systemic and relevant from their inception and worthy of study. susan is joining us in california on the democrats line. you on with michael barone. >> caller: thank you for taking my call. i was listening to different calls and it seems the republican party -- first of all sounds -- >> we are going to leave this recorded segment of washington journal, you can watch all our programs online, c-span.org, now to live coverage of the u.s. senate. tates are district judge for the western district of kentucky. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is it, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of justin reed walker of kentucky to be united states district judge for the western district of kentucky shall be brought to a close? the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll.

vote: vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? seeing none, the ayes are 50, the nays are 39, and the motion

is agreed to. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: madam president, i have six requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. these have been approved by both the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. cornyn: madam president, we are rapidly approaching the one-year mark since president trump and the presidents -- the prime minister of canada and the president of mexico signed a new trade agreement to strengthen our economies. the united states-mexico-canada agreement, or usmca, will replace nafta, the north america free trade agreement. 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, the united states-mexico-canada agreement, or usmca, will replace the north american free

trade agreement, or nafta, and continue to guide trade with our northern and southern neighbors into the future. it's estimated by the u.s. chamber of commerce that the number of jobs in the united states that have been created directly as a result of trade with mexico range in the $5 million -- around the $5 million figure. another $8 million by national trade with canada. so this is no small matter. since nafta was enacted acted, though, back in 1994, a lot has changed, the way we communicate, the way we shop, do business and go about and do our daily lives relies on technology that didn't exist 25 years ago. make no mistake, nafta has been a huge benefit to our country and texas has benefited. in 2018, texas exportd nearly

$110 of gods to -- goods to mexico. when you consider actions being taken by china to ircounter --or counter our interests all over the world. our reliance on partners has become increasingly important. that shows the need to ensure that we are not left behind as the global economy continues to evolve. the usmca is the most significant update to u.s. trade policy in a generation and will propel our growing economy into the 21st century. it nics account businesses and practices, that i said, didn't exist, things like two-day shipping, online microretailers and digital products. it requires canada and mexico to raise their de minimis shipment

value levels with expedited entry procedures. that's a big deal for small- and medium-sized businesses that often lack the resources to pay customs duty and taxes. the usmca places restrictions and increases goods markets access and boosts digital trade, safeguards intellectual property and supports agriculture and, as i said earlier, keeps jobs here at home. in short, this trade agreement is a big win for the american people. some even argue that the usmca is more important than restoring our normalized trading relationship with china. earlier this year the international trade commission provided insight into what we could expect to see once the usmca is ratified. within six years, they say, we are looking at 167,000 new american jobs and an increase in

our gross domestic product by $68 billion. that's a bigger impact than the transpacific partner trade agreement. the usmca is expected to have a positive impact on every energy sector, industry sector in the u.s. economy. we can look more to more $30 billion in exports and more than $31 billion in inports, that is -- imports, that is great news for those who will reap the benefits of this agreement. when i meet with my constituents back home or here in washington, one of the most questions i get is when is the usmca going to pass? mexico's already ratified the agreement and canada's waiting for us to move before acting. the agreement has broad support in the senate and clearly the president is on board as well. so the only holdup in the entire

process is the house of representatives. up until about a month ago i told my constituents i thought the prospects for passage sometime this year was looking pretty good. house democrats did have some concerns but speaker pelosi was reportedly working in good faith with the administration to work through them. there were indications of progress and productive conversations with mexico and canada to address their concerns as well. and it looked like we were moving along the path to a deal. but then the house blew up all plans for a productive year in congress and launched head on into impeachment and t ossed aside important legislation. forget working on a trade deal that will benefit every sector of the american economy. house democrats are too busy conducting secret hearings in an effort to force the president out, someone who they despise. whether or not they intend to allow the usmca to receive a

vote in the house is unknown, but i sincerely hope that house democrats have enough good sense to avoid blowing up a vital trade deal over political disagreements with the president. the closer we get to a presidential election, the tougher it becomes. it is a shame the house puts politics ahead of good policy that will benefit the american people. the usmca is good for the economy, it's good for business, workers, and it is good for texas. it is time for the house to quit playing games so we can ratify this trade agreement without further delay. madam president, i greeld the floor. -- madam president, i yield the floor, and i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call: quorum call:

mr. paul: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky. mr. paul: i ask unanimous consent to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. paul: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that samantha ramona and sherry gill, interns in my office be granted floor privileges for the remainder of congress. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. paul: thank you. and i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. warner: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator for virginia. mr. warner: mr. president, it's been two and a half weeks since the president -- the presiding officer: the senator will suspend. the senate is in a quorum call. mr. warner: mr. president, i ask that the proceedings of the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. warner: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, it's been two and a half weeks since the president announced he was abruptly withdrawing u.s. forces from syria, betraying our kurdish allies and derailing the international fight against isis in syria. in the course of one tweet, this president blind p sided our allies in the region -- blindsided our allies in the

region -- yes, the kurds, but the israelies as well. frankly, the only one who seemed to know that this was coming was the turkish president, mr. erdogan. as a result, brave men and women who fought alongside the united states are now at the risk of being slaughtered by turkish forces. already, kurdish fighters and unarmed civilians have been killed by turkish-armed groups and militias. hundreds of isis detainees have escaped from prison and isis is being given space and time to regroup. simply put, we may be witnessing one of the most significant counterterrorism setbacks in recent history. with nowhere else to turnings the kurds have aligned

themselves with the assad regime. that's good us in news for one of -- that's good news for one of history's most brutal dictators. it is also good news for his allies in iran. but perhaps no one has benefited more than vladimir putin. just this week, russia and turkey agreed to a new joint strategy in syria, greenlighting russian and syrian forces to clear the border region of any of our remaining kurdish allies and, unfortunately, expanding russia's footprint in the middle east. the truth is, the president's sudden withdrawal from syria without a plan, without serious consideration for our kurdish allies, i believe is a disaster. and it may harm our foreign policy for decades to come. if this is how the united states treats its allies, how can anyone trust the united states on a going-forward basis? frankly, i fear most of the damage may have already been done. no tweet, no press conference,

no personal assurances from erdogan or anyone else can rebuild the years of trust and progress that have been destroyed. but the least we can do -- perhaps, unfortunately, the most we can do -- is to make sure those kurdish allies who served alongside u.s. forces as translators and other military support roles are not left to die in syria. that's why i've introduced the syrian allies protection act. this legislation is similar to programs in the past which granted special immigration visas to iraqi and afghanistany nationals who served along u.s. forces. the truth is these kurdish allies and their families are now at risk because of their work with u.s. forces. they're threatened not only by the turkish incursion but also by the freed isis fighters and by the assad regime forces. this legislation would provide permanent american residence to

syrian national whose worked for the u.s. during the last six months, who've obtained a favorable recommendation from a general or a flag officer in the chain of command and who being passed through a background check and screening. the legislation also directs the administration to evaluate eligible individuals to help evacuate eligible individuals to safety. if their lives are at risk remaining in syria, they can either be brought to the united states or to a third country while appropriate voting takes -- vetting takes place. this legislation will not reverse what we did to our kurdish allies. but it will show those who worked with our military forces, in many cases we have heard translators and others who the american forces left without even saying goodbye to because they had to withdraw to, would at least remove part of the sting. so, mr. president, as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that the judiciary committee be discharged of s. 2625 and the

senate proceed to its immediate consideration; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. paul: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator for kentucky. mr. paul: reserving the right to object, ironically, the syrian kurds may be closer to having some degree of autonomy or homeland than they have been in decades. with the new arrangements or rearrangement of alliances, the syrian kurds now will have an alliance with someone who will remain in syria, whether you like them or not, the assad government is there to stay. there was never going to be a u.s. presence for long enough or great enough to preserve or create a homeland for them. i think there is every possibility that in alliance with assad that there will be some kurdish arrangement. it happened inish. iraq, the oil proceeds are said.

