the cartels, both to the traffickers and smugglers that are moving people and then more money to be able to cross the physical border. but if you bring a child with you, it's half price, it's $4,000. the incentive now is it is cheaper to cross this area if you bring a child because the cartel knows i don't have to sneak you over the wall. all i have to do is be able to get you to the border and drop you off. and we watched as a family unit and a group of families were sent in one direction and border patrol interdicted them and then a mile away three single adults made a sprint for the border, went to the wall with a makeshift ladder and worked their way up the ladder, but because it took extra time for them to do that, border patrol could get to their location and were able to arrest them.

but cartels make it so they can sneak in people that most likely have a criminal record that can't just go through the normal system. they can't just match up a family with them they've got to move them separately. and at the same time moving large quantities of drug across the border not far away from there. on the day i was there, this picture was taken on the border not far from where i was. this was taken at 3:00 in the afternoon with a group of four individuals carrying large bags and boxes across the border. now i can't tell you for certain what's in those, but i have a pretty good guess. that at headquarter in the -- that at 4:00 in the afternoon four individuals bringing almost identical bundles across the border, it's a pretty good guess those are drugs. this still photo snapped at 3:00 in the afternoon during a weekend was a reminder again of exactly what's happening at the border as cartels line up. families go this direction. single individuals with a criminal record go this direction and then we move drugs

a different direction to see if we can't work our way through it. why is this happening? this is happening because customs and border patrol are spending all their time on humanitarian work now. 60% of the work of each individual agent has been on humanitarian work processing families. but they're doing the work. they're engaged in the process, and they are committed to taking care of people. when 60% are in town taking care of the humanitarian work, that leaves only 40% to still be able to patrol the border. where there used to be literally 60 people that would travel in this region of the border, now there's 20 to be able to cover all of those miles. and the cartels know it. so the more they can send families up through this section, the more they can cause chaos inside, the greater likelihood they can move drugs across the border freely. how does this happen? this happens because the cartels can work to be able to get a

message to central america and say we have a way to get you into the united states and we can get you in quickly. bring a child with you. you pay them $8,000 or $4,000 if you bring a child. we will work you up and make promises to them of would will happen. many of these people are from high poverty areas in central america and they will work them towards the border and drop them off at that spot. or it costs even more if you're not from central america. some chinese individuals that have been moved across our border paid as much as $30,000 to the cartels, $30,000 to be able to pay the price to be able to move them through mexico and then cross the border at a time of their choosing. this is something that is making a tremendous amount of money for the cartels. and if we don't engage on solving this issue, we're allowing it. we need to realize that our laws are broken. they're not only broken for immigration of what's happening,

they're not only breaking our hearts for what's happening in the humanitarian crisis of what's actually occurring but it's become a critical issue that we have to be able to respond and we should. let me show you this next shot. this is what it looks like now along the border. as i traveled through the different locations to be able to see what was happening in the five different locations, some of them are gut wrenching and difficult because for the border patrol, there are police stations along the border. border patrol, they don't do detention. when you go to a police station and i hope you only go legally to a police station, but when you go to a police station, they're not there to hold up people. they're there to write the reports, to process but not to hold people for periods of time. that's not what a police station does. border patrol stations are like police stations along the border. they're really offices and they manage that. but now they've also become places they have to hold children and adults by the

thousands. thousands of people are crossing the border and they're trying to figure out how to be able to manage it. some of their facilities are exceptionally overcrowded. there is a facility that many people have seen the pictures of, they aaffectionately call the kids in cages facility. i'll tell you more about that in a little bit. it was designed for 1,500 people in total. it had 1,590 the day i was there. it has had as many as 3,000 in the facility the last couple of months. it is miserably overcrowded. there are people packed in together. but those individuals are getting meals, showers, toilets, access to supplies, snacks, all the basics are being provided and the border patrol are trying to figure out how do we manage this many people when none of them were trained on how to be able to detain people. because that's not their task. border patrol has now set up this facility called a soft sided facility where they've moved a thousand family units away from that larger what they call the central processing

