watch our exclusive interview with president donald trump as he reflects on his first two and a half years in office, including the raising of the debt ceiling. >> you fake a -- you take a look at the european union, it's doing poorly. you take a look at china doing poorly. we have a strong military, a lot stronger after this last budget, and then at some point very soon i'll be able to cut back, but we had to rebuild our military. we didn't have a choice. >> an interview with president trump saturday at 10 a.m. eastern on c-span. watch anytime on-line at c-span.org and listen wherever you are using the free c-span radio app. >> the u.s. senate is about to gavel in. today lawmakers will finish debate and vote on a two-year federal budget and debt limit agreement. that measure would prevent

automatic sequester cuts. kentucky senator rand paul will offer an amendment to lower spending caps over the next decade. we expect final votes later this morning and we may also see more work on president trump's judicial nominations. now live senate coverage here on c-span2. the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal god, who has created humanity in your image, look upon us and hear our prayers. today, give our lawmakers the desire to do your will and the energy to complete the tasks that will glorify your name. that which they don't know, reveal it.

that which they lack, supply it and that which they doubt, confirm it. keep them blameless in your service, so that their lives will be living letters causing people to exalt your name. lord, strengthen their minds for your service, so that your wisdom will permeate their endeavors. we pray in your mighty name. amen. the president pro tempore: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: i'd like to address the senate for one minute as if in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: i think we can save the taxpayers a lot of money by giving states more options under medicaid. unlike medicare and private insurance, medicaid doesn't incentivize bundled payments. this prevents states from testing a method that could potentially save money. the bipartisan prescription drug pricing reform legislation i introduced with senator wyden allows states to collect rebates from drugs in outpatient

settings. this removes an existing exemption in statute for some outpatient drugs and allows states to more completely utilize and test bundled payments to possibly save money money, giving states flexibility allows them to focus on the best care for different populations. encouraging bundled payments in medicaid would do just that. i yield the floor. mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: my office and i are closely monitoring our significant explosion of a gas, natural gas transmission pipeline near danville in my home state of kentucky early this morning. as of this morning one fail talt and five -- fatality and five more injuries have been reported. we hope and pray these figures do not increase. several structures have been damaged or destroyed. the lincoln county emergency

manager reported, quote, the part of the area that has been compromised there is just nothing left. the fiery explosion was so large that it was picked up by weather satellites, and witnesses report that the smoke could be seen from miles down in louisville, almost 70 miles away. obviously the investigation is just beginning. my staff and i will continue to stay on top of this and be a resource for everyone affected. this morning our prayers are with the families whom this disaster has touched and our gratitude is with all the first responders who rushed toward the towering flames to protect their neighbors and communities. now on a completely different matter, the senate has accomplished a significant amount of business this week for the american people. we made a big dent in the backlog of president trump's well-qualified nominees for federal office.

with respect to the judiciary, we've confirmed 13 impressive individuals to lifetime seats on the federal bench, and we've also ensured that two more key components of the president's foreign policy team will be on the job before the senate adjourns for the august work period. we confirmed the deputy secretary of defense and a new ambassador to the united nations, both with bipartisan support, just as it should be for nominees who are so fully prepared for jobs that are so important. but today, mr. president, the senate will turn our attention to legislation we need to address the senate limit, secure the full faith and credit of the united states. we need to continue to secure the funding that our national defense demands. fortunately the pending legislation will accomplish precisely that. in recent weeks key officials on president trump's team engaged in extensive negotiation with speaker pelosi and the

democratic house. given the exigencies of a divided government we knew any bipartisan agreement on funding levels would not appear perfect to either side. but the administration negotiated a strong deal. first and foremost, it ensures our federal government will not approach any kind of debt crisis in the coming weeks or months. it secures our nation's full faiths and credit and ensures that congress will not throw an unnecessary wrench into the gears of job growth and the thriving economy. what's more, despite the desires of the democratic house, the administration successfully kept far-left poison pills and policy riders entirely out of the process. we had heard that our democratic colleagues across the capitol were clamoring to take us backwards, perhaps targeting the hyde amendment or more

dollars towards planned parenthood. we heard they were trying to handcuff the administration's important work on border security, but on those fronts and many others the far left was denied any such victories, no poison pills, a big win for the white house. so, mr. president, i'd like to ask consent that the terms of this agreement and the specific prohibition of poison pills be included in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: perhaps most importantly, particularly to my republican colleagues and to me, this legislation sets a specific funding level for our national defense. over the past few months, as we worked through important legislation like the ndaa, we've been reminded of one glaring reality. the forces that seek to harm the united states and our interests are ever changing, and they demand the full attention of a fully equipped, modern, and ready military. now since president trump took office, republicans in congress have made remarkable progress.

working together we've begun rolling back the damage caused by the previous administration's neglect, atrophy, and misdpieded approach. -- misguided approach. we've gun to rebuild and restore our military and taken important steps towards modernization so we are investing in capabilities we'll sorely need tomorrow. i trust that none of my colleagues are under the illusion that our work is finished. as our adversaries grow stronger critical gaps remain in our ability to influence campaigns and direct acts of violence towards america and allies around the world. the bipartisan funding deal is the opportunity, the only opportunity on the table to continue filling these gaps before it's too late. so make no mistake, russia is not waiting idley by as we wait to sort out full funding to missile defense or uphold support for forces in europe.

china will not scale back its ambitions if americans decide to take a breather ourselves. iran's financing of terrorist organizations and regional trouble making is not going to stop if we stop investing in our own l ability to check their efforts and project power. so, if we say we're serious about countering threats to our homeland, allies and men and women deployed overseas, if we say we're serious, we have to actually deliver on our promise to equip our forces for the job. we have to invest and improve readiness to help our military commanders plan for emerging challenges in research and development to support the u.s. military of the future. and in rock solid support of for our alliance commitment which helps preserve the peace and our values. this deal is designed to do that. this is the agreement the administration has negotiated. this is the deal the house has

passed. this is the deal president trump is waiting and eager to sign into law. this is the deal that every member of this body should support when we vote later this morning. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to consideration of h.r. 3877, which the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 165, h.r. 3877, an act to amend the balanced budget and emergency deficit control act of 1985, and so forth and for other purposes. mr. mcconnell: 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 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby move to

bring to a close debate on calendar number 165, h.r. 3877, an act to amend the balanced budget and emergency deficit control act of 1985, and so forth and for other purposes, signed by 17 senators as follows. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the mandatory quorum call be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. blumenthal: thank you, mr. president. later today the united states senate will move to consider the measure on the floor and probably pass it and then leave town. and there will be efforts to describe what we've done. as a reason for satisfaction

and pride. there have been accomplishments. but on one critical issue, really a range of issues involving our national security, we have only abject failure to show for the months that we have been here. i'm proud to come to the floor of the senate today to advocate for that cause -- election security -- with colleagues like senator amy klobuchar of minnesota and senator mark warner of virginia who have been tireless champions, articulate and eloquent advocates for this cause. election security is national security. the testimony from robert mueller, whatever you think about his verdict on the president, clearly called for action. robert mueller is a modern-day

paul revere, sounding the alarm about the russians and many other nations, as he put it. the russians and many other nations who are mounting a renewed attack on this country. this attack in the next election will make 2016 look like child's play, a dress rehearsal, because the tools and techniques they will bring to bear in attacking our democracy are so much more sophisticated, already in 2016 robert mueller called that attack sweeping and systematic. it was the reason that he spoke first about it in his statement and closed that statement in may with a severe, dire warning about the ongoing interference in our democracy.

and those many other nations already include iran, that has been reported by "the washington post" just last week to be mounting its own disinformation campaign, using social media and misinformation, disinformation to distract, divide, and sow discord here and in other democracies around the world. there is nothing unknown to many of us about the russians' intent and the designs of these other nations. it is hiding in plain sight. and for all the classified briefings that we received over these months, the russians know

what they are doing. we know what the russians are doing. we know about what we are failing to do. the ones in the dark are the american people. and that is why senator klobuchar and senator warner and i are on the floor today, to make sure that when we leave today, it is not the end of this topic, it is the beginning of a drumbeat, a cry of outrage, and unhappiness around the nation. there are a number of measures that we have championed involving more funding for the states to do election security. paper ballots by the states to provide backups. auditing standards and cybersecurity pyrite yeah. these measures are a matter of common sense.

that word common sense is overused these days, especially in a city where it is on display so in infrequently, but -- so infrequently, but common sense is the reason we are here. i want to talk about the duty to report act. it's based on a very simple idea. if you see something, say something. the duty to report act would require all campaigns, all candidates and family members to immediately report to the f.b.i. and the federal elections commission any offers of foreign assistance. it would codify into law what is already a matter of moral duty, patriotic duty, and common sense. it's already illegal to accept foreign assistance during a campaign. it's already illegal to solicit foreign assistance during a

campaign. all this bill would do is require individuals and campaigns and family members who report those illegal foreign assistance efforts to the f.b.i. when robert mueller came before congress, he outlined the most serious attack on our democracy by a foreign power in our history. it includes 140 contacts between the trump campaign and russian agents, russian covert and overt efforts to influence the outcome of our election by helping one candidate and hurting another. but the russians and those many other nations that will engage in similar attacks on our democracy have no particular partisan preference. they are doing what's in their interests to disrupt our democracy, and the victim in one election may be the one preferred in the next.

so we have a common cause here. indeed, robert mueller testified, quote, over the course of my career, i have seen a number of challenges to our democracy. the russian government effort to interfere in our election is among the most serious. this deserves the attention of every american. we have an obligation, above all, as members of this body, where there has been so much history of bipartisan action come together in this cause. christopher wray, director of the f.b.i., recently came before the senate judiciary committee, and he warned that the russians are still actively trying to interfere in our elections. again and again, our intelligence community has warned severely, repeatedly, powerfully about this threat. and yet, when asked whether he

would accept foreign help in 2020, the president of the united states said, quote, i'd take it. much like his son donald jr. said during the last campaign, in response to an offer of assistance from the russians, quote, i love it. when robert mueller was asked about this point during his testimony, he said, quote, i hope this is not the new normal, but i fear it is. that is the reason we need this measure. that is the reason that we need the measures that my colleagues, senator klobuchar of minnesota and senator warren of virginia -- senator warner of virginia have helped to lead. that's why i join them p in this effort. to my republican colleagues in the leadership, i say lead or

get out of the way. to the president of the united states, lead or get out of the way. our national security is too important to make a partisan issue. we ought to join together as we did after 9/11 to prevent more disaster and to join in this common cause. this legislation is a matter of moral duty, patriotic duty and common sense. with the 2020 elections literally on the horizon before us, we must act now. time is not on our side. it is only on our adversaries' side. as much as we can take pride in the national defense authorization act, the threat to our national security is not only from the planes and the submarines and the aircraft

carriers, it is from the cyberattack, the social media campaign to disrupt and destroy our democracy. i am proud to be joined today by a great colleague who has been a wonderful champion on this issue, senator amy klobuchar, of minnesota. thank you. ms. klobuchar: thank you. madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota. ms. klobuchar: i want to first thank my colleague from connecticut, senator blumenthal, for his incredible work and leadership on this important bill on the duty to report as well as all the other work that he has done. he gets it. he gets that we are about to adjourn this day without passing election security legislation. we have bipartisan election security legislation. we've had that for years. and yet it has been stopped every step of the way. russia invaded our democracy.