the kurds have wanted more in iraq. they have gotten some degree of autonomy within their province. i think that sort of encouraging the syrians to abandon their country, encourage the syrian kurds to abandon their country is really premature and doesn't recognize the fluidity of whoas going on on the ground there. there is the potential for the first time in eight years to break through to a peace agreement. peace agreements have been unable to be achieved in the past because people have refused to acknowledge that assad is staying. it's easy to say assad is all of the things that he likely is, but it's harder to acknowledge that no matter who he is, he is staying and that peace on the ground will ultimately for the syrian kurds probably come through an arrangement with the -- with assad's regime. there's been a huge diplomatic breakthrough, so as much as we have all the talk of sturm and

drang and the world sending and there's going to be a kurdish genocide, perhaps the opposite is going to happen. no one can predict the future with certainty, but it actually looks as if there has been a somewhat reasonable withdrawal. you have the syrian kurdish generals now saying that they have agreed with the withdrawal. there is now in place hopefully a long-term cease-fire. so while nothing is ever perfect in syria, nothing is ever perfect in the middle east, i think rather than say it is the end of the world, we should say this is a big transition, this is a big realignment of interests there, and there is a possibility that the kurds could get a homeland. the last thing you would want is to say to all the leaders in the kurdish community, all the intellectuals, those who speak english, those who are open to western ways, hey, come over here and abandon your country. it would be equivalent to france saying to george washington

after the war, hey, founding fathers, why don't you all come to france? it is not a good notion to ask the leaders to leave and arizona ban done their country. so with that, i respectfully object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. the senator for virginia. mr. warner: mr. president, i disagree with my friend from kentucky about what may or may not happen. i believe that one thing i would agree with him on that we have not often had well-organized plans in the middle east. the unique thing about our alliance with the kurds is after trying in iraq and afghanistan and other places around the region, to find allies p who would stand up and fight, with the kurds, we found this out. and they did a remarkable job dismantling isis. the senator from kentucky's proking nosty --

prognostication, i don't agree with and time with tell. regardless of the changed circumstances the assad regime may have in terms of treating people with more respect or the turkish militias which we've seen evidence of their killing of kurdish fighters, the one group, the one group i think that is probably safe to say will be the targets of both the syrians, the turks, the militias will be those individuals, those kurdish individuals who work directly for the u.s. military. even if there is -- if the senator from kentucky's prognostication plays out on a more macro basis, i don't think anyone with a straight face can say the turkish or kurdish translators who two weeks ago were working for the americans forces, that they won't be victims of whether it be turkish, syrian, russian, or

other aggression. i think it would have been the right thing, and i'm going to continue to try to find ways to bring this legislation to the floor. i know it would be broadly bipartisan supported. i hope we'll have a chance to revisit this. i don't think we can ever fully reverse the actions this president has taken. but at least in terms of these translators -- this is not talking about taking the whole kurdish leadership, but these generally men who two weeks ago were working for the american military, i think we owe them a greater debt of obligation than to simply say good luck. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator for kentucky. mr. paul: i think one of the interesting things about the kurdish situation and about syria in general is how quickly how kurds and assad did ally. if you watched the war over the last eight years, the kurds and assad have not largely fought each other. there -- it was actually pretty remarkable how quickly they came

together. one of the things is we think we're doing best and we try to do the best when we insert ourselves in the middle east, but sometimes we get unintended consequences. we've been there and we want peace, but we refuse to allow the kurds to talk to assad. there's a stalemate and civil war that's gone on eight years. had we never been involved, assad likely would have crushed the rebellion in six months, maybe 500,000 people wouldn't have died, maybe three million people wouldn't have left and you'd still have a dictator. instead we have people dead, people left as refuges and we still have a dictator. i think we need to question our strategy as to what our intended goal is and what ends up happening. syria is a disaster made no better by our intervention, the saudis intervention and qataris intervention. there is a great deal of unknown as to whether or not the sunni extremists that were supported by the saudis and qataris and

sometimes us would be more humanitarian and more for human rights than assad is. i think we can agree assad used chemical weapons. the other side is radical islam, radical jihad with the things that led to 9/11. it's a very complicated situation over there, but i think that we cannot say with certainty that there will not be a deal that sticks actually between assad and the kurds. if the kurds want a homeland and they believe assad is staying, it makes all the sense in the world for them to work together. if assad wants to actually protect that region of north syria either from turkey or from others and the kurds are willing to help them doing it, the kurds have proven that they are good fighters. the kurds would probably have to acknowledge that there is a greater syria and they're part of it. if they want to break off from syria there will be continual war. if they're able to make an arrangement with assad there's a chance there could be an

oil-sharing arrangement like we have in iraq. the bottom line is we sometimes see the world in black and white terms and think we can get thomas jefferson in syria or in libya or in iraq. but what happens is time and time again we topple a dictator, get chaos, get more terrorism. isis sprang out of the vacuum that was iraq after a government that was incapable of doing it after we get rid of the same. the same thing happened when we got rid of qadhafi in libya. i think we need to rethink our approach to the middle east. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator for virginia. mr. warner: i won't belabor the point. i know my friend from connecticut is here to raise another issue. i don't agree with the president's -- with the senator from kentucky's analysis. i hope he proves to be right. i would agree with him that sometimes our notion that we're

going to find thomas jefferson to rebuild these countries has not proven to be the case. this legislation i'm proposing is not broad policy changing. it is simply saying let's look at a very limited universe of individuals who two weeks ago were working with the american military. and my fear, mr. president, is that at least in terms of how those translators and their families will be viewed by both the turks and by the assad forces, they will not be viewed as thomas jefferson's but they will be viewed as benedict arnold's, and my fear is their fate will be in our hands. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator for connecticut. mr. blumenthal: thank you, mr. president. i want to thank my colleague from virginia for his advocacy on this critical measure, and i support him on it, and also for his advocacy on the fire act, very similar to the measure on

which i am going to ask for unanimous consent. he's done wonderful and dedicated work on both measures. i want to make the request as if in legislative session for unanimous consent that the rules committee be discharged from further consideration of s. 1247, the senate proceed to its immediate consideration, and that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. i ask that that be done. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. paul: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator for kentucky. mr. paul: reserving the right to object, i'm concerned this bill would put an undue burden on anybody who decides to run for office in the sense that you would be burdened with trying to

understand everyone that you talk to anywhere in the united states whether or not they're an agent of a foreign government or an agent of a foreign principal such as a foreign company. for example, i might run into hunter biden in the airport. i know he's an american citizen, but this bill doesn't prevent american citizens from being an agent of a foreign principal. hunter biden also worked for a ukrainian oligarch in a company with mysterious origins that may well have something to do with our foreperson. -- foreign policy. if i meet hunter biden i'm concerned i could be reprimanded by the f.e.c. by talking to him. i enjoy going to the indian new year in louisville and sometimes see 5,000 indian americans but i can't tell you how many of them are brand-new to the country, what their visa status is, whether they have a relative in government there that might come

forward to me. i think we need to be putting forward law particularly by unanimous consent that hasn't been scrutinized and might end up having a burden we don't really agree with. there's been a certain degree of hysteria over the russian thing. some on the other side of the aisle can't get over they lost the presidential election, and so they continue to blame the russians for losing the election. it's so bad that their candidate from last year, hillary clinton, had to go after chelsea gabbard, a democratic member of the congress, a sitting congresswoman, the first female congresswoman to run for president and she's been labeled by hillary clinton a russian asset. so you can see that the hysteria over russia is a little bit concerning, that we may be going too far in this hysteria. once we apply this to the world, is there going to be a hesitancy to talk to someone who looks different than you, who dresses different than you, that has a different color skin from yours because you're concerned they might be from a foreign country? i think this would have the ability of stifling speech,

stifling political speech. and i think it's a reactionary way to look at things and fits in with this sort of unseemliness of hillary clinton thinking everybody is a russian agent to many of the democrats saying donald trump is a russian agent. we spent $35 million on this notion. this was probably a notion promulgated by people within the intelligence community that already hated donald trump before he was elected. i hope we get to the bottom of this but i'm not about to allow by unanimous consent an attempt to politicize our election process and make it so absurd that you'd have to worry about who you talk to as you travel the country. i object. mr. blumenthal: mr. president. the presiding officer: objection is heard. the senator for connecticut. mr. blumenthal: mr. president, i truly regret the objection by my colleague. i regret even more the reasons for his objection. characterizing the threat of russian interference as hysteria