facility. they moved it away from the central processing facility a few miles away and have set up a massive series of tents. air conditioned, a lot more space. this happens to be in one of those where there was actually teenage boys in this particular area. this is what detention looks like now along the border. they're sitting there watching actually puss in boots on the tv. people are laying around, getting some recreation space and plenty of activity that's going on there. this is what border patrol is currently doing to try to be able to manage it. what does that look like and how will things be able to work? when you check in at the border patrol station, wherever it may be, whether in the central processing facility that is so overcrowded or whether it's out to the soft sided facility. when you get there the first thing they do is they actually swap clothes with you. they've got clothes they bought with their budgets. they allow you to be able to pick different types of clothes to be able to wear. they take the -- border patrol and their families take the clothes of those individual migrants and they have washing machines set up and they will

personally wash all their clothes for them while they get a shower and get cleaned up. because many of these folks have not showered or cleaned up for a month. the first step that they do is help them get all cleaned up and to able to get them fresh clothes on and a fresh shower and hot meals. they have hot meals every single day. they also have snacks and supplies. this is again in the same soft sided facility. this is just one of their supply rooms where you can get a feel for snacks and drinks and water and toiletries. back over in this area large quanities of hygiene products, clothe, all kinds of things that are all piled up that they have gathered to be able to help take care of individuals. one of the things i've heard so many times is these kids can't even brush their teeth because americans are so mean and the border patrol are so ruthless to them. i went to five different facilities and every facility i asked to see their supply room. and every facility i saw these. that looks like toothbrushes to me. in fact in the central processing facility that's had so much attention in the media,

i asked the director there. they said they've actually had 87,000 toothbrushes there. there's always been toothbrushes and toothpaste. there's always been soap and water and ways to be able to clean up. the challenge is some of these folks come from very remote villages and guess what? they're not used to brushing their teeth every day. that's not a normal hygiene habit for some people in some places they come from. when the media says have you brushed their teeth today and they say no, it's not because they didn't have a toothbrush available. it's because no, they didn't brush their teeth today. i actually watched an interview where they went to a child and said, have you brushed your teeth and they said no. and the response on twitter was how atrocious. we're better than this as americans when this was what was in the storm room -- store room and they've been offered. even as i walked through the central processing facility that is way overcrowded, i saw people

lined up at the sinks brushing their teeth. we are providing supplies and resources for these individuals. that is a normal habit. this was interesting to me as i wassed through the facility -- walked through the facility. this was in the central processing facility that was so crowded. as i walked through, there was a coast guard individual here because, yes, the coast guard is coming to be able to help the border patrol because they need additional manpower. this is a coastie that was coming through the facility that found a young girl that was just crying on her own. she's alone. one of these kids that had just been dropped off. and he's walking through the facility, walking her around, holding her while she cried and they had just stopped for a moment to watch tv. this is what's actually going on at the border. there are facilities that are overcrowded. absolutely there are. the people that struggle with that the most are actually members of the border patrol

because they have been exceptionally frustrated that they're for the getting more support and more ability to be able to transition people out of their facilities into actual detention facilities. you see, the famous kids in cages facility that president trump has taken so much heat for is actually a facility in mcal whren -- mcallen, texas, they call the central processing facility. it was stood up in 2014 and 2015 when president obama was facing a rush of children coming across the border with no place to put them. and so president obama's team jeh johnson as the secretary of d.h.s. built a facility in mcallen to be able to hold children there. that's the facility that president obama is getting blamed for -- i'm sorry, president trump is getting blamed for. president obama and his team actually designed and built.

now, is it a great facility for children? no. i don't think it is. nor is it the fault of border patrol, though, that it's a bad facility. they're using what they have to be able to manage the crisis that's happening in front of them. but i'm tired of hearing people say that president trump is trying to be able to throw all these kids out and treat them so miserable when that is not the case. they're scrambling to be able to figure out what they can do and how they can manage and take care of the kids and the families that they have and how they can sort out and try to figure out what to do. so let me talk through the solutions here. how do we solve this crisis that's going on currently with thousands and thousands of people illegally crossing the border every day? well, somewhat we can start getting the message out which is already happening, that america is open to immigration if you do it legally. we have 1.1 million people that

go through the legal permanent residence process every single year. we have 700,000 people every single year that become citizens of the united states through a naturalized system. we have 500,000 people every day that legally cross the border from mexico into the united states. half a million every day legally did it. so one of the places that i stopped to be able to see was the legal border crossings at the international bridge. i watched individuals drive in, show their papers, go through the simple process, show a passport, show their visa, whatever it may be and drive across the border. thousands of people lined up to do it, millions a year in each facility. i watched as people crossed the border on a pedestrian bridge and as they crossed it with their paperwork, they were brought in. as they walked up to the bridge and they said i'm asking for asylum, as they walked across the border on the international bridge and were taken into an air conditioned room to start processing their asylum

