him questions and get in his face on the issues that are important to theamerican people and just essentially write about what's happening. obviously we can't take the entire press corps within . as the print puller and the television cooler , we have to relay everything that he says to our colleagues and there's thousands of people i'm emailing reports to constantly that day speak. >> host: so they can take your information as they reported? >> guest: that's correct so the pool or reads through the data to share everything that their reporting on . and that's something we do through the white house correspondents association, this is long-standing practice. >> we're going to break away from this recorded program and take your life to the floor of the u.s. senate where they are about to

dabble in for their day. the senate will spend the week considering district court nominations, among those the nomination of general john abezad to be the ambassador to saudi arabia. live now tothe floor of the united states senate . >>

matter, several families were in washington this last week to advocate for the release of their loved ones by two rogue regimes. one of the men being held captive in syria is austin tice. there are many ways you can describe austin. he's a seventh generation texan, a decorated marine corps veteran, eagle scout and award-winning journalist. but to austin's family, he's so

much more than this impressive list of accomplishments. he is their beloved son, brother, and friend who they've not seen or heard from for six and a half years. in the summer of 2012, austin was getting ready to enter his final year of law school at georgetown university. instead of spending the summer working at a law firm, he chose to do something few were brave enough to do at the time which is report on the syrian civil war from the inside. austin has always had a passion for story telling and he was frustrated by the lack of reporting on the impact this vicious violence was having on the syrian people. demonstrating his courage and tenacity during this time that he earned -- gained during the marine corps, austin got on a plane to fly to turkey that may and over the summer his photos and stories illuminated the human cost of this conflict

until one day in august of 2012 his stories abruptly stopped. the following month shock be video surfaced showing austin blindfolded and bound surrounded by unidentified armed men. austin was just a few days from returning to the united states when he was abducted and to this day we have no specific information on his captors or the conditions for his release. austin's family and particularly his parents, mark and debra, have worked tirelessly over this last six and a half years to locate austin and to bring him home. i've had the privilege of meeting with them multiple times and i can only imagine what an impact this has had on them and their entire family. i have tremendous respect for mark and debra and their family, and i wonder if others could stand up under this pressure as well as they have these many

years. during their steadfast advocacy for their son's safe return. but they do have a sort of serene confidence that comes across when you talk to them that one day austin will return home. so today i'd like to once again join the tice family in calling on austin's captors to release him immediately and i also continue to call on the administration to make sure that austin is kept in mind when there are any discussions with the syrian government and future decisions to remove u.s. forces from syria. i want to assure austin's family that our resolve is not weakened. it has only grown stronger, and i will do everything possible to press for his release and i'll continue to urge the administration to do the same. but madam president, sadly austin is not the only american being held captive by a rogue government regime today. in fact, he isn't even the only

texan. in november of 2017 days before thanksgiving, six citgo executives were summoned to venezuela with meetings with citgo's parent company, venezuela's state-owned pdvsa. during the final meeting these men were detained by the ven venezuelan government and the last 16 months been held captive beneath a military intelligence compound in caracas. they've been denied contact with the state department, held without trial, been unable to receive humanitarian aid. and as the already horrible situation in venezuela continues to worsen, their conditions are likely deteriorating even further. in february the children of two of these men wrote an op-ed in the houston chronicle detailing the suffering of their father's -- of their fathers and that all six families have faced.

they wrote in their isolation, our fathers have bonded together over a shared purpose, to stay strong in body, mind, and spirit, in anticipation of their eventual return to their families. i want to assure these families that we will continue to stand alongside them in this fight, and i call on the maduro regime to immediately release these americans and to allow them to return home. i have and will continue to urge the administration to make sure this remains a top priority. just as we've worked closely with the tice family over the last six years to advocate for the release of their son austin, we'll continue to do the same for these six men. the heartbreak felt by these families is unfathomable. their spouses, children, and grandchildren are desperate to have their loved ones returned home. together we should do everything in our power to make that a

reality. madam president, i yield the floor and i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. schumer: madam president? the presiding officer: the democratic leader. mr. schumer: madam president, first i want to start off by -- the presiding officer: the -- mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. the democratic leader. mr. schumer: i want to start off by sharing a few words about our former colleague, fritz hollings, ernest f. hollings, to be precise. he passed away this weekend at his home in isle palms.

