executive nomination and then later this afternoon, senate lawmakers will vote to confirm army chief of stat mark millie will be the chairman of joint chiefs of staff. the armed services committee held a hearing for him earlier this month. now to live coverage of the u.s. senate here and c-span2. the reverend black la lead us in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. almighty god, the author and finisher of our faith, we rejoice in the privileges you have strewn on our path. give us the courage to use our opportunities to serve you and country. may our lawmakers strive to stand for right, though the

heavens fall. remind them that evil prospers when good people do nothing. may our senators also use the gift of intercessory prayer to unlock your storehouse of blessings so desperately needed in our nation and world. in hours of hardship, provide them with your peace. lord, give our legislators the wisdom that enables them to hasten the coming of your kingdom of justice and peace. we pray in your sovereign name. amen.

the presiding officer: please join me in the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of americ, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington, d.c., july 25, 2019. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable cindy hyde-smith, a senator from the state of mississippi, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: chuck grassley, president pro tempore.

mr. mcconnell: madam president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: today we expect the house of representatives will pass the two-year government funding agreement that the trump administration and speaker pelosi announced earlier this week. i stand with the president who has publicly expressed his support for the agreement on several occasions, and i'm grateful to the members of his administration who led the negotiations -- secretary mnuchin, acting chief of staff mulvaney and acting o.m.b. director vought. consider the circumstances is of divided government. this is a good deal. after the house approves it today with bipartisan support, i expect the senate to do the same next week. here's why it's a good deal -- because it achieves the number one goal of the republican side of the aisle, providing for the common defense. continuing our progress and rebuilding the armed forces of the united states and modernizing them so they can continue to keep americans safe

and project power for years to come. this has been a top-shared priority for this republican senate and this republican white house for two and a half years. pentagon leaders need stable, reliable, and sufficient resources. the greatest military on earth should not drift in uncertainty. our service members deserve better than a string of funding crises and continuing resolutions. our commanders need predictable resources and sufficient resources to lay the foundations for the future of our national defense. service members deserve to deploy armed with state-of-the-art training and cutting-edge equipment. their families deserve the best support services the nation can offer. and the nation as a whole deserves a global presence that is up to snuff and competitive

with the leaps forward in which our adversaries have invested heavily. that's why we've delivered historic increases in resources for modernization and d.o.d. reforms to ensure the u.s. military is strong and agile enough to confront a growing number of threats to america and our interests. that's why just a few months ago we authorized the largest year-on-year increase in defense funding in more than a decade. and now this funding agreement is the next step forward in that process. so, madam president, every member of this body knows the threats we face are serious and getting more serious. the resurgence of great power competition with nations like russia and china, the destabilization influence of state-sponsored terror and regional aggression from bad actors such as iran, and the testing of historic a lines -- alliances.

amidst the growing international chaos, the pre-emin addition of the u.s. government is to provide for the common defense. that physical for the safety and security of the -- this provides for the safety and security of the american people. a nation that understands these threats and takes them seriously makes serious investments in the readiness of its own defenses today and the modernization that will preserve their strength into the future. for years we've seen china extend its strategic reach, testing the waters of the indo-pacific region and beyond. we've watched its communist leadership nearly double military spending in the last decade and push the boundaries in everything from offshore territorial claims to 5g technology. america's edge is in jeopardy. our allies in the pacific are uneasy. and the administration's budget agreement with the speaker will allow america to ensure that our

own foot stays on the gas pedal as well. meanwhile, in the middle east, we're confronted daily by escalating threats to our allies and interests, state-sponsored terror, and proxy actions are becoming vulgar, gray zone activity in places like the strait of hormuz is raising the economic and geopolitical stakes of iran's meddling. from syria to crimea, russia continues to stretch its legs. not since the height of the soviet union have we seen moscow this focused on extending influence beyond its borders. and all over the world historical alliances like nato need to be strengthened and renewed for this new landscape. fortunately, in the coming days we'll have the opportunity to address all these areas -- europe, the middle east, the indo-pacific, and beyond. that opportunity is this bipartisan spending agreement. so i'm grateful to the administration for ensuring that

such robust funding for our national security is included in this package. it will make us safer world wide, it will make needed investments in our own facilities right here at home like fort knox, fort campbell and the bluegrass army depot which kentucky is proud to host. and what's more, i -- and once more i congratulate the president on holding the list on left-wing policy riders that democrats have sought to push throughout the partisan appropriations process over there on the other side. we're talking about far-left wish list items, things like reversing the trump administration's decision and getting title 10 taxpayer dollars flowing back into the pockets of planned parenthood; weakening the conscience rights of health care professionals; removing protections for the second amendment; and efforts this would have weakened i.c.e. and defunded the president's