requests. that's happening every day right now. yet everyone in the media is saying that's not happening. the first thing we can do is start getting out accurate information of what is actually occurring at the border. the second thing we can do is one of the primary issues the border patrol asks for over and over again and that was fund i.c.e. now why would the border patrol ask for more funding for somebody else? because i.c.e. is the primary entity that actually does detention. border patrol is the police station. i.c.e. does detention. so when individuals are picked up at the border by border patrol, they are processed and immediately delivered to i.c.e. i.c.e. then does detention for those individuals. they've got facilities scattered all over the country where they can house individuals in consistent housing with plenty of space, set up perfectly for that with well-trained individuals to be able to detain folks and to be able to go through that process. border patrol's number one request is, please stop asking us to do detention.

we don't have facilities for it. clearly that's why everyone is packed in. allow i.c.e. to be able to do this. now why doesn't i.c.e. have funding? because it's been one of our biggest battles with our democratic colleagues that are obsessed with defunding i.c.e. over and over again they say they want to abolish i.c.e., defund i.c.e., get rid of i.c.e. what's really being stated there there's no place to do detention when that occurs. let me give you an example. in 2018 the request for i.c.e. was $3.6 billion. actually what we could get at the end of it was just over $3 billion. there were $600 million down from what they said they needed n. 2019 the request was $3.5 billion. what they got was $3.1 billion. again much less than what they needed. when the crisis began to hit in its highest portion and we finally got a humanitarian relief package to these

individuals on the border to try to get additional support, including building the soft-sided facility, my democratic colleagues held out and refused to do any funding for i.c.e. in the humanitarian package, there was zero funding for i.c.e. detention, none. when border patrol said that is the prime thing that we need to actually solve this problem, what we need more than anything else is allow these folks to move out of these temporary facilities into long-term facilities so we can actually get them in better housing situations but when we debated our way through this, our democratic colleagues held firm and said no funding for i.c.e. detention. that perpetuates this problem on the border. we've got to solve this. they should be able to have the additional funding that they need so we can get these kids and these families into better locations for their housing, not temporary stopgap locations.

next issue we need, we should move asylum officers to the border. the prime issue is -- many of these individuals come and say i want asylum. well, let's walk them through the process. let's get there. the problem is the vast majority of individuals that request asylum do not qualify for actually asylum. they're actually coming to the united states because they want to connect with family members that are here or economic opportunities or other opportunities. which i completely understand that. we have a legal process to do that. but you just can't come across the border and say, i've got a cousin that lives here i want to come and that qualifies for asylum. that's not asylum. only 15% of people crossing the border asking for asylum actually qualify. but individuals will wait up to two years waiting to qualify for asylum. so individuals that qualify can't because 80% of the people are clogging the system up

asking for things that are not asylum. we should move asylum officers closer to the border to be able to do faster processing so we can help individuals seeking asylum get it and also identify people that are gaming the system and say, you cannot just game the system. you've got to come through the process legally. one more thing. we have to deal with this 20-day release issue. right now the rule is you can only hold a family with a child who are a child 20 days. a after that, they have to be released into the country. the cartels and human smugglers know that rule. that's why we've seen from 2014 only one percent of the men bringing a child to now 50% of the men bringing a child. because they know, you bring a child, you'll be released within 20 days. here's what's different, though. in 20 days, we can do our record checks in the united states to say, does this person have a

criminal record? but when we contact any of the 63 other countries that these individuals are coming from just in that sector, most of those countries can't respond to us with their country's criminal record within 20 days. so what's really happening on the border is, individuals are coming across with a child, they're being detained for 20 days while we request criminal records from their home country, they're there the 21st day. we have to release them. then 10 to 15 days, we get record that individual trial has a murder warrant in their own -- individual actually has a murder warrant in their own country. also a few days ago we released an adult with a child and found out a few days later their home country was seeking this will because they were a pedophile in their country. but we just released that adult with a child into our country because we have a 20-day restriction and we can't wait until we get criminal records

from another country. that is absurd. we are encourage the trafficking of children by saying, you get into our country no matter what, if you just bring a child, and we're encouraging people to come in with a criminal record and bring a child because they know that's their fast track to be able to get in because their home country can't fulfill it fast enough. why would we do that as a country? why would we knowingly, willingly do that? we can solve this prompt it is a horrible humanitarian crisis. we need to pay attention to it and be logical about this. stop saying abolish i.c.e. when what we really need is the i.c.e. facilities to be able to help us be able to detain people in the best possible environments while we find out what the records are, who they are, whose related to who, and what the background is. stop ignoring the obvious things. we have some people coming for poverty. we have some people coming to smuggle drugs.

