disaster funds. they're expected to voice vote a motion to win official work on the nearly 13 1/2 billion dollar bill and then start on amendments. lawmakers will because that seib at 1:30 eastern to consider the nomination of former national highway traffic administration head nicole mason to head the federal

highway administration. a confirmation vote is expected at 2 eastern. now to live senate coverage here on c-span2. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain of the senate, dr. black, will offer prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. king of our lives,

we acknowledge your sovereignty, believing because of you we live and move and have our being. show our lawmakers how to use this day's fleeting minutes to accomplish your purposes on earth. make our senators your instruments of deliverance, causing justice to roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream. sanctify their thoughts, words, and deeds throughout this day and all of their tomorrows. lord, provide them with

goodness, grace, and wisdom for the living of these days. we pray in your holy name. amen. the president pro tempore: will you join me in 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: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. mr. grassley: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa grass i ask for one minute to speak as if in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: governor reynolds of iowa designated our state as a severe weather awareness week. that goes beyond just the flooding situation, but it's because of the catastrophic flooding throughout our state and to tell everybody that it's

not over. the national oceanic and atmospheric administration has warned of significant spring flooding yet to come. we're seeing increased flows in the missouri and mississippi and their tributaries. iowans should review their insurance policies for gaps and consider flood insurance as one of the things that governor reynolds is suggesting. also, it would be good to have a plan in case it's necessary to evacuate, including important personal belongings and pets. fema's website ready.gov can help you with some of that information. ice, snow, severe weather including massive snow storms, flooding, tornadoes and heavy winds, the key is to be prepared, help our neighbors, and stay vigilant. and i thank governor reynolds for alerting people to the future as well as just worrying about the past. i yield the floor.

thank you. mr. mcconnell: madam president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: in recent months, my home state of kentucky has been hit hard by severe weather. over half of our 120 counties have reported flood damage. the governor has placed the entire commonwealth under a state of emergency and mobilized resources to help with recovery.

local state and federal emergencies have started assessing the flood damage. my staff and i are monitoring the progress to provide assistance wherever we can. and i look forward to meeting with the kentucky emergency management director later today to get the latest update. unfortunately our state is not alone. far from it. many states are currently bearing heavy burdens in the wake of powerful natural disasters. families in florida and the carolinas are still picking up pieces from a damaging hurricane season. in alabama and georgia, recovery is just beginning after vicious tornadoes and the effects of serious flooding remain across the southeast. and in the midwest in places like iowa and missouri, kansas and nebraska, many americans are still waiting, praying, and working to mitigate the destruction from devastating flooding. many communities are still literally under water. i know the entire senate is

especially mindful right now of this destruction in america's heartland so i'm grateful for the efforts of several colleagues to bring forward a package of supplemental disaster relief funds to address the most urgent needs. the legislation we're considering this week would help growers and producers with storm-related crop losses. it would help local infrastructure from roads to schools and hospitals resume full operation. and it would help our nation's military restore readiness at bases and installations that were caught in harm's way. so thanks to chairman shelby, senators isakson, perdue, scott, rubio and others, we'll have the opportunity to deliver critical resources to the communities facing the long road back to normal. so i would hope each of our colleagues will join me in supporting this measure which will do just that. now, madam president, on an entirely different matter, this week the american people saw our democratic colleagues go on the record on a truly astonishing

policy proposal. a truly astonishing policy proposal. after months of enthusiastic declarations of support, of tripping over one another to prove their devotion to the far-left core of the new democratic party, the vast majority of our colleagues across the aisle were unable to vote against even an obviously ludicrous proposal to tank the u.s. economy and to leave american workers out in the cold. now you might think that after their radical proposal met with such an inglorious end my colleagues might choose to pause and take stock. well, think again. just yesterday our democratic colleagues introduced a senate version of speaker pelosi's sweeping legislation to rewrite the rules of american politics to benefit one side.

new washington rules for how citizens can exercise political speech. new washington systems to funnel taxpayer dollars into the pockets of political campaigns. and an unprecedented washington intrusion into state and local election law all across our country. as i argued before, it conveniently turns out the vast majority of their proposed changes seem tailored to help more democrats get elected and stay elected. hence, my name for the legislation, the democratic politician protection act. apparently our friends are under the impression that if democrats aren't winning as many elections as they'd like, then the entire process by which we elect our representatives must certainly be broken. if democrats don't like an outcome, then the rules themselves need to be tossed aside. this seems to be emerging as a kind of pattern on the other side of the aisle.

when our constitution, our institutions, or the american people disappoint our democratic colleagues instead of taking the hint and perhaps making their own positions more mainstream, they look instead to change the rules. after they've failed to defeat the nomination of justice kavanaugh last year, liberal leaders decided the underlying structure of the american judiciary needed to be radically overhauled to suit their whims. they set out to rehabilitate the absurd notion of court packing, a term that since the 1930's has been synonymous in american history with the idea of an unprincipled pair paragraph. the idea that sometimes they lose elections and republican presidents sometimes subsequently appoint supreme court justices is apparently no longer tolerated. instead of filling existing vacancies why shouldn't the next

democratic president make up a bunch of new ones, create a bunch of new ones so the far left can stack the court. forget about nine justices. forget about judges who don't wear red robes or blue robes but black robes. forget about interpreting and applying our laws and constitution the way they're written instead of how partisans might wish they were written. the far left wants to forget about all of that, madam president. because democrats would rather rewrite the rules. out of history can this talk of court packing. a notion that would threaten the rule of law and our american judicial system as we have long understood it. a truly radical proposal that has been dead and buried by bipartisan consensus for almost a century. but now, now president obama's

attorney general eric holder says we should be talking even about expanding the number of people who serve on the supreme court if there is a democratic president. one of our senate colleagues who is currently running for president called this interesting idea that i would have to think more about. "the new york times" reported that at a recent campaign event, another democratic candidate said he's open to the idea after being asked about it by a member of a new far-left group that is literally named -- this is their name. listen to this -- pack the courts. pack the courts. i hope the lion's share of our democratic colleagues will speak out forcefully against exhuming this thoroughly discredited idea. i hope my colleagues will have the courage to look at these far-left agitators in the eye and tell them that some extra diss and some institutions are more important than partisan

point scoring. but given that we've already seen democrats rush -- rush to headlong embraced schemes like the democratic politician protection act, medicare for none, and the so-called green new deal, i have to say at this point that kind of courage of statement would come as a pleasant surprise. now, madam president, i understand there is a bill at the desk due a second reading. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the clerk will read the title of the bill for the second time. the clerk: h.r. 297, an act to extend the federal recognition to the little shell tribe of chip would indians of montana and for other purposes. mr. mcconnell: in order to place the bill on the calendar under 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. the senator from alabama. a senator: i call up my amendment. go ahead. the presiding officer: morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of the motion to proceed to h.r. 268 which the clerk will report. the clerk: motion to proceed to h.r. 268, an act making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2019, and for other purposes. mr. mcconnell: madam president? the presiding officer: all postcloture time has expired. the question is on the motion to proceed. all in favor say aye. those opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the bill. the clerk: calendar number 15, h.r. 268, an act making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2019, and for other purposes.

