hearing is adjourned. [inaudible conversations] >> the house will be in order. >> for 40 years c-span has been providing america unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events from washington d.c. and around the country. so you can make up your own mind. created by cable in 1979, c-span is brought to you by your local cable or satellite provider. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. government. >> the u.s. senate is about to gavel in to resume work on judicial nominations today. confirmation votes are planned on three nominees, u.s. district judge for the eastern district of arkansas, district judge for the middle district of pennsylvania and u.s. appeals court second district which covers connecticut, new york and vermont. now to live coverage.

senate here on c-span2. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the senate will be opened by the senator from oklahoma, mr. inhofe, and he will lead us in prayer. mr. inhofe: let us pray. almighty god, creator of all, as we gather here today, we are grateful for the service members who are deployed in the defense

of our great nation under god. we ask for your comfort of the families who continue the duties at home with the courage to maintain the home front in the absence of their loved ones. protect our service men and women with the shield of your strength as they discharge their sacred mission and keep them safe from all evil and harm. may the power of your love enable them to return home in safety, that with all who love them, they may ever praise you for your loving care. assist with your spirit of counsel and fortitude for the president and other government leaders of these united states. may they always seek the ways of righteousness, justice and mercy. grant that they may be enabled by your powerful protection to lead our country with honesty and integrity. we know all too well our weak and fallible human nature, and we recognize that the work which

lies before us is demanding and complex. yet, o god, i thank you for calling us to this difficult and rewarding work. lead our troops, and all of us, 0 lord, in the way of peace. unite us in the spirit of service. we pray these things in the name of our lord and savior, jesus christ. amen. the president pro tempore: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to our flag. 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.

mr. grassley: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: i'd like to speak in morning businessor one minute. the presiding officer: -- for one minute. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: this year on veterans day i will join all americans in honoring our armed forces. as a nation, we owe those who have served a debt of gratitude for the sacrificings they have made to protect our country, our way of life and the principles of liberty and natural rights. and too often we forget to thank the families who are left behind while they are in service. they deserve our consideration as well. the least we can do in return is

wrork to ensure -- is work to ensure that all veterans have the health care and benefits that they have earned. we owe it to veterans to ensure that they are never forsaken or forgotten. i yield the floor. mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: this week the senate will continue to confirm president trump's well-qualified judicial nominees. this president and senate have confirmed these impressive men and women to lifetime appointments, talented individuals who know that the job of the judge so apply our nation's laws and constitutions as they were actually written and not how they wish they were written. at the close of business today it so happens that one in every four judges on the federal courts of appeals will have been nominated by president trump and

confirmed by us in the senate. there is nothing about this that ought to be viewed as a partisan accomplishment or for only this president or only one side. that's the wrong way to look at it. every american should be proud of this. citizens deserve a judiciary of fair-minded men and women who don't confuse their jobs with the job of a legislator. every member of this body should be proud to confirm federal judges that understand that our job is to make the laws and their job is to apply them fairly. if the concept of faithful judges to fulfill their role strikes anyone as partisan or threat to their political agenda, i would suggest that it is their agenda that needs modifying and not the judicial branch that our founders intended. on another matter, one of the untold stories of the obama administration was the dramatic

geographic inequality that deepened on the democrats' watch. from 2010 to 2016 the nation's largest metro areas captured nearly 75% of the new jobs and 90% of the population growth. big cities did okay, but unfair and regressive policies like the war on coal left many other communities, smaller cities, small towns, and rural areas literally in the dust. homegrown american energy, including coal has supported entire communities in kentucky and throughout the country for generations. even before he took office, president trump de -- president obama declared a war on coal. here's what he said. if somebody wants to build a coal-fired power plant, they can, it's just that it will bankrupt them. that approach didn't just hurt

american businesses, it hurt american workers. in 2009, 23,000 kentuckians made their living mining coal, by 2016 that number dropped to barely 6,500. from 23,000 to 6,500 during the obama years. nearly three-quarters of the state's coal jobs gone in the span of one presidency. since the earliest days of the trudges, we prioritize -- trump administration, we prioritized ending the war on coal and ending the damage. we created tail winds instead of headwinds for america's energy dominance. but eight years of damage is not easy to unwind. many coal communities are still suffering. more mine closures, more bankruptcies, workers' paychecks and retiree benefits thrown into