let's be clear about that. i don't like when we use the word meddle because that's what i do when i call my daughter on a saturday night to ask her what she is doing. this country, this foreign country didn't just meddle in our election. they invaded it, right. they didn't use missiles or tanks. they used a new kind of modern warfare, which is cyber warfare. and they did it to invade our democracy. think about this. our founders literally set up a country and a constitution because they want it to be independent of a foreign country, right? in this case, it was england. and hundreds of thousands of americans have lost their lives on the battlefield, fighting for our democracy and deckses across the world. that's what world war i and world war ii were about, right? fighting for democracy across the world. fighting for the simple right

that people should be able to determine their own destiny and vote. yet, in 2016, we know for a fact, we know it from president trump's own intelligence advisers, dan coats, who was once a senator in this very chamber, someone we're going to miss, who is leaving his position, dan coats made it clear. he said they are getting bolder. so this is something right in front of us right now, and we must respond to it. but yet, we haven't passed a bill to address it. yes, senator lankford and i along with senator leahy and coons and shelby and others have worked to get some money, over $200 million, into the states, which is important. we got that done, but it doesn't really end there because actually there was no strings attached to that in terms of what we want to have done in this country, and i'll get to that in a minute. so let's first go back over the facts.

some people in this chamber seem to have trouble with facts. let's go over those. special counsel mueller under oath just last week and in his report concluded that russian interference in our democracy was sweeping and systematic. those were his words, not my words. we know that they are actively working again to undermine our democracy. in his words, when he was testifying under oath, they are doing it as we sit here. that's what he said under oath. the day before special counsel mueller testified in the house, the f.b.i. director testified in front of the committee that i'm on, the senate judiciary committee. i was there and asked him questions. i asked him whether he thinks having things like paper ballots makes sense in the event that the russia hacking happens again. he said yes, they would be a good thing. this is the f.b.i. director for

the united states of america who was appointed by donald trump. again, he was under oath. we have got multiple pieces of legislation that would require backup paper ballots, different versions, but they all really do the same thing. some of them have different kinds of audits, but the one thing they have in common is the paper ballots. and i am leading one of these bills with senator warner and a number of my colleagues. one of them is a bill we have with senator wyden that's important. and then there is the work that senator lankford and i have done across the aisle, which is a bipartisan bill which we continue to work on today. but what has happened, what do all of these bills have in common? they have been blocked by the leadership on the republican side and opposed by the white house. that's right. they weren't vetoed because they never got to the white house because the white house made the

move of stopping them in their tracks before they could get to the white house. i know because i am the ranking member of the senate rules committee, and our jurisdiction is elections, and our job was to get that bill through the committee to the senate floor. it was actually scheduled for a markup, which means you get the bill all done and you head in to the senate floor where i predict it would have gotten at least three-fourths of the members voting for that bipartisan bill. what happened? the white house made calls. they made calls. the white house counsel actually called senators on the committee and said that they didn't want it to advance. that's what we call like, you know, smoking gun evidence. that happened. that happened. okay. so we know why this bill was blocked. in addition to that, republican leadership, including the leader, made very clear that they did not want that bill to advance in the senate.

our top intelligence officials and law enforcement officers are sounding the alarm about the fact that our elections are a target. look at what they have done. they have blocked this, blocked this, despite the best advice from the intelligence officials in the united states of america. and it doesn't stop there. it doesn't stop there. other bills that they won't allow to advance, one of them involves social media. you all know what it's like when you have your facebook page or your twitter feed or you are searching something on google and something comes up. an ad pops up, right? sometimes it's scarily related to something you were searching for, but yes, ads pop up. do you know what other kinds of ads pop up? political ads pop up. those ads are paid for by some kind of political entity. i see my friend, senator warner, is here on this floor, and he is

an expert on this as the ranking member of the intelligence committee, the fact that actually some of these ads in 2016 were paid for in rubles. this is illegal. a foreign country cannot pay for ads on the internet, but they were doing that because there is no checks and balances. so what kind of ads are on there? what would you do if you were a campaigner, an issue group, and you want to put a bunch of dirty ads out there? would you do it on tv? no, you wouldn't do it on tv. if you were a attorney country, would you do that? no, because there are rules in place for newspaper, tv, and radio. they have to check those ads out, they have to keep them so people can see them and they have to show who is going to pay for them. there are no rules like that on social media. that's why i have introduced formally with my friend senator mccain, now with senator graham and senator warner, the honest ad act which simply puts those rules in place. literally if we pass that bill right now, today, before we left for recess, well, they could get this done on a large platform.

some of them are voluntarily doing that, but the mishmash and some of them aren't doing it at all. we cannot go into this next election when last time over a billion was spent on them and next time it's $3 billion to $4 billion without any rules of the road. i go back to the same argument i made. hundreds of thousands of people risked their lives and died on the battlefield to protect that right to vote, to not be influenced by foreign countries, right? why aren't we doing things to protect that democracy now in this modern age? four little girls in a church in birmingham lost their lives at the height of the civil rights movement. why? because people were trying to take away people's rights. because they didn't want them in on this democracy. that's the american history. and yeah, these things sound newfangled that we're talking about, cyberattacks and ads on social media, but it's actually just the same version of what our founders fought for in the very beginning. and that is why we are making such a big deal out of

protecting our democracy. everyone remembers the 2000 election. we all saw the hanging chads displayed on tv across the country. that experience taught us that our election systems were outdated. so what did congress do back then? pass the help america vote act, landmark legislation that provided more than $3 billion to states, helping them update their election infrastructure. o before the i phone exists and we have not updated our electronic technology since. russia knew that when they attacked us in 2016, right? we can't do it this way. we aren't able to use battleships. what's their big vulnerability? let's go to the soft spot where they haven't put the money in to protect themselves. they hacked political committees and campaigns and revealed the e-mails of the chairman of the

democratic candidate, targeted administrators and private firms responsible for manufacturing these systems. social security numbers of thousands of registered voters were exposed. recently we learned that the hacked election systems, two florida counties, hacked by the russians, and the department of homeland security is conducting forensic analysis using north carolina after it was revealed in the mueller report that a community was lacked by russia. what we need to do now is to address these facts with purpose, and the american people, there must be an outcry about this. this must be done not after 2020. it has to be done now. we have a long way to go to make sure that our election systems are resilient against attacks.

so more facts, 40 states relay on electronic voting systems 10 years old, 16 states have no state-wide audit requirement. these are alarming statistics. i'm not telling you anything secret. the russians know them today. that's why i worked with my democratic colleagues in the house and senate on legislation that would provide critical election security funding in the coming years, and mostly it would be tied to a requirement that they have backup paper ballots. otherwise what are we going to get done if we don't have the backup paper ballots if there is a hack? it doesn't matter if three counties in a swing state were hacked, this is going to be a national presidential election and we cannot risk having counties or states hacked into

because then we would have chaos and not know the result. last week my bill was offered by senator schumer on the floor. it could have gone to the president's desk that day. instead leader mcconnell objected. during his objection, he said that election legislation must be drafted with great care and on a bipartisan basis. we did that. senator warner is here. he worked on it. we did that with senator lankford, but we were blocked at the rules committee. we were blocked that. is a documented fact. the markup had been scheduled. it was ready to go. senator blunt was willing to hold a markup on the bill and it was stopped. i am going to tell that story every day until we advance this. i have an opportunity to do that, and i'm going to do it because people need to know what's going on. this should not be -- this should not be about bipartisanship or about what benefits what party. do you think that's what the

founders were thinking when they decided to declare independence from a foreign country? they were thinking of our country as one, a ramshackle group of those early founders, farmers, small business people. they came together and said, we love this land and we want to have another country influencing us. that is exactly what this is about. election security is national security. it is time we started acting like it. the federal government spends more money on military bans every year than it does on election security assistance to states. in 2018, i love military bands, but let's get real. in 2018 we fought to gets dz 230 million in -- $320 million in election funding. two state attorneys general sent congress a letter asking to protect the integrity of our

election infrastructure, including the attorneys general from states like iowa and mississippi. these were not blue states. they did not see this as a partisan issue. this is not about one election or one party. this is about our democracy and our national security. we need to be on a united front, i say to my colleagues, a united front in fighting against those who interfere with our democracy. i'm glad to see senator warner, someone on the front line who, 0 -- who is in the intelligence committee, is here with us. mr. warner: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from virginia. mr. warner: madam president, first of all, i want to thank my colleague from minnesota, senator klobachar, for his leadership and passion on this issue. this shouldn't be that hard. i know -- i'm going to readdress some of the legislation that she's talked about.

i also know earlier senator blumenthal came to the floor as well. i think the theme you're going to hear from all three of us is that while we may have made some progress, the truth is we're simply not doing enough to secure our election infrastructure. now, there are a series of bills here that i think, in common sense if they got to the floor, would all get 75 votes, maybe even more. over the past few weeks i've come to the floor a couple of times trying to move by unanimous consent my legislation known as the fire act. now i'm not going to do that this morning, but i do want to highlight this bill as one more example of commonsense bipartisan -- bipartisan election security legislation that, unfortunately, is not getting its chance to be debated on the floor of the senate. all the fire act would do is

simply require presidential campaigns do the right thing and report offers of foreign assistance -- offers of foreign assistance that are already spelled out as illegal to report those offers of foreign assistance to the f.b.i. anyone who says it does anything else in terms of limiting contacts with foreign press or limiting contact with foreign diplomats or even somebody said it might limit communications with dreamers just flat wrong. and if there's way to improve the bipartisan legislation, i'm wide open to that. i don't know how anyone could be against the idea of putting country over narrow interests or putting national security concerns over political advantage. a new poll last week found that 87% --le 7% of -- 87% of

americans agree. another poll found that 85% of americans feel it is wrong for campaigns to secure international interests since we uncovered russia's attack on democracy, this body has not held a single vote on stand alone legislation to protect our election security. it's true we did approve some additional funding to secure the 2018 mid-term elections, and i commend folks at the d.h.s. for the job they did. i'm proud of that. but we would be making an enormous mistake if we simply patted ourselves on the back and said because the russians or others didn't issue a full

frontal attack on 2018, we're safe on a going forward basis. and, please, don't take my word for it. let's look at what special prosecutor bob mueller said last week, he said ruins are continuing attacks virtually every day. the bipartisan election security committee report said we made progress, but more works need to be done. the director of the f.b.i., director wray, said more needs to be done. secretary coats, who left the position of director of national intelligence, maybe he left because he spoke truth to power that there's not enough security. and others have continued to point out russian and other foreign ininfluences trying to attack our democracy. it's been disappointing that

some of my colleagues have turned this into a partisan issue. securing our democracy is not a democratic or republican issue. the absurdity is maybe thinking about protecting our power grid as a partisan issue. we have seen efforts of foreign entities trying to interrupt the power grid. shouldn't we expect the same kind of attention and commonsense approach when we see those same foreign adversaries attack our election infrastructure? well, i think we do need to take that kind of step and move forward. senator klobachar already made mention of some of this legislation, and i know my friend, the senator from georgia is here, and i'll try to wrap-up. but there was a broad bipartisan group of senators last congress

that introduced the secure election act, something i was proud to be a part of. that bipartisan bill would have provided the additional resources for state and local election officials while still preserving local control of elections. what that legislation would have done is simply said is if local or state election officials wanted additional help from the federal government, they've got to meet some basic standards. you've got to make sure every polling station in america ought to have a paper backup, we ought to make sure there is appropriate auditing of how we do in our election system. i frankly wish the bill would have done more and gone up the food chain to the three private companies that control most of the voter files, because those voter files, if they were hacked into, you don't need to change the vote totals, you simply

would have to move a series of folks from one precinct to another to create chaos on election day. senator klobachar mentioned legislation that she and i and senator graham, a bipartisan bill to prevent misinformation and disinformation, particularly over the internet. it would simply put exactly the same rules for disclosure for a political ad on facebook that already's in place for a political ad on television, radio, or newsprint. i'm also proud to be a cosponsor of another bipartisan bill called the deter act. that one, led by senator rubio and senator van hollen, and they are absolutely right, that says we need to mutt in place automatic consequences if russia or other nations try to use their 2016 playbook once again in interfering in our 2020 election. let's warn our adversaries that they should have consequences if

they once again try to interfere in our process. madam president, these are just a few of the mainly largely bipartisan ideas about protecting the united states against foreign attacks on our election systems. i'm sure they could be -- there could be suggestions for how we could improve this legislation, that's fine. that's what we're here to do. let's debate. let's vote. let's add amendments, but what we should not do is simply pretend that this threat is going away. what we should not do is simply assume that because in 2018 we improve that we are safe in 2020. what we should not do is not recognize that local and state election officials need the kind of assistance and the kind of paper ballot backup and the kind of responsibility the federal campaign officials and president -- in presidential campaigns ought to have an

affirmative duty to report or that political ads that pop up on facebook ought to have the same kind of requirements of ads that pop up on television and radio. i don't think this is too much to ask. i think the overwhelming majority of americans expect us to do our job on this item and i hope when the senate reconvenes in september, maybe people can be refreshed by the -- by their voters back in their home states because i'm sure, whether you go to whatever state there is and visit with folks about election security, they will say congress, senate, do your job, pass commonsense legislation. let's make sure our election security is absolutely as safe as it can be as we move into the 2020 cycle. thank you, madam president. with that, i yield he the floor.