until we can sort that out, we should figure out who's who. it doesn't seem irrationale to me. and we should be able to find a way to process asylum requests much faster so individuals pursuing asylum can go through that process quickly and get processed and individuals that are gaming the system do not get to game the system. we can do better at this. we have to do better at this. and i would encourage us to be serious about immigration in the days ahead. this congress can solve this issue, but it won't because it's just a political game. and when it's about scoring political points rather than solving the humanitarian crisis, people in this body have to decide which one they want to do more. i will never forget last year sitting with a bipartisan group of my colleagues and as we

discussed solutions to immigration, one of my democratic colleagues said out loud, i haven't decided what i want to do on this yet. there's an angel on one shoulder saying this problem needs to be solved and there's aively on my other -- a devil on my other shoulder saying, this is the greatest political weapon i have against the president. why would i give it up? and i haven't decided which way i'm going to go yet. i looked at them and said, here's a basic rule of thumb i try to live by. when there's an angel and a dell i have talking to you, go with the angel every time. this is something we should do and we should stop playing political games and trying to hurt the president and ignore the obvious solutions that we all should see. this is not a partisan issue. this is a humanity issue. let's go solve it together. with that, i'd yield the floor.

i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from virginia. mr. warner: mr. president, i ask that the proceedings under the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. under the previous order, the senate having received the veto messages on s.j. res. 36, s.j.

res. 37, and s.j. res. 38, the messages are considered read and spread upon the journal in full en bloc. the senator from virginia. mr. warner: mr. president, in a moment, i will ask unanimous consent for the senate to take up and pass legislation i have introduced to help protect our democracy from foreign interference. earlier today, special counsel robert mueller testified that the russian government's efforts to undermine our elections are, quote, among the most serious challenges to our democracy, end of quote. a challenge, he says, that deserves the attention of every american. mr. mueller's testimony should serve as a warning to every member of this body about what could happen in 2020, literally

in our next elections, if we fail to act. when asked if he thought that russia would attack our democracy again in 2020, mr. mueller said they are doing it as we sit here. think about that for a moment. the special prosecutor spent two and a half years looking into russian intervention in our elections in 2016 and says not only are they going to do it, but they are doing it as we sit here. now, if was just coming from thg from the special prosecutor, some folks might be willing to dismiss it, but this is exactly the same message we heard earlier this week from f.b.i. director wray. it's a message that all of us have heard -- and i particularly on the intelligence committee have heard repeatedly from director of national intelligence coates, and we have

heard this as well from other leaders of law enforcement and our intelligence community. again, i point out leaders all who were appointed by this president who have sounded the alarm about the ongoing russian threat to our elections. unfortunately, in the nearly three years since we have uncovered russia's attack on our democracy, this body has not held a single vote on stand-alone legislation to protect our elections. mr. president, i'm not here to relitigate the 2016 election or for that matter to second-guess the special counsel's findings. this is more a question safe how we defend our democracy on a going-forward basis. and the reason we need to do this, amongst a host of reasons, is just a month ago, the president of the united states

sat in the oval office and by dismissing this threat effectively gave russia the green light to interfere in future elections. since then, unfortunately, my republican colleagues have done nothing to prevent further future attempts at undermining our democracy. so let me be clear. if a foreign adversary tries to offer assistance to your campaign, your response should not be thank you. your response should be a moral obligation to tell the f.b.i. mr. mueller, the former f.b.i. director and arguably the straightest arrow in public service, said as much this afternoon. so if the president or other members of his family or campaign can't be trusted to do the right thing and report their foreign contacts and foreign offers of assistance to their