uncertainty, so our work continues. a few years back i worked to secure permanent health benefits for thousands of retirees around yesterday a bipartisan group here in the senate led by senators capito, manchin and myself took a step toward the emergency of underfunded pensions for thousands of miners and retirees and their families. we introduced new legislation to expand the health care fix to protect the pensions of nearly 92,000 miners into the future. earlier this week i personally raised the subject with president trump. we talked about a solution for these retirees. i hosted kentucky miners here in the capitol to hear their concerns and discuss a path forward. i spent my entire career in the senate fighting for all kentuckians. i worked to protect coal

companies from bad ideas and promote their future. i will work with the trump administration and support our mining families. on another matter, mr. president, earlier this week the securities and exchange commission took a significant step into the 21st century. when public companies put business decisions up for a vote by their shareholders, it stands to reason that asset managers who own shares on behalf of their clients have enormous power to determine the outcome. since these institutional investors lack the bandwidth to study every company in great detail, many rely on outside advisory firms. in principle there is nothing wrong with institutional investors getting advice, but in practice things get pretty interesting. this cottage industry of proxy advisory firms is extremely concentrated in a very few hands. i believe the two largest firms

have something like 97% market share between them and their advice is often taken uncritically. one analysis found that 95% of their voting followed one advisory firm's recommendations. we have a small concentration of voices yielding power over american business. and questions have arisen about whether they are following the best financial interest of the investors many they seem less interested in the pick company and more in advancing an ideological agenda. they are leveraging their influence to force corporations to conform with their own vision of social justice. that's why as the chairman of the s.e.c. explained, he received letters from ordinary

american investors expressing, quote, concern that their financial investments, including their retirement funds were being steered by third parties to promote individual agendas rather than to further their own primary goal of saving for retirement and leaving something behind for their kids and grandkids. now, these proxy advisors are regulated by the s.e.c., and, as it happens, some parts of these rules have not been updated since 1954. so this week the s.e.c. has updated these eisenhower-era guidelines for the 21st century. it will enable more rules and transparency and accountability and ensure that these powerful voices have skin in the game and not searching for a convenient vehicle to advance their interests. i applaud this step forward by

chairman clayton and the s.e.c. now, one final matter, on monday our nation will observe veterans day and some will gather here at our nation's capitol at the monuments that pay tribute to the service and sacrifice of brave service members. many more will mark the day in ceremonies in small towns and cities across our country. and, of course, many americans will have veterans to thank first hand in their own families and neighborhoods. my own father's army service took him to the heart of the battle for europe in 1945. his company sustained heavy losses. when he returned home, he traded his uniform for a briefcase and went back to work in our community. perhaps the only thing more remarkable than the heroic service that generation offered at home and overseas is the fact that they came home and kept

right on serving in new ways as fathers and mothers, as skilled workers, entrepreneurs or educators and in every case as a custodian in a unique part of our nation's collective memory. it is a cliche, but it is a cliche for a good reason. the land of the free because of the brave. the senate will not be in session on monday as we honor veterans day, but i hope that each of our members will be remembering and giving thanks for all veterans and for those brave men and women serving today. their efforts are the reason why this chamber exists, why it still stands and why american self-government and american freedom endure. 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 executive session to resume consideration of the following nomination, which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination,

judiciary, lee philip rudofsky of arkansas to be united states district judge for the eastern district of arkansas. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the democratic leader. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: now, mr. president, senate democrats had hoped to work with our republican colleagues this year on a fully bipartisan process. it got off to a great start when the four congressional leaders reached a budget deal over the summer, but it quickly went awry. senate republicans departed from the bipartisan process by unilaterally proposing their own allocations to the various agencies. this was not part of the agreement. this was not in the spirit or concept of the agreement. it was always when we agreed that we would work out the 302-b allocations.

but instead, the republicans went ahead unilaterally, and they proposed moving $12 billion, $12 billion from critical health programs and military families to pay for the president's border wall. and that was way out of bounds. the republican leader has accused democrats, myself included, of breaking our budget deal by not going along with these very partisan bills. he knows, every member of this chamber, democrat and republican, knows well the democrats are not going to support a unilateral move by the republicans to take $12 billion away from military families, away from education, opioids, n.i.h., and put it into the president's vanity partisan wall. and so until republicans get serious about negotiating a bipartisan way forward, the partisan appropriations bills are all we have, and they cannot move forward.