the senate has lost a giant. hollings was the longest serving junior senator in american here, behind strom thurmond, representing his constituents for 38 years in the senate. before that he was a governor, state legislator, and world war ii veteran. public service was his life's calling. he championed education reform, increasing teachers' pay, a national voice in the fights against hunger and poverty. he was brought up in the old jim crow days with a great deal of segregation, but as he went through carolina -- south carolina, he realized how terrible that was. and he began to move in the opposite direction. and he was an original. you could always go over to fritz hollings, even when i was a younger legislator, he'd a tension. and he'd have something very interesting to say. everyone talks about the -- the

days of blow-dried, look-alike, all the same senators. fritz hollings certainly wasn't one of them. he was an original, and we were all the much better for it. so, fritz, to you and your family, we will miss you and our thought goes with your family, a as do our prayers and well wishes. now, on another matter -- puerto rico -- last week senator leahy and i offered this chamber a chance to pass a national disaster funding package that would have addressed everyone's concerns here in the senate. the all-of-the above solution we presented contained $16 billion in relief for all americans affected by natural disasters, and i would add, i see my two friends from iowa on the floor today -- one in the president's chair, one ready to speak -- that it would have included far more money for the midwest than the republican bill because the republican bill that was on the

floor, while it added to 2019 disaster relief, it didn't add any more money despite the devastation in iowa and nebraska. well, our bill added an additional $2.5 billion in funding for the disasters of 2019, and the vast majority that have would go to iowa, to missouri, and to nebraska. but it also provided much-needed aid for the people of puerto rico and other territories, and they need the help, too. and they are american citizens as well. and let's face the music, folks. everyone knows what's going on here. democrats and republicans had agreed, as we always do -- when there is a disaster, we help. the original bill that was put together had aid for puerto rico as well as aid for the other parts of disaster. the original bill that occurred

before, was put together before the midwest, so it didn't have that. and what happened? is it that somehow our republican friends from the midwest and elsewhere thought that puerto rico didn't deserve the aid? no. president trump went to a tuesday lunch. banged his fist on the table -- figuratively, i suppose -- and said, i don't think any aid should go to puerto rico. did our republican friends, especially those from states with disasters and who needed the aid, say, no, no, we're not going to do that. we're not going to let you divide us. no, they went along with it hurting their states. we all know if there's no real aid for puerto rico, the house will not pass the bill. we here in the senate on the democratic side do not want to hold iowa, nebraska, missouri,

the other states -- florida, texas, alabama -- that are getting the aid, hostage that our republicans want and our colleagues shouldn't hold puerto rico hostage for what they want. this grand tradition, the traditions seem to crumble here day by day, minute by minute, of helping states that needed help, that when one american is hurt in one area, americans in every other area come together and say, we're going to help, that's why we have disaster aid because the enormity of a tornado or a wildfire or hurricane -- the taxpayers of that state can't afford to do it all themselves. so citizens throughout america have in effect had a compact that says, when one area is hurt, we all come together. look, i suffered a little from that. when new york had sandy, we had some of our senators from the very states, from the very

states that are now requesting aid, don't give aid to new york for sandy. i've never done that. i've always been for aid to states that are far away from new york and just have republican representation. we don't do that here -- until now, until now. and so i would say to all of my friends on the other side of the aisle, there's a way out of this. provide the aid that original senator shelby -- republican -- lay -- leahy -- democrat -- agreed on. don't get president trump's temper tantrum get in the way. we know he'll sign the bill. he's not going to stop aid for texas or florida or iowa or any other state because this body and the house have put in aid for puerto rico. let me just mention, just as the people in the midwest are

suffering, people in puerto rico are suffering. that island has had a slower recovery from a storm of greater magnitude than any others that we're talking about. so we need to vote on this legislation. it is not an either/or situation. and to say you're putting $600 million in food stamps for puerto rico so people won't starve when they're not getting the same aid that everybody else gets -- cdbg, fema -- that is not right, that is not fair, and at that fig leaf will not -- not -- cover up the real motivation president trump, which unfortunately i don't think most of our republican colleagues agree to with, but they go along with. everyone is afraid on the other side of anything president trump does, right or wrong. unfortunately, it's wrong far too often. puerto rico needs access so they can rebuild. they need the food aid, but they