mr. perdue: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from georgia. mr. perdue: madam president, in 1975, congress passed a new budget act. it was revolutionary, comprehensive. it was supposed to streamline how congress appropriates money to fund the business of the federal government every year. unfortunately now 45 years later we know that bill was an unmitigated disaster. four times in the last 45 years since that budget act was passed has congress funded the government through the appropriation process before the end of the prior fiscal year. four times. this year -- today is the end of july -- we're about to leave congress today hopefully, or the senate today if we get these bills passed today that we'll go back to our states and we'll work in august. we heard yesterday a lot of people talking about what they are planning to do in their states. it's a busy month.

i wish it were a vacation month but it's not, nor should it be given the things that we have to do today. but when we come back in september, there will be ten working days left before the end of this fiscal year. 30 september, ten working days. as i stand before this body today -- this is not a partisan observation, madam president. as i stand here today, we have not appropriated one dollar for next year's budget to run the federal government of the united states of america. that's an indictment. it's an indictment on the process. it's an indictment on the members. it's an indictment on the fact that we have no consequences by not funding the government by september 30. not one. so today, madam president, we are about to do something that could cause us to actually use the 187th time a continuing resolution, potentially, 187 since the 1974 budget act was passed.

187. we now know how draconian those continuing resolutions are, and i'll talk about that in a minute. but today we're voting on a bill, hopefully we'll vote today, on a bill that is a compromise bill that actually sets the stage. it just sets the upper limit. it doesn't even do the appropriating at the detail level. it just sets the top-line number for the fiscal year 2020, which starts october 1, 2019. now that number is roughly $1.3 trillion, madam president. i have a debt clock in my office and i can watch the national debt spin about $100,000 a second going up every single minute of every single day. this bill begins to address that. president trump had a couple of priorities here, but before i talk about that, i want to talk about and put in perspective what this bill actually does.

we've talked before, madam president, about mandatory spending and discretionary spending. again, the problem is in our federal government, this whole budget drama that we've seen, this year and have seen for the last 45 years only deals with the discretionary budget which is $1.375 trillion for the next year. -- or for 20201, i'm sorry. discretionary budget today -- this is 2019, the dotted line here is where we are, 2019. the discretionary budget is 30% -- that's the blue line here -- of the green line which is the total spending for the federal government. today we spend $1.3 trillion in discretionary spending. we spend $3.3 trillion in mandatory spending. that's a total of $4.6 trillion. what's in discretionary spending? military spending and all other

discretionary spending is in there. health, education, agriculture, labor. the attorney general's office, state, all of the discretionary spending is in there. some v.a. expenses are in there. $1.3 trillion. now, madam president, any business, any enterprise, your personal budget, if you only dealt with 30% of what you spend in your budgeting process, wouldn't we all have a good time? it wouldn't matter how much we did on discretionary spending because we could just go borrow more money, and that's what the federal government does. but let me remind everybody today that we are borrowing also about 30% of what we spend every year, a little less than that. but between 25% and 30% we're borrowing. that means, because mandatory is like your home mortgage, your car payment, your insurance payment, it's automatically deducted. so all these mandatory expenses

that today is 70% of what we spend gets spent with no debate here in congress. none. zero. why? because it's mandatory. it gets spent like your home mortgage gets automatically deducted. once that's done, what's left? just a few pennies to take care of discretionary. the point i'm trying to make is that all this drama we've had this year and have every year is over a piece of the budget that is totally borrowed. over 90% of what we spend in our federal government's military expenses today, our national defense is borrowed money, madam president. borrowed money, by definition. so right now what we're talking about is a spending bill that actually reduces spending for discretionary items. we're not even talking about the mandatory side, the 70%. and if you look at the 70% over the next decade, even in the next two decades, discretionary spending is relatively flat. these are aggregate numbers, total numbers, adjusted for

inflation. but the orange line is the mandatory expenses, and they're projected to skyrocket here, going from about 70% today to almost 85% of every dollar the federal government spends in the next 20 years, from 70% today to well over 80%, almost 85% by 2039, 20 years from now. madam president, i'd argue that's the problem. until we address the mandatory side of our spending and save social security and save medicare, we will never be able to solve this debt crisis that we see before us in very real terms today. so let's move to this bill that we have today. i came to the united states senate, i ran because of the debt crisis and because of the global security crisis. this debt issue is real. i have been working on it for four and a half years, and yet this bill today actually lowers spending as a percentage of our economy. this bill proposes $54 billion

increases in discretionary spending over two years. that's 2% 3er year for the next two years. that lowers spending as a percentage of our economy, madam president. as a matter of fact, since 2011, the last ten years, what we've seen, if we do this budget, federal spending on discretionary items goes from 8.7% of our total economy, 8.7% down to 6%. madam president, when i ran a business, that's what i looked at, is what was my overhead. and that's what this is. overhead is declining on discretionary items as a percentage of what we spend totally and a percentage of our total economy. so president trump had two goals. one is he wanted to continue to reduce discretionary spending as a percentage of g.d.p. check that box. this bill does that. so all the so-called debt hawks out there and all the budget hawks that say i'm voting no to any null spending need to --

any null spending needs to recognize this bill lowers spending as a percentage of the economy. the second objective the president had, and we're just now coming, the senate is just now coming to realize how draconian these 186 c.r.'s have been over the last 45 years. the last administration, president obama's administration reduced spending in the military by 25% so that readiness had been reduced to a point by january 1, 2017, when president trump was inaugurated, readiness in the military had been devastated. two-thirds of our fa-18 lead fighter jets couldn't fly. three of our army brigades could go to war that night. i saw that. i'm on the armed services committee and you can see that when you travel the world how absolutely gutted our military had been. so for the last two years we've been rebuilding that, getting readiness back. in the month of june the fa-18's got back to 80% readiness. the second thing this bill does is it continues, it provides

the second and third year to continue to rebuild the military after it had been gutted by the prior administration. madam president, the focus of the military today is readiness, recapitalization, that means rebuilding burned-out equipment, and absolutely rationalation. we have the first d.o.d. audit, thanks to president trump, in the history of the united states. last november -- by the way there was a law passed in saying we would have a d.o.d. audit. president trump was the first president that provided that. we now have that and we understand opportunities to rationalize our spending. when you look at this the vote, you look at your choices. there are two choices, two votes that lead to three potential outcomes today. a yes vote continues to support the military and defend our country at a level that meets the near peer competitors level

of volume. china today when adjusted per purchasing power parity is spending the same amount on their military as we are. they can get there quicker because they don't have the regulatory overhang we have in the united states. but a vote yes means that we continue to do that. we continue to lower discretionary spending as a percentage of our economy, and we set the stage to the begin to have the hard conversations around how do we save social security and save medicare. the major thing it does is it avoids the drama around not funding the government. it gives us a chance to fund the majority of our government before october 1. and remember, 30 september ends this fiscal year. a no vote has two potential outcomes. a no vote could lead to sequestration. some people says that cuts 10% out of all spending. that sounds really good to me. the reality is that happened over the last decade, and we see now the draconian impact that that had on certain parts

of our discretionary spending, like military and veterans and so forth, that we've had to come back and rebuild. and when you come back and have to rebuild, it costs so dramatically much more. that's the point. if we take a long-term view of this, you have to end up voting yes to this. the second outcome of a no vote is actually more of the same. well, we'll pass another continuing resolution and we'll kick the can down the road again, for the 187th time. it sounds so easy. everybody gets to go home. we pass a c.r. and yet the military gets gutted again, devastated. it disrupts the supply chain. it keeps our vendors from hiring people. imagine if you're a midcareer military officer or noncommissioned officer, imagine what that tells you about what we think of our military and our men and women. i hear people on both sides beat their chest all the time, i love our military, we've got to support our military, and then vote no on a bill like this.

we cannot let that happen, madam president. ironically, a no vote, because of the two alternatives, is actually a vote to increase spending dramatically, not just a little bit, but dramatically over the next decade or so. this bill is a compromise. people back home tell us to come here and work with the other side and compromise and make decisions and get to a result. we just did that. president trump and speaker pelosi just did that. that's what this is reflective of. and what i'm here to tell you today is it is our job now to back that up. in closing, madam president, it's imperative that we get this bill passed, allow our appropriators to get busy and start appropriating so that by 9 /30, the end of this fiscal year we have a clans to get this government funded. we know that a no vote leads to more spending. madam president, it's our responsibility to be fiscally responsible, and i think a yes

vote here does just that. thank you. i yield the floor. mr. murphy: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. murphy: thank you very much, madam president. i'm on the floor today to talk about a crisis overseas. but before i do, i just want to take one moment -- the senator from georgia talked about the increases in defense spending that we have done on a bipartisan basis and suggested that it was the prior administration that had gutted defense spending. that is just not true. i think we should clear the record about that. in fact, in the first few years of the obama administration defense spending was on the rise, and it was the election of a republican congress that led to what we call sequestration, the downward descent of discretionary spending, both defense and nondefense dollars.