now, in the last few days, after conversations that i had with speaker -- with leader mcconnell, speaker pelosi, leader mccarthy, we're seeing some positive signs that we can get the process back on track. this month, democrats and republicans worked through a package of bipartisan appropriation bills on the floor with few issues, and now as we speak, both parties, both sides, democrat, republican, house and senate appropriators have started talking again about restarting the good-faith negotiations on the remaining bills. we hope this moves forward in a bipartisan way. each side has to agree, and i would repeat my view. if trump stays out of it, we will come to an agreement. if president trump messes in, if the republican leader feels so in obeisance to donald trump, who doesn't have any concept of how to get things done around here, then we won't get it done,

and we may have a second trump shutdown with the leader going along, which will not succeed. which will not succeed in getting them what they want. so i hope with a little effort and compromise, we in congress can find a way forward on appropriations by working together. on the whistle-blower. yesterday, the house intelligence committee announced the schedule for its first week of public hearings in the house impeachment inquiry, including testimony from the current and former top u.s. diplomats in ukraine. these public hearings are a reminder that the whistle-blower's account has already been corroborated many times over by officials with firsthand knowledge of the situation, and yet there remains a searing focus by the president and one member of this chamber on the whistle-blower. even though his or her account has been verified by other sources, the white house and most particularly the junior senator from kentucky seem

committed to discrediting the whistle-blower, disclosing the whistle-blower's identity, and turning the right-wing media machine on this person, and they can be vicious. the junior senator from kentucky went so far as to block a simple resolution from my friend, the senator from hawaii, mazie hirono, that would have reconfirmed the senate support for the whistle-blower protection laws, laws that have been on the books for a very long time. the whole concept started with the continental congress even before the constitution. we're going down a dangerous road when members of this body are refusing to stand up for our nation's laws, particularly those laws that enforce rule of law and make sure our government is doing what the people want. these attempts to expose the whistle-blower are unfortunately not the only example of how a few of my colleagues are taking the defense of this president too far. it seems that with each coming

week, sometimes each coming day, the president's allies in congress come up with a new tortured defense of his actions. house republicans have gone from attacking the process because it was closed to attacking it because it was open. they have insisted -- they have gone from insisting on no quid pro quo to saying maybe quid pro quo, but who cares? here in the senate we heard a new one yesterday from the chairman of the judiciary committee who said the trump policy toward ukraine was so incoherent, his words, that the administration was incapable of forming a quid pro quo. that's a good one. seriously, he said that. they're reaching. they're reaching as far as they can because they know the facts, at least as we've heard from the house. we'll wait until they come over here, if they do. but the facts are so damning about what the president did. there was even a member of this

chamber who went so far as to insult the speaker's intelligence at a political rally. a childish and nasty smear far out of bounds. nobody is happy about the fact that the house is examining the potential impeachment of a president. it has always been a sad and somber process, but there is no excuse for jumping to conclusions, advocating for law breaking resulting to nasty insults. this is a time when we must check partisanship at the door, examine the facts, study the case, and make our own independent judgments. that is our duty. i'd remind all of our colleagues that history will one day judge if we have lived up to it or not. now, on isis. next week president trump will welcome turkish president erdogan to the white house. frankly, it's confounding that president trump is rolling out the welcome mat to an autocrat whose recent actions have threatened our allies, our

partners. for over five years american and coalition troops, including our syrian-kurdish partners worked shoulder to shoulder in northern syria to bring isis to the brink of defeat. but after the president's calamitous decision to green light erdogan's iltaker operation and precipitously withdraw american troops, turkish forces and their proxies have advanced far into northern syria and committed atrocities without accountable. -- accountability. it's -- this shameful betrayal of our kurdish partners, it's thrown our efforts to defeat isis into chaos. detainees have reportedly broken out of prison and disappeared and could be very dangerous to us in our homeland. while we're glad that terrorists like al-baghdadi have been taken off the field, the fundamental question remains. what ised administration's plan to secure the enduring defeat of isis? it is unacceptable that over a month into this crisis, the