efforts to secure our border. these are just some -- just some -- of the policy riders that the far left that is hoped -- hoped -- to smuggle into the appropriations process, perhaps using the full faith of the u.s. states as l but the administration froze all of those out. they're not in this deal. they shepherded and agreement that delivered on our most basic responsibility to the american people. they set the stage to provide for the common defense. today it's the house's turn to follow through and then in the near future it will be ours. now, madam president, i understand there is a bill at the desk due a second reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the title of the bill forked second time. the clerk: s. 2258, a bill to provide anti-retaliation protections for antitrust whistle-blowers. mr. mcconnell: in order to place the bill on the calendar, under the provisions of rule 14,

i would object to further proceedings. the presiding officer: objection having been heard, the bill will be placed on the calendar. mr. mcconnell: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. schumer: good morning. madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: now, yesterday, as we all know, former counsel mueller testified before two house committees. i believe it was crucial for the american people to hear straight from robert mueller's mouth that the president was not, underline not exonerated by his report, despite what the president claims, and it is utterly amazing. mueller says something and the president says the exact opposite to the media. we have never had a president who lies so often. he knows what mueller said, but he thinks he can dupe people when he says it, and i hope it's not true. now, it's important for the american people to hear straight

from robert mueller's mouth that the president is not telling the truth when he claims that mueller found no obstruction. mueller did not. anyone who watched the hearings saw it. it was plain as could be. but that's not the subject of my remarks today. my remarks are involved with election security. above all, it was important for all of us to hear, straight from robert mueller's mouth, that the threat from russia and other foreign adversaries seeking to meddle in our elections is very real and still very much ongoing. asked about russian interference in our democracy, mr. mueller responded, quote, it wasn't a single attempt. they are doing it as we sit here, and they expect to do it in the next campaign. leader mcconnell, let me read you that sentence. if you care about america. quote, mueller, about russian

interference, quote, it wasn't a single attempt. they're doing it as we sit here, and they expect to do it in the next campaign. unquote. he went on to say that many more countries were developing similar capabilities that russia has. he reminded members of the house intelligence committee that russian fake images reached nearly 126 million people on facebook alone. and as if it needed to be even -- even needed to be spelled out, mr. mueller added, quote, much more needs to be done in order to protect against these intrusions, not just by the russians but by others as well. mueller's testimony was a clarion call for election security. mueller's testimony should be a wake-up call to every american, democrat, republican, liberal, conservative, that the integrity of our elections is at stake, to

be manipulated by a foreign power. this is all about the future of this country. if we lose faith in our electoral process, democracy begins to walk away from us and we'll be a different country than the glorious country we have been since 1789. and yet, our republican colleagues put their heads in the sand. donald trump, as usual, with his enormous self-ego, doesn't want to admit the russians interfered, even though he encouraged it publicly because he feels it will cast some illegitimacy on his election. the election's over. he's president. i wish he weren't. but that's not the issue here. the issue is the future of our democracy. and our republican colleagues

once again, either afraid of president trump or even worse, seeking advantage from russian interference, are keeping their heads in the sand. we have tried, we have worked with our republican colleagues to craft several bipartisan bills, democrats and republicans alike, to safeguard our election infrastructure and deter any foreign adversary from targeting our democracy in 2020. we have asked the republican majority on the appropriations committee to devote more resources to harden their election systems, to no avail. leader mcconnell has refused to bring these bills to the floor. republicans have rebuffed our requests for additional appropriations this year. election security goes into mcconnell's legislative graveyard, even though it should be the most nonpartisan of issues. he has refused, refused to let

us consider anything using his power as majority leader. he is backed up by every single republican who are complicit in not stopping the russians, as putin seeks to stretch his long arm and delve into a sacred process, how we elect our officials. why? what could possibly be the down side of ensuring that our elections are fair and free of foreign interference? why would leader mcconnell and every one of our republican colleagues who now has failed to step up to the plate, even though some of them work with our colleagues on bills, why would they ignore the admonitions of the -- of the founding fathers who said foreign interference is a great danger to democracy? what could be the down side of ensuring our elections are fair

and free? i ask that question of leader mcconnell. the only excuse i've heard is he says additional action isn't necessary. well, mr. mueller, who has done far more investigative work on this than just about anything else cleared all that up yesterday. he didn't say we've done enough already. he didn't say we're on top of it. he said much more needs to be done. leader mcconnell, do you disagree? is mueller wrong? are all the experts wrong and the f.b.i. appointed by president trump? and the n.s.a., appointed by president trump? all those leaders who say we need to do more. we've heard them. so we are going to continue our fight for election security. we are not going to let leader mcconnell put the bills passed by the house into his

legislative graveyard without a fight. you're going to hear from us on this issue over and over again. the legislative graveyard of leader mcconnell is known from one end of the country to the other. americans know he doesn't want to help them. doesn't want to help middle-class americans. the graveyard of our republican colleagues in obesens to powerful and -- in obeisance to powerful and special interests gets larger, more stunning, more debilitateing to this country every day. yesterday, democratic senators requested unanimous consent to pass some election security legislation that they had worked on, much of which was bipartisan. the republican majority blocked them. soon -- i believe in about an hour -- i will be asking unanimous consent on the house-passed election security