need more than that. trump wanted to cut out all of it. someone on this side said, well, you've got to at least do food aid. well, i'll do that. nothing else. that's not right. should we do food aid for every other state? no rebuilding? less all those houses and -- let all those houses and homes and factories and stores suffer? no, we wouldn't do it for those states. we shouldn't. and we shouldn't do it for puerto rico. so then we decided even more to compromise. there's $20 billion of aid already for puerto rico that hasn't been allocated. the president in his nastiness to the people of puerto rico, citizens -- they're american citizens -- he refused to allocate that money. we then said -- senator leahy, let's take $3.8 billion of that and free it up. our colleagues won't even do

that. so when the american people want to know what's holding up this bill, when the people in the floods areas, in the areas that have been hit by wildfires and hurricanes want to know what's holding it up, it's donald trump picking one part of the country saying, i don't want to give aid to them and too many -- just about every one of our colleagues thus far, going along. elections have consequences. the house is now democratic. it's their view -- strongly -- that we ought to give aid to puerto rico. it's a view that i share. but if we to do the right thing in this body where with you a tradition of -- where we have a tra i guess did of coming together -- where we have a tradition of coming together, when we say president trump won't signing is, when he originally had nothing to do with putting together this bill, we're all going to be stuck for quite a while. let us in the house -- in this body, in the senate come to a

compromise that satisfies the middle west, that satisfies the hurricane states of florida and mississippi and georgia and alabama, that satisfies texas, and get moving. that's what we should be doing. but this idea that we are holding up this bill when the house wouldn't pass is anyway, the idea that we are holding up this bill when we know the history that president trump went into that lunch and changed everything around in a nasty way that he can't even explain -- huh-uh. that's not going to fly. now on secretary nielsen. well, kirstjen nielsen submitted her resignation as the secretary of homeland security. i think we're going to remember her tenure as a cruel chapter in which the agency followed

through on president trump's worst impulses. among those include advocacy for trump's inp effective and expensive -- ineffective and expensive wall. her support for the longest shutdown in history. didn't produce anything for president trump. her separation of thousands of children from their families. now, some say secretary nielsen argued inwardly against these policies. maybe it's better, maybe it's worse if she knew they were wrong. but it's not good no matter what. through this all she continuously misled the american public, even insisting once -- and i quote -- we do not have a policy of separating families at the border, period. well, that was just absolutely

false and americans from every part of the country were just appalled by that. in fact, some people say, one of the reasons the house went democratic is a lot of suburban republican women didn't like that policy, as they shouldn't have. so it wasn't even politically smart, as maybe president trump thought it was. despite secretary nielsen's advocacy for the wall, for her support of the shutdown, for embrace of the child separation policy, which she always misled americans about, she still wasn't radical enough for president trump. as nbc news reported this morning, president trump has urged for months that his administration reauthorize the awful practice of separating little, tiny children and babies from their parents. this is further proof that the president is kowtowing to the

worst instincts of people and to the conservative hard right and extreme voices in the republican party. with no or little regard for our national security or the ability to function efficiently. and what he's done by these constant firings and constant change of policy is simply created chaos at the border. nobody knows what the policy will be from day to day and week to week and month to month. he doesn't tell the top people in his departments that he's changed his plans. he fired evidently mr. visit yellow without -- mr. vitiello, without even mrs. nielsen knowing about it. this is not solving any problems at the border. and the more problems -- chaos there is, the more people will see that president trump as

president can't solve this problem, despite his rhetoric, where he appears tough but doesn't solve the problem. finally, madam president, on the secret service director dismissal, this brings plea to my final -- brings me to my final point. the white house confirmed that he now asks that secret service director randolph alice step aside. this comes in the midst of a report of security vulnerabilities surrounding president trump, particularly at mar-a-lago, that's why he must testify before congress as son as -- as soon as possible, vulnerabilities of a chinese person arrested with malwear on her person.