so to the extent that my colleagues are worried about what happened to defense spending in the last ten years, there's only one explanation for that, and that is the election of republicans to the house of representatives in 2010 and their demand that in order to vote for an increase in the debt ceiling, discretionary spending had to be slashed in the first several years of the obama administration, defense spending was on the rise. madam president, i'm here on the floor today to talk once again about a dire, dire humanitarian nightmare happening on the other side of the world in a country called yemen. the united states' complicity in that horror, and the national security disaster that comes with staying involved in this war. i could have brought down a bunch of much more disturbing charts to the floor to talk

about the world's worst humanitarian disaster, a country in and on the brink of famine, a cholera epidemic that the world has never ever seen before in recorded history. instead i chose to bring you a picture of a child with its back turned to you to spare you the worst of this nightmare. but i'm here today before we break to make an urgent plea to my colleagues, because as bad as the situation is today, it is about to get much worse over the course of the summer and this fall. there are millions of yemenis who are going to die, who are going to die if we don't make some decisions and pressure our allies to make some decisions in the coming days. the reason for this is simple. at the beginning of this year, saudi arabia and the u.a.e.,

which are the primary military partners of the united states of the war in yemen, made a pledge, a pledge they have made in the past, which is while they are dropping bombs and fighting battles on the ground in yemen that they would put up money to make sure that people got fed, that children got immunized. they made that pledge at the beginning of this year, and we are now halfway through the year, and the u.a.e. and the saudis have reneged on that pledge. saudi arabia pledged $750 million to the united nations. they still owe today $630 million. the u.a.e. pledged $750 million. today they still owe $500 million. now, they have always been tough negotiators, difficult to get the money from, but this year is different. this year six months in, the saudis and the emiratis are essentially saying we are not giving the u.n. their money. now, if you meet with them, they are tell you that they are spending that money in other

ways, that they are working with other partners inside yemen to do the same kind of work. don't let them pull that argument over on you. there is no one in yemen that can do the nutrition work, the health care work, the anticholera work that the u.n. can and does. there are no other partners who have the capacity to keep the u.n. alive like the u.n. you can't have that capacity outside of the united nations. and if saudi arabia and the u.a.e. weren't planning on giving the u.n. the money, then they shouldn't have promised it at the beginning of the year, because the u.n. went out and built infrastructure. they hired partners based on those pledges. and so if the emiratis and the saudis weren't planning on giving the money, they shouldn't have promised it at the beginning of this year. so let me just tell you what is happening right now inside yemen. work has been suspended on 30 new feeding centers in the most

famine-stricken parts of yemen. vaccinations have been suspended for 13 million people, increasing the risk for things like measles and malaria. new medical supply and equipment procurement suspended. unicef has stopped their clean water and sanitation services for 8.4 million people, including three million kids. that means more cholera. and cholera is already on the rise. there are more cholera cases reported in the first half of this year than in all of 2018. half a million new cases of cholera just in the first six months of this year. and the u.n.-supported treatment plants that purifies water for agriculture has started to shut down as well, meaning an additional four million people could be eating vegetables that are irrigated with girthy water. the world food programme won't be able to buy vouchers for three million people.

starting very soon. 60 more feeding centers will close in the coming weeks. the world food programme has stopped providing nutrient bars to 2.6 million malnourished women and children which will tip them now into the category of severely malnourished, just like this child is. the u.n. will have to stop providing fuel for hospital generators. 35,000 cancer patients are going to stop receiving treatment. i could go on and on and on, but why are we standing here? why aren't we all pressing our friends, the saudis, our allies, the emiratis, to come up with this money, because while we are all bakken joig our august recess, there are going to be millions of children in yemen who will look like this, who don't look like this today. there will be hundreds of

thousands who will either die or reach the brink of death. all because of a war that the united states has perpetuateed and funding commitments that can't keep all of these people alive, that can't save all of these children's lives, but could save tens of thousands of lives if our friends, our allies would simply do the right thing. i'm furious about this, madam president, my colleagues, because i don't know what the trump administration is getting for this bear hug that they have put around saudi arabia. after the murder of jamal khashoggi, we transferred them more nuclear technology, we sold them more weapons. maybe the hope was that in exchange for that, they would do something about the humanitarian nightmare, but they are making it worse. they are getting everything from

us, and then they are not even feeding the people on the ground in yemen who are dying as we speak. the president said at a 2015 campaign rally in alabama, i get along great with the saudis. they buy apartments from me. they spend like $40 million, $50 million. am i supposed to dislike them? i like them very much. a firm connected to the saudi government paid $270,000 to the trump international hotel in d.c. in 2016 and 2017. 2018, a five-day visit from the saudi visit to the trump hotel in new york city boosted their revenue by 14%. i hope this isn't the reason why the administration isn't pressing the saudis harder on coming up with their funding commitment. but the president has been pretty clear that the saudis send him and his family a lot of money. he has been open about that. and i hope that's not the reason for why we aren't forcing our

partners to step up. but this is life-or-death time right now. if the administration is not going to do it, then we have to do it. members of congress have to do it. so i hope before my colleagues go home and enjoy some rest and relaxation over the month of august, that they get on the phone with their friends in the saudi government, this they get on the phone with the em-- emirati government, they get on the phone with the trump administration and tell them it's time to pony up the money they pledged. the united states is the number one donor. we could do more, but the saudis and the emiratis have come through on a quarter of the money that they have promised, and the consequences of that continuing are absolutely nightmarish. so before we go home for our break, let's do something to make sure that a handful more of these kids are alive when we come back. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky.

mr. paul: some say that it is irresponsible not to raise the debt ceiling. well, true fiscal conservatives say it's irresponsible to raise the debt ceiling without any reform of our profligate spending ways. to allow the debt ceiling to go up an infinite amount, as much as congress can possibly spend and borrow, over a nearly two-year period is fiscally irresponsible and has never been seen in our history. this may well be the most fiscally irresponsible thing we've done in the history of the united states. the federal government is currently spending nearly $2 million every minute. don't let anybody fool you. this is a spending problem. the annual deficit this year will exceed $1.2 trillion. what is irresponsible is recklessly indent iewrg our -- indenturing our children and our

grandchildren. what is irresponsible is binding our kids to this massive burden of debt. what is irresponsible is a congress that believes they are santa claus and that they can be everything to everyone and everything is free. at least democrats are honest. democrats don't care about deficits, and they will tell that to your face. democrats, in fact, are falling all over themselves to propose more than $50 trillion in new spending in addition to the trillion-dollar annual deficit. they want to add $50 trillion in spending. but it's not just democrats. republicans are also guilty. at least the big-government republicans who will vote for this monstrous addition of debt. many of the supporters of this debt deal ran around their states for years complaining that president obama's spending too much and borrowing too much, and these same republicans now,

the whole disingenuous lot of them, will wiggle their way to the front of the draw, to the front of the spending trough to vote for as much or more debt than president obama ever added. get this. all of those who said debt was bad under president obama, well, today -- will today snuggle their way up, wiggle their way up to the spending trough and they will do exactly what they condemned under president obama. shame. shame on the politicians who campaign as conservatives but govern as big spenders. america, wake up. the two parties are often one. the two parties who ostensibly fight are in reality one party of big spenders, separated by only -- separated only by where they want to spend the money. the media reports a lack of compromise. the opposite is true. there is too much compromise, and the compromise is always more debt, more pork-barrel

spending, and more burden for our kids. but there is another path. there is another form of compromise. instead of compromising to raise spending for guns and butter, we can compromise to hold the line on all spending. just a mere 2% cut in spending would balance the budget over a five-year period. one, two pennies out of the dollar. you get to spend 98% of what you spent last year when you balanced the budget, but that's never enough because these people are not honest with you. they are not willing to hold the line. they want more, more, more. more spending, though, means more debt, and that's what we're getting. so what i offer today is a compromise. the right would have to deal with less military spending. they say oh, we don't have enough. perhaps the mission's too big for the budget. it isn't a lack of money. we spend more money on the military than the next ten countries combined. we spend more money on the military than all of europe

spends. it isn't lack of money. it's that the mission is too large. why do we have troops in 50 of 55 african countries? why are we involved in every civil war on the globe? we need to question what our mission is. the left would have to accept less welfare spending or at least holding the line and getting 98% of what they spent last year on welfare. the right would have to spend 98% of what they spent on the military last year. guess what? we would balance the budget. so my amendment is called cut, cap and balance. when the balanced budget is passed and sent to the states, when spending caps are in place, and when spending has been cut, then and only then will we raise the debt ceiling. this is the only responsible way of dealing with this. it's irresponsible just to give a blank check to a government that has shown themselves to be so reckless and to so recklessly disregard any kind of sense of sanity with regard to the

budget. today's votes, though, will be a litmus test for fiscal conservatism. those senators who vote for an unlimited increase in the debt ceiling are not and have no right to call themselves conservatives. so america, wake up and watch the votes today and discover who actually gives a damn for the future of our country. thank you, and i yield back the remainder of the republican time. madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky. mr. paul: i call up my amendment 932. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from kentucky, mr. paul, proposes an amendment numbered 932, strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following -- section 1, short title. mr. paul: i ask consent that the reading be waived. the presiding officer: without objection.

mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the democratic leader. mr. schumer: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are not. mr. schumer: mr. president, in a short time the senate will vote on passage on a bipartisan agreement to lift the budget caps for two years and extend the debt ceiling. it will strengthen our national security and provide our troops with the resources they need to do a very difficult and often

dangerous job and it will clear the way for critical investments for those in the middle class and those struggling to get to middle class with child care, cancer research, our veterans, and more. for too long the arbitrary, draconian limits of sequester have prevented us for military readiness. this deal ends the threat of scwair permanently -- sequester permanently. that is huge as large forces erode the financial resources, automation, technological advancement, one of the only enforcements large enough to push back on the side of the middle class and help them is the federal government. investing in education and health care, infrastructure, child care is how we give middle-class americans greater security and give americans

struggling to get into the middle class a ladder up, something this government has done for decades and decades. but hasn't been doing very well when the sequester was in effect. the sequester hamstrung our ability to make investments in the middle class for eight years. no longer, thank god. no only does this agreement end the sequester, it includes a significant increase in support for domestic priorities. in fact, the budget deal increases domestic budget authority $10 billion more than defense. in the three years of trump's presidency in a republican senate, democrats have secured over $100 billion in increases for domestic programs. that means additional resources for the states to combat the opioid epidemic, support for v.a. hospitals caring for our veterans, cancer research and

other critical medical research that has saved the lives of literally millions, climate and clean energy technology, reducing the burden of college debt, infrastructure and transportation improvements. so this $100 billion is not abstract. it means jobs, it means ladders up and it means hope for the american people who are often pushed around by forces much larger than themselves. and, finally, this legislation lays the groundwork to avoid another government shutdown and will preserve the full faith and credit of the united states. as my colleagues know well, the house has already passed this legislation and recessed for the state work period. the president supports it. reportedly he's calling members to encourage them to vote yes. the final piece to this puzzle is the senate's stamp of

approval. i want to salute senator leahy, our ranking member, all the members of the appropriations committee, and all of those, bipartisan, who came up with this agreement. i urge my colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, to vote yes. let's give our military, our middle class a boost before the senate adjourns today. i yield the floor. and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. paul: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky. mr. paul: i ask unanimous consent to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection.

the presiding officer: the question occurs on the paul amendment numbered 932. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: on this vote the yeas are 23. the nays are 70. under the previous order, requiring 60 votes for the adoption of this amendment, the amendment is not agreed to. mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i have two requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the

majority and minority leaders the senate is not in order. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the remaining votes be ten minutes in length. the presiding officer: is there an objection? without objection. 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 move to bring to a close debate on calendar number 165, h.r. 3877, an act to amendment the balanced budget and emergency deficit control act of 1985 and so forth and for other purposes signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on h.r. 3877, an act to amend the balanced budget emergency control act of 1985 to establish

a congressional budget for 2020 and 2021 to temporarilily suspend the debt limit and for other purposes shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? on this vote, the yeas are 67, nutteries 27. three-fifths of the senators duly chosen and sworn having voted in the affirmative, the motion is agreed to. under the previous order, all cloture time is expired. the clerk will read the title of the bill for the third time. the clerk: calendar number 165, h.r. 3877, an act to amend the balanced budget appeared emergency deficit control act of

1985 and so forth and for other purposes. the presiding officer: question is on passage of the bill. the yeas and nays -- is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or wishing to change their vote? if not, the ayes are 67, the nays are 28, and the bill is passed. the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from texas.