, well, i suggest that my friend from kentucky spend a little bit of time -- it won't take a lot -- with members of the intelligence community, any member of the intelligence community, all the members of the intelligence community who agree unanimously that the threat of russian interference is real. in fact, it is ongoing. that's the warning that we have received from the c.i.a., the director of national intelligence, and most pointedly, from the director of the f.b.i. they have warned us in no uncertain terms that the russians are interfering now spreading disinformation and creating false accounts and cite that they are planning to do it even more intensely. and it is not only the

russians, but other nations. that was the warning of robert mueller when he said that the russians' interference in our last election was sweeping and systematic and that they were doing it again, and we need to pay attention to it. and that is exactly what my colleagues and i have been doing for the past few days, raising for floor consideration various election security bills. we've done it not only in the last few days, but for months, the honest ads act, the shields act. but my colleague from kentucky says it is hysteria. well, it's a well-founded fear based on fact. as one of our former colleagues, daniel patrick moynihan, once said people are entitled to their own opinions.

they're not entitled to their own facts, and the facts here are indisputable, set forth in numbing detail by the mueller report, but also by the intelligence community independently in the hearings that have been conducted by various of our committees in open and public, in armed services and judiciary and also behind closed doors, some of the them -- the intelligence committee -- which produced a report most recently by the senate intelligence committee, a bipartisan report showing how the russians scanned every single state to penetrate them, seeking to disrupt them. and that is an absolutely chilling fact-based, evidence-founded prospect that we need to counter. and that's the reason that my

colleagues and i have come to the floor for these measures, a number of them i've been proud to cosponsor and help to lead. the one that brings me here now is the duty to report act, s. 1247, and it very simply says there's a duty to report. if there is an illegal offer of assistance, if anyone knows of an illegal acceptance of assistance from a foreign leader or foreign national or foreign government, there's a duty to tell the f.b.i. or some other law enforcement official. the plain fact is our elections are under attack, and 2016 was only a dress rehearsal. just this week -- talk about hysteria -- facebook banned

dozens of fake iranian accounts attempting to spread misinformation and disinformation to americans. the purpose, to disrupt the 2020 election. it isn't necessarily an ad for one candidate or another, it may be an ad that suppresses the vote, and the point is that attack will continue and opposition to it is based on hysteria about the potential political implication. what saddens and angers me is that our commander in chief, not just some of our colleagues, refuse to believe that our elections were attacked and will be again. he's actively working to undermine our democracy. the president's attempts to invite a foreign leader, the ukrainian president, to interfere in our democratic election was a betrayal of his oath of office and an abuse of

power. it's an impeachable offense, but it will occur again by others as well as him if we do not pass measures like the duty to report act. it started with a whistle-blower complaint and now we have call notes between the president and ukrainian president zelensky corroborating the statements of multiple witnesses in the government and president trump's own statement, his own words on live television admitting that he did it. the transcript of his call, chillingly, shows how he literally pressured and extorted ukrainian president, using the threat of a cut or elimination of military aid vital to

ukrainian lives and ukrainian defense against an ongoing russian attack, not to mention the visit to the white house, also used as leverage. with these ten powerful words, quote, i would like you to do us a favor though. end quote. and the favor was digging dirt on a political opponent through a faux investigation to favor himself over that opponent. the invitation to interfere in our election goes to the core of our democratic institutions. it is, literally, condoning and, in fact, inviting and encouraging an attack on our democratic institution and the

president has said, when he was asked, that if he were offered foreign assistance, he would take it. his son, during the last campaign, was offered russian assistance, and his response was, i love it. that is not the appropriate response for the offer of any illegal act of assistance. it should be to go to the f.b.i. or another law enforcement agency. every republican should be asked to answer the question. in fact, forced to answer this question, is it acceptable to solicit or accept the assistance of a foreign power to win an election? we cannot allow this kind of practice to become the new normal. it is already illegal to accept or solicit such an assistance from a foreign government or leader and what we want to do is

make it illegal to fail to report it. and as for finally my colleague's objection that it would inhibit somehow an active and honest campaign, someone who has reason to know that there is an illegal offer of assistance, someone who knows that that assistance is being solicited by his or her campaign or a member of their family certainly should feel a duty to report as a matter of simple patriotism and moral obligation, not to mention legal responsibility. with the 2020 presidential election looming, we must stop this kind of foreign interference. we must take active and effective measures against it.

we must ensure that the american people, not russia or china or iran -- and they are all gunning for our democratic institution -- decide who the leaders of this country will be and what the direction of our democracy will take. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. and i suggest 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 for kentucky. mr. paul: i ask unanimous consent to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. paul: i ask unanimous consent to commence with the prearranged vote. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. the question is on the nomination. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? if no, the yeas are 50, the nays are 41. the nomination's confirmed. under the previous order, the

motion to reconsider sr considered made and -- reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. the senator for tennessee. mr. alexander: i ask unanimous consent that 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. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator for maryland. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. president. i'm on the senate floor now where in a moment i will be asking the senate to take up and vote on a house-passed bill that would provide full mandatory funding for historically black colleges and universities and other minority-serving institutions. and, mr. president, the reason i'm here is that the authority for this mandatory spending

expired 24 days ago, and we have it within our power right now to remedy that situation. we can take up a vote on what's called the future act. we have a bipartisan senate bill that's championed by senator jones and senator scott, and we have before us at the desk a bill passed by the house of representatives by voice vote, unanimously passed by the house of representatives. without the passage of this bill, the futures act, our nation's historically black colleges and universities will lose $85 million a year in critical funding aimed at bolstering their resources, improving their management and enhancing their academic programs. in my home state of maryland, we have four terrific hbcu's, bowie state, capon, and collectively

they could lose over $4 million a year which they need for services to support students and help them stay in school. now, mr. president, i realize there are some who say that since we just enacted fiscal year 2019 funding that there's no urgency to take up and pass this bill now. but just this past saturday i met with board members of the thorough good marshal -- thorough good marshal fund and when they asked me why when there's so much agreement and support for this program we couldn't pass the extension, i couldn't give them a good answer. and here's what else they said, mr. president. they gave me a letter that they had sent to the united states

senate just last week trying to dispel the myth that there's no urgency to the current situation. here's what they wrote in their letter. this is from their president dr. harry williams. he says, quote, the expiration of this program is already -- already having real consequences. he goes on to write, we already have examples of campuses notifying employees that their positions and programs will be terminated as of september 20, 2020, if not sooner. these are real jobs who enact with students every day in programs that play a critical role that help students in the stem field, among other disciplines. he goes on to write the longer we wait, the more institutions

will be left with no choice but to begin winding down programs that materially benefit students and employees alike and strip away the knowledge basis that our colleges have built over time. that is from dr. harry williams, the president of the thurgood marshall college fund. hsbcu say that they can't budget on plan on hope, they have to budget and plan on reality. i understand our colleague, the senator from tennessee and the chairman of the help committee is on the floor. like him, i hope we do a broader higher education reauthorization. i know we need to do that. i know the house wants to do that. i just spoke to the chairman of the house and labor committee,