mr. mcconnell: madam president, i ask consent that withdraw amendments 5 and 6. the presiding officer: without objection. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mr. shelby: i call up my amendment number 201. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from alabama, mr. shelby, proposes amendment numbered 201. mr. shelby: madam president, i ask that the reading be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i send to the desk a substitute amendment. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the cloture motion. the clerk: cloture motion. we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on senate amendment numbered 201 to h.r. 268, making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2019, and for other purposes, signed by 17 senators as follows. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i have an amendment at the desk and ask the clerk to report. the presiding officer: the clerk

will report. the clerk: the senator from kentucky, mr. mcconnell, proposes an amendment numbered 213 to amendment numbered 201. mr. mcconnell: i ask for the yeas and nays on my amendment. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the yeas and nays are ordered. mr. mcconnell: i have a second-degree amendment at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from kentucky, mr. mcconnell, proposes an amendment numbered 214 to amendment numbered 213. mr. mcconnell: i ask the reading be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i have an amendment to the text of the underlying bill. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from kentucky, mr. mcconnell, proposes an amendment numbered 215 to the language proposed to be stricken by amendment numbered 201. mr. mcconnell: i ask the reading be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask for the yeas and nays on my amendment. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the yeas and nays are ordered. mr. mcconnell: i have a second-degree amendment at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from kentucky, mr. mcconnell, proposes an amendment numbered

216 to amendment numbered 215. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the mandatory quorum calls for the cloture motions be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. leahy: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. leahy: madam president, i ask unanimous consent the call of the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. leahy: madam president, i ask consent that warren montgomery from my office be granted floor privileges for the remainder of today. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. leahy: i thank the presiding officer. you know, i thought there was exceptionally good news on sunday that special counsel

robert mueller did not implicate our president in a criminal conspiracy with russia to attack our elections. the alternative, of course, would have been nothing short of catastrophic for our republic. and i also want to express my appreciation to mr. mueller and his team for their service to our country in determining the facts of what happened during what was an unprecedented attack on our democracy. this investigation endured relentless attacks during its 22-month existence. in fact, the investigation by mr. mueller was attacked 1,100 times by president trump alone during this time. these attacks may have tried to politicize and undermine mr. mueller's investigation, but they didn't deter its course. in fact, anybody who knows

robert mueller would know he would not be intimidated by anybody, republican or democrat. in fact, far from being deterred, mr. mueller obtained 37 indictments including against numerous close aides of the president. that marks the special counsel's investigation as one of the most productive and consequential in our history. the american people and their representatives in congress now deserve to see the special counsel's work. the oversight authority of this body is deeply rooted in the constitution. we would be derelict in our duties if we did not do everything within our power to obtain the full report and its underlying evidence. we already know from the 37 indictments and the testimony received by the judiciary committee that this investigation has uncovered

serious misconduct we do know the trump campaign was informed that russia had stolen democratic e-mails months before anybody else. we know that a senior member of the campaign enthusiastically accepted an offer from the russian government to provide, quote, incriminating, close quote, information on hillary clinton that afterward he and president trump blatantly misrepresented that meeting. we know from roger stone's indictment that the president was told about the coming release of stone e-mails and the campaign asked stone to keep them apprised of the development with future releases. and we know during all of this the president was hiding his pursuit of a lucrative business deal in moscow.

now, these activities may not amount to a crime, but they certainly amount to serious misconduct that reached the highest levels of the campaign and this administration. and they certainly raise questions about the president's baffling relationship with russia and vladimir putin. this relationship has been baffling to both republicans and democrats. and that doesn't even touch on obstruction of justice. attorney general barr's letter revealed there is still nonpublic evidence of the president's attempt to interfere with this investigation. the special counsel did not conclude whether the president's obsessive interference in this investigation qualifies as obstruction. yet, he stated that his report does not exonerate the president, does not exonerate

the president. that is an extraordinary statement. apparently, attorney general barr believes there is insufficient evidence to charge obstruction, but mr. barr also believes it is not obstruction for a president to interfere with an investigation. exercising the article 2 powers. and regardless he believes the only mechanism for holding a sitting president accountable is through congress. well, let's accept all of that -- and i don't necessarily accept all of it, but let's assume he's accurate in that. then i would hope he has agreed it's the judgment of congress and of the american people, so the utmost importance in this moment is simply no justification for even a portion

of the mueller report. the president has claimed it totally exonerates him with respect to the collusion investigation, grand jury secrecy can be waived by the courts when there is a particular need that outweighs the interest and the secrecy. with respect to the obstruction investigation, executive privilege cannot be used to hide evidence of a potential crime. in fact, if you want to hide evidence of a potential crime, a crime under executive privilege, all they have to do is look at a supreme court case where that was tried. it's called u.s. versus richard nixon. he claimed it would likely not survive a challenge under uz v. nixon. it's also hard to imagine such

hypothetical claims were not waived when administration witnesses talked with the special counsel's office. transparency is really the touchstone of our democracy. any attempt to hide swaths of the mueller report from public scrutiny is only going to fuel suspicions that president trump's justice department, which represents not president trump but all the united states, is instead playing the role of president trump's defense team. if no person, however powerful, is truly above the law, then no person should be permitted to conceal the results of such a critical national security investigation from public view. i hope in the days and weeks ahead, the senate has something to say about that.