mr. cornyn: madam president, the senate is not in order. the presiding officer: the senate will be in order. the senate will be in order. the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: madam president, when the senate gavels out at the end of this day, members will head home for the august work period to spend time with our constituents and family. i for one am eager to get back home to texas and spend time with folks in about every region of my state. i have the honor of representing roughly 28 million people, and it takes a little bit of time and effort to get around the state, but i'm looking forward to it. i have the chance to highlight some of the work that we've been doing here in washington and, yes, hear from my constituents, my fellow texans on what they care most about, what they agree with, what they

disagree with, and everything in between. with the passage of this bipartisan budget deal, we've now taken care of our final piece of business for this work period. the funding agreement we just passed will provide stability for our nation through 2020 and deliver on some of the administration's key priorities. it's been the result of extensive negotiations between president trump and speaker pelosi and represents a compromise between two sides that typically don't agree on much. and, yes, compromise is still not a dirty word. it's the only way things get done around here. but, obviously, this agreement is not perfect. that's the nature of compromise and the hallmark of responsible governing. by passing this funding agreement, we are avoiding the possibility of government shutdown again this fall.

instead, it provides us the time and space for wide-ranging debate about our government's spending habits. as our national deficit continues to grow, that could not be more critical. i was glad to see that through the president's tough negotiations, it prevents 30 poison pills or policy riders from reaching the president's desk. it's no secret that our friends across the aisle have tried their best to eliminate the hyde amendment, which since 1976 has defined a consensus that no taxpayer funds be provided for abortions. that argument is over until the end -- until 2020. we also know there will be no green deal done, no undoing of the president's regulatory reform through the back door. most importantly, though, this funding agreement invests in our military. if there is one priority for

what we ought to be doing here as elected representatives in the federal government is provide for the common defense and for our national security. this funding agreement provides the pentagon the predictability and flexibility they need in order to keep our country safe today and tomorrow. a predictable and steady budget gives our military leaders the ability to plan for the future and allows them to invest in the innovative and cutting edge tools our service members need and ensure that when the call comes, we are ready. i was proud to support this funding agreement, and i'm glad it's now headed to the white house for the president's signature. madam president, on another matter, over the last few months, i have spoken at length on the senate floor about a bill i introduced earlier this year to reauthorize the debbie smith act, legislation to help us end the nationwide rape kit backlog.

this legislation carries the name of a fierce and courageous woman, a sexual assault survivor whose advocacy was born of her personal experience. three decades ago, debbie smith was abducted from her home and taken to a wooded area where she was robbed and raped by an unknown attacker. she reported the crime to police and went to the emergency room for a forensic exam, but because of the rape kit backlog, she had to wait six and a half years before finally receiving the call that her attacker had been identified through a d.n.a. test. during that time, she lived in constant fear, wondering who he was, where he was, and whether he would return to hurt her again. identifying offenders through d.n.a. evidence is critical to providing not only justice but peace of mind for those

assaulted and delivering justice to victims, and, yes, even exonerating the innocent. the power of d.n.a. testing is such that it can essentially rule out people from being the potential -- being the alleged assailant or the actual assailant. so this is really important for a number of reasons, and sharing this information across state lines through the federal system can help us identify repeat offenders who would otherwise go undetected. knowing the potential impact, debbie became one of our nation's most vocal advocates for eliminating rape kit backlogs, including the -- this reprehensible rape kit backlog that i have been speaking about. in 2004, a bill that carries her name was signed into law to help local and state crime labs partner with federal law enforcement to receive resources to end the federal d.n.a. evidence backlog. it is because of the debbie smith act that more than a billion dollars has been

provided to forensic labs across the country. since 2005, more than 860,000 d.n.a. cases have been processed, accounting for 43% of all forensic profiles in the f.b.i.'s d.n.a. database. the debbie smith act has also been central in eliminating the rape kit backlog in my home state of texas which had reached the point of more than 20,000 untested kits at one point earlier this decade. as i said at the beginning, i introduced the debbie smith act of 2019 to reauthorize this important funding stream that supports the auditing, testing, and sharing of d.n.a. evidence so we can eliminate that backlog and ensure that it will not grow again in the future. the benefits of continuing the programs created under the original debbie smith act cannot be overstated, and we must get this important legislation to

the president's desk before it expires at the end of september. since it was first enacted in 2004, the debbie smith act has never lapsed or expired, and there is no excuse for allowing it to expire or lapse this year. this bill is not controversial. it's not partisan, and it's not divisive. in fact, when it came to the senate floor, not a single senator voted against it. but since we passed the legislation in may, the house of representatives has sat on its hands and has done nothing. after repeated requests from myself, our other colleagues and countless victims' advocates, speaker pelosi has refused to bring the debbie smith act up for a vote. earlier this year, the fraternal order of police, which represents more than 348,000 members, sent a letter to speaker pelosi and leader

mccarthy urging the house to move this legislation. we also heard from the national district attorney's association, the sergeant's association and several other groups who are fully supportive of this legislation. all of us are ready for the house to act. i urge speaker pelosi to take up the debbie smith act once the house returns to washington in september and before it expires or lapses. it is simply unconscionable to let unrelated partisan bickering stop a bill that brings justice to victims. mr. cardin: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. cardin: thank you, madam president. first i want to compliment the leadership on being able to come together on a budget agreement.

this was a good day for the united states senate, a good day for congress, and a good day for the american people. we now have predictable spending caps not only for the fiscal year that begins october 1, but for the following year. so this is good news. it provides the predictability we need in order to have an early process for the consideration of the appropriation bills when we return in september. it's our anticipation that the house and senate appropriations committees will be hard at work, and we'll have an opportunity to get our work done prior to the beginning of the fiscal year on october 1. i want to just explain why i think this was the right vote and why i proudly supported it. it provides a reasonable growth rate for discretionary spending. if you look at the trend line over several decades, you will find that discretionary spending has become a smaller and smaller part of the federal budget, so we have held back on screrg

spending in this country, whether it's defense or nondefense needs, and those needs have grown, and we have not kept up with the needs of funding these programs, and this budget agreement will now give us the opportunity to set priorities and be able to move forward with many important programs that are funded by the discretionary spending. once again, discretionary spending has grown much slower than the growth rate of our budget generally, so it is a reasonable expectation that we can meet the needs of the people of this country by allowing some growth. so what does it mean? well, this past week, the environment and public works committee has recommended a transportation reauthorization bill for surface transportation that would grow by about 10%. i think everyone in this chamber understands that we have tremendous unmet needs in transportation infrastructure in this country. these caps give us a better opportunity at meeting those

types of needs. tomorrow i will be in the city of bowie, not far from here. meeting with the mayor. he has requests, his drinking water pipes need major replacement. there is not enough capacity within the ratepayers in order to be able to do that work. he needs the federal partnership, state revolving funds or other areas in order to help fund a modern infrastructure so we have safe drinking water in our community. these budget caps again give us the opportunity to move forward on programs like that so the federal government can help us meet our needs. i'm proud in the state of maryland we have the national institutes of health that are located and headquartered in our state. we're all very proud of the work that they do. they are unlocking the mystery of diseases in this country. we need to fund them. at the present time, so many worthwhile grant applications go

unmet and unfilled that could discover how we could deal with some of the most dreaded diseases in our country. funding n.i.h. is in our national interest, but we have been held back because of the budget caps that have been in place. this allows us now to move forward with that priority. this is the year that we prepare for the census. we only do that every year, take the census of our country. this budget will allow the census bureau to have the tools so that we can accurately count the people in this country. why is that important? it's in the constitution it's important, but it's important that we do proper legislative representation in the congressional districts as well as in the state legislatures that give us the numbers so that communities are properly represented so their voices can be adequately heard. it's also user distribution of

federal funds so that proper distribution can be made to the people of this country. i could go on a whole list of issues that are important. wfer u.n. of them is important. we'll set the priorities. whether it's child care, dealing with our veterans. we all want to make sure we do what's right for our veterans. we know there are a lot of unmet needs. this budget will allow us to move forward in that area. i'm proud to represent the state of maryland that has major urban centers. this bill will allow us to deal with some of the challenges that we have in our urban centers. i also represent rural maryland. this bill will allow us to move forward with their needs. we will be able to move forward in education, which is the -- it should be our top priority. it's a great equalizer in this country. now the appropriators often make those judgments on priorities and we'll have to reconcile between the house and senate and get the president's signature, but that's what we should be doing, setting up the priorities for our country but having a reasonable pool of money to deal

with discretionary spending. we have been denied that many years. now we have the opportunity to really do what congress should do and set the priorities for this country. in addition, we have -- one other thing let me just mention is the drug problems. i probably have more meetings in my state on dealing with the drug crisis -- it's in every community in maryland and this nation -- and i hope that we will see increased federal participation in that area. another part of the budget agreement was to extended the debt limit for two years. now, madam president, this to me is one of the absurdities of what we do on debt limits. we spend -- we incur money, we incur debt, and then we put a limit as to whether we will pay for the bills we incurred. you don't default on your debt. that's not what measure's about. we have got to control what we spend, but we have to pay for what we spend.

we have to honor our debt. so our credit ratings were at risk, the secretary of treasury made this one of his top priorities, i agreed with him on this issue, and now we no longer have the fear that america will not honor its debt. the bill also gets rid of sequestration. good riddance. this was put in as a place holder for us to deal with the budget deficit. it didn't work in that way. all it did was cause uncertainty, and in many respects would have required across-the-board cuts. that is not the way that we should do business. we have to make decisions. sequestration could have been used for us to avoid making the tough decisions. we have to do that ourselves. so the bottom line is the budget agreement gets rid of that, gives us a much better chance to avoid a shutdown of government, which makes absolutely no sense at all, and hopefully not having to deal with continuing resolutions. continuing resolutions put us on

auto pilot because we can't pass a budget. now i hope we will be able to pass budgets and avoid not only shutdowns but continuing resolutions. i want to emphasize this point. discretionary spending has become a smaller part of the overall part of this issue. so why do we have growing deficits? we have growing deficits because -- by the way, discretionary spending is at historically low levels in this country. revenues, unfortunately, are also at historically low levels. in other words, we're not raising the traditional amount of revenue that is necessary for us to pay our bills. now, i come from a family that believes you have to pay your bills. i think it's wrong for us to spend money today and ask our children and grandchildren to pay for our current spending.

we should have the courage to provide the revenues necessary to pay our bills. instead, what have we done? we cut revenues again and again and again. so our deficit today is not sustainable. we have to deal with it. but the major culprit has been these irresponsible tax cuts, the last of which went primarily to the wealthiest people in this country, according to the congressional budget office, will add $1.9 trillion to the deficit over the next decade. that's the culprit of the deficits. and that's what we should be dealing with. i heard a lot of my colleagues come in here and lament the agreement saying it will increase the deficit, some of those are the same people who voted for the tax cuts. we have to have the revenues to pay for ha we incur in spending.