chairman bobby scott. he understood and the house understood that time is of the essence with this bill which is why the house sent it over to us in the first place. so there is really no time to waste. we need to give these universities and colleges certainty. so, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 212, h.r. 2486, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made be laid on the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. alexander: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator for tennessee. mr. alexander: mr. president, reserving the right to object. with all respect, this is no way to help historically black colleges or minority serving institutions. what the senator from maryland is surgting is that which i -- suggesting that we pass a bill

that would have two years of funding that has a budget gimmick that will never be passed by the senate. if you're relying on that funding for historically black colleges, it's all over. what i introduced instead on the floor of the senate was a bipartisan package of bills that begins with permanent funding for historically black colleges and minority-serving institutions that's is fully paid for. so the choices between two years of a gimmick that will never pass the senate or permanent funding that is fully paid for. that's not much of a hard decision for me, and in addition to that, mr. president, i suggested at the same time we pass some other -- other proposals that are bipartisan and have been drafted by 32 senators, 18 democrat, 14 republican, that in addition to the long-term permanent solution for minority-serving

institutions of 225 million a year, simplifying the fasa, that helps 20 million families a year. senator jones and i introduced a bill to do that yesterday. that could pass this week and go to the president and be signed into law. short testify term pell grants, senators portman and kaine have supported that. we have a way to pay for the package. we have a way to keep parents from having to set two sets of had their tax information to two different agencies of government. all of this package, the eight bills and three bills i hope to include later, end up with 48 senators, 25 democrats, 23 republicans, all of this is ready to be considered by the senate and sent to the president and can pass this year. so i'm about to object, but what i want to make clear to the

historically black colleges, and there are six of them in tennessee, is that the secretary of education has written a letter assuring them there are sufficient funds for another year than the proposal by the senator from maryland would only be two years, budget gimmick, never pass the senate. so let's work together to permanently fund historically black colleges, simplify the fasa and all of that can be done now and not keep pretending that we're helping the colleges with a proposal that short-term budget gimmick and never pass the senate. i object. mr. van hollen: mr. president. the presiding officer: ooks is -- objection is heard. the senator for maryland. mr. van hollen: mr. president, i would just say to the chairman of the committee that i believe the best judge for what's good for hbcu's are hbcu's hems, and

they have -- themselves. and they have asked the senate to act immediately on the legislation that passed the house unanimously on a voice vote. so while we all would like to work toward comprehensive reform and reawrgz -- reauthorization on higher education, there's no need to wait on this provision that's sitting in the united states senate. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to put the letters we've received from the thurgood marshal college fund and from the uncf which are both organizations that advocate on behalf of hbcu's. i ask unanimous consent they be put in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. van hollen: and i would just underscore the fact that with respect to the chairman, the best judge of what's good for

hbcu's i think is hbcu's and they're worried because they're already having to provide notice to their professors and their staff that funding might not be available next year. i know in the senate sometimes we think that no one needs to plan ahead, but most of the world needs to plan ahead. so we will be back on this floor in the future again asking that we pass this urgent matter. and i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator for west virginia. mr. manchin: mr. president, i i'm here to recognize an unbelievable individual that contributed so much to my home state and country. my home state of west virginia mass lost a beloved family man, a noble veteran, legendary businessman and a very proud west virginian and a very dear friend. president john kennedy when visiting our state said the sun doesn't always shine?

west virginia but the people always do. charles t. which we called captain charlie jones exemplified this and his light will forever shine through the many people who knew and loved him best. he was truly one of a kind, one of the most warm, kind people i'd ever had the privilege of knowing. last year i had the privilege of submitting a congressional record statement for charlie's 100th birthday. he credited his long jeft to good genes -- longevity to good genes, good wife, a very supportive family, colleagues and friends. he was an innovator. he always had ideas of how to make something better or run more smoothly meeg him a joy to -- making him a joy to work with and for. there is no greater reward in life than to give back to the place that made you who you are. while he grew up on the banks of the river in west virginia, charlie attended school in new jersey later earning a degree in business from babson institute in massachusetts. charlie then served his country

in the united states navy during world war ii with the navy cb's in the canal and on a mine sweeper as an engineering officer off the coast of japan and the philippines. after the war's end, charlie came home to west virginia and went to work for his family's coal business, star coal and coke company which later became amherst coal company in 1946. that was the company that his grandfather started in 1893. due to the downturn in production and demand of coal, out of necessity the company ventured into river transportation. in 1951 the family bought the hatfield campbell coal company, a business that operated steamboats, barges, and river terminals along the ohio river. he took over the operations of the company and renamed them amherst barge company. along the way the company became madison coal and supply company.

and is now known as amherst madison and still specializes in marine sches, like -- services like towing, construction, and equipment repairs. amherst and its affiliated companies have proudly employed thousands of west virginians over the past 70 years. charlie was one of the most hardworking, humble, and giving people the mountain state has ever known. and was a long time supporter of many businesses, charitable and community organizations throughout the canal valley. over the years he served on numerous boards and committee, including the yeager airport authority board, board of trustees for the university of charleston, chairman emeritus of the inland waterways user board, trustee emeritus of the west virginia chapter of the nature conservancy. director emeritus of the museum, past chairman of west virginia mining and reclamation association, former director of the charleston medical center foundation, one valley bank

corps and the western pocahontas corporation. ohio valley improvement association and so many, many more. in recent years charlie was honored as a distinguished west virginian by the governor entered into the honorable board of kentucky colonels by the people of the commonwealth of kentucky and inducted into the west virginia university college of business and economics business hall of fame. and recognized as a west virginian who's who by the state journal. additionally received previous honors such as the charleston ymca spirit of the valley award, induction into the coal mining hall of fame, charleston gazette west virginian of the year, seaman church institute lifetime achievement award and the national rivers hall of fame achievement award. only to name a few. put simply, charlie was a regular renaissance man and what stands out about charlie's character was he was beloved by those who worked with him and

knew him. he was compassionate and considerate and also a strong leader. it was an honor to call him a friend. we send our deepest condolences to his children. so i'm honored to join each of you in remembering charlie's legacy as well as the unwavering love he had for his loved one, community, and most importantly our home state. i know he and mariellen and their son nelson are looking down on each of them fondly today. thank you, mr. president, i yield the floor.

mr. scott: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator for florida. mr. scott: i rise today to speak about the crisis in venezuela, a defining human rights issue of our time.