madam president, every one of us, republican and democrat alike, has a stake in knowing what is in that report and seeing the whole report. after months and months of work, all the investigations, all of the indictments, all the grand jury hearings, to say we have to rely on just a four-page summary, that's not enough. i don't accept that. i would hope that no senator, republican or democrat, would accept it. i would note that the house of representatives voted unanimously, every republican, every democrat, to have the report released. and i note that when we tried to have a similar resolution here,

it was blocked by the republican leader. i think the republican leader and all of us say let the american people know the facts. madam president, i do not see anybody else seeking recognition. i would note on another matter disaster legislation, appropriation, legislation has been filed that. there will be discussions on that. the house of representatives has a bill which does a great deal toward the disaster relief for all americans who were hurt by the recent disasters in our country. i had proposed some modification of it which would include all americans, and i believe the house would have accepted it. i am concerned if now we have

before us a bill that excludes a large number of americans, those living in puerto rico, people who serve noblably in our military to help our country are americans. they should not be excluded for whatever reason. and so we'll have a debate on that next week. i hope very soon for the american people we can have a resolution and an honest and clear one that brings relief to those who suffered from disasters -- fires, hurricanes, floods -- throughout our country. with that, madam president, i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. before i do that, are we under divided time? we're not. i'd just suggest the absence of

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

mr. thune: madam president? the presiding officer: the majority whip. mr. thune: madam president, i understand the senate is in a quorum call. the presiding officer: we are. mr. thune: i would ask unanimous consent the quorum call be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: madam president, when republicans took office after the 2016 election, we had one goal in mind -- make life better for american families. and we knew that a big part of that was getting our economy going again. after years of sluggish economic growth, family budgets were stretched thin. getting ahead had frequently been replaced by getting by. wages were stagnant and jobs and opportunities were often few and far between.

and so republicans and the president got right to work. we repealed burdensome regulations that were hamstringing economic growth, and we passed a comprehensive reform of our outdated tax code. you might ask, why the tax code? well, the tax code has a huge effect on american families' prosperity. it helps determine how much you bring home in your paycheck and how much you have left over to spend or save. and it helps determine what kind of jobs, wages, and opportunities are available to you. a small business owner struggling to afford a heavy tax bill is unlikely to have the money to hire a new worker or to expand her business. a larger business is going to find it hard to create jobs or improve benefits for employees if it's struggling to stay competitive against foreign businesses paying much less in taxes. prior to the passage of the tax cuts and jobs act, our ttacker code was not helping -- or tax code was not helping american workers. it was taking too much from

americans' paychecks and it was making it difficult for businesses to grow and to create jobs. and so we passed the tax cuts and jobs act to put more money in americans' pockets, to spur economic growth, and to expand opportunities for american workers. we cut tax rates for american families, doubled the child tax credit and nearly doubled the standard deduction. we lowered tax rates across the board for owners of lower- and medium sized businesses and farms and ranchers p. we lowered our nation's massive tax rate which up in until last year was the highest corporate tax rate in the world. we expanded abilities ability -- we expanded companies' abilities. we brought the tax system into the 21st century so that american businesses are not operating a the a competitive disadvantage next to their

foreign counterparts. now we're seeing the results. our economy is thriving. economic growth from the fourth quarter of 2017 to the fourth quarter of 2018 was 3.1 p.r.c. the -- was 3.1%, the strongest growth we've seen. the longest streak in nearly 50 years. the number of job openings has once again exceeded the number of job seekers. department of labor reports that january was the p 11th straight month with more job openings than people looking for work. the economy has added more than 5.3 million jobs since president trump was elected. job growth has averaged 209,000 jobs a month over the last 12 months exceeding the 2017 average by 30,000 jobs a month. wage growth has accelerated. wages are growing at a rate of

3.4%, the seventh straight month at which wages have grown at a rate of 3% or greater. median household income sat an all-time high. business investment is up which means more jobs and opportunities for american workers. u.s. manufacturing is booming. small business hiring recently hit a record high. and, madam president, the list goes on p. this is a big turn. after years of economic stagnation during the obama administration, some are predicting that sluggish growth would be normal. it was predicted that the economy would grow at a rate of 2% in 2018 and 1.7% in 2019. after republicans cut burdensome regulations and passed an historic tax reform bill, the office substantially revised that prediction predicting 2.7%

growth in 2019. the economy has delivered t importantly, the benefits of our thriving economy are being spread far and wide. the lowest wage earners saw the fastest wage growth in 2018. "the wall street journal" recently reported -- and i quote -- all sorts of people who had previously had trouble landing a job are now finding work. racial minorities, those are less education and people working in the lowest paying jobs, are getting bigger pay raises and in many cases experiencing the lowest unemployment rate ever recorded for their groups. they're joining manufacturing workers, women in their prime working years, americans with disabilities, and those with criminal records, among others, in finding improved job prospects after years of disappointment, end quote. that from "the wall street journal." madam president, tax cuts and other republican economic policies are making life better for american families.

so what do democrats want to do? continue with the policies that are bringing relief to american families? that would make sense. unfortunately not. democrats want to raise taxes -- by a lot -- to pay for the socialist fantasies that they're now embracing. plans like the green new deal and medicare for all would result in massive tax hikes on just about everyone. our economy would suffer and american families would see a permanent reduction in their standard of living. it's deeply alarming that the democrat party is rapidly turning into the socialist party. and it's vitally important that we ensure that hardworking americans never have to live under democrat socialist fantasies. republicans are committed to protecting americans from any attempt to undo the economic progress that we've made, and we will continue working to

strengthen our economy even further. madam president, i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. schumer: madam president?

the presiding officer: the democratic leader. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: now, madam president, on monday, the trump administration doubled down on their assault on american health carcare by supporting an efforto completely eliminate the health care law through the courts. people scratch their head. are they really doing it? after trying for two years unsuccessfully? after losing the election? yup, they were. the action is no small matter. the trump administration's radical support for the whole sale elimination of the health care law would send our health care system into certain chaos. if the trump administration has its way, it would send premiums soaring for millions of americans. it would revoke coverage for tens of millions more who gained coverage through medical expansions. it would strike protections for an estimated 133 million adults

in america who have preexisting medical conditions, even people who get coverage from their employer. let me say that again. there are 133 million americans who have preexisting medical conditions. if the trump administration has its way, the insurance company could just tell those 133 million and their families cut you off. we don't want to pay for your insurance anymore because it's too expensive. your daughter has cancer, your wife has severe diabetes. it's a disgrace. and let's not forget the system would impose billions of dollars in new prescription drug costs on seniors on medicare. the consequences are dire, and that's why we are introducing an amendment to ensure that not a dime of the american people's money goes to the trump administration's fight to destroy the entire health care

system. not one cent to the department of vuz should be used to hurt -- of justice should be used to hurt americans like this. donald trump campaigned on end obamacare. then the republican party and even we thought trump himself saw they had no replacement. this repeal and replace, there was no replacement. they couldn't come up with one. and so what is now the republican party standing for? well, here it is. the republican party will become the party of health care, says donald trump. absolutely not. here's what his tweet should say if he's being honest and telling the truth to the american people. the republican party will become the party that ended your health care. you cannot have a situation where the trump administration, president trump says one thing and their attorney general goes to court to do the opposite. you cannot or should not have a situation where a republican -- where republican senators get up and say we need to expand health care for people and then they