and, yes, there's another area that we can do better, and that's in health care spending, much of which is mandatory spending, it's not discretionary spending. these are bills, appropriations that have to be made, and we could do a much better job of raining -- reining in the cost of health care. we had a chance to do that this week and we didn't take full advantage of that. i'm a member of the senate finance committee. we passed a bill to deal with the escalating costs of prescription are drugs. today, in maryland, i've been told one out of every four health care dollars is spent in medicines, and we pay so much more in america for medicines than in the other industrial nations of the world. so, yes, we have recommended to the senate body a bill to deal with the cost of prescription medicines. it will deal with the issue of putting a cap on how much you can see escalation of current

drug prices. it will put a cap on how much out of pocket costs the people in medicare part d will have to pay. that's good. those are two good things, but we had a chance to really make a difference by eliminating the prohibition in the current law that prevents medicare from negotiating the cost of medicines. think about that for one moment. where else do we do that? do we tell businesses that they can't leverage all of their buying to get the lowest possible price, but we tell medicare that they can't leverage the total market that they are paying in order to get the best price on prescription medicines. what does that mean? that means we are overpaying. you're pay -- whether you're paying it in part d or current premiums or as a taxpayer, we're paying too much for medicines. it's the primary reason why the

international price on medicines is so much lower than what we pay here in america. and we had a chance to deal with it this week and didn't. we'll have another opportunity when the bill comes to the floor. and i hope we'll do the right thing by removing the prohibition that's in current law on negotiated price. so, smawp, i am -- madam president, i'm pleased that we got the budget agreement done. no, i'm not pleased about the deficit. but recognize, the deficit, we need to deal with revenues and deal with cost-like prescriptive drugs which were not part of today's vote. so i hope when we return in september, the goodwill that we used in order to get the budget agreement done will continue, the appropriators will be able to reconcile the appropriation bills before october 1 so we don't need continuing resolutions and there's no threat of a government shutdown

and i hope we'll have the same type of bipartisan agreement where people have expressed their outrage on the growth of the deficit to deal with the real causes of the deficit. we'll have a chance to deal with the costs of medicines and let's make sure we raise the revenues we need in order to pay for our expenses. with that, mr. president, i will yield the floor. mr. durbin: madam president. the presiding officer: the assistant democratic leader. mr. durbin: madam president, today i rise on my behalf and on behalf of senator duckworth to express my condolences to the family of special private nance, he and brandon j.grasher gave their lives in afghanistan. the early reports on their deaths is they were shot by an afghan soldier at a military base, a so-called green on blue

attack. the incident is under investigation. isaiah was 24 years old. isaiah was the 96th service member killed in afghanistan since our invasion began in 2001 and one of 2,089 troops that died there. he was a proud member of the 82nd airborne earning the purple heart as well as qualifying as a basic -- he loved his country and wanted to serve his country. he died doing something that he loved. isaiah had arrived in afghanistan just a few weeks ago, shortly after a trip to europe with his mother. he and thousands of other americans still there were deployed in support of our nato-led mission to train, advise, and assist the afghan

army. as fate would have it, when uniformed army personnel arrived at his house to break this are terrible news to his family, much of the family had already gathered after the funeral of nance's great-grandfather, who served in the united states army in the korean war. as one member of isaiah's family noted, quote, it was the worst day in our family's history. isaiah was raised by his mother and grandparents in chatham on the south side of chicago. he attended college in florida. he told his mother he wanted to join the army and continue his family's tradition of military service. not only was his great-grandfather in the service, but several members of his family serve in the chicago police department. he told his mother he wanted to pursue his dream and after it was over would finish his

degree. he rnd his wings -- earned his wings at the air force and was with the 505th para shoot airborne division. the motto is airborne all the way. isaiah lived every bit of this motto in his faithful service to america and with his family and friends he enjoyed wrestling, traveling the world and cheering for the white sox. he was a foody who loved good soul food and perhaps more especially, he loved spending time with his younger brother. he was energetic, athletic, funny, humble, all the things you want your kid to be. madam president, every member of the senate would be proud to have a son like isaiah and every member joins me in expressing

our condolences with his family an grieving with them over isaiah's bright light ended all too soon. madam president, i yield the floor and suggest the be absencf a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: quorum

call: quorum call:

mr. portman: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. portman: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. portman: so we just had our last vote here in the united states senate before going into the august recess. and i'm looking forward to being home in ohio during the week. i come here during the week, go home on the weekends but during this august recess period, it gives me a chance to get all around the state because we're home during the work week. i'll be in a few dozen counties by the end of the recess but i'm going to start by being at the ohio state fair tomorrow. tomorrow morning at 7:30 a.m. we have the biggest ag event in the state which is our annual ag breakfast. i'll be hearing from farmers all over the state. it's been a tough year for us in ohio because of all the water. we have a lot of farmers who aren't able to plant their crop.

there are some fields that are bare. others who did plant their crop have found the crops aren't doing very well because of all the water damage early in the year. so it's been a hard year and frankly it's been a hard few years in terms of the price, particularly of corn and soybeans. on top of that we have less exports of soybeans which i hope is now being addressed with the new agreements being made with prtleship with -- relationship with china in particular. without having the additional overseas markets, it has had the effect of lowering the price particularly for soybeans and corn. and on top of that, you know, it's just been generally a tough time in farm country in terms of the price of inputs going up and the price of the product being flat. so my hope is tomorrow i'll get more input from farmers all across the state and we'll be able to continue to talk about the things we are doing. i've supported the united states agriculture department providing some emergency loans and grants to ohio farmers to get us through this season to avoid

bankrupts, to get people back on their feet. that many is beginning to flow, i'm happy to say. we're beginning to see some progress. the new farm bill is helping. my hope is we will see better weather here going into the end of the season for these crops, that the harvest season will be better and we'll be able to get back on our feet. also tomorrow after touring the fair, i'll be having some meetings with the business community talking about what's working, what's not working in terms of regulations and taxes. i'll also be meeting with business leadership in how to get the new opportunities in the tax bill going. we'll have community leaders, people from neighborhoods that have had a tough time even during the economic growth we've seen some neighborhoods have been left behind. they still have relatively high unemployment. they still got real problems of stubborn poverty. and these opportunity zones are a perfect example there. this actually puts moab into these communities -- puts money into these communities by

lowering the capital gains tax for people if they agree to invest. i'll be talking to small businesses that are excited about this, to housing advocates who are excited about this and see how it's working in columbus, ohio. i'll also be in youngstown, ohio early next week talking about it same topic as well as some other economic development issues we have there, in terms of how we deal with the lordstown plant which is a plant general motors has chosen to walk away from which is very discouraging. so we'll be all over the state. on saturday i'll be at the largest gathering in the country of watercraft which is the annual paddle fest. more kayaks and can use in on the ohio river than any other event in the country. i'll be participating in a charity race. this as race -- i think it is an 11-mile race this year with my son, going down the ohio river, all for a good cause. i look forward to that as well.

i'll be all over the state. and it is an opportunity to visit the state, talk to constituents, hear what's going on, and try to be more heavily here in -- helpful here in washington to address the concerns we have in ohio. one of the things i'll be doing next weekend is visiting the cuyahoga valley national park, and i'd be touring the park, looking at what some of their maintenance needs are, talking to the park rangers. it is one of the 13th most visited national parks in america. and you probably haven't heard of it unless you're from ohio. but if you're from akron or cleveland, you've heard about it because it is kind of nestled we need it these two big cities. it gets a lot of visitors, a lot of school i had cans. it is a suburban/rural park. there is a lot of outdoor education going on there as well. there is a beautiful river that runs through it, the cuyahoga river. there is also a train that can commute you back and forth.

i will be there with the secretary of state of ohio. we will be doing a kayak trip down the river. this leads me to a topic that i had hoped to discuss on the floor yesterday. but because of a string of votes we were unable to do so. i was going to be out here on the floor giving a colloquy with some of my colleagues, senator alexander, senator warner, senator king, and others, and we were going to talk about the need for us to provide more repairs to our national parks. unfortunately, cuyahoga valley national park is one of those parks that's badly in need of it. they have about a $48 million maintenance backlog. now, what does that mean? it means that every year we do fund the parks, but we don't fund these capital expenses that are needed. in the case of cuyahoga valley, as an example, there is a bridge that's falling apart, an old railroad bridge they use for pedestrian traffic now. they may have to close it off pretty soon. every year that you don't attend to this deferred maintenance, things get worse and worse. think about your own home.

if you stop taking care of the roof, what happens? you get a i can -- you get a leak. so the federal government is not providing the right steward madam president in terms of these longer-term -- the federal government is not providing the right stewardship in terms of these longer term needs. but these more expensive items like deferred maintenance do not get funded. so my hope is that we will pass legislation to do that. for more than a century we have been blessed as americans to have these national parks. and they are amazing. some of you have experienced the majesty of the yellowstones and the yosemites. a lot of them are focused in terms of history of the historic

homes. they attract over 330 million visitors every year. think about that. more than the population of our country. again we've got eight of those parks in ohio. 2.7 million visitors go to ohio's national parks every year. and they're part of our history, part of our culture. this $12 billion backlog of long-delayed maintenance needs is a real concern, though. $12 billion now. and these parks are treasures, but they've been allowed, unfortunately, to deteriorate to the point that some of the assets in these parks are totally unusable. so if you go it a park today, you may find out that the trail is closed or a visitor center captain be visited. we have a visitor center in ohio that had to be closed down because the roof was leaking. they didn't have the funds to actually replace the roof. and they had funds to run the programs within the visitor center, but again these long-term maintenance problems are a real problem. you may find that some of the

overnight lodging facilities aren't available. in a way, our parks are crumbling from within. they look good on the outside, but they have serious problems. i mentioned that we have long-term maintenance problems at cuyahoga. we have problems at others. last august i visited perry's victory international peace memorial on the shores of lake erie. it was established to honor those who fought in the battle of lake erie, during the war of 1812. as well as to celebrate the now long standing peace we've had between great britain, canada and the united states. there i saw $48 million in long-delayed maintenance needs at the site. pre-merrell a seawall. there as seawall on lake erie to keep it from destroying its park. there are actually sink holes around it. so you can't walk near the seawall for fear of falling in. this something that needs attention and needs it now.

think of the expense of that. it is about a $48 million project when you add to that. the need to make the visitor center accessible under the a.d.a., the americans with disabilities act. so that's an example. i mentioned thest president task's place. the problem has some problems. it has roofing problems that are necessary, about $2 million worth of repairs needed there. i visited hopewell culture national historical park in chillicothe. there you see these millennial-old burl sites from -- burial sites. it includes repairs to the exterior of the visitor center that was absolutely needed, and you can see why when you go there because there's construction signs in front of it, and you can go in the visitor center, but pretty soon

you won't be able to at all. parks have a the although of issues that build up over time. deferred maintenance is really important. we've got legislation to address that. and it is important that we do it now because if we don't, the costs just go higher and for taxpayers it's a good deal to move now to make these improvements so that the costs don't compound and you make the situation even worse. and by the way, this is at a time when more and more people want to go to our parks. visitation is now over the last ten years increased by about 58 million people. that's putting a lot of pressure on the parks o but it is good if people want to go to the parks. a national treasure. it is a great place to go with our family. but we can't keep the parks healthy through band-aids alone. we need this legislation. along with my colleagues, warner, alexander, and angus king, we have proposed what's

called restore our parks act. it is a commonsense solution. specifically, the legislation creates what's called the legacy restoration fund which will get half of all the annual energy revenues over the next five years not otherwise allocated to be used for these priority deferred-maintenance projects. this money would come from our offshore and on-shore energy projects. by the way, the trump administration is doing more energy exploration and development, so there's actually more funding coming out of here. that funding, the royalty, would go to this purpose, to the extent it is not being used for other purposes. and the bill caps the deposits into the fund at $1.3 billion annually, which would provide a total of $6.5 billion for deferred maintenance over the next five years. you might notice that $6.5 is not quite the total we need. number two, we've asked the park service to i have go us a specific list of what are the most urgent problems and that's about $6.5 billion.