nicolas maduro is starving his own people and innocent children are dying. what is happening in venezuela is pure genocide. every day that passes, the situation in venezuela grows more dire. i will not stand by and let maduro continue to terrorize his people. i will not let democrats in congress use the venezuelan people as a political prop. i will not allow the inaction to continue. americans have always stood up for freedom and today is no exception. that is why i'm here again, i'm here to ask unanimous consent to pass my amendment to h. r.549 granting temporary protective status for venezuelans fleeing nicholanicolas maduro's oppresse regime. even those -- even though the democrats blocked the same proposal last month, i refuse to give up. i stand with the proud venezuelans. mr. president, my proposal has

the support of all senate republicans. i believe that the president will sign this into law. it is the only solution that stands a chance of becoming law. we have to act. we also need to be responsible. the courts have basically made a temporary program permanent which is not sustainable. despite what some confused democrats, including speaker pelosi may say, the t in tps actually does mean temporary. in addition to protecting the venezuelan people right now, my amendment makes much needed reforms toward the t.p.s. program and returns the program to its intended purpose. we want those seeking refuge for more and oppressive regimes to have a safe haven in our country but we need a system that works and that is truly temporary. we need to act now to save the venezuelan people. mr. president, i ask consent to address the senate in spanish. the presiding officer: without

objection. mr. scott: [ speaking spanish ] i ask unanimous consent that the committee on judiciary be discharged from further consideration and the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of h.r. 549. i ask unanimous consent that my amendment at the desk be agreed to and that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. van hollen: reserving the right to object, i share the concerns expressed by my colleague, the senator from florida, about the situation in venezuela. i meet with many of my constituents of venezuelan

heritage and discuss with them the crises that their relatives back in venezuela are facing every day, shortages of food and water and medicine, state-sponsored violence has caused 4.3 million people to flee the country. and that is exactly why i joined many of my colleagues in supporting legislation many months ago to grant temporary protected status to people fleeing the horror in venezuela. and, of course, the house of representatives passed legislation to do exactly that. i have a copy of h.r. 549 in my hand. it is sitting here in the united states senate. now, i say to my colleague, the senator from florida, that i'm happy to sit down with you and discuss how we can revise and

reform the entire t.p.s. system going forward. in fact, i introduced legislation back in march of this year, s. 879, to extend temporary protected status to all the people who are right now in great fear of being deported from the united states when their protective status expires. but i recognize that there may be reforms that we can make to the overall system. i would just suggest that a bill focused just on t.p.s. to venezuela is not the place to try to reform the entire t.p.s. system, which i'm more than happy to have a discussion about. as you know, we have people with t.p.s. status from many, many countries, including el salvador, guatemala, honduras, haiti, and a number of african countries. and to try to overhaul the

entire system in one piece of legislation, trying to pass something right now for venezuela doesn't make a lot of sense, which is why -- which is why i support what the house did, which is to immediately address the situation in venezuela with our current t.p.s. system. don't try and rewrite the whole set of t.p.s. rules now. let's address the international situation right now and the -- let's decrease the emergency situation right now and the senate can do that by passing the house bill. and i'm going to ask in a moment that we take that up. but i abto the gentleman's -- but i object to the gentleman's request to pass this version which tries to overhaul the entire t.p.s. system. the presiding officer: objection is heard. the senator from l ifful. -- the senator from florida. mr. scott: mr. president, reserving the right to object, i

-- mr. van hollen: i ask unanimous consent that the committee on judiciary be discharged from further consideration and the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of h.r. 549. i ask unanimous consent that my amendment at the desk be agreed to and that the bill, as amended, be considered read third time and passed and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. van hollen: i apologize. let me withdraw -- i ask unanimous consent to withdraw that. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. van hollen: okay, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the judiciary be discharged from further consideration of h.r. 549 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. further, that the bill be considered read a third time and

passed and the the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. scott: plop? the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. scott: reserving the right to object, i have appreciated the opportunity to work with my colleague from maryland and look forward to working with him again in the future, and it would be great if we could work together to try to figure out how to provide temporary protected status for the venezuelans and also fix the program so it continues to work not just for the venezuelaians but people all over the world. the democrats know that their proposal cannot become law. it lacks support here in the senate, which is why i propose an amendment which has support and actually can become law immediately. my amendment grants t.p.s. to venezuelans for 18 months. it requires congressional approval for t.p.s. extensions, no more than months a the a time. my amendment limits the

availability of illegal aliens to benefit from t.p.s. it ensures that those identified under the magnitsky act are not gibel for t.p.s. status. it includes provision -- it does not count as an admission for purposes of the immigration and nationality act. under my amendment, t.p.s. recipients cannot return to the t.p.s. country during the period of designation and the amendment requires current t.p.s. designations will come up for congressional review two years after the enactment of this amendment. my amendment is the only way to help the venezuelan people. it is the only proposal that can become law. there is no path forward for the democrats' plan, and unfortunately they know it. it is clear now more than ever that unfortunately the democrats don't want to get anything done on this issue. that's why they're standing in our way. all republican senators have signed off on this. unfortunately, the democrats have decided to use the venezuelan community as a political prop instead of working with us to find a solution. we cannot lose sight of the fact

that nicolas maduro is killing his citizens. it is a genocide. who would we be if we're turned our back on a genocide right here in our hemisphere? we can't we must help venezuela january families & it is time to reform t.p.s. in this country. temporary protected status was never meant to be endless. it was meant to help families in need. so let's get this program to work. i look forward to working with my colleague from maryland and all my colleagues to help the families in venezuela and to finally create a long-term solution to t.p.s. i will not rest until we do. my colleague, senator rand paul, asked i object to the senate's democratic proposal. so on behalf of senator paul, i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. the majority leader.

0 the senator from maryland. mr. van hollen: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. cramer: mr. president. the presiding officer: i think we're in a quorum call. you may want to ask unanimous consent -- mr. cramer: i will do exactly that. i ask unanimous consent to suspend the quorum. the presiding officer: without

objection. mr. cramer: i ask unanimous consent that it be in order to offer the following amendments, number 961, 1019, 1067, that no second-degree amendments be in order to these amendments prior to the vote that on monday the senate vote in relation to these amendments in the order listed. the presiding officer: is there objection? hearing no objection, it is agreed to. mr. cramer: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

mr. carper: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. mr. carper: i ask unanimous consent that we vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. carper: i ask unanimous consent, i would ask unanimous consent that three interns from our senate office, conner thompson, gail connolly and tmar epps be granted floor privileges today. the presiding officer: without

objection. mr. carper: mr. president, i will take the next 15 minutes today to talk about the ongoing situation in syria and the region surrounding that country. it's a part of the world that some folks might not be all that familiar with. let's take a look at the area that i'm going to be discussing today. syria, the mediterranean, just north of syria, we have turkey. to the southeast of syria, we have iraq. further to the east of iraq we have iran. the south -- the south, southwest of syria we have lebanon, israel, and jordan. and here south of jordan is saudi arabia, and over here egypt. egypt, the red sea. georgia, not the state, the country. and that gives us just a little bit of a lay of the land. but the focus of my remarks

today will be on syria. three years ago, mr. president, actually three years and four months ago this week, i stood right here. i stood right here at this place, at this site on the senate floor in front of a map of syria and spoke of the progress about to be made of that country to battle, degrade and destroy isis. that -- and we're going to look at another map here in -- maybe just right now. let's look at the next map. there we go. same area. pretty. the same area blown up. syria, iraq, turkey, lebanon, jordan, israel. the areas here in -- i call it peach. i'm not sure what you call that color. that's the area that about -- where isis runs it, was running the show or had undue influence.

and at this particular point in time, isis had been making undeniable progress in building what they call a caliphate, it's their country, their capital. let's look at -- again, this is the area they covered at the height of their influence. isis at that time had recruited more man power than any terrorist group in the world and it was also the richest terrorist group in the world many they would go into a town or country or whatever and a lot the banks, empty them. take the cash, take the money and run. and through a dominant social media presence, isis was attracting some 2,000 foreign fighters per month, that would include 10 americans per month, which means over 100 americans per year. this is syria, most of northern

syria. including arqa, right about here, and the strategic city of monbeg, which is close by. isis was able to project an image of strength by touting their victories. you know how everybody wants to be the winner in football. you see people wearing patriots clothing, we'll probably see nationals fans in months to come. isis was projecting strength to the world. they were reeling in potentially recruits by touting victory in the region and growing territory. three years and four months ago when i stood on the senate floor progress had begun being made in reversing isis growth. u.s. and kurdish forces recaptured the beach.

they were recruiting 2,000 month. they were down to about 200. we had found where they kept a lot of their money, not all of it. isis previously held strategically important sunni triangle in nearby iraq. when i spoke on the floor three years ago, 2016, iraqi forces recaptured tikrit, and fallujah and were posed to make additional gains in the months that followed. just over a year later, in 2017, raqqa was recaptured from isis control. around that time and in the months that followed isis fear diminished by about two-thirds. i referred to that map already but we can look at it again. this is where they were, about three years and four months ago.