say not a peep when their own president tries to strip it away from them. president trump says the republican party wants to be the party of health care. well, i say god help the middle class if republicans are the party of health care. what, dare i ask, is their plan? let me ask leader mcconnell and every republican senator, and i hope their constituents will ask them, too, because this is the number one issue across the country. we should ask our republican friends and the president what's your plan to deal with prescription drug costs? costs are at an all-time high. instead, they are supporting this lawsuit which would impose billions of dollars in prescription drug costs on seniors. we ask president trump and leader mcconnell, what's your plan to get more people covered

on high-quality health insurance that they can actually afford at a time when premiums are still rising because of sabotage by the trump administration, how will they bring relief? but instead, our republican colleagues, by their silence, are assenting to a lawsuit that would kick tens of millions of people off insurance. i ask president trump, senator mcconnell, and our republican colleagues what's your plan to protect people with preexisting conditions? republicans say over and over again that they support keeping safeguards for preexisting conditions, but instead they're supporting this lawsuit whereby their silent assenting to their president, their party's president's lawsuit completely wipes the protections for preexisting conditions away. the american people deserve answers because president trump insisted yesterday that he has a

, quote, a plan that is far better than obamacare. we all know that's not true. he just talks off the top of his head. he said it at the lunch. well, president trump, what is your plan that's better than obamacare? you may not have all the details, but give us the main points. when you're president, you have a responsibility as people's lives are at stake. they need health care. to not simply say we have a better plan, file a lawsuit which gets rid of the existing plans and give people no inclination, no even clue as to what that plan is. now, why is this? why is this happening? well, one, we know that president trump has no fidelity to issues. he talks off the top of his head. he doesn't know what the issues are all about. he's the least-informed president we have ever had in american history about issues. he just says what he thinks sounds nice at the moment.

but then his administration does the hard-right thing all the time, the extreme thing that's in the narrow special interests but not in the american people's. president trump's actual administration seems to be far to the right even of the mainstream of the republican party. why does that happen? well, here's one reason. as reported last night, mick mulvaney, who is now the chief of staff, was o.m.b. head and still sort of has a lot of say over that agency. it was reported that night it was mick mulvaney against the advice of others who convinced president trump to take this radical position on health care. so we all know who's holding the strings, who is putting in president trump's head these

hard-right ideas which his administration continually effectuates and almost never backs off from. we now seem to be living in the mick mulvaney administration. the same person who said we need to end medicare as we know it, that, mr. president, should send a chill down every american's spine. let me repeat that again. the mick mulvaney administration, which president trump is a willing follower, if you will, says we should end medicare as we know it. do americans believe that? no. do republicans believe that? not most of them. but this man mulvaney, not elected, puts ideas in president trump's head, and that's what president trump does. so make no mistake about it.

the ultimate responsibility is president trump's, but when you wonder why the words the president says so differ from so many administration policies, and it's the policies that are hurting americans, the reason is mulvaney. so here's what the mulvaney administration looks like. extreme budget cuts to the programs that the middle-class families depend on. cuts to the department of education, transportation and science, severe cuts. severe cuts to e.p.a. cuts to programs that are most in need, snap. cutting medicare faster. and repeated government shutdowns. yesterday it was reported the administration is considering no more fannie and feddie. no more help for the middle class to buy a home. another great mulvaney idea. mick mulvaney is one of the

five-most-hard-right people in the house of representatives. one of the authors of the previous shutdown. his views are far, far away from the average american. and donald trump, who gets full blame for mulvaney's ideas because he's enacting them, seems to be following him lock, stock, and barrel. if the president actually campaigned in 2016 on these mulvaney ideas, he would have been roundly defeated. if he goes -- when he goes to michigan tonight and he talks -- if he talked about these mulvaney ideas, he would get booed even by his own supporters. he enacts the mulvaney ideas. his justice department is now suing to get rid of health care, something mulvaney has always abdicated for. president trump, your administration is now the

mulvaney administration, and that should terrify every single american. it should terrify any thoughtful republican senator. make no mistake about it. donald trump's hard-right administration, which so hurts the middle class and so helps the narrow, wealthy special and corporate interests, the brain child of many of these ideas comes from mr. mulvaney, he puts it into the cipher of donald trump, donald trump enacts it, and the american people suffer. on puerto rico. it's been 18 months since hurricane maria and hurricane irma devastated the people of puerto rico and the surrounding islands. these were extraordinary disasters that required an extraordinary response. president trump has hardhearted ly said that the island of puerto rico has received too much aid. he complained that the u.s.

government had already given $91 billion in relief. mr. president, stop making up your own facts. $90 billion is the amount of damage these storms caused. the people of puerto rico are suffering. they have received a sliver of the funding they need. it's hard to fathom the depths of cruelty that it takes for the president to treat the people of puerto rico this way. they're american citizens. democrats have taken action. the house passed a comprehensive disaster bill two months ago. it would have provided aid to puerto rico and the other states that are hurt. we want to help all those states. that's what americans do. but donald trump has told our senate republicans no aid for puerto rico. instead of standing up and saying that's wrong, that's not fair, they seem to be going along.

this is shameful. we have an opportunity to change that by fixing the disaster bill currently on the floor. i would tell our republican friends we want to help people in the states where there's flooding in the middle west, where there's wildfires in the west, where there's droughts, but the bill that they are trying to pass here is never going to pass the house. they know that. to get disaster aid for the country, well needed in so many places, our republican friends are going to have to tell donald trump his cold, cruel-hearted and divisive policy of not letting any of the aid that has already been allocated to puerto rico to be distributed there must fall. finally, mueller.