we'll continue to work on this, but right now we need that funding badly because, again, if we don't provide it, not only will the parks not be there for people to enjoy and certain assets off-limit, but also the costs only get mire and higher. it is an historic step in the right direction. last congress we proposed this legislation and we got a lot of support. we had a eliminate to of 40 cosponsors here -- we had a total of 40 cosponsors here in the senate. more than one third of this chamber. there was a house bill also offered, companion legislation in the house. that actually got 302 members supporting it. so these are totally benefit approaches -- so these are totally bipartisan approaches. we also got it through the senate here, the senate energy and natural resources committee, passed it 19-4. we also received support from all over the k as people found out about this legislation, the people that love the parks stepped forward. it also included the pew

charitable trust, the national parks association, the national trust for public land, and others. during the legislation hearing last year, the director of the pew trust agreed saying, quote, supporting this bipartisan bill is a wise investment for our national park system and has overwhelming support from the american public, generates hundreds of thousands of jobs, and billions of dollars for the economy each year and provides access to world-class recreational opportunities and helps preserve our nation's history. all true. so this is a critical piece of legislation that we can actually agree on here on a bipartisan basis. we urge that it be moved quickly. as we enter the august recess, a lot of my completion are going to go to one -- a lot of my colleagues are going to go to one of our parks. one of them lives in the shadow of one of our parks. our largest single one, cuyahoga

national park, and this is the time for us to see the parks, tour the parks, find out what the needs needs are and hopefule back p in september and do something about this deferred maintenance. i want to urge my colleagues first on the energy and natural resources committee to take this bill up. let's mark it up again as soon as possible after the recess. let's not wait any longer until things get worse. i look forward to working with my colleagues toest going this legislation -- to getting this legislation on the floor of the senate, to get it voted on, to have the companion bill that's still being worked on in the house, voted on as well, and let get something done and send it to the president for his signature so we can ensure that these treasures, our national parks, are there for generations to come. thank you, mr. president. i yield back. the presiding officer: the senator for new jersey. mr. menendez: mr. president, i rise today to draw attention to

the growing risk of an ebola epidemic in central africa and to urge the senate to take up and pass s. 1340, my bipartisan bill authorizing usaid to combat the ebola outbreak in the democratic republic of the congo. this legislation passed the senate foreign relations committee in june, and it's time for the full senate to act. on july 17, the world health organization declared, this ebola out-barack a public health -- outbreak a public health emergency of international concern with experts predicting the outbreak will last well into 2020. the democratic republic of congo or the d.r.; as it's known, has been facilitiing an ebola outbreak for exactly one year as of today. despite the best efforts of the congolese, the world health organization and international partners, this outbreak is now the second worst in history.

more than 1,800 people are dead. more than 2,600 confirmed in probably cases have been identified. it took over -- just over seven months to reach 1,000 cases of ebola, but only two months to reach 2,000. and according to the world health organization, up to 25% of all infections may be going unreported. the scope of the outbreak continues to grow. just today press reports indicate that there is a third case in the city of goma, home to over a million people. imagine the consequences of an unrestrained outbreak in a city of over a million people. mr. president, under the best of circumstances, it would be difficult but not impossible to control the outbreak. however, we're not dealing with ideal circumstances.

today's ebola outbreak is unfolding amid a noxious mix of political mistrust and overall insecurity. consider that eastern congo has been plagued by armed groups and militia, dozens of armed groups operate in the areas most affected by ebola. periodically preventing health officials from reaching communities in need of treatment and prevention. likewise, criminal gangs operating with near impunity have made it dangerous for health care workers to travel to ebola-affected villages without security. to complicate things further, we've witnessed community resistance specifically to the ebola response. long marginalized by the capital of the d.r.c., communities remain skeptical that the crisis is real. they fear the government is using the disease as another tool of disenfranchising them, especially after the former

government canceled elections. some actors even oppose medical interventions and promote disinformation and conspiracy theories questioning the existence of the ebola outbreak. today there have been more than 100 attacks on health facilities, hampering the response of the d.r.c. and international community. misinformation, mistrust of the government, fear of violence at health centers resulted in between 25% and 50% of new ebola deaths taking place outside of treatment facilities. this means infectious patients are less likely to receive lifesaving treatment and more likely to infect others. we no longer have the luxury of halfhearted international engagement. we need a multifaceted, multisectoral international response to get this under control. we know all too well infectious

diseases have no borders. it's one airplane flight away coming to our own country, and that has happened in the past. it is in our national and international interest to ensure the united states uses every resource available to get this outbreak under control. to date, however, the white house response has not only been inadequate but down right counter productive. in early may usaid developed a new strategy focusing on basic assistance for disenfranchised communities to help build trust and improve access for health care workers. this strategy would, for example, support health interventions for anyone who comes to a health care center in need of care even if not totally related to ebola. usaid proposed new programs to increase education, provide clean water and sanitation in communities and improve conditions in ebola-affected communities. these programs were designed to

build trust and promote resilience in at-risk communities so that health workers can better stop the spread of the disease. these were good ideas. but instead of embracing them, the administration has effectively tied its own hands in promoting a sensible, sustainable response to the ebola crisis. as we all know, the trafficking victims protection act, which i have been a champion of at the senate foreign relations committee, worked with the former chairman, bob corker, who felt passionately about these issues, railed against the administration when they didn't put countries in tier 3, the most significant consequence under our law because they were playing politics with that country for other reasons and not observing the essence of the law, made sure that the ttip report was transparent and hoon in its -- honest in its assessment.

i'm supportive of the sanctions for countries that fail to combat human trafficking. the d.r.c. severely restricted from receiving usaid. let's use common sense here. this legislation was never, never intended to hurt the most vulnerable in society or to be used as an excuse to ignore a deadly epidemic with international implications. in fact, congress foresaw the need for exceptions to these sanctions in extraordinary cases in 22 u.s.c. chapter 78 section 4 of the trafficking victims protection act. this language that i just cited allows the united states to waive sanctions and provide assistance when it is in our national interest to do so. indeed, the law specifically says, and i quote, the president shall exercise the authority --

shall exercise the authority under section 4 when necessary to avoid significant adverse effects on vulnerable populations, including women and children, close quote. according to the world health organization, the ebola virus disease has a 50% mortality rate, and no one can deny its effects on vulnerable populations. if the people of eastern congo, including women and children, are not vulnerable, then i don't know who is. yet, the white house has refused to exercise the waiver. that's why we need the ebola eradication act. this simple legislation directs the usaid administrator to immediately provide assistance, including multisectoral, nonhumanitarian and nontrade-related foreign assistance to the democratic republic of the congo and other vulnerable countries to

effectively combat the ebola outbreak, notwithstanding the sanctions required by the trafficking victims protection act. make no mistake, president trump could have done this himself months ago, but as a bloomberg editorial published today points out, president trump has failed to respond with urgency. as a result, needless delays and inaction have hampered our response. in mid-june, the administration had granted exceptions for all ebola-related activities proposed under usaid's new plan, but they have yet to be launched. and to make matters worse, those exceptions were only granted for f.y. 2018 money. finally, the exception is not a country waiver creating loads of red tape for future activities related to combatting ebola. in other words, we're shooting ourselves in the foot with unnecessary bureaucrat hurdles that serve no purpose and slow down our response even as the

disease continues to kill more and more people. fortunately, the d.r.c. and bordering countries together with the world health organization have lessened the overall impact by successfully vaccinating more than 120,000 people. they have also administered experimental treatment regimes to over 300 people which if caught in time can save more lives. but this is a case where in fact america can and must do more. while there's no magic wand that we can wave to change the security situation, we can certainly step up the u.s. response and our support for local and international efforts. we have a moral obligation to help contain and combat this outbreak before it becomes an epidemic. likewise, we have an obligation to protect the safety and security of the american public. our goal must be to save lives and prevent the spread of ebola

before it stands a chance of reaching america's shores. ultimately we ignore the tragedy unfolding in the congo at our own peril. it's time for this body to act. usaid administrator mark green testified in front of the senate foreign relations committee earlier this year and expressed strong support of for this legislation as it is currently written. i urge my colleagues to work with me in passing s. 1340, the ebola eradication act of 2019 as it is currently drafted and as the senate foreign relations committee passed it in june. this is an opportunity to ultimately save lives. it is an opportunity, something we don't always get in this chamber, that we can actually save lives. it's an opportunity to stop an epidemic. it's an opportunity to preserve our own interests by making sure

ebola doesn't come to the shores of the united states. it should be a no-brainer. and i hope we can work through the one objection i understand that exists with our colleague from utah so that we can actually control the epidemic, save lives, and ultimately ensure our own interests. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor and observe the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the previous order of july 31 with respect to district judges be modified to allow for confirmation votes notwithstanding rule 22. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the senate proceed to executive session. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the consideration of the following nomination, executive calendar 421. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent that the senate vote on the nomination with no intervening action or debate, that if confirmed the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, the president be immediately

immediately notified of the senate's action, that no further motions be in order and that any statements related to the nomination be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the nomination. all those in favor say aye. oppose, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nomination is confirmed. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following nominations, executive calendar 57 and 58. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report the nominations en bloc. the clerk: nominations, the judiciary. m. miller baker of louisiana to

be a judge of the united states court of international trade. timothy m. reif of the district of columbia to be a judge of the united states court of international trade. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the senate vote on the nominations en bloc with no intervening action or debate, that if confirmed the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table en bloc, the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, that no further motions be in order and that any statements related to the nominations be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the nominations en bloc. all those in favor say aye. opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nominations are confirmed en bloc. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the following nominations, executive calendar 296 and 297. the presiding officer: without objection, the clerk will report the nominations en bloc.

the clerk: nominations, united states international trade commission, randall j. stayin of virginia to be a member. carbon monoxide of washington to be -- amy karpel of washington to be a member. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, that no further motions be in order and that any statements related to the nominations be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the nominations en bloc. all those in favor say aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nominations are confirmed en bloc. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following nominations. p.n. 892, p.n. 492, p.n.159.

p.n.160, 161, 163, 164, 165 and 167. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate vote on the nominations en bloc with no intervening action or debate, that if confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, that no further motions be in order and any statements related to the nominations be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the nominations en bloc. all those in favor say aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nominations are confirmed en bloc. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following nominations. executive calendar 241, 242, and 338. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report the nominations en bloc.

the clerk: nominations, united states postal service, ron a. bloom of new york to be a governor. roman martinez iv of florida to be a governor. john barker of glavment to -- of florida to be a governor. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, that no further motions be in order and that any statements related to the nominations be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the nominations en bloc. all those in favor say aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nominations are confirmed en bloc. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following nominations. executive calendar 391 and 392. the presiding officer: without objection.

the clerk will report the nominations en bloc. the clerk: nominations united states postal regulatory commission, ann c. fisher of the district of columbia to be a commissioner. ashley jay elizabeth poling of north carolina to be a commissioner. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the senate vote on the nominations en bloc with no intervening action or debate, that if confirmed the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table en bloc, the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, that no further motions be in order, and that any statements related to the nominations be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the nominations en bloc. all those in favor say aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nominations are confirmed en bloc. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following nominations, executive calendar 80, 413 and

414. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report the nominations en bloc. the clerk: nominations. department of education, mark schultz of nebraska to be commissioner of the rehabilitation services administration. equal employment opportunity commission, sharon fast gustafson to be counsel, charlotte burrs rose of the district of columbia to be a member. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the nominations be considered en bloc, without nomination or debate, that if confirmed, the motions be considered en bloc, and any statements related to the nominations be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the nominations en bloc. ayes appear to have it.