that's basically where they were, in the magenta. isis. in short order from there, they lost about two-thirds of their control and are down to this point right here. when i speak of progress that we made, i'm not just referring to u.s. forces or the united states alone or one or two of our allies. i'm speaking of a coalition -- get this -- of over 60 nation who have come together to fight the rise of isis and prevent it from establishing the caliphate that i referred to earlier. each member of the coalition found that it was in their self-interest to join this fight as part of a bigger coalition. among the forces who contributed the most, though, were believe it or not, the syrian kurds. the kurds are -- you probably ask who are the kurds? where are they from? tell us something about the kurds? people would have no idea. the kurds are one of the largest ethnic groups in the world without a nation to call home. there are 30 million people of

them, there's 30 million of them, largely divided across four countries. syria, turkey, iran, and iraq. for decades the kurds have sought self-determination and basic rights, something we want for ourselves and our families. too often they have been victimized, attacked, they have been slaughtered including by president erdogan of turkey. over the last several years, kurdish soldiers trained, kurdish soldiers fought against isis alongside our soldiers as part of the syrian democratic forces. they call themselves s.d.f., syrian democratic forces. the kurdish soldiers put their lives at risk to stop isis who successfully established a caliphate from which to wreak even more havoc around the globe and even here in the united states. in fact, the kurdish s.d.f. fighters were carrying out most of the ground operations while

u.s. troops provided support. their willingness, the willingness of the kurdish fighters to risk their lives and shed their blood likely meant that countless american lives were spared. i'll say that again. the willingness of kurdish soldiers, kurdish fighters to risk their lives and shed their blood likely meant that countless american lives were spared. 11,000 kurdish fighters have been killed in combat while fighting isis. compared to that, four american lives have been lost during the same campaign. think about that. 1 1,000 kurdish fighters laid down their lives. four american lost their lives. that's too many. the idea is we've heard it said oftentimes they laid down their lives to spare ours, and that's exactly what happened. earlier this month president trump abruptly announced he

would be pulling remaining u.s. coalition forces from syria effective immediately. he did not do so after thoughtful consideration of the risks involved to the u.s. electricity. he did not -- to the u.s. interests. he did not consult with our allies. as far as i know he did not consult with our military leadership, some of the ones speaking up, raising their voices. he did that after a weekend phone call with turkish president erdogan. in the process, he left our kurdish allies hanging out to dry. as someone who served this nation in uniform in times of war, i served with coalitions before. two of the most important factors in building a successful coalition are communication and trust. but our abrupt abandonment of kurdish forces and their people will not serve to encourage our people around the world to risk their lives of their soldiers and join in a coalition led by us, the americans. in fact, what we've done in

abandoning the kurds is going to discourage other nations from deciding to join a coalition with us in the future. the decision to abandon our kurdish allies isn't just morally wrong -- and it is -- it's not just harmful to our credibility with allies around the globe -- and it is harmful -- it is a gift to several of our greatest adversaries. here's what president trump's abrupt decision to pull u.s. ground forces from syria has achieved. he has created almost overnight a power vacuum in which isis can regroup and wreak havoc again. according to recent news reports, isis fighters are cheering president trump's decision on social media channels viewed around the world. just this week the, our secretary of defense confirmed that over 100 isis prisoners escaped, adding the u.s. does not know where they are today. and what is does our president

say in response? he tells us that captured isis prisoners are secured. unfortunately that does not appear to be true. and when presented with the possibility that isis prisoners might be released as a result of his hasty withdrawal, what did our president say? this is what he said, and i'm going to quote, he said, well, they're going to be escaping to europe. think about that. well, they're going to be escaping to europe. think about it. who do we know in europe? do we have any friends? yes, we do. nato where we've been a part of for half a century. they're our friends, they're our allies. somehow the idea that that's where the escaped isis folks are going to head is okay. well, it's not okay. those words, in my view, were disgraceful. and chairman and ranking member of the senate foreign, senate, rather, homeland security and governmental affairs committee for a number of years, i worked with democrats colleagues. we worked to find ways to

effectively combat isis. of course it was critical to destroy isis overseas and on the battlefield. in today's age isis' message of hate doesn't need a visa or plane ticket to reach our shores. it has been important to find ways to prevent the radicalization of american citizens at home in the u.s.a. we worked tirelessly in the obama administration to reach out to the community and work with local officials, faith leaders and family members to combat terrorist groups efforts to radicalize and recruit our own citizens who might be vulnerable to their hateful ideology. isis fighters never have to step foot on american soil to spread their hate and inspire inspeakable violence.

for our president to say it is not our problem because the prisoners will go to maybe to europe, that's i think callous. it's foolish and it demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of the ever evolving terrorist threats that we face in this world today. president trump's decision to pull out of syria without a plan to protect our gains hasn't just energized isis fighters there. it's also given russian president vladimir putin a long desired foothold in the middle east. just yesterday president putin and erdogan an announced their forces will jointly control a soaf zone along the syria-turkey border. there's syria, an area there, a 20-mile soaf zone that is going -- safe zone that's going to be patrolled not by the

syrian kurds but by the folks from russia and the soldiers from turkey. so if the kurds want help in fighting erdogan's ethnic cleansing and chemical attacks, instead of turning to the u.s., they now have only another dictator to turn to. that's vladimir putin. and because we left the region without a plan for exit, mr. putin has secured an important public relations win of his own. at least one base, at least one base where american forces used to work side by side with kurdish forces in syria to gather and share critical intelligence regarding isis movements is now in not our hands, not in the hands of the syrian kurds. it's in russian hands. you know what they're doing with that change of hand? they're tweeting their videos to prove it and laughing all the way to, i don't know wherever they go. and if empowering russia, erdogan and isis wasn't enough,

president trump's decision to leave the region also creates a golden opportunity for hard-liners to achieve a long desired goal of their own, and that is establish a land bridge across the middle east in order to further antagonize our allies, the israelis. presumptive repeatedly promise to fulfill his campaign promise to end what he calls america's endless wars. we should not be fooled. not one war has ended during his presidency. in fact, more troops have been deployed to the middle east than have come home. today roughly 200,000 u.s. troops are deployed all around the globe. some of those troops are in war zones, places like iraq, afghanistan and somalia and a small number remain in syria. even more troops remain overseas from legacy missions in places like japan and germany, the philippines and australia. for instance, right now more than 28,000 u.s. troops are

stationed in south korea. just two weeks ago president trump announced that he would be sending an additional 3,000 troops to saudi arabia. prior to president trump's reckless withdrawal from syria, there were roughly 1,000 american troops stationed in the northeastern corner of that country. the northeastern part, mostly up here. compared to america's military presence elsewhere, that is a small, small fraction. think about it. some 200,000 american troops spread around the world. roughly 1,000 of them, less than .5% that were serving in this part of the world in syria. in spite of their strategic -- president trump chose to abruptly pull a small number of troops out of syria. as it turns out, with the death of john mccain, one of the last vietnam veterans serving here in the united states senate, and i know well what

it's like to come home from a long deployment. when i was with my squadron, the flight overseas six times to southeast asia. i agree we cannot afford to entangle our men and women in uniform in endless conflicts around the globe. it's not fair to them or not fair to their families. but what donald trump has achieved is not a carefully negotiated cease-fire, to shore up the gains we made against isis and fulfill our commitments to the allies who helped us, who helped us along the way. oh no, make no mistake, this is a retreat. the last thing i'll say is this this, i'm far from alone in criticizing this administration's decision with respect to the withdrawal of our troops from a, a small number of troops from syria. in the past week i've been joined by some unlikely colleagues to warn about the dangers of mr. trump's syrian policy. we've also heard from top