bill. it's sitting here. it's in the drawer of the leader. is he going to let this go into the legislative graveyard? we'll see in an hour. and i hope at least one of my republican colleagues will come to the floor and urge that we vote on this, or at least debate it and amend it. one. the republican leader's intransigence resistance to this effort is inexplicable. why he wants to put election security in his legislative graveyard is impossible to explain on a logical basis. i believe his intransigence, his resistence is untenable. so when i move in about an hour for unanimous consent to bring the house bill to the floor, maybe, maybe something will be chirping in smfort brains of --

some of the brains of some of my colleagues here and say we can't allow the russians to interfere and we have to do something. if they don't agree with what the house passed let them propose amendments, let them propose alternatives but let us debate it. this is a national security issue of paramount importance. i urge my friend, the leader, to stand down and let election security come to the floor. if he doesn't, all of america will know when russia interferes, why. now on another matter, now i'm not -- this is on deficits. i'm not in the habit of commenting on every opinion issued by newspapers i don't typically agree with, but this week "the wall street journal" wrote such a howeller of an -- howler of an editorial i feel compelled to. the editorial board criticized the latest budget agreement for its increase in domestic spending wringing its hands over the effect on deficit while simultaneously praising defense

spending which the editorial board believes for some reason has nothing to do with deficits. this, by the way, is the same editorial board that played head cheerleader for the republican tax bill which contained such mammoth tax cuts for the biggest corporations and the already wealthy that it will add $2 trillion to our deficits. $2 trillion. huge tax cuts contributed more to the deficit than all of these spending programs put together. but "the wall street journal" cheered on the tax cuts and now says don't spend for the middle class on things like education and infrastructure that have broad support in america, helping kids go to college. but don't spend on that because it increases the deficit, but it's okay to pass massive tax cuts for the rich and the big corporations that are profitable already. so for the sake of the record, "the wall street journal" editorial board believes deficits are really bad but only if they're caused by investments

in americans' health care or education or infrastructure. when deficits are caused by defense spending, when deficits are caused by tax cuts to the wealthy, they're peachy. the truth is so many of my republican friends have engaged in the same egregious bit of hypocrisy. so i have a few words this morning from my deficit scolding friends, mick mulvaney and the wall street editorial board. a deficit is a deficit is a deficit. they try to make the arguments that massive tax cuts won't create a deficit, but all the numbers that are coming in now and are projected for the future say that is just not true. if the "wall street journal" really cared about deficits above all, they wouldn't have supported the tax bill. when the senate debated these tax cuts in 2017, there were several proposals on the table. many democrats and republicans supported them that would have reduced taxes on corporations

while remaining deficit-neutral. many would have changed the tax codes in ways i didn't support, but nonetheless they would have held revenues and expenditures in line. we didn't hear a peep out of the "journal" to support those proposals. oh no. democrats even put together a deficit-neutral middle-class tax cut at the time but republicans ignored it and pushed through congress a bill that lined the pockets of the wealthy, blowing a $2 trillion hole in our deficit. "the wall street journal" could have said something then. they didn't. they were asleep at the switch. they were asleep at the switch then and they're crying now. the fact of the matter is republican tax cuts for the wealthy and endless wars in the middle east championed by george bush and the republican party are the big drivers of the nation's debt and deficit. not nondefense domestic spending. president obama, to his credit, cut the budget deficit

in half during his term. the last time we had a surplus was under a democratic president, bill clinton. but in fact every single republican administration has added to the deficit while every single democratic administration has shrunk it since 1981. reagan deficit increase. h.w. increase deficit. bill clinton deficit goes down. george bush deficit increase. obama deficit goes down. what does it that say? donald trump, deficit goes up. "the wall street journal," editorial board and my republican friends silent about deficits but railed against deficit spending i say spare us. enough about this deficit hypocrisy. finally on climate, i want to congratulate my dear friend, one of the most intelligent,

hard working, articulate senators we have, sheldon whitehouse on reaching a rhetorical milestone. on his strong eloquence on the environment this goes together. yesterday senator whitehouse gave his 250th speech on the subject of climate change. many members of this chamber have yet to speak 250 times on the floor in total, much less on a single topic. but senator whitehouse's speeches have covered everything from sea level rise to polar cap ice melting, the effect of climate change on our economic security and our national security. he's diligently shone a light on the impediments to legislative progress on climate change, and he waxes fervent and poetic on the web, condemning the web of dark money that funds fraudulent climate research and lobbies against climate action.