the ayes do have it. the nominations are confirmed en bloc. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the help committee be discharged from further consideration of p.n. 172 and consider calendar number 68707275, pn10, pn13, pn14, pn pn16pn12, and pn172. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the senate vote on the nominations en bloc, that if confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, en bloc, the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, that north motions be in order and that any statements related to the nominations be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the nominations en bloc. all in favor say aye.

opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nominations are confirmed en bloc. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the consideration of the following nomination, executive calendar 366. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, department of justice, willmer acashia. mr. mcconnell: if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, that no further motions be in order, and any statements related to the nomination be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the nomination. all in favor say aye. aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nomination is confirmed. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent senate proceed to the en bloc consideration of the

following nomination, executive calendar 114. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, department of defense, thomas mccaffrey, of california, to be assistant secretary of defense for health affairs. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the senate vote on the nominations with no intervening action or debate, if confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, the president be need my notified of the senate's action, that no are further motions be in order and any statements related to the nomination be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the nomination. all in favor say aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have tvment the nomination is -- have it. the nomination is confirmed. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the consideration of the following nomination, executive

calendar 245. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, executive office of the president, michael eric wooten, of virginia, to be administrator of federal procurement policy. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the senate vote on the nomination with no intervening action or debate, if confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, nor further motions be in order, that any statements related to the nomination be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the nomination. all in favor say aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nomination is confirmed. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the commerce committee be discharged and the senate proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following nominations, p.n.21, p.n.25, and

p.n.963. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask that the senate vote on the nominations en bloc with no intervening action or debate. if confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, en bloc, the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, nor further motions be in order, any statements related to the nominations be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the nominations en bloc. all in favor say aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nominations are confirmed en bloc. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the consideration of the following nomination, executive calendar 373. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, department of interior, mark l. greenblatt, of maryland, to be inspector general.

mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the senate vote on the nomination with no intervening action or debate. if confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, nor further motions be in order, any statements related to the nomination be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the nomination. all in favor say aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nomination is confirmed. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following nominations, executive calendar 243, 244, 388, and 389. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report the nominations en bloc. the clerk: nominations, the judiciary, james a.crow wll, to be an associate judge of the superior court of the district of columbia, jason park of the district of columbia to be an

associate judge of the superior court of the district of columbia, rainy r. brant to be an associate judge of the superior court of the district of columbia, shanna frost matini, to be an associate judge of the superior court of the district of columbia. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent senate vote on the nominations en bloc with no intervening action or debate. if confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, en bloc, the president be immediately night of the senate's action, no further motions be in order, any statements related to the nominations be printed in the record are. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the nominations en bloc. all in favor say aye. opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nominations are confirmed en bloc. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following nominations -- executive calendars 293, 158 and

7. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report the nominations en bloc. the clerk: nominations, united states tax court. emin toro of virginia to be a judge. courtney dunbar jones of virginia to be a judge. department of the treasury, michael faulkender of maryland to be an assistant secretary. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the senate vote on the nominations en bloc with no intervening action or debate, that if confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table en bloc, the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, no further motions be in order, any statements related to the nominations be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the nominations en bloc. all in favor say aye. opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nominations are confirmed en bloc. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to consideration of the following nomination -- executive calendar

115. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, department of defense, lisa m. schenck of virginia to be a judge of the united states court of military commission review. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the senate vote on the nomination en bloc with no intervening action or debate, that if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be made and laid upon the table, the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, no further motions be in order, and any statements related to the nominations be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the nomination. all in favor say aye. opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nomination is confirmed. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following nominations -- executive calendar 178, 181, 395, 397, 400, 401, 405, 406,

and 361. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report the nominations en bloc. the clerk: nominations, department of state, kenneth s. george, texas, to be ambassador to the oriental republic of uruguay. w. patrick murphy of vermont to be ambassador to the kingdom of cambodia. richard k. bell of pennsylvania to be ambassador to the republic of the ivory coast. jonathan r. cohen of california to be ambassador to the arab republic of egypt. christopher landau of maryland to be ambassador to the united mexican states. richard b. norland of iowa to be ambassador to libya. phillip s. goldberg of the district of columbia to be ambassador to the republic of colombia.

jessica e. la penn of new york to be representative to the african union. mary beth leonard of massachusetts to be ambassador to the federal republic of nigeria. elliott pedrosa of florida to be united states executive director of the inter-american development bank. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the senate vote on the nominations with no intervening action or debate, that if confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, no further motions be in order, and any statements related to the nomination be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the nominations en bloc. all in favor say aye.

those opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nominations are confirmed en bloc. mr. mcconnell: mr. president, i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the motion. all in favor say aye. opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to executive session and consider calendar number 403. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all in favor say aye. opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, department of state, kelly craft of kentucky to be representative of the united states of america to the sessions of the general assembly of the united nations. mr. mcconnell: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: cloture motion. we, the undersigned senators, in

accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of kelly craft of kentucky to be representative of the united states of america to the sessions of the general assembly of the united nations during her tenure of service as representative of the united states of america to the united nations, 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. all in favor say aye. opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to executive session and consider calendar number 5. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all in favor say aye. opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: department of health and human services, elizabeth darling of texas to be commissioner on children, youth, and families.

mr. mcconnell: 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 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of elizabeth darling of texas to be commissioner on children, youth and families, department of health and human services, 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. all in favor say aye. opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to executive session and consider calendar number 174. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all in favor say aye. opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: department of state, stephen akard of indiana to be director of the office of foreign missions.

mr. mcconnell: 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 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of stephen akard of indiana to be director of the office of foreign missions, with the rank of ambassador, 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. all in favor say aye. opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to executive session and consider calendar number 246. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all in favor say aye. opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: office of personnel management, dale cabaniss of virginia to be director of the office of personnel management. mr. mcconnell: 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 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of dale cabaniss of virginia to be director of the office of personnel management, signed by 17 senators as follow- 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. all in favor say aye. opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to executive session and consider calendar number 294. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all in favor say aye. opposed no the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: department of veterans' affairs, james byrne of virginia to be deputy secretary. mr. mcconnell: 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 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the

nomination of james byrne of virginia to be deputy secretary of veterans' affairs, 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. all those in favor say aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar number 333. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: federal reserve system, michelle bow man of kansas. mr. mcconnell: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate move to bring a close to the nomination fl michelle bow man of kansas to be a member of the

board of governors of the federal reserve system. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous 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: all in favor say aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar number 335. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: department of treasury, thomas peter feddo of virginia. mr. mcconnell: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion. cloirp we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of, rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, signed by 17 senators as follows. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection.

the question is on the motion, all those in favor say aye, opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to executive session and consider calendar number 407. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: international bank for reconstruction and development, jennifer d.nordquist, director of the international bank. mr. mcconnell: i send a cloture motion to thing bank. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators,, in accordance rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate hereby move to bring a a close for debate of jennifer nordquist. moim --. mr. mcconnell: i consent the reading of the names be waived and the mandatory quorum calls

be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the consideration of the following nomination, executive calendar 337. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, tennessee valley authority, william killbridge of tennessee to be a member of the board directors. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the senate vote on the nomination, if confirmed the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, no further motions be in order, any statements related to the nomination be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the nominations. all those in favor say aye. all opposed, no.

the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nomination is confirmed. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to legislative session and be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding the senate's adjournment, committees be authorized to report legislative and executive matters on friday, august 16, from 1:00 p.m. until 3:00 p.m. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the majority leader and senior senator from texas be authorized to sign duly authorized bills for joint resolutions on august 1 and august 2. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding the upcoming adjournment of the senate the president of the senate, the president pro tempore and the majority and minority leaders be authorized to make appointments to commissioners, committees, boards, conferences, or

interparliamentary conferences authorized by law by concurrent action of the two houses or by order of the senate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the consideration of s. res. 304 submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senates resolution 304 designating september 2019 as national workforce development month. the presiding officer: without objection the senate will proceed to the motion. mr. mcconnell: i know of no further debate on the measure. the presiding officer: no further debate, the question is on the adoption of the resolution. all those in favor say aye. all opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the resolution is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the preamble be agreed to and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of s. res. 305 submitted earlier today.

the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 305 designating the week of september 14 through september 21, 2019, as national estuaries week. the presiding officer: without objection the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. mcconnell: i ask the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 44, s. res. 394. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 44, s. 394, a bill to amend the presidential transition act of 1963 to improve the orderly transfer of the executive power during presidential transitions. the presiding officer: without objection the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the committee-reported amendments be agreed to, the bill as amended be considered read a third time and passed and the motions to reconsider be

considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 54, s. 862. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 54, s. 862, a bill to repeal the sunset for collateral requirements for small business administration disaster loans. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the kennedy amendment at the desk be agreed to and the bill as amended be considered read a third time. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i know of no further debate on the bill as amended. the presiding officer: if there is no further debate, the question is on the passage of the bill as amended. all in favor say aye. all opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the bill as amended is passed. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the kennedy title amendment be agreed to and that the motions to reconsider be

considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of the following bills en bloc -- h.r. 2336, h.r. 2938, h.r. 3304, h.r. 3311. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report the bills en bloc. the clerk: h.r. 2336, an act to amend title 11 united states code with respect to the definition of family farmer. h.r. 2938, an act to exempt from the calculation of monthly income certain benefits paid by the department of veterans' affairs and the department of defense. h.r. 3304, an act to exempt for an additional four-year period from the application of the means test presumption of abuse under chapter 7, qualifying members of reserve components, and so forth. h.r. 3311, an act to amend chapter 11 of title 11, united

states code, to address reorganization of small businesses, and for other purposes. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to the measures en bloc. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the bills en bloc be considered read a third time. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i know of no further debate on the bills en bloc. the presiding officer: if there is no further debate, the question is on passage of the bills en bloc. all in favor say aye. all opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the bills are passed en bloc. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all en bloc. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the democratic leader, no later than thursday, september 26, the senate proceed to the consideration of calendar number 102, s. 1340.

#eu i -- i further ask that the lee amendment number 935 be the only amendment in order, that there be two hours -- i notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: now,

mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the democrat leader, no later than thursday, september 26, the senate proceed to the consideration of calendar number 102, s. 1340. i further ask that the lee amendment, numbered 935, be the only amendment in order, that there be two hours of debate equally divided between the two leaders or their designees, followed by a vote on adoption of the lee amendment with a 60-vote affirmative threshold for adoption. finally, following disposition of the lee amendment, the committee substitute, as amended, if amended, be agreed to, the bill as amended be read a third time, and the senate vote on the passage of the bill as amended with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: now, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it

adjourn to then convene for pro forma sessions only with no business being conducted on the following dates and times, and that following each pro forma session, the senate adjourn until the next pro forma session. friday, august 2, 1:00 p.m. tuesday, august 6, 9:00 a.m. friday, august 9, 9:00 a.m. tuesday, august 13, 12:30 p.m. friday, august 16, 3:00 p.m. tuesday, august 20, 9:00 a.m. friday, august 23, 9:15 a.m. tuesday, august 27, 10:00 a.m. friday, august 30, 5:00 p.m. tuesday, september 3, 1:00 p.m. and friday, september 6, 8:30 a.m. i further ask that when the senate adjourns on friday, september 6, it next convene at 3:00 p.m. monday, september 9, and that following the prayer and pledge, the morning business

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, morning business be closed, and the senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the craft nomination. finally, notwithstanding the provisions of rule 22, the cloture motions filed during today's session ripen at 5:30 p.m. monday, september 9. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: so if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask it stand in recess under the previous order. mr. mcconnell: let me try again. if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand in adjournment under the previous order.

the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until 1:00 p.m. tomorrow.