we must know to the extent other governments like china are infiltrating and conducting electronic surveillance on classified information. the president and the white house staff may like to treat hiring and firing in the administration as some kind of reality tv show or parlor game, but to the american people this has real-life consequences. it's about national security, security at our airport, responding to national disasters, including our efforts to fight international cargo carrying drugs like fentanyl. that is why it's urgent to get to the bottom of this and why the outgoing secret service director must testify as soon as possible. now, just all three of these comments, what's happening in puerto rico, what's happening with department of homeland

security, and now secret service indicate just the chaos that seems to be overwhelming this administration. president trump's policies, if he has them, switch from day to day. he's erratic, he seems to get emotional. he pushes out whatever is on his mind that day, no matter its consequences, and this country is floundering. there's a lot of rhetoric and not much else. all of these people leaving in very important positions. the president undercutting them, not calling them into the office and having a discussion but tweeting and ranting. i've never seen america governed like this. never. never. and i don't care what your political affiliation is. i don't care if you're a liberal, not rad, or -- moderate or conservative. what is happening in this white house as it fails to lead this country and instead does seem something like a tv reality show

is hurting us -- it's hurting us and hurting us badly, and i who he we can get some bipartisan efforts to do things about this and to speak up about it. i yield the floor. mr. grassley: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senior senator from iowa. mr. grassley: first i would like to ask unanimous consent that charles pankaneir, a detailee on my senate finance committee staff be given floor privileges for the remainder of the 116th congress. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: and then for one minute before i speak for what i came for a longer period of time to speak, i want to address a trade issue. congress needs to pass the united states-mexico-canada agreement this year to give farmers and businesses the certainty that they need and the

certainty they deserve. the past year has brought rising costs, lost markets, and uncertainty for the farmers and businesses. we need to focus on creating opportunities instead of erecting barriers. i'd like to see a resolution with canada and mexico on steel and aluminum tariffs, one that would acknowledge that we need our allies to help us deal with the source of the overcapacity problems, and that source of the problem is china. i urge president trump to lift the 232 tariffs so that we can forge ahead with the u.s.-mexico-canada agreement and eliminate the uncertainty that is present in the american market. now for the main purpose of my

coming to the floor. after years of hearing democrats falsely proclaim that the trump campaign clueded -- colluded with russia, special counsel mueller found no collusion exists. the fact that they found no collusion was a very positive development. not just for this administration, but for the entire country. however, it does seem that the real collusion occurred with democrats, and i will explain. it was the clinton campaign and democratic national community that hired g.p.s. to do opposition research against candidate trump. fusion g.p.s. then hired christopher steele, a former

british intelligent officer to compile the steele dossier that reportedly used russian government sources for information. you see, it was a clinton campaign and the democratic national committee that funded the document that largely created the collusion narrative. a narrative that's been deemed false, and, of course, that's the irony here. the democrats paid for a document created by a foreign national with reported russian government sources, not trump. president trump did not do that. the democrats did, but apparently it's not over yet, or so the democrats tell us every day. their next step is to subpoena

the entire mueller report. well, i agree congress and the public should see that information, and it sounds to me like president trump agrees as well. the attorney general already said on multiple occasions that he's going to release as much information as the law allows and as soon as he can. and it looks like congress, and likely the public, will get the mueller report this month of april sometimes, but democrats have requested more than just the report. they've asked the justice department to also produce the mueller report's underlying evidence, including all intelligence-related information. i agree with the need to see as much information as possible. in fact, i cosponsored a

bipartisan bill that will would do just that, but the democrats' fury over mueller's findings and inconsistent positions make me think all of this is more about politics than principle. after all, the chairman of the house judiciary committee opposed the public release of this type of information in the 1990's to guard against that political gamesmanship there's only one legitimate way to do this, let's see all the documents. but by all i don't just mean those related to the mueller investigation. we should see every piece of evidence, including evidence connected to how the russian investigation started. now, that should be a very easy ask, and you know why?

i've already requested that information. for example, i've requested documents related to steele, his dossier, and campaign-related fisa applications. these documents relate to actions taken by james comey, peter strok, and bruce orr, and are critical to congress fully understanding the creation of the russian investigation. if congress is going to review the mueller report and all underlying information, it should be table to review information relating to how the russian investigation started. so will the democrats join me in that effort and support my request. further to be consistent we

shouldn't stop at the russia investigation. the democrats want all the mueller information but seem to be turning a blind eye to other investigations where congress and the public have yet to see every bit of information that's out there. again, that leads me to believe their request for mueller-related documents is a political ploy. take, for example, the clinton investigation. will democrats ask the justice department for all the underlying information relating to the hillary clinton investigation? as i've written about publicly before, the justice department inspector general produced to congress a highly classified document relating to the clinton investigation. that document makes clear the justice department and the f.b.i. still ought to produce

information to congress and answer for questions. for example, the unclassified version of the inspector general's report provides important context about the classified report, and i have a long quote here. the f.b.i. had considered obtaining permission from the department to review certain classified materials that may have included information potentially relevant to the mid-year investigation, although the mid-year team drafted memorandum to the deputy attorney general in late may 2016 stating that review of a highly classified material was necessary to complete the investigation and requesting permission to access them. the f.b.i. never sent this request to the department.