president has chosen to welcome erdogan to american soil before explaining to congress his plan to defeat isis. so ahead of erdogan's arrival next week, i and several of my democratic colleagues are sending a letter to president trump demanding that he submit to congress a comprehensive plan to secure the enduring defeat of isis. there are questions that we need to be -- that need to be answered immediately. how many isis members have been accounted for in the wake of our withdrawal? how are we going to stabilize the former isis territory? what training will we give to the forces on the ground to continue fighting isis? these questions need to be answered at once. they are far more urgent than welcoming an autocrat who just bullied the president into giving him everything that this autocrat wanted. finally, on mr. menashi. in a few minutes, maybe as of

now, in a few minutes the judiciary will be holding a vote on a nominee who is dangerously unfit to serve on the second circuit court of appeals. mr. steven menashi of new york. his nomination should not be allowed to continue. mr. menashi has a very troubling record on race, women's equality, lgbtq rights and the rights of immigrants. his conduct before the judiciary committee was insulting. his contempt for the senate reprehensible. his refusal to be forthcoming about his record is outright disqualifying. but if members of the committee needed any more evidence to vote against menashi's nominees, she -- nomination, they should read this morning's "new york times." here's the headline, appeals court nominee shaped devos' illegal loan forgiveness effort. the times reports that during

mr. menashi's tenure working with secretary devos at the department of education, he played a leading role in designing an illegal,en illegal effort to deny debt relief to thousands of students swindled by for-profit colleges. let me repeat. mr. menashi concocted a plan to illegally use the private social security data of defrauded student borrowers to deny them debt forgiveness after they were preyed upon by for-profit schools. a federal judge ruled that these efforts violated privacy laws and this is someone the president wants us to make an appellate court judge? a judge is supposed to uphold the law, interpret the law, have a reference for the law -- reverence for the law, not someone who schemes to break the law as mr. menashi did. his nomination is an embarrassment to this country.

it's an insult to millions of hardworking young americans saldzed by student -- saddled by student debt, an insult to women, lgbtq community, and everybody who believes in the rule of law. if anyone has not earned a privilege to a lifetime appointment to the bench, it's mr. menashi. i urge every member of the judiciary committee to vote against his nomination and i yield the floor.

mr. thune: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority whip. mr. thune: mr. president, on tuesday morning, i visited with secretary of defense mark esper. we talked about the military's needs and national security priorities, and we talked about the fact that more than a month into the new fiscal year, congress still hasn't funtsed -- funded the military for fiscal 2020. we shouldn't have needed to talk about that, mr. president. we should have passed the defense appropriations bill for 2020 weeks ago. but democrats won't let us. last week democrats blocked consideration of the 2020 defense appropriations bill for the second time. apparently, they have every intention of continuing to block military funding. mr. president, this is politics at its worst. make no mistake, this is politics. a couple of months ago democrats and republicans got together and agreed on defense and nondefense funding levels for 2020 and 2021. the idea was to pave the way for

passage of appropriation bills in a timely fashion. it seemed for a moment that despite democrats' fixation on partisan politics and impeachment, we could actually go about the business of funding the government and the military in a somewhat bipartisan fashion. but apparently that was too much to ask of the senate democrats. senate democrats are currently running from the agreement, attempting to derail the defense funding bill with poison pills that would prevent the bill from ever being enacted into law. mr. president, funding our military should be the first priority of every member of congress. the safety of our country depends on the strength of our military. if dwoants get national security -- if we don't get national security right, the rest is conversation. and getting national security right means making sure our military is adequately funding, making sure we're funding the current needs of the military and preparing for future priorities. it should go without saying that an essential part of this responsibility is getting that funding passed in a timely fashion. right now since we haven't passed the 2020 funding bill,

the military is operating under a continuing resolution that maintains funding levels from last year. there are multiple problems with that, mr. president. the first place, of course the military is operating without all the funding that it needs. for example, the pentagon can't fully support the pay increase military members should be getting. but in addition, a continuing resolution prevents the military from starting key projects that will help ensure our men and women in uniform are prepared to meet the threats of the future. the pentagon can't start new procurement projects. new research and development initiatives that keep us a step ahead of our adversaries are put on hold. all told under a continuing resolution, the military's purchasing power is reduced by roughly $5 billion each quarter. $5 billion each quarter, mr. president, that we continue to operate a continuing resolution is the amount of purchasing power that's lost to our military to meet their critical priorities. but to put that in perspective,