much more important than senator whitehouse's milestone of course is the issue he's talking about. each passing week brings another proof point that climate change is happening right now. reshaping our planet for the worse. moving so quickly that at some point we will not be able to recover no matter what we do, and the world will be so much worse for our children and grandchildren. i think of my eight-month-old, just turned eight months on the 24th, my little grandson. will his world be the same as ours? will it be just as beautiful or will there be flooding and fires and changes that make his life and the life of his whole generation far more difficult? if we do nothing, that will happen. carbon levels in the atmosphere are at the highest point ever in human history. just days ago nbc reported this will be the hottest july on record. last month june was the hottest june on record.

we all know the consequences are going to be devastating, just devastating to our planet if we fail to take action soon. it's time for the senate to debate serious, significant policies to address climate change, and parenthetically, it's another place, mcconnell's legislative graveyard unfortunately gains, gains more and more. he will not do anything on climate change, as important as it is. so let me thank senator whitehouse for his leadership on this issue. maybe leader mcconnell will read his 250 speeches and have a change of heart. i doubt it, but who knows. i wish that all of my colleagues on the other side would listen to him and join our democrats in our efforts to pass legislation to combat climate change. and finally, one more point, madam president, on puerto rico. last night the governor of puerto rico, ricardo rossello,

announced he will resign on august 2. i'm glad that the governor has listened to the voices of the people of puerto rico. it's clear he had lost their trust, their respect, and certainly the mandate to govern. the most important thing now is a quick and orderly transition of power so that our fellow citizens on the island can turn the page on this difficult chapter and move forward. no matter what, we have to stand with the people of puerto rico. the island is still a far way off from recovery after the did he devastation of recent hurricanes. it's essential that the local puerto rican economy continues to recover, that basic services performed by the government continue undisturbed and the process continues. as a new governor enters office, we pledge to do whatever we can to ensure the people of puerto rico receive the aid and the support they need. we fought incredibly hard on the disaster bill to make sure that the people of puerto rico were

not treated worse than any other u.s. citizens. the events of the past two weeks should in no way inhibit that aid from reaching the island quickly and efficiently because it's so badly needed. i'll be watching and doing everything in my power to guarantee that's the case. and i now note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call: mrs. murray: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: thank you, madam president. i ask unanimous consent to lift the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. murray: thank you, madam president. i come -- the presiding officer: time is reserved. under the previous order, the senate will be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the senator from washington. mrs. murray: thank you, madam president. i come to the floor today to

once again sound the alarm against republicans' efforts to throw the lives of millions of families into chaos and uncertainty and to urge my colleagues to reverse course and join democrats to protect people's health care before it is too late. a few weeks ago president trump and republican attorneys general argued in court to create a health care crisis for families in our country. if republicans win, their blatantly partisan lawsuit, the consequences could be sweeping and devastating. tens of millions of people who have health coverage through medicaid expansion or the exchanges could lose it, as could many young adults who are on their parents' insurance. over 100 million people with preexisting conditions could lose protections that stop

insurance companies from charm -- charging them more, excluding benefits they need, or denying them coverage entirely. patients could lose protections that require insurers to cover essential health benefits like prescription drug costs or maternity care or emergency care, mental health care, and more. and limits on how much patients have to pay out of pocket could go away while lifetime and annual caps on patients' benefits could come back,even for those insured through their employer. republicans have refused to acknowledge what's actually at stake now for the patients and families whose health they are putting at risk, and they have made it all too clear that despite the horrible consequences they are setting up, despite the lives their throwing needlessly into jeopardy, republicans are going to go full steam ahead with this

reckless lawsuit to strike down health care for millions and without any plan to do anything if they win. now, some republicans have tried to dodge this fact by saying they'll figure it out after they win. that's an incredibly telling and incredibly alarming position. and it is about as comforting as an arsonist telling you he'll figure out how to rebuild your house avenue burns it down. here's an idea -- how about republicans put away the matches. let's be clear. republicans have no plan for the patient whose lose their coverage, no plan for the families who see their health care costs go up, no plan for the people nationwide who rely on these plans for their health care that will be taken away. families expect better. they deserve better. this is not rocket science. people want us to protect their health care, not take it away. they want us to bring health costs down, not send them

hurtling higher. they want us to fight for them, not against them. republicans have made the wrong choice time and again, so i call on my republican colleagues to stop this chaos, work with us, let us fight for patients before it's too late. the clock is ticking, patients and families are watching close liz. if -- closely. if republicans and the trump administration refused to end this partisan lawsuit, families and patients will be the ones who suffer the consequences, and they will not forget the republicans who stood by and cheered and let it happen. thank you, 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. blunt: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from missouri. mr. blunt: mr. president, -- the presiding officer: the senate is in a quorum call. mr. blunt: i move we dispense with the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. blunt: mr. president, those of us who have had a chance for some time to work with newt gingrich knows that he is a man of ideas and often thinking well beyond the moment. i had a chance the other day to read a paper that he prepared on