one final matter. yesterday, for the second time this week, leader mcconnell blocked our request made by the ranking member of the judiciary committee, dianne feinstein, to make public the full report authored by special counsel mueller. i want to thank senator feinstein for making the request and for standing up for transparency. as senator feinstein said, a four-page summary from a political appointee is hardly a sufficient substitute for special counsel mueller's two-year investigation. there are reports this morning that the mueller report is over 300 pages. all we have gotten is four-page summaries by someone appointed by the administration who before he took office felt the president could never, almost never be called for obstruction

of justice, one of the main parts of the mueller investigation. for mr. barr to quickly issue a four-page report in his attempt to try and exonerate president trump and now to delay the release of an over 300-page report written by mueller so the american people and we senators and congressmen can see what was written has too much of the odor of political expediency to help the man who appointed him, president trump. the american people have a right to know the full scope of the facts behind russia's interference in our election. the american people have a right to make their own conclusions about actions taken by this administration. the american people deserve to have full confidence in the integrity of our system and the impartiality of the rule of law, and only the full release of the

report can affirm that. what i'm saying here shouldn't be controversial. in the house, it passed 420-0 to make the resolution -- the resolution to make the full report public. voted for by such partisan defenders of the president like representative jordan and representative meadows. and transparency, we all know, is all the more important because the attorney general has made no secret of his antipathy toward this investigation and appears intent on holding the report secret for as long as possible. i guess his hope is let the dust settle and then no one will pay attention. well, he's wrong about that. he's prolonging this thing. remember, this attorney general made clear that he was hostile to the special counsel and opposed to mueller's inquiry into obstruction of justice, and then he opines about it two days

later without showing anybody any backing? that is so wrong. according to press reports on his phone call yesterday with mr. nadler, mr. barr would not even commit to releasing the whole report at any time. he wouldn't commit to a date. he wasn't even willing to disclose how many pages are in the counsel's report, as if that were some kind of state secret. since that conversation, there are reports it is over 300 pages. if it is, it's just disgraceful for mr. barr who was able to read through it and summarize it in 48 hours to say now he can't release it because he is busy culling it. the administration -- the attorney general must end the stalling and the secrecy. it's not going to be a happy opening chapter for the attorney general when history looks back upon what he has done.

we should make the report public now. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: i'm pleased that my colleague, finance committee ranking member senator wyden, will be joining me in introducing the taxpayers first act of 2019 later today. this legislation seeks to modernize the internal revenue service, improve taxpayer services, and strengthen taxpayer protections. the package of i.r.s. reforms we introduced today is the culmination of years of work by both the senate finance committee and the house ways and means committee. it is truly a bipartisan package that adopts provisions authored

by committee members on both sides of the aisle of the house and the senate. former chairman hatch of utah deserves a lot of credit for working to reach a bipartisan, bicameral agreement at the end of the last congress that is reflected in the legislation that we will be introducing this afternoon. i know senator hatch put a lot of work into trying to get this legislation across the finish line last year. unfortunately, it wasn't meant to be due to both political realities and maybe time constraints, even more so s however, his work -- even more so. however, his work helped us get to where we are today. in other words, we're advancing a great deal of what senator hatch worked on.

and our hope is that it will allow us to move quickly this year and finally get these commonsense reforms of the internal revenue service enacted into law. some of the i.r.s. reforms in this legislation include establishing a truly independent office of appeals within the internal revenue service. this will help ensure the playing field is not tilted against taxpayers when those taxpayers are in dispute with the internal revenue service. to help bring the internal revenue service into the 21st century, the legislation also would require the i.r.s. to submit to congress a plan to redesign the structure of the agency to improve efficiency, enhance cybersecurity, and

better meet taxpayer needs. it also includes a number of provisions to protect the taxpayers better from tax i.d. theft and improve taxpayer interaction with the i.r.s., should they become a victim of that crime. this includessesting could a single point -- this includes creating a single point, a point of contact, in the i.r.s. to help the taxpayers navigate the bureaucracy and resolve their issues as quickly as possible. to provide taxpayers with better protection against becoming such a victim in the first place, the legislation will expand to all taxpayers an i.r.s. program that currently allows victims, and only victims, of tax i.d. theft to obtain a personalized p.i.n.

that better secures the identity of any taxpayer that asks for it. the legislation also puts in place new safeguards to protect taxpayers against recent i.r.s. enforcement abuses of so-called structuring laws. on several occasions, the i.r.s. used these laws to seize bank accounts of small business owners when no underlying criminal activity was present. this includes seizing $33,000 from a small business owner who operated a small restaurant in arnolds park, iowa, for nearly 40 years.

just the i.r.s. at a whim taking $33 billion from that small business caused the business to close and the owner did nothing wrong in the end. provisions in our bill will help ensure these types of abuses never occur again. i would also like to note the improvements to the i.r.s. whistle-blower program that are contained in the bill. in 2006, i authored legislation that established mandatory i.r.s. whistle-blower program. since it was established, the i.r.s. whistle-blower program has turned into one of the most effective programs addressing tax evasion, leading then to the recovery of more than $5 billion in taxes that would have otherwise been lost to fraud.

unfortunately, too many i.r.s. whistle-blowers continue to be treated like a skunk at a picnic. they often wait for years, and while they're waiting for years, it's in the dark then, with no indication of whether the information they provided to the i.r.s. would ever lead to a successful recovery or whether their reward is even being processed. moreover, they're often putting their careers on the line, exposing corporate tax shelters with no protection, should their employer decide to retaliate. provisions in our bill will help to address these issues by authorizing the i.r.s. to communicate with whistle-blowers in certain instances while protecting taxpayer privacy. what we're really saying in

there, you ought to let these, which that are patriotic people -- you ought to let these whistle-blowers, which are pa trottic people, treat them like the patriotic citizens they are. the bill would also extend anti-retaliation provisions to the i.r.s. whistle-blowers that are presently afforded to whistle-blowers under other whistle-blower laws. the false claims act, which i authored in 1986, as well as a more recent sarbanes-oxley act that i didn't -- that came out of another committee that i didn't serve on. finally, the bill includes modification to the private debt collection program. i've long been a proponent of this program as a way to tackle the tax gap and to promote tax

fairness. it works by assigning certain tax debt that the i.r.s. otherwise would not attempt to collect through an outside contractor to pursue. in other words, if the i.r.s. isn't going to go after all the money that's owed to the taxpayers -- and we don't want one dollar more than what people owe, but we want every dollar that people do owe -- if they're not going to go after it, we ought to find some way to go after it. recent quarterly revenue reports demonstrate the program has the potential to bring in hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue on an annual basis. i understand some of my colleagues, particularly on the house ways and means wheat, have been concerned that the -- on the house ways and means

committee, have been concerned too heavily on the low-income taxpayers. we listened to these concerns and worked to develop a sensible compromise while yet strengthening the long-term viability of this program. these are just a few of the provisions in this bill. there are many others that it will go a long ways towards making the i.r.s. work better for taxpayers. i also know that some of my colleagues have additional ideas that we were unable to include in this package. i want them to know that i see this legislation as a first step towards refiring -- reforming the i.r.s. and strengthening taxpayers' protections. i agree that there is more that we can do. i am committed to evaluating additional proposals with input from all of our colleagues on a reform that could be included in