political activities, then we need to make it a legal requirement. and that's what my legislation, the fire act, is all about. the fire act is a simple, narrowly targeted bill. all it does is make sure that attempts to interfere in future presidential elections are promptly reported to the f.b.i. and the f.e.c. let me be clear, the fire act is not about prohibiting innocent contacts or the exercise of first amendment rights. contrary to some of the mistaken rhetoric we heard, it does not require reporting of contacts with foreign journalists or dreamers or official meetings with foreign governments. it is simply about preserving americans' trust in our democratic process. if a candidate is receiving or welcoming help from the kremlin or its spy services, i think

the american people should have a right to know before they head to the polls. consequently, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the rules committee be discharged from further consideration of s. 2342, the fire act, that the senate proceed to its immediate consideration, that the bill be read a third time and passed, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? a senator: mr. president, i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. the senator from mississippi. mr. blumenthal: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. blumenthal: mr. president, i want to thank my colleague, senator warner, and we'll hear shortly from senator wyden. these two great colleagues are championing election security.

senator warner at the helm as vice chairman of the intelligence committee has done as much as any american, any member of this body to uncover the serious russian threat to our election system, and it's a threat not just from the russians but from other countries as well. and that's why i have offered and i will shortly ask for unanimous consent for the passage of s. 1247, the duty to report act. this legislation, like senator warner's, is based on a very simple idea. if you see something, say something. the duty to report act would require campaigns, candidates, and family members to immediately report to the f.b.i. and federal election commission any offers of illegal foreign assistance. it differs in some technical aspects. for example, mine, family

members. from senator warner's proposed fire act. but it is the same idea because it codifies into law what is already a moral duty, a patriotic duty, and basic common sense. it is already illegal to accept foreign assistance during a campaign. it is already illegal to solicit foreign assistance during a campaign. all this bill does is require campaigns and individuals to report such illegal foreign assistance directly to the f.b.i. today special counsel robert mueller came before congress to answer questions about his very comprehensive and powerful report which documents sweeping and systematic interference in our election. and as he testified, to benefit principally the campaign of

donald trump. but this measure is about the future. it is about preventing such election interference in the future and providing a mandate and a duty to report any offers of assistance from a foreign government like the russians. this the report outlines the most serious attack on our democracy by a foreign power in our history. it tells a story of more than 150 contacts between the trump campaign and russian agents. it tells a story of russian covert and overt efforts to influence the outcome of our election by helping one candidate and hurting another. and it shows, most important for the purpose of this measure, that the trump campaign knew of it, welcomed it, happily accepted it.

mueller testified this morning, quote, over the course of my career i've seen a number of challenges to my democracy, the russian government's efforts to interfere in our election is among the most serious. as i said on may 29, this deserves the attention of every american. but equally important, just yesterday f.b.i. christopher wray came before the judiciary committee and warned that the russians are still actively trying to interfere in our election. as mueller said today, when he was asked about some of the remarks, some of the efforts in the trump campaign -- and he was referring to donald trump jr. when he said, i love it,

in welcoming russia's offer of assistance in the campaign in the june 9 meeting, director mueller said, i hope this is not the new normal but i fear it is. this is the context of troubling comments that brings us here today. and one of the most troubling is president trump's own comment. when asked if he would accept foreign help in 2020, and he said, i'd take it. quote, i'd take it. well, that is why we need the duty to report act. if that kind of assistance is offered, there is an obligation to report it, not take it. 2016 was simply a dress rehearsal. with the 2020 election upon us, we must stop this kind of foreign interference and ensure

that it is the american people, not russia or any other foreign power like china or iran who decides who the leaders of this country are and the direction of our democracy. so, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the rules committee be discharged from further consideration of s. 1247, that the senate proceed to its immediate consideration, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? mrs. hyde-smith: mr. president, i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. blumenthal: mr. president, i yield to another great colleague who has been a champion of this cause of election security.

i'm pleased to yield to senator wyden. mr. wyden: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. wyden: mr. president, i thank my colleagues senator blumenthal and senator warner have spoken strongly on the issue at hand, which is to protect our country, our great country. in 200 years of self-governance, this extraordinary experiment in self-governance, and to do it we have to add a new tier of strong protection for the sanctity of our elections. so i want to thank senator blumenthal. he is a member of the judiciary committee where he is doing important work on these issues. our colleague, senator warner, of course the vice chairman of the intelligence committee where i serve, and i just want to thank my colleague who is still on the floor, senator blumenthal, for all his leadership.