president trump's moon-mars development project and i want to borrow heavily from his thinking as i talk about this project today. it's an important time. we just spent significant time remembering, appreciating, looking back at the 50th anniversary of american astronauts landing on the moon and returning safely. 50 years goes quicker than you might think. but, really, for the first time in that 50 years, we're really at a point where there is a chance that we could cease to be the leading power in space. we decided we were going to become the leading power in space, we became the leading power in space, we have been the leading power in space, but that's not necessarily a given, and you can only last so long living on your past

accomplishments. president trump, on the fourth of july, made this comment. he said, i want you to know that we're going back to the moon very soon and some day soon we'll plant an american flag on mars. my guess is that was received with the same amount of skepticism that president kennedy's challenge was more than 50 years ago. now, there's no question that the artimus project that president trump is talking about is not the apollo project 50 years later. this is not an effort to get somewhere and get back. we know we can do that. it is an effort to look at where we might go next and how we might benefit from that. in may of 1961, president kennedy challenged the congress by saying we should commit ourselves to achieving the

goal -- talking about the goal of getting to the moon. we should commit ourselves to achieving the goal before this decade is out and send a man to the moon and return him safely. i think 50% of the american people polled that they were opposed to doing that. why would we send somebody to the moon. why would we worry about getting somebody there and if we get them there, we have to worry about getting them back. about a year later, the president at rice university tried to explain that. we choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy but because they are hard. that's one of the famous quotes if you look back at president kennedy's challenge to the country. you hear, we're going not because it's easy, but because they are hard.

he went on to say that goal will serve to organize and use the best of our energies and skills because that challenge is one we're willing to accept. and he said we're unwilling to postpone and we intend to win. there's nothing wrong with an america who wants to win. there's nothing wrong with an america who doesn't want to take second place. there's nothing wrong with an america that wants to set a standard that everybody else can hope to achieve. we've been caught a little flat-footed in the mid-1950's when the russians put a satellite in space, sputnik, and americans went out to see if they could see when it was passing over, you put something there that appeared to perpetually be there and there was a cosmonaut in space, but president kennedy we don't want

anymore than to have big challenges and to test ourselves. to the vice president of the united states, vice president pence said at the national space council in huntsville, alabama, on march 26 of this year, he said 50 years ago one small step for man became one giant leap for mankind. he had to -- you would have to try to avoid it not to hear that quote last week as it was repeated over and over again, but the vice president said but now it's time for us to make the next giant leap and return american astronauts to the moon, establish a permanent base there and develop the technologies to take american astronauts to mars and beyond. that's the next giant leap according to the vice president. you will note here that the direct connection between the moon development and going to mars, as the president put it, is there. it's the reason to go back to

the moon. it's the reason to do what we can to understand the moon. our goal is not just getting to the moon, of course, we've already done that. our goal is to be there and to do that in a way that works for us. now, john marberger, george w. bush's science advisor said in 2006, the moon is the closest source of material that lies out of earth's gravity. the closest place we can go and get material that can be used with 3-d printing and all sorts of things, things that are possible to construct on the moon that weren't possible to construct anywhere in that same way just a few years ago. the first phase of science on the moon would be a lot like anartica. i haven't been to anartica. i would like to go sometime. we don't have people on anartica

because anartica is an easy place to live. we have people staying on anartica to see what people can learn by being on the continent of anartica all the time. the next phase of the moon would be like that where people go to the moon, they stay on the moon, they look at opportunities on the parts of the moon where we believe there's ice and -- i know the formula for this. if you've got ice, you've probably got some form of water, and if you've got water, lots of things can happen that might not happen otherwise. this is a project that will inspire others to want to be part of it, whether it's jeff bezos or elon musk or paul allen, who passed on, but was intrigued by the moon. they are all people with great private resources. the founding of america was founded on a public-private

model, jamestown, the pilgrim foundation, the east indian company were all private with government sponsorship that happened that wouldn't happen otherwise. that, mr. president, i would suggest can happen on the moon. in newt gingrich's talking about the challenge on the moon, he talked about what happened at wallman rink and how it might relate to what can happen on the moon. if you're not bound by the normal things that bind a lot of people, every person thinking about the moon-mars project, according to former speaker gingrich, should look at what donald trump did at the wallman rink. the wallman rink was a very popular site for ice skating in norkts in 19 -- new york city when it -- in 1980 when it broke

down. new york city spent six years and $15 million trying to fix the ice rink. fortunately for the city of new york and the ice skaters that go there, the ice rink happened to be in sight of president trump's apartment, and he kept complaining about the ice rink and the failure of the city to do anything about the ice rink. finally mayor koch just said to donald trump, well, why don't you fix it if you think this is so easily done. and he did. he fixed the ice rink in four months for $2.25 million. i remember the city spent $15 million in failing to fix the ice rink. $2.25 million. the first year after the ice rink was fixed, 225,000 people skated on the ice rink. and one reason the president was