national security officials past and present in uniform, out of uniform, who have extensive experience when it comes to american foreign policy and military policy. last week a senior member of the senate foreign relations committee described the trump administration's decision to pull american troops out of syria as, his words, out of line. and also as dangerous. the senator also warned that isis is the biggest beneficiary. isis is the biggest beneficiary. of what? of the administration's abrupt decision to pull u.s. troops out of syria and leave our kurdish allies open to predictable invasion and, unfortunately, likely slaughter by the turks. you might be surprised to learn that those remarks were made by our republican colleague from south carolina, someone who also wore the uniform in his life,

lindsey graham. another one of our colleagues stood right here -- in fact, right over there -- on the senate floor this week and said that president trump's decision to abandon our kurdish allies, i would strike him, strikes at american honor. he goes on to say, what we've done to the kurds will stand as a bloodstain -- as a bloodstain -- in american history. then he went on to say that the deal by vice president pence as a victory, this is the words of our colleague, does not change the fact that america has abandoned an ally. that senator went on to say that the administration speaks of this flippantly even as allies families homes have been torn apart. those, again, are the words of not a democratic colleague, but a republican colleague, our friend from utah, senator mitt

romney. just this past weekend we were warned by a highly decorated retired u.s. marine corps general, one who served in the persian gulf war and in afghanistan and in the iraq war, and here's what he said in his warning, that the administration's abrupt withdrawal from the syrian-turkish border will lead to, in his words, disarray in syria and his quote, he said isis will resurge. isis will resurge. not my words, not a democrat's words, the words of president trump's former defense secretary general jim mattis, affectionately known as mad dog. colleagues, i'm -- i'm not describing a misguided foreign policy here today. i'm describing an abandonment of the values that americans have

embraced. i'm not describing a misguided foreign policy. i'm describing something much bigger than that, an abandonment that we, as americans have faced since the founding of our democracy. we have a package of sanctions that ought to be passed. these are stoarng than the ones that president trump imposed on turkey this week, which he apparently lifted. he lifted those sanctions as part of the retreat negotiated by his administration and he lifted those sanctions in the face that turkish forces continue to attack kurds and commit possible war crimes. but even strong sanctions such as those contained in our bill would pass would not solve the urgent crisis that president trump has created abandoning our kurdish allies. his quote. his quote, the president said

this last week or two. he said i alone can fix it. i alone can fix it. well, mr. president, for once that might be true. you alone can fix it. after a single phone call with an authoritarian leader, you created this mess, and you -- maybe you alone can reverse that decision. i urge you to do so. in fact, i think we urge you to do so. don't turn your back on the kurds. don't give up on the gains against isis that our service men and women, along with our allies fought so gravely for. that would be leadership. that would be leadership. that would protect our national security. and that is what the american people and our allies look to the president of the united states to do. tom friedman, noted author, columnist for "the new york times," someone who has been at

this capitol any number of times has something called the trump doctrine. he says it goes something like this, barack built it, i, trump, broke it, you fix it. i want turn the trump doctrine on its head and say, no, no, no, mr. president, you've broken it and it can be fixed and you need to do the fixing. and, with that, i yield the floor, mr. president. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from virginia. mr. kaine: mr. president, i thank my colleague from delaware for his comments and i rise to continue to speak about the u.s. retreat from syria from alliance with our kurdish allies, the u.s.' hasty withdrawal from syria produced pictures of u.s. troops being pelted by stones and rotting vegetables as they left their kurdish allies.

those kurdish allies who fought so valiantly with us. the trump retreat has been pitched by the president as a great victory for american foreign policy. it isn't. it's a grave failure that will ultimately make our country less safe. it's paving the way for potential ethnic cleansing that has been testified to by administration officials. in the last two weeks 176,000 kurds, more than half of them children, have been displaced. president trump claims that the kurds understand that we're doing them a great service, that is just flatly wrong. the trump retreat empowers russia, empowers iran, empowers the syrian dictator about a about a shad as ar, and it empowers turkey, which despite

being a nato member has led to a sled. and it's more than just abandoning them and walking away from them. the president reached out personally to say that they were no angles, trashing -- angels, trashing them on the way out the door for no reason. this has led to more than 100 isis prisoners escaping under the testimony of the special ambassador who has been charged to be the envoy to the region, ambassador jeffrey. the president declared they had been largely recaptured but when the ambassador was asked about the president's claim, he stated, quote, we do not know where they are. and based on testimony from military leadership, testimony just read by senator carper, it's pretty clear that the president has increased the

likelihood of a resurgence of isis with this move. we hope this does not happen, but it's largely been predicted by our defense leaders. what's the grand strategy here? well, if you look at this highly consequential decision, which is literally a life and death decision, and you look at how it was made, it becomes pretty clear to me that there wasn't a grand strategy. president trump encouraged a career state department diplomat who spent his whole life in this region, ambassador jim jeffrey, to come out of retierl and take a portfolio of responsibility for syria and the anti-isis campaign. ambassador jeffrey was charged directly with this task, but ambassador jeffrey testified before the foreign relations committee that he was not even asked or consulted with about the cause of action that this president took. imagine how that would make you

feel. you have retired, you are recruited by the president to lead the coalition against isis, the president makes a life and death decision about the syrian mission and does not even ask you for your advice about it. this speaks volumes about the chaotic nature of the retreat. in july, ambassador jeffrey announced, and this was good news, that he and the team had convinced britain and france to add troops to the mission, the anti-isis mission in syria to deal with this isis threat. that was just announced two to three months ago, but what we heard after president trump's announcement was that he did not consult with britain and france, the nations that had made commitments. they said -- the president of france said he heard of president trump's decision by

tweet. when neither the u.n. ambassador nor the british and french allies were consulted about this, that adds to the sense of chaos. mr. president, i believe this. if the administration had come to congress three months ago or three weeks ago and said, here is our proposal, we want to empower russia, turkey, iran, and assad. we want to raise the risk of isis reconstituting. we want to walk away from the kurds. we want to make other allies wonder about whether we'll be loyal to them. and we want to send a message that protecting oil wells is more important than protecting allies. if the administration had come to the armed services or foreign relations committee and said, we have an idea, this is what we want to do, what do you think? i know what we would have done. i think virtually everyone in the body would have asked

questions but would have laughed the strategy out of the room. but the president didn't come to congress, didn't come to the relevant committees to share their thought or their idea about what should be done, took the unilateral action and now we're seeing the consequences of the trump retreat. the trump retreat was promoted at a press conference by the president yesterday with a branding, and the branding was, quote, mission accomplished and promises kept. that branding sent a very bizarre, chaotic and contradictory message. we're protecting oil fields but not our allies from isis. we're pulling out of the region, but we're also puttings thousands more troops in saudi arabia. we're pulling out of the region, but we, in fact, added 14,000 more troops to the gulf since may. we're pulling back from the safe zone that we spent months trying to implement just to put russia

in charge of that safe zone. we're empowering dictators but we're abandoning allies. we're sending the signal in saudi arabia that the reason we're putting troops there is, as the president said, because they'll pay for it, sending the message that our military is now mercenaries, that we would go to the country where the country will pay for it regardless of the human rights situation in that country. the withdrawal made it difficult for anybody to think about partnering with us in the future with isis. the kurds were strong in the battle against isis. if isis does resurge, the normal response would be to go to our best battlefield partners to