end of quote. so the inspector general found four important things according to the unclassified report. number one, the f.b.i. apparently had highly classified information potentially relevant to the clinton investigation in its possession. two, the f.b.i. drafted a memo to get access to the information. three, that memo said review of the information was necessary to complete the investigation. and then, four, ironically, that memo was never sent. years later when the inspector general interviewed the f.b.i. agents, they said they didn't seek access to the information because they didn't think it would materially impact the

conclusion. now, how could they conclude that point if they never got access to the information? in may of 2016, the memo was necessary to complete the investigation and then years later somehow it wasn't. that's tearily inconsistent -- tearily -- materially inconsistent and makes no sense. moreover, look at the month the memo was drafted, may 2016. that's the same month that james comey began writing his statement exonerating hillary, which was months before the f.b.i. interviewed her. did comey aactions -- comey's actions have a trickle-down effect on his subordinates

causing them to kill the memo? it seems to me we ought to find out. to my colleagues, it seems like the f.b.i. left a potential amount of evidence unreviewed. how can you complete an investigation without reviewing all the evidence relative to the investigation? the american people have every right to question how this investigation was handled and they deserve answers. assuming president trump has read the classified inspector general report, he would understand the importance of the justice department about my inquiries. i've written to the justice department seeking those answers. i would like to know since the

democrats want to investigate everything dealing with collusion and the mueller report, would they join me in that request? i want to give you another example. uranium one. i've been pushing for years for more answers about the transaction that allowed the russian government to acquire u.s. uranium assets. i received classified and unclassified briefings about it from multiple agencies, and i've identified some f.b.i. intelligence reports that may shed more light on the transaction. just last week my staff were told that the attorney general has refused to provide access to those documents. well, if the democrats demand intelligence related information from the justice department

regarding the mueller report, there's no reason why they shouldn't do the same for uranium one. and if the justice department provides that information about the mueller report, well, then there's no reason why they should withhold the uranium one material. it kind of gets down to this point, if the democrats want to be consistent, they'll have to treat clinton, uranium one, and russia-related investigations the same. anything less than that wreaks of political gamesmanship and sets a clear double standard. and that double standard also extends to the position the democrats have taken with respect to obstruction. we know that mueller did not conclude that the president committed a crime, and neither did the attorney general.

still democrats want to make the case that trump obstructed justice even though the justice department said otherwise. with no evidence, the democrats have accused the attorney general of bias. but mr. barr evaluated this matter in close consultation with deputy attorney general rosenstein, the person who appointed mueller in the first place. the democrats, looking for absolutely anything they can to make a case when there is no case, but these same democrats in the obama justice department didn't bat an eye when clinton associates deleted records subject to subpoena and preservation orders. march 2015 clinton's attorneys

had a conference call with paul combatta, the man who helped on clinton's nongovernment server. after that call he deleted clinton's e-mails with a software program designed to prevent forensic discoveries. i've seen no evidence that anyone has even speculated that the president ever did that or instructed anyone to go that far what also troubles me about one aspect of the clinton investigation is that the f.b.i. agreed to limit the scope of review to her time as secretary of state. that eliminated potentially high relevant e-mails before and after her tenure that could have shed light on why she operated a

nongovernment server. it also eliminated e-mails around the time of that conference call that could have shown what exactly was intended in deleting those e-mails. why the d.o.j. and f.b.i. pulled their punches. mueller sure didn't pull his punches. he extended his scope of investigation well beyond allegations of collusion which turned out to be false. and lastly, the f.b.i. agreed to destroy records and latops of clinton's associates after reviewing them. now that happens to be an astonishing agreement in light of the fact that those records could have been relevant to ongoing congressional inquiries that the f.b.i. knew about. where were the democrats when all that stuff happened?