able to do that as a private citizen was he wasn't bound by the things that bound most people. he wasn't bound by the things that bind the government. the historic project to fix the wallman rink achieved a goal that fit the cost in one-18 -- 1-18th the time that it took the city to get it done. and ice skaters flourished. and a lot of things could happen with the project that the president is talking about. in march of this year, again, going back to the vice president. and remember on the effort to get to the moon, president kennedy turned that project over to the vice president, vice president johnson, and said you're going to be in charge of nasa and you're going to be the point person on the moon project, so there's a little history there maybe repeating

itself when in march of this year in huntsville, alabama, the vice president outlined the principles that we could use to meet the goals that the president had established for our efforts in space. now, principle one, mr. president, was to establish a big goal and then stick to it. remember, why did we go to the moon to start with? not because it was easy but because it was hard. establish a goal and stick with it. stalure --ure to a -- failure to achieve a goal and not return in the next five years, according to the president, not an option. and be prepared to leach outside -- reach outside to entrepreneurial companies to get the job done. he said, we're not committed to any one contractor or one company. if our current contractors can't do what we think they can do, we'll find new once. if american industry can provide

critical services without government development, then we'll buy into that project and share it with them. if commercial rockets are the only way to get american astronauts to the moon in the next five years, then commercial rockets will be the way we return to the moon. and number three, be willing to change the bureaucracy rather than abandon the goal. if we call on nasa not just to adopt new policies but embrace a new mind-set, that begins with setting a bold goal and staying on schedule. a new mind-set matters. failure is not an option. the willingness to postpone our goal, as president kennedy said almost 60 years ago, not an option. number five, be determined to change the bureaucracy in fundamental ways. nasa must transform itself into a leader more accountable

organization. if nasa's not currently capable of landing american astronauts, men and women on the moon in five years, we need to change the organization, not change the mission. and then number five, which, by the way, mr. president, i know in your case this is coming from private business. this might be your most important principal. urgency must replace complacency. the hardest thing to arrive at result. that fifth principle is exactly that. it's not just competition against our adversaries. it's our worst enemy against complacency. competition against our own willingness to believe things aren't going to happen that clearly can happen. this is a great goal. it is a step to the moon and beyond. it is a step outside our solar system to other solar systems in

our lifetime, may not see much of that. but this is not about our lifetime. this is about a step into the future. i applaud the president and the vice president for their leadership here. i look forward to applying those five principles. and, by the way, i think almost all of those principles are five principles we could apply to government every day and have a more effective government if we do. and i would yield the floor.

the presiding officer: the presiding officer: the democratic leader. mr. schumer: i have a i ask unanimous consent request, and i know my colleague from delaware has one as well. i will speak for a few minutes on mine and then i will yield to senator blumenthal, he will speak on his, and then we will wait for the leader who is supposed to come out in five minutes to object if he so chooses. we'll make the request after that. so now, mr. president, yesterday everybody heard special counsel mueller and there was a lot of dispute about obstruction of justice and things like that. there was almost no dispute about two facts that mueller said, one, the russians

interfered in our elections in 2016, and, two, they plan to do it in 2020. we rise to the floor because when russia or any foreign power seeks to interfere in our elections, it eats at the wellsprings of our democracy. the founding fathers -- the founding fathers, in their wisdom, said one of the greatest threats to our democracy was foreign interference, and now we're faced with the specter of it and -- specter of it and we're asking our republican colleagues to join with us in doing everything we can to stop it. this is serious stuff. mr. mueller said yesterday, quote, russian interference wasn't a single attempt. they are doing it as we sit here and they expect to do it in the next expain. unquote. -- in the next campaign. unquote. that's robert mueller, one of the most authoritative voices on this issue. mueller warned, quote, much more

needs to be done to fortify against future attacks, not just from russia but are from others who are looking to interfere in our elections as well. and mr.le mueller is not the only one calling for action for election security. f.b.i. director wray, appointed by president trump, has said the same. national intelligence director coats, also appointed by president trump, has stressed that foreign actors, quote, will add new tactics as they learn from 2016. so we must do more. this is not an issue -- a democratic issue or republican issue. this is not a liberal issue, a moderate issue or conservative issue. this is an issue of patriotism, the national security, of protecting the very integrity of american democracy, something so many of our forebearers died

for. what do we hear from the republican side? nothing. there is no credence to the claim made by the leader that we've already done enough in this chamber, mueller, wray, coats all said we need to do more -- all of them. here in the senate, the senate intelligence committee, led by mr. burr, senator burr, of north carolina, a republican, has recommended we do more. they too say otherwise. yet, leader mcconnell, and the republican majority, refuse to do anything. so in a moment i'm going to ask unanimous consent to pass legislation that safeguards our election. this legislation passed the house nearly a month ago. it would provide immediate resources for the states to modernize their election infrastructure and establish a

consistent funding stream to maintain it. the states say they need more money. it will require the use of paper ballots. almost every expert greece that that is -- agrees that is needed to protect elections from manipulation. if they manipulate machines, the paper ballots will be a safeguard. it will require states to conduct election-limiting audits and secure cybersecurity voting systems and assure that vendors are held to the highest standards so the russians and no one else can hack into these machines and interfere. these are not revolutionary changes. they are basic, commonsense accepts to greatly improve the security of our elections after president putin conducted a systematic attack on our democracy and intends to do it again. the house has passed this bill already.