that's equivalent of losing out on about 56f-35 joint strike fighter planes depending on the variant every three months. or nearly two complete virginia class attack submarines like the recently commissioned u.s.s. south dakota or about 5,000 joint air-to-surface standoff missiles like those used to clean up the site of the baghdadi raid or strike weapons facilities in 2018. that's $5 billion, mr. president, that isn't spare change. it's funding for critical military priorities. mr. president, in november of 2018 the bipartisan national defense strategy commission released a report warning that our readiness had eroded to the point where we might struggle to win a war defense a major power like -- against a major power like russia or china. that's a dangerous situation for our country to be in.

and we need to keep working to rebuild our military. and that starts with making sure that our military is fully funded in a timely fashion. mr. president, on the floor last week i noted that democrats would like us to believe that they're serious about legislating. and that their years long obsession with impeaching the president isn't distracting them from doing their job. after democrats' defense filibuster last week, it's becoming abundantly clear that democrats are incapable of putting anything ahead of partisan politics, including the safety of our country and the well-being of our military. it's particularly ironic that democrats are blocking this defense funding bill which would provide $250 million in assistance to ukraine. at the same time, at the same time, mr. president, that they're trying to impeach the president for allegedly delaying ukraine funding. think about that. mr. president, it's hard to know

what to say to my democrat colleagues. it should not be this hard to convince them that funding our military is more important than scoring points against the president. i hope the leader will continue to bring up the defense funding bill and that enough of my democrat colleagues will decide to join us in getting this funding to our military. it's the very least that we can do for the men and women who spend every day working to keep us safe. mr. president, veterans day is coming up on monday. and our nation will pause to remember all those who have served in our military. and i'll be calling my dad who will be 100 in december, a world war ii vet who flew helcats in the pacific and thank him against for his service. mr. president, as united states senator, i've had the privilege of meeting many veterans, men and women who decided that they were willing to lay down their lives if necessary to ensure that their families, their communities, their fellow countrymen could enjoy the blessings of freedom. members of the military give up

a lot for us. they forego physical comforts and embrace sacrifice. they accept long deployments. days of duty that start before dawn are stretched long into the night. they accept the fact that they will thanking -- thanksgivings and christmases, date nights, little league games and family reunions. they shoulder the burden of facing evil head on so the rest of us never have to, and many of them bear the scars. mr. president, we enjoy tremendous blessings, and we're used to .they we're used to waking up in safety. we're used to going about our days in safety. we're used to voting in safety, attending church in safety, expressing political opinions in

safety. and it can be too easy to forget that we enjoy these tremendous blessings because men and women have been willing to go out and put their lives on the line for them. veterans day is a chance to remind ourselves, to remember that we live in peace and freedom every day because men and women were willing to answer the call to serve our country. we owe our veterans a debt we can never repay, but, mr. president, we can make sure that we never forget what they've done for us, and we can resolve to lead the kind of lives that will make us worthy of their sacrifice. mr. president, i yield the floor. mrs. murray: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i'm here to once again shine a spotlight on senate republicans' unwavering support for president trump's efforts to remake the federal

judiciary and to make clear how this is going to hurt families, women, and communities in washington state and across our nation. now i'vedom here before to -- i've come here before to call out republicans for rubber-stamp ping this president's judicial nominees, many of whom have no business sitting on the federal bench and for gutting precedents and norms to allow this president to jam pack the courts with hard-right picks from neil gorsuch to brett kavanaugh, down the line. the majority leader has told us how the republicans cleared the way to take up more trump judges by generally turning the senate into a legislative graveyard. led by the majority leader, senate republicans have ignored the standards swee have held for -- we have held for decades when considering judicial nominees and opened the door to