where was their outrage at the potential obstruction of justice and obstruction of congressional oversight? it seems to me that if the democrats want to be consistent, they'll have to address what was done and what was totally ignored in the clinton investigation. let's also not forget about the prosecutorial double standard. secretary clinton and her associates mishandled highly classified information. the law makes grossly negligent mishandling of classified information a criminal offense. comey did not recommend prosecution because it was not historically done under law unless intent was present. so not only did he and the justice department read intent into the statute, they made a judgment call based upon how

many times someone had been charged under the law. well, the same thing could be said of the fortunately agents registration act in lying to congress. each have had minimal prosecutions between 1966 and 2015, the justice department only brought seven criminal foreign agents registration act cases. one resulted in conviction. two pled guilty. the rest pled to other charges or they were dismissed. all of that changed with mueller. so we have a double standard again. unlike comey, mueller didn't seem to think historical precedent was all that important. some have said that mueller has made fairer a law to pay attention. the same with 18 u.s.c. 1001

which covers lying it to federal agents in congress. recently the justice department has said that it's transitioning, quote, from treating fara as an administrative obligation and regulatory obligation to one that is increasingly an enforcement priority, end of quote. well, it may be about time that the laws are enforced. and that's a very good and necessary shift. i've engaged in fara oversights since april 2018. i've also held a fara oversight hearing in july of 2017 and introduced the disclosing foreign influence act to shore up that law of the 1930's. i want to say fara properly enforced, and i'm glad that the justice department suddenly seems to care whether somebody

lied to congress. but i want to see quality enforcement, not -- i want to see equal enforcement not just with fara, but with all laws. i've said many times before the law must be applied equally without regard to power, party, or privilege. that approach prevents inconsistent application and avoids double standards. so when the democrats asked for material relating to the russian investigation, i say fine, let's do it. however, that means they ought to be consistent with other investigations, and the justice department has to be as well. anything less is a double standard. and i'll tell you right now the democrats' obsession with bringing trump down is nothing but a double standard if they're going to ignore other

investigations of national importance. if you want to be taken seriously in this country, you have to be consistent. my attitude and my approach is straightforward and nonpartisan. let's see it all, clinton, uranium one, russia. all of it, let it lang -- let it hang out. sunshine is the best disinfectant. to my colleagues in the democratic party, are you afraid to be consistent? are you afraid of what might be found? let's work to make sure the american people have as much information as possible about all of these investigations. after all, the taxpayers are paying for the work. and don't forget that, that the american taxpayers ought to have some consideration when their money is spent to make sure that equality and enforcement of the

law is the same for all. i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from florida. a senator: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: yes. mr. scott: i ask unanimous consent to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. you can proceed. mr. scott: i rise today to honor the life of one of florida's brightest lights, a light that was extinguished far too soon. one year ago today we lost jerry bustamante in a tragic accident. she was my press secretary but she was so much more. she was my spanish tutor, my travel partner. she was so kind to everyone that you couldn't help but love her.

everyone thought that jerry was their best friend because she was so loving to everyone. she brightened every room she walked into and made everyone around her better. there's not much that brings the florida political world together, but republicans, democrats, and even our friends in the press loved and respected jeri. she lived the american dream. as a small child, jeri moved from panama to the united states with her family speaking only spanish. she grew up in miami where she attended miami beach high, miami dade community college and florida international university. she had a passion for communications. she started out at a local miami tv station and eventually working for the miami-dade property pray -- appraiser and became my lieutenant governor. she joined my reelection campaign in 2014 and was with me for four years. she was determined, she was

courageous, she had big goals. she wanted to be the press secretary for the president of the united states. i have no doubt she would have been. that's the kind of person she was. she never stopped working to meet her goals in life, but she always did it with a smile, with a joke, with a kind word. in her memory, my wife and i established the jeri bustamante memorial scholarship to support a high schooler who like jeri is trying to become the first to go to college. today we are introducing a resolution to honor jeri's memory. we will never forget her and we will never forget the ways she made all of us better. and now i'd like to honor jeri in the best way i know how speaking the spanish she taught me. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to address the senate in spanish. the presiding officer: without objection.

mr. scott: i have provided to the senate a translation for the record. [speaking spanish] [speaking spanish] mr. scott: as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the consideration of senate resolution 147, submitted earlier today.

the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 147, honoring the memory of jeri bustamante on the one-year anniversary of her passing. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed. mr. scott: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. scott: thank you, and i yield back.