we could deliver it to the president today. now, the republican leader has already indicated his intention to bury this bill in the legislative graveyard. that's a disgrace. it would be as if we said we don't need a military. we don't need ships off our shores or planes in the air. attacks on our elections are as great a threat to our national security as any other, and, yet, for reasons inexplicable, the republican leader refuses to bring legislation to the floor -- legislation that has been crafted in a bipartisan way. many of the bills that are before us have democrat and republican sponsors, and if the rumors are true, the leader urged the republicans to back off. there are only two inferences, neither good. one is the republican side doesn't care about interference in our elections and the other

is they want it because maybe they think it will benefit them. i know that president trump doesn't like to talk about this. he's childishly thinks this will cast aspurringses on the legitimacy of his election. that is a babyish and insecure thing to think when our security is at risk. but where are our republican colleagues when our national security is threatened? where are our republican colleagues? if we invite the russians to interfere by not doing enough and they do and americans lose faith in the fundamental wellspring of america, our grand democracy, this is the beginning of the end of democracy in this country. as george washington and james madison and benjamin franklin

warned us, we must do all we can to prevent foreign interference in our elections. by allowing this u.c. request to go through, we'll be taking a giant first step, and i hope the leader goes along. and, again, if he says the states don't need it, the states say they do. they are the judge. i will be asking my requests in a minute, but first let me yield to senator blumenthal who will also have a u.c. request. mr. blumenthal: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. blumenthal: i thank my colleague from new york for his compelling and powerful remarks and for his steadfast leadership on this issue of election security. the issue of election security goes to the core of our national security. in the last presidential election, this nation was

attacked. it was an attack as pernicious and insidious as any in this country's history, although it was less visible than bombs dropped at pearl harbor and less dramatic than the attacks on our troops elsewhere in this country, whether in iraq and afghanistan, it was an attack on this nation. and some of us have called it, in fact, an act of war on both sides of the aisle. and on both sides of the aisle, there has been unanimity, in fact, that the attack was by the russians through social media, through other means and tools of misinformation and disinformation to interfere with our election.

that unanimity comes from not only robert mueller, a distinguished public servant and dedicated american, but also from our entire intelligence community. there's only one person in a position of authority who disagrees, and that's the president of the united states, who finds vladimir putin more credible than our intelligence community and has said so publicly. in a few moments i will ask for unanimous consent for the passage of 1247, the duty to report act, which would address the president's saying very explicitly that he would accept outside help from a foreign power, again, in the course of

an election. the proof is overwhelming that the trump campaign accepted it in the last election, but even disputing those facts, even putting aside the president's contention that there was never an attack from the russians, the opinion is overwhelming that we must act on a very simple idea. if you seeing is, say something. the duty report act that i've offered would require campaigns, candidates, and family members to immediately report to the f.b.i. and the federal election commission any offers of federal assistance. it codifies into law what is already -- i think we all agree -- a moral duty, a

patriotic duty, a matter of common sense. it is already illegal to accept foreign assistance during a campaign. it is already illegal to solicit foreign assistance during a campaign. what this bill does, all it does is require campaigns and individuals to report such illegal foreign assistance directly to the f.b.i. yesterday robert mueller came before congress to answer questions about his sweeping investigation and 448-page report. that report documents compellingly and convincingly the most serious attack on our democracy by a foreign power in our history. it tells the story of 140 contacts between the trump campaign and russian agents.

it proves russian covert and overt efforts to influence the outcome of our election by helping one candidate and hurting another. and it shows powerfully the trump campaign's knowledge of take effort and willingness to accept that help. mueller testified yesterday, quote, over the course of my career, i've seen a number of challenges to our democracy. the russian government's effort to interfere in our election is among the most serious as i said on may 29, this deserves the attention of every american. the legislation that senator schumer is offering through unanimous consent now, the legislation that i am offering by unanimous consent now is necessary as a matter of urgent

national security. we have no choice but to defend our nation and our democracy. given the sweeping sophisticated attack by the russians outlined in the mueller report and confirmed by his testimony yesterday, we have an obligation to act now as we would against any impending attack in our history. just the day before yesterday, f.b.i. director christopher wray came before the judiciary committee. and he warned that the russians are actively trying to interfere in our elections right now in real time as we speak here. he has told this body that if a foreign agent or government tries to help a campaign, the f.b.i. would want to know about it. that also is a matter of simple