defeat isis. the president virtually made it impossible to go back to the syrian kurds and say, okay, well, now, can you help us defeat isis again? and i think the president's actions this week has sent a message to other nations as well when the u.s. asks you to get on the battlefield, you have to be worried about whether the u.s. will abandon you when it's decided that your time is it up. -- your time is up. i want america, and i know you do, mr. president, because of your background. i want america to be the country that tells the world you can count on us, you can count on us, not the country where they say -- where other countries say, don't believe a word they say. in my capacity as a member of the senate armed services and senate foreign relations committee, i have spoken to a number of colleagues both sides of the aisle about what we can do. i don't think the president will

reverse course, but there are soms things that we -- some things that we could do to start the road to repair. there's strong partisan support for the risch-menendez bill. this is a bill that deals with sanctioning turkey for its behavior, calling the administration forward to present us with the anti-isis plan that should exist right now. i would urge the senate to take up that bill and pass it immediately. it has strong bipartisan support. i further urge the senate to pass either the house resolution containing the president's action or the resolution that senator mcconnell has introduced to condemn the president's action, either or both of those, i think, would be strong statements that the senate could make. for some reason that is not yet been explained, mr. president, the administration has refrained from implementing the mandatory sanctions against turkey

following turkey's purchase of the s.-400 missile system from russia. these are mandatory sanctions. by law the president was supposed to have implemented them from now. we heard from brett mcgurk, who is working in the region, that vladimir putin said that turkey bought our system and you haven't sanctioned them yet, so you're a paper tiger. the region is wondering, they are mandatory yet the u.s. isn't implementing the sanctions. why not? i call on the administration to reverse this decision and immediately implement the sanctions to send an important message to both turkey and russia. i call on congress and the administration to be focused on the need for increased humanitarian assistance in the region. the 1276,000 -- 176,000 kurds displaced from their land already is like -- are likely to

be followed by ten or hundreds more. i believe that humanitarian assistance is important and also i would argue, mr. president, humanitarian assistance to the k.r.g., the kurdish government, naturally as they leave, one of the places they are likely to go is kurdistan. and nearly 9,000 kurdish refugees have crossed the border into iraq. as we look at humanitarian assistance to deal with the scope of this crisis, i hope we would consider humanitarian support to the k. r.g. i call on congress the bill introduced by blumenthal that would provide visas for kurdish translators and others who have worked

alongside our military. this is something we had a good track record of doing with people who supported our troops in iraq and supported our troops in afghanistan and then are left in harm's way because of that support. those on the kurdish side who have worked together with our troops in northern syria i think should be extended the same special immigrant visa status. the administration should be asked to come to both houses of congress and testify about the plan to prevent a resurgent isis. this is something that americans should be afraid of. maybe the administration has a plan about how they will try to protect against that happening. but whether they have a plan or not, they should come to congress or we should ask them about it. and finally, i want the white house to release the transcript of the call between president trump and president erdogan where this deal was hatched. when i heard the testimony of ambassador jeffrey at the hearing yesterday, testimony that was public, that he wasn't consulted and that the british

and french who recently put troops in weren't consulted, i still have real questions about why this decision was made. and i believe those questions would largely be answered if the transcript of the call between presidents erdogan and trump were delivered, whether in a classified or other context to congress. so i call on the white house to release the transcript. mr. president, i'm going to conclude with this. along with many of our colleagues today, i gather here -- gathered here in the chamber at 10:30 to go over to the memorial service for elijah cummings and it was a powerful one. it was a powerful one. not many members of congress, senate or house, lie in state in the capitol. and it was a moving occasion. i knew elijah cummings pretty well, being kind of a next door neighbor, virginia and maryland. and over the years we did a number of events together. one of the things representative

cummings used to say, one of these voices that sounded like it was coming out of the testament, a fire and brimstone voice was this powerful, powerful statement we're better than this. and he would say that. when he would say it, he would say it about a number of circumstances. he said it probably most recently, most vividly when pictures emerged of children in cages at the border but he would often say it. and he would say it to criticize actions and it would sound like a tough criticism. but as some of the yule gists today -- yule gists or saying today saying that statement about representative cummings -- it suddenly struck me as not a critical statement. it suddenly struck me as an extremely optimistic and positive statement. i hadn't really thought of it that way until i heard it earlier today. why do i say it was optimistic and positive? the statement we're better than this says that whatever the

imperfections of the day were really more defined by our ideals take are imperfections. we're more defined by our values than our vices. sure, when he would use that statement, he would be criticizing an imperfection of the day, a bad decision, a bad policy. but he would be criticizing it by saying we as a country, we as a congress, as a senate, even we as individuals, we are actually better than this. we -- our ideals are better than the way we're acting right now. you know, if you look at reality, you can define it by it's imperfection or you can try to define it by its ideals. i would like to have a judge that looked at me and judged me by my ideals more than my imperfections, even while calling me to live up to my ideals. the fact that an elijah cummings who had suffered throughout his life many kinds of second class treatment and discrimination,

even being routed into special ed classes as a kid because people thought he was slow when he was actually really, really gifted, the fact that he would go through life and still believe so strongly that our country's values and ideals were a more accurate reflection of who we are than our imperfections and vices is something that i found pretty inspirational as i thought about his life. i do believe we're better than this. with respect to this particular -- i think we're better than abandoning battlefield allies. i think we're better than empowering authoritarian dictatorships. i think we're better than suggesting we care more about oil than we care about people. i think we're better than facilitating ethnic cleansing of a proud population, including kids. i think we're better than this.

so in the spirit of representative cummings, i'm going to define us as a nation, us as a senate, us as individuals more by our ideals than by our imperfect actions and then call us to live up to them. and there are concrete steps that we can take, some of which i've outlined that i think will be more in tune with who we are and the ideals we hold. with that, mr. president, i thank you. i yield the floor. and i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. scott: mr. president?

the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. scott: i ask unanimous consent to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. scott: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 197, and s. 2065. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 197, s. 2065, a bill to require the secretary of homeland security to publish an annual report on the use of deepfake technology and for other purposes. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. the senate will proceed. mr. scott: i further ask that the committee-reported substitute amendment be agreed to, the bill as amended be considered, read a third time and pass and the motions to be consider be be considered made and laid on the table with no vein. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. scott: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 198, senate 20 -- 2107.

the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar 198, s. 2107, a bill to increase the number of c cpb agricultural specialists and so forth and for other purposes. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed. mr. scott: i ask unanimous consent the bill be considered read a third time, passed, and that the motion to be considered be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. scott: i ask unanimous consent the judiciary committee be discharged from further consideration of senate resolution 362 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 362 designating the week beginning on october 13, 2019, as national wildlife refuge week. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the committee is discharged and the senate will proceed. mr. scott: i further ask that 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. scott: i ask unanimous consent that the senate now proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following senate resolutions which were submitted earlier today. senate resolution 379, senate resolution 380, senate resolution 381, senate resolution 382, senate resolution 383, senate resolution 384. the presiding officer: is there objection to rowing to the measures en bloc? without objection, the senate will proceed to. mr. scott: i know of no further debate on the resolutions. the presiding officer: further debate? if not, all in favor say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the resolutions are agreed to en bloc. mr. scott: i ask unanimous consent that the preambles be agreed and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, you

will en bloc. -- all employment en bloc -- all en bloc. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. scott: i ask that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 3:00 p.m. monday, october 28. following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed. following leader remarks, the senate resume consideration of h.r. 3055 under the previous order. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. scott: if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until senate stands adjourned until

see me the house will be in order.

and >> it was a sunday morning i believe or saturday. it was empty because they were gone and she was in the industrial part. immediately her intelligence just kind of came right through and we spoke for about an hour, and half an hour or so and she told me her life which was like a cliché of everything wrong that could happen to somebody. eventually i asked her what i ask everybody which is you know how do you want me to describe you? she shot back, i am what i am a

prostitute a mother of six and a child of god. the committee on education and labor will come to order. welcome everyone. i note that a quorum is present to the