a package of additional i.r.s. reforms later this congress. but first things first. companion legislation is being introduced in the house which i hope that the senate will receive in the near future. so i ask all of my colleagues to join me and ranking member wyden in supporting this bipartisan bill. now, another thing that i shouldn't have to come to the floor to talk about -- and it'll only take me about three or four minutes -- is something that i'm still hearing these questions about my intent to my objection to the nomination of william evanina. these are the same questions that i heard last year when i initially placed my hold on the evanina amendment. and, by the way, my hold is printed in the record and the rules of this senate require all members that put a hold on a

nomination or a bill within two days after doing that to put something in the record, and most senators aren't following that rule of the senate. so if you've got some disagreement about something and you put a secret hold on and somebody ought to sit down wants to talk to you and see what's wrong, how are they going to know who it is? that's why in 2011, on a vote of 96-4, that wyden and i got these rules so that there should be no secret holds in the united states senate. so i'm back here again. this statement will be the fourth time since june 4, 2018, that i've publicly expressed my reason for this hold, and i spoke here on the senate floor. it seems to me no one has been listening to what i've been saying. but what's unusual about that? as i've said repeatedly, the

judiciary committee has experienced difficulty in obtaining relevant documents and briefings from the justice department and the office of director of national intelligence, deputy attorney general rod rosenstein -- ally assured me that the -- personally assured me that the judiciary committee would receive information provided to the house select committee on intelligence with regard to negotiations about the pending subpoenas from that committee related to the 2016 election controversies. i haven't received equal access, as promised. on august 7, 2018, i wrote to the justice department and pointed out that the house intelligence committee received documents related to bruce orr

that the committee on the judiciary did not receive. and, without objection, mr. president, i'd like to have that letter inserted in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: the department flat-out denied that those records had been provided to the house intelligence committee. now, that wasn't the truth. after my staff confronted the department, we've eventually received some documents. there's no reason for stonewalling. there's no reason for lack of cooperation. plain and simple. in that august 2018 letter, i asked for additional documents based on my equal access agreement with deputy attorney general rosenstein. to date, the department still hasn't provided a response. i later learned that the justice department has taken the position that director coats has

prohibited them from sharing the requested records with the committee. then, in addition to the outstanding records request, in may 2018 the director of national intelligence and the justice department provided a briefing in connection with the pending house intelligence subpoena to which no senate judiciary committee member was invited. the judiciary committee's attempt to schedule an equivalent briefing has been ignored. the lack of cooperation then obviously, as any one of the 100 senators would do, the bureaucracy, the faceless bureaucrats, are facing our hand. congressional oversight is a constitutional requirement. it seems that every administration -- republican or democrat -- i'm forced to remind them of that constitutional responsibility of oversight.

and that responsibility cuts both ways. the executive branch can't hide documents from one congressional committee, especially one which clearly has oversight jurisdiction over the matter, and to provide the very same documents -- at the same time provide those very same documents to another committee. in this case, my colleagues on the senate intelligence committee have received these documents. now, i don't blame them at all for getting that information. i say to them, full speed ahead with whatever you need to do. however, that doesn't mean that this senator has to stand down. quite the opposite. i'm going to fight until i get what's been promised to me, but more importantly, what's been promised to 21 members of the judiciary committee. i think it's worthy to note that it the authorizing resolution that created the senate

intelligence committee made clear that other committees still have authority to review intelligence documents. for example, senate resolution 400 explicitly reserves for other standing committees such as the judiciary committee independent authority to, quote, study and review any intelligence activity to the extent that that such activity directly affects a matter others within their jurisdiction of such committee, end of quote. and continuing to quote, and to obtain full and prompt access to the product of the intelligence activities of any department or any agency, end of quote, within that jurisdiction. the information i seek is connected to the foreign intelligence surveillance court. that court is within the jurisdiction of the judiciary

committee. now to be fair, the justice department has provided access to fisa applications, and some of the relevant background material on more than one occasion. one must give credit where credit is due. however, if they provided the judiciary committee access to that information, what is holding them back from showing the rest? the secrecy just doesn't make any sense, and it's secrecy that often prevents accountability. i won't release my hold until the justice department upholds its equal access agreement with me and the judiciary committee. and in no way am i questioning mr. evanina's credentials. director coats and others have spoken highly of him. the fact of the matter is if they really do believe in his

credentials, then they should produce the requested documents that they have promised me more than once. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from new jersey. mr. menendez: mr. president, i'm glad to have been here to hear the distinguished chairman of the judiciary committee talk about the need for oversight and the response iveness that executive branch agencies owe it to the united states senate and its committees. in doing so, i'm having a similar problem with the state department as it relates to getting information about actions that have taken place with reference to political reprisals and firings of the state department and subject to being investigated right now by the inspector general of the state department and a special

counsel. so i can share in his concerns about the inability to get information from the executive branch as a legitimate exercise of oversight. but i rise today as i have so many times in my career to be the voice for the people of puerto rico in the united states senate. on september 20 of 2017, hurricane maria, a powerful category 5 storm, ripped through the center of the island of puerto rico, wiping out its electrical grid and leaving millions of american citizens disconnected and in the dark. and this was preceded by hurricane irma which also struck the island, a double body blow. what ensured were months of absolute hunger, despair and death. and while the president played golf in mar-a-lago thousands of fellow americans were dying due

to lack of electricity, lack of oxygen tanks, dialysis centers or refrigeration or medications, problems, as i said at the time, could not be solved with paper towels. i'll never forget this moment. it was one of the moment insulting moments to the people of puerto rico, a people of parts of the united states, 3.5 million united states citizens who have served and worn the uniform of this nation and whose names on the vietnam memorial here in washington are disproportionate to the number of their population. and the president said they want everything to be done for them. i hate to tell you, puerto rico, but you're throwing our budget out of whack. no other american citizen in any other of the areas of disaster heard anything, anything near to that. so today we know that nearly 3,000 americans perished in what's now known as one of the worst natural disasters to strike our nation in all of

american history. now let me be clear, we know that a president cannot prevent a natural disaster. but when the lives of americans are on the line, we expect our commander in chief to do everything in their power to come to their aid. these are the moments that are supposed to reveal the very best of america. in the face of disasters of this magnitude, we do not turn our backs on our fellow citizens. we face the challenge head on. we save as many lives as we can. we strive to stem suffering, and we lend a helping hand. that's the american way. just imagine how many lives could have been saved had president trump directed the federal emergency management agency to give puerto rico the, quote, a-plus treatment that he called for in our fellow citizens in alabama. but for the majority latino,