ms. mcsally: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from arizona. ms. mcsally: the colorado river is the lifeblood of the southwestern united states. the river provides drinking water to 40 million americans. irrigation to 5.5 million acres of farmland, and more than 4,000 mega watts of carbon free hig hydropower to communities across the west in seven states. unfortunately the last 19 years have been the colorado basin's

driest on record. this long and intense drought has left the combined water stored behind lake powell and lake mead near critically low levels putting the water supply for some of the nation's largest cities in danger. the colorado river drought contingency plan otherwise known as the d.c. p. was negotiated between the seven colorado river basin states to respond to this prolonged drought. it is designed to protect lakes mead and powell from reaching critical levels, including the risk of reaching crisis levels where operational control of the colorado river system would be lost. these states put a lot of hard work and sacrifice for the good of all who rely on the river, and by doing this, they avoided having the department of interior directing draconian measures and cuts from the federal government. but the plan must be codified in

law. it literally takes an act of congress to approve the d.c.p., and it is urgent. that is why i am on the floor today. i am proud of the bipartisan nature of this legislation. as the water and power subcommittee chair, i am leading this legislation with my democrat ranking member from nevada, senator cortez mass mosquito. we have eight democrats and six republicans spanning a wide ideological spectrum as original cosponsors. this bill is about an impending water crisis impacting states like arizona. the effort to get this bill to this point is an example of bipartisan that arizonans and americans are calling for. this is about the livelihood and the safety of 40 million americans. the colorado river d.c.p. authorization act puts sound water policy over partisan

politics. and people thought that never happened in washington, d.c. they should be celebrating today about this bill. i want to ask all my colleagues to join the 14 bipartisan senators from the colorado river basin and support this bill. as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of s. 1057. i further ask consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: the senator from nevada. ms. cortez masto: thank you, madam president. would the senator from arizona modify her request to add that when the senate receives the papers on h.r. 2030 and if the text is identical to s. 1057, the bill be considered read three times and passed, and the

motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: does the senator from arizona so modify her request. ms. mcsally: mr. president, i would gladly modify my request. it seems that our house colleagues -- again, both sides of the aisle -- will be passing an identical version of our bill tonight. and as we talked about, this is urgent. it's urgent for arizona, it's urgent for all the seven states that rely on the colorado river, and so the fastest way that we can get this legislation to the president's desk is what i support. so i support this modification. the presiding officer: is there objection to the modified proposal? without objection, so ordered. ms. mcsally: mr. president, i want to thank you and i want to thank senator cortez masto and all of our colleagues for supporting this critical legislation. it is now going to allow immediate action to increase water security for arizona and

all of the seven colorado river basin states. by acting so quickly, we just introduced this legislation last tuesday -- but by acting so quickly, the lower basin states will be able to immediately begin saving hundreds of thousands of acre-feet of water behind the hoover dam. this also ensures mexico's water contribution to make mead will be made beginning next year. we worked hand in hand with chairman grijalva to develop this legislation and as i said we've got identical bills passing on the same day. i want to thank our house colleagues, chairman grijalva, ranking member bishop and i want to thank all of the staff on both sides of the house and the senate, this bicameral, bipartisan effort only came to fruition because of their hard work over the last days and years. thanks again, everybody. really great day for the

colorado river basin and for arizonans, and i yield the floor.

mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate resume legislative session and be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 4:00 p.m. monday -- sorry about that. let me start over. i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10:00 a.m. tuesday, april 9. further, that following the

prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed, and the senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the domenico nomination. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow.

appeared before house appropriations subcommittee light at 9:30 a.m. eastern on c-span3. this week on the communicators, technology watcher talks about his book. >> facebook is the poster child. they're extremely large and only care about money and they did not take the position. during the 26 election they had

a terrible effect in the news and so the social effect and political effects of facebook are enormous. you. >> tonight at the eastern on c-span2. [screams] the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. [inaudible] cspan's newest book the president is america's best and worst cheese executive.

it oversees the 44 american presidents interviewed by noted presidential historians and explore the life events, challenges they face and the memories they left behind. published by public affair cspan, the president will be on shelves april 23 and you can preorder your copy of the hardcover or e-book today at cspan.org/thepresident or wherever books are sold. this weekend kim ryan announces his presidency. in northeast ohio and is going to represent file for states and washington, d.c. he asked attendees for the rally and greeted members of the crowd. this is about 25 minutes. no