moral duty and patriotic duty and common sense. when asked if he would accept foreign help in 2020, the president said, quote, i'd take it. this is much like what his son don, jr., said. quote, i love it, end quote, in response to russia's offer of assistance to the trump campaign in that june 9 meeting, now infamous in these halls and in the country. when mueller was asked about it yesterday he said, quote, i hope this is not the new normal, but i fear it is. well, it doesn't have to be the new normal if congress passes the duty report act. this legislation would assure that any campaign, literally any

campaign offered any assistance from any foreign government in any future election would mean the f.b.i. would learn of it. 2016 was just a dress he remembersal -- a dress rehearsal. we can expect that the same will happen with greater intensity and sophistication in the election to come. we have a duty to act against it. taking the measure sent to us by the house of representatives, introduced for unanimous consent by senator schumer now, and the duty report act now so that we protect our democracy going forward. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. mr. schumer: mr. president? the presiding officer: the democratic leader. mr. schumer: i'd ask unanimous consent to submit this letter from 21 attorneys general saying they need more election assistance to protect against

foreign interference for the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the rules committee be discharged from further consideration of h.r. 2722, the safe act, the senate proceed to its immediate consideration, the bill be 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. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: is there objection? the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: reserving the right to object. what my friend the democratic leader is asking unanimous consent to pass is partisan legislation from the democratic house of representatives relating to american elections. this is the same democratic house that made its first big priority for this congress, a sweeping partisan effort to rewrite all kinds of the rules

of american politics, not to achieve greater fairness but to give themselves a one size political benefit. the particular bill that the democratic leader is asking to move by unanimous consent is so partisan that it received one, just one republican vote over in the house. so clearly this request is not a serious effort to make a law. clearly something so partisan that it only received one single solitary republican vote in the house is not going to travel through the senate by unanimous consent. it's very important that we maintain the integrity and the security of our elections in our country. any washington involvement in that task needs to be undertaken with extreme care, extreme care and on a thoroughly bipartisan basis. obviously this legislation is not that. it's just a highly partisan bill from the same folks who spent

two years hyping up a conspiracy theory about president trump and russia and who continue to ignore this administration's progress at correcting the obama administration's failures on this subject in the 2018 election. therefore i object. mr. schumer: mr. president? the presiding officer: the objection is heard. mr. schumer: mr. president? the presiding officer: the democratic leader. mr. schumer: just for a moment we -- there are bipartisan bills on this issue which the republican majority has objected to. i would suggest to my friend the majority leader if he doesn't like this bill, let's put another bill on the floor and debate it. but so far we have done nothing, absolutely nothing in this chamber to protect our country and its elections security. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. blumenthal: mr. president, i have a separate bill. it has not come to us from the house but it should have bipartisan support, so i ask unanimous consent that the rules committee be discharged from

further consideration of s. 1247, the senate proceed to its immediate consideration, that the bill be read a third time and passed, and that motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. mcconnell: i object? the presiding officer: the objection is heard.

mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: for the information of all of our colleagues, i want to provide an update on the remaining items -- on the remaining items the senate needs to deplete before we adjourn -- complete before we adjourn for the august state work period. here's what we need to accomplish before members depart next week. we need to confirm well qualified nominees to two open positions of utmost importance, the deputy secretary of defense and our ambassador to the u.n.

these jobs are important. the nominees are impressive and we need to confirm david norquist and kelly craft next week. obviously we need to pass the bipartisan funding agreement that president trump's negotiating team worked out with speaker pelosi, the house will pass it today. the president is strongly in support of it. the senate needs to pass it and put it on the president's desk next week. and, madam president, we need to make more headway on the backlog of qualified judicial nominees who are waiting for confirmation. so next week we'll also need to process a significant bipartisan package of district court nominees. that's our to do list for next week. the deputy secretary of defense, u.n. ambassador, bipartisan government funding agreement, and a significant group of well qualified judges. not bad for a week's work and

that's what the senate will accomplish before we adjourn for august. i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar number 119. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion to proceed. all those in favor say aye. opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. and the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: -- the nomination. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, michael t. liburdi of arizona to be united states district judge for the district of arizona. mr. mcconnell: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion, we the undersigned senators in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby bring for a close on the noble nation of michael t. liburdi to be united states district judge for the district of arizona 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 move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion to proceed. all no in favor say aye. all op motioned say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. mc -- mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to calendar number 120. the presiding officer: the motion is on the motion -- motion to proceed. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, peter d. welte, of north dakota, to be united states district judge for north dakota. the presiding officer: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22, do hereby bring to a close debate on of peter d. welte, of north dakota, to be united states district judge for the dist