spanish-speaking island of puerto rico, there was no a-plus treatment. they got the f-minus treatment. the painful reality is that nothing can ever bring the thousands of americans who died in hurricane maria back, but that doesn't mean the president shouldn't try to make things right. he has many opportunities to atone for his cruel and unfair treatment of the puerto rican people. but instead president trump seems intent on kicking puerto ricans when they're down. just last week he hosted a group of my republican leader colleagues at the white house and proceeded to complain about how much puerto rico has received. and what's so disappointing is none of my colleagues even dared to check the president on this issue. they didn't receive what he said. they didn't receive a fraction of what he said. this president continues to behave as if the people who call

puerto rico home are not real americans. it's almost as if he views himself as the real victim here, not the 3,000 american mothers and fathers and brothers and sisters who perished in hurricane maria's wake. we in the senate have an obligation to do what is right with this disaster supplemental. so let me say first that i'm glad everyone here greaz puerto rico needs a fully funded nutrition assistance program for the next fiscal year. but still it was appalling to hear the white house call the house's bill, the house of representatives' bill inclusion of an additional $600 million for nutrition assistance as excessive and unnecessary. mr. president, there's nothing excessive or unnecessary about helping 1.35 million struggling low-income americans in puerto rico, many of them with small children, avoid going hungry.

we're talking about $649 a month for a family of four, just $160 or so a week for people who need it the most. let's turn to a moment to what's missing from the senate legislation. first, hurricane maria created 600 million could cubic yards of debris. a year and a half later the island still has 160,000 cubic yards of debris stored in temporary sites waiting to be removed. to put that in perspective, a large dump truck can carry ten cubic yards. that means it would take 16,800 dump trucks to remove all the garbage created by the hurricane in a small island that barely measures 100 miles long by 35 miles wide. make no mistake, puerto rico has made significant progress, but the crippled economy has made everything that much harder.

this legislation should help them get the job done, not set them back. second, there remains hundreds of open fema projects for emergency protective measures. we're talking about short-term locations for government agencies to provide vital services as they await the completion of permanent reconstruction. we should also allow for the continued use of generators to power critical facilities on the island. this would help keep the public safe and provide stability to puerto rico's power grid while it's repaired. we can do this by increasing the federal cost waivers for categories a and b to 100% just as the house of representatives bill does. congress has done this many times before. this is not new. after hurricane katrina, wilma, dennis, and rita, and puerto rico deserves no less. in the bipartisan budget act we

passed last year, we specifically authorized fema to waive stafford act requirements so they could replace and repair facilities in a way that reflects today's industry standards, not their previous subpar condition. and yet i keep hearing that fema is nickel and diming over what it may fix and what puerto rico may not fix. so let's end the ambiguity. let's fix this language. let's send a clear message that it was always congress' intent to rebuild puerto rico stronger and more resilient than ever. no one wants to face the same kind of damage next hurricane season, as is said, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. let's properly fund the army corps of engineers so they can help rebuild the area which continues to flood over with raw sewage impearling 126,000 american lives with unsanitary

conditions and breeding grounds for mosquitoes for diseases like zika. these are the kind of measures that would be stripped from the house bill, mr. president, by the pending substitute. it's just not right. it's just not right. these 3.5 million united states citizens have worn the uniform of the united states. they have defended this nation going back. the congress gave an all-puerto rican regiment the highest commendation it can, a congressional gold medal. but that doesn't mean anything if you turn your back on 3.5 million united states citizens. it doesn't mean anything if you treat them as second-class citizens. and it's just fundamentally biased and wrong. and come september we'll have to congregate once again to talk about the island's crumbling medical infrastructure and the need to provide puerto rico with

additional medicaid funding. we can solve that problem today by adding critical medicaid funding for the territory. puerto rico is a subject of angst and resentment for the president. i don't know why, but it's clearly so. i suggest we do him a favor. spare him the worry and get the job done ourselves today. let's do what is right. i would urge my colleagues to vote against cloture on the substitute. let the underlying bill stand, and let us move forward so that we act in the name of our nation. it's the united states of america. we leave no american behind, and we should leave none of the 3.5 million americans in puerto rico behind. mr. president, with that, i yield the floor.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: mr. president, in 2017, i said here on the senate floor that we needed to come together to help rebuild in the wake of hurricane harvey in the houston area and that our work was not complete and more work needed to be done, and that unfortunately still is true today. it's true also from the damage caused by other natural disasters during that same time frame that was appropriated by congress but has not yet found its way to the intended beneficiaries. although we voted to send billions of dollars to help texans still reeling from hurricane harvey, some of those funds are still needlessly caught up in bureaucratic red tape. this is not just a phenomenon

that affects my state. it affects all of our states. this is not acceptable to me, and it isn't acceptable to the people i represent, all 28 million of them. and it shouldn't be acceptable to members of the senate. this storm ravaged the texas coast and was the largest rain event in american history, with parts of the southeast texas seeing 60 inches of rain over about a five- or six-day period. it destroyed people's homes, their businesses, and our communities. in the wake of the storm, we all pulled together here in congress in an unusually bipartisan manner to provide billions of dollars in disaster aid. like i said, it wasn't just for texas. it was florida, puerto rico, and other places, wildfires out in california, other places that suffered from natural disasters. but the dollars that we appropriated that were signed into law by the president have helped texas get back some sense

of normalcy, and i'm grateful to my colleagues for working together with us to make that happen. what has not been helpful, however, are the unnecessary delays on the part of the office of management and budget in getting the roughly $4 billion in mitigation funds into the hands of state and local communities that desperately need them. you know, i searched in vain in the constitution for where the office of management and budget has the power to pass appropriations bills passed by congress and signed into law by the president. i can't find it, yet they are still the impediment of the execution of congress's intent toe get money to the people who need it. the intent of congress was crystal clear in the february 2018 disaster supplemental when we appropriated about $12 billion in community development block grants for disaster recovery. as i said the undue delay is

unacceptable and i'm filing an amendment to the disaster relief to ensure these funds and other like funds are promptly disbursed. last month governor abbott, senator cruz and i sent a letter to o.m.b. to stop stalling, but so far all we heard was contradicts. this will start a time on when the government must release funds appropriated by congress. it would give the government bureaucracy up to 90 days to get the money untangled from all the red tape and to get it to the communities that desperately need it. but this 90-day rule wouldn't just apply to this particular block of funding, it would apply to any funds appropriated by congress to the states that is being withheld by the office off management and budget. as i said, congress has the