i look forward to partnering with him and with senator warner in the days ahead. mr. president, in a moment i will be asking for unanimous consent to adopt a bipartisan bill that i have proposed with senator cotton. it is s. 890, the senate cybersecurity protection act. before i ask, however, for that unanimous consent request, i just want to give some brief background on why senator cotton and i are working on this issue and putting all this time into this effort. in the 2016 election, obviously the russians inflicted damage on our democracy by hacking the personal accounts of political parties and individuals and then dumping e-mails and documents online. this tactic generated massive amounts of media coverage that was based on those stolen documents. it is clear, in my view,

mr. president, and colleagues, that russia and other hostile foreign actors are going to continue to target the personal devices and accounts which are often less secure than official government devices. and you don't have to take my word for it. top national security officials in the trump administration have said virtually the same thing. last year the director of national intelligence, our former colleague, senator coats, told the senate intelligence committee that, and i quote, the personal accounts and devices of government officials can contain information that is useful for our adversaries to target either directly or indirectly. these officials and the organizations with which they are affiliated. likewise, in a letter to me last year, then-director of the national security agency, mike

rogers, said that the personal devices and accounts belonging to senior government officials, and i quote, remain prime targets for exploitation. these foreign intelligence threats are not just aimed at the executive branch. last year a bipartisan senate working group examined cybersecurity threats against senators. in their november 2018 report, the working group revealed that there was mounting evidence that senators are being targeted for hacking which could include exposure of personal data. likewise, google has now publicly confirmed that it has quietly warned specific senators and senate staff that their personal e-mail accounts were being targeted by state-sponsored hackers. unfortunately, the sergeant at arms, an office that's tasked with protecting the senate cybersecurity, is currently

barred from using its resources to protect the personal devices and accounts of senators and their staff even if senators and staff are being targeted by foreign spies and hackers. so that is why on a bipartisan basis senator cotton, who also serves on the intelligence committee with me and with senator warner, who spoke earlier, senator cotton and i introduced legislation to permit the sergeant at arms to provide 100% voluntary cybersecurity assistance to senators and staff. our bill, mr. president, is modeled after a provision in the recently passed senate intelligence authorization bill which permits the director of national intelligence to provide voluntary cyber help to protect the personal devices and accounts of intelligence community employees.

fighting back against foreign interference means securing every aspect of our democracy, including the personal accounts and devices of elected officials. i feel strongly that the majority leader, our colleague from kentucky, must stop blocking this commonsense legislation and allow this body to better defend itself against foreign hackers. mr. president, i now ask unanimous consent the rules committee be discharged from further consideration of s. 890, the senate cybersecurity protection act, the senate proceed to its immediate consideration, the bill be read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? mrs. hyde-smith: mr. president, i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard.

mr. wyden: mr. president, i note again there's been an objection, and i would only state that i don't see how anyone can consider what i have proposed to be a partisan issue. our colleague from arkansas, a military veteran, senator cotton, and i have joined in an effort which i would just say to the senators that are on the floor is going to be one of the great threats of our time because these personal devices are what we know hostile foreign actors are going to be targeting. they began to show what the opportunities were in the last election. now we know that those opportunities are going to grow exponentially as devices become more sophisticated in the days ahead. so i only want to pass on that i

think this is regrettable, and there's been an objection and i just hope that we'll be able to pass this bill before more people are hurt. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor.

ms. hyde-smith: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from mississippi. ms. hyde-smith: i understand there is a bill at the desk and i ask for its first reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the title of the bill for the first time. the clerk: s. 2258, a bill to provide anti-retaliation protections for antitrust whistle-blowers. ms. hyde-smith: i ask for a second reading and in order to place the bill on the calendar under rule 14, i object to my

own request. the presiding officer: objection is heard. the bill will receive its second reading on the next legislative day. ms. hyde-smith: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of s. resolution 283, submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 283, expressing the support for 2019 as the international year of the periodic table of chemical elements. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. ms. hyde-smith: i further, that the motion be agreed to and the preamble be agreed to and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. hyde-smith: i ask unanimous consent that at 1:00 4r5 p.m., the -- 1:45 p.m., the senate proceed to calendar number 375,

that the senate vote on the nomination with no intervening action or debate, that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate, that no further motions be in order, that any statements related to the nominations be printed in the record, the president be immediately notified of the senate's action and the senate then resume legislative session are. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. hyde-smith: i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourns until 10:00 a.m., thursday, july 25, further, 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 the senate be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. hyde-smith: 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 morning.