power of the purse, not the office of management and budget. i don't know about the rest of my colleagues, but i'm not okay with letting o.m.b. dictate when and how duly elected funds are released to the beneficiary. the disregard of those who are struggling to rebuild and prepare for future storms by the bureaucrats is appalling. they know the kind of hardships my constituents are facing and they know that hurricane harvey will not be the last hurricane to hit texas. it is time to do what's right for states and local communities who have seen their communities rot in floodwater. it has been more than a year that president trump signed a bill that would have sent roughly $4 billion to texas. imagine what could have been accomplished with that money in the meantime. they could have repaired wastewater treatment facilities

that haven't been fully restored. it could have led to important economic revitalization prompts in -- projects in decimated areas, they could have relocated damaged facilities to prepare for the next storm. but, no, those projects are still on hold because the o.m.b. has refused to release the funding. the 2019 hurricane season is fast approaching and it's critical we get work done on long-term projects to protect my state and the texas coast against future storms. but it's difficult to plan for the future with the resources we need being caught up in bureaucratic limbo. we've been waiting to get to the place to where before harvey and after harvey isn't such a stark difference. with my legislation, the clock will start ticking on o.m.b. to

do its job. texas communities have waited long enough. mr. president, i want to draw attention to another group of people that it need our help, than is the officers and agents of the u.s. customs and border protection. yesterday commissioner mclina announced that customs an border protection is -- and border protection is facing border security crisis all along the southwest. yesterday morning c.v.p. had more than 13 now migrants under their care. they consider 6,000 to be a crisis. and now they have more than double that. the commissioner said yesterday we are at a breaking point along the border. now, the american people may, because they, frankly, aren't

acquainted with some of the details think that c.b.p. can handing 13,000 people on a given day. that is not the case. c.b.p. is built for the short-term detention of single adults. the current migrant surge from central america is primarily children and family units and put these facilities amount overcapacity levels. processing times have slowed due to the large number of people being processed and the lack of border patrol personnel to process them. as the chief of the border patrol has testified before the senate judiciary committee, this is irn tensional on behalf of the transnational criminal organizations that are responsible for transporting people from central america to our borders. this is a money-making proposition. if you can charge 5,000 or more ahead for every person you deliver to our border, that's a

big, big deal. but these people are not just involved in transporting my grants, they are engaged of trafficking of human beings for sex or involuntary servitude and they are engaged if trafficking and drugs. i'll remind all of us that last year 70,000 americans died from drug overdoses last year according to the centers for disease control. a substantial part of that was the opioid epidemic -- part of the opioid crisis, prescription drugs but also synthetic fentanyl and heroin. 90% of the heroin that comes into the united states comes across the u.s.-mexico border. so this is truly, as president obama himself said in 2014, a humanitarian and security crisis, but it's on steroids today. on monday c.b.p. had the high

vest total of -- highest total of apprehensions. daily apprehensions are higher than we've seen at any time since 2006. last month c.b.p. apprehended 60,000 people in one month, the highest monthly total in over a decade. but yesterday commissioner mcalenin announced they are on back to beat that record to 100,000 apprehensions along our southwest border in march, 76,000 in february, an estimated 100,000 in march. as a result of the surge, because the border patrol has to do something, 40% of the border patrol's manpower is now spent processing mi grants and --

migrants and providing care and transportation. they are not engaged in border security because they are busy handing out juice boxes and diapers to children, as well as processing the migrants and providing transportation. the border patrol does not have the ability to handle this crisis which is to protect the border. we know that detention centers are over capacity and local charities and nongovernmental organizations are strained as well. and all of our border communities are being overrun by humanity. senator cruz and i were down at the checkpoint, serata checkpoint, it was named after a border patrol agent was killed by two illegal aliens, we were

met by someone who is well respected by law enforcement officials in our state. he said because the border patrol is unable to be released, they are worried, increasingly, about public safety. now, notwithstanding the fact that many of our border communities are extraordinarily safe, at least on our side of the border, you go to the mexican side of the border and they are some of the most dangerous communities in the hemisphere. this is having a profound impact on the men and women of the customs and border patrol and should be an embarrassment for us that we haven't dealt with this in a more timely and effective way. because the cartels have figured this out, people crossing the border are largely families and unaccompanied minors because of the special way they have to be

process and because of a consent decree called the flores decision which says you can't detain them for more than 40 days. that is not enough time to get them in front of a judge. so they are lee leased -- released into the interior of the yesterday, and overwhelmingly they don't show up for their court hearing and they beat the system. the cartels know that because of the money they make and they are exploiting these vulnerabilities in our laws and infrastructure, and the only people that can fix that is congress and the president working together in a bipartisan way. now i know we had a a big debate over border barriers, walls, fences, you name it. frankly, you can build all the barriers you want along our southwest border and it won't stop this flow of unaccompanied minors and family units because

frankly they are showing up at the border and turning themselves in. so we need to act. two weeks ago secretary neilson, secretary of the department of homeland security said that the situation on our southern border has gone from a crisis to a national emergency to a near system-wide meltdown. our democratic colleagues have called this a fake emergency. they've opposed treating this crisis for what is it. but it is even more than an emergency, it is a total system failure and the only people that can fix it are congress working with the president, but i'm not sure how much longer our democratic colleagues can be in denial when we see this flood of humanity coming across at higher and higher numbers every day. the issue is staring us in the face. the numbers confirm that we said all along. this is a border security and

humanitarian crisis. secretary nielson made an important point that it's our community, our members of law enforcement, and the migrants themselves who are paying the price for our inaction. we heard it from people along the border who know how to fix the problem and we need to listen. they have told us it will take a combination of technology and boots on the ground and it will take legislative action to fill the gaps that we know are being exploited by the cartels. i want to commend our men and women in customs and border control for doing their job. it's a thankless job. i'm frankly embarrassed they haven't seen more support by the people who represent them in congress. we've sent them out in a losing battle. unless we can work together here in congress to give them the

resources and the legislative fixes that they need. but, madam president, i want to assure these dedicated men and women that we are trying, but we need their help to talk to their elected representatives here in congress. we need mrs. pelosi to consider this the same humanitarian crisis that president obama identified back in 2014 when he called it a humanitarian and security crisis. and by any measure it has gotten much, much worse. and we need to give this crisis the serious attention that it deserves. madam president, i have four requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they've been approved by both the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. cornyn: i'd yield the floor

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