people who lack even the most basic qualifications to sit on the federal bench. for starters, today the senate is slated to take up the nomination of lee rue rudofsky r the arkansas eastern district. now, mr. rudofsky had a history in arkansas of working to deny women access to reproductive health care. he had a law to ban abortion at 12 weeks as an ideal vehicle for the supreme court to reevaluate and overturn roe v. wade. on top of that he has previously argued in favor of efforts to cut off medicaid funding to planned parenthood. he defended a state law that could have resulted in the closure of every reproductive health care clinic that provides abortions in the state, and he has worked against hard-fought progress for equality for lgbtq

people. does that sound like a judge that will protect the rights of women and others and who will put aside his own partisan notions to ensure equal protection under our laws for everyone? it does not. or take sarah pitler who president trump nominated to a district court in missouri. missouri is reeling from this administration's repeated attacks on women's health care and reproductive health where there is currently only one clinic in the entire state that can perform abortionings. she has worked throughout her career to limit access to a wide array of reproductive health care service, not just abortions. she expressed opposition to suckercy and -- surg acy and the u.s. of contraception.

she called birth control an even and a moral wrong. it is the 21st century and no matter what they believe in the white house, birth control is health care, full stop. we cannot have judges on the bench who are so ideologically driven that women are morally wrong for using. even beyond her rigid ideologiy, she is unfit to become a judge. the bar association determined that she is not qualified. writing that ms. pitlyk has never tried a case as a lead or cocounsel and has never examined a witness. does that sound like someone who will uphold the rule of law justly and apply the rules of the -- the rules of the land

correctly? she has demonstrated no commitment to protect individual's fundamental rights. mr. president, again, the answer is no. and then there is steven menashi who president trump nominated to the second circuit court of appeals. she know he has a history of disparaging comments against women, against communities of color, against immigrants, and the lgbti community, and as if his extreme views aren't bad enough, we know that in his role in the office of general counsel at the department of education, mr. menashi also worked on secretary devos' cruel rollback of title 9 protections for survivors of sexual assault and for protections of students regardless of sex. under his tenure, secretary devos has moved us to

unaccountability and secrecy where lgbti students could be subject to cruel discrimination at school. additionally, i am incredibly concerned about mr. menashi's confirmed role in being one of the architects of secretary devos' efforts to violate the law by undermining protections for student borrowers who were cheated by predatory for-profit colleges, students whose rights are at this moment being undercut by people in our federal government like mr. menashi who should be doing just the opposite. people deserve to trust that the women and men who serve as our federal judges will ensure equal protection for all and apply the law fairly and without bias. so i ask again considering mr. ma n.r.a.y's troubling record of undermining critical rights and questions surrounding his involvement in secretary devos' shameful efforts to

ignore the law, does he sound like someone who deserves a lifetime appointment to our federal bench? someone who will uphold our rule of law? confirming judges to our federal courts is one of our most important duties as senators. it's one i take very seriously. i am deeply disturbed by the harm these individuals, if confirmed, may inflict upon women, on families, and some of our most vulnerable members of our communities. so let me be clear about these nominations. nothing less is at stake than the integrity of our judicial system and the future of our democracy. we have to maintain tain the high -- maintain the high bar we set for the federal judges and these judges are just three examples of how far rehave fallen. it is not too late. i know my -- republican colleagues know how supremely unqualified they are and i know

they are aware of the irreparable harm they will have on the credibility of our judicial system. that's why we have to stop the parade of unqualified rigid nominees to our federal judiciary. when it comes to our courts, nothing is more important than ensuring that we are sustaining a system that people can trust, one that upholds our laws, one that seeks justice without bias or favor or agenda. so i urge my colleagues to join me in rejecting mr. rudofsky's nomination as well as the nominations of ms. pitlyk and mr. menashi or any nominee by president trump that does not meet our high standards and returning to a thoughtful, rigorous bipartisan process of selecting only the most qualified judges to a lifetime appointment in our federal courts. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from virginia. mr. kaine: mr. president, i rise today to say just a word about veterans day, but then to talk about our nation's historically black colleges and universities and other minority-serving institutions. we will celebrate veterans day as a nation on monday and so this will be an opportunity just to stand as a member of the armed services committee, as a senator from a very militarily connected state to just echo the words of senator thune from a few minutes ago that we owe a huge debt to our veterans. it's also on the -- on november 10, the anniversary of the marine corps and as a father of a marine, it is my honor to wish them happy anniversary. representing the state of virginia is the ability to meet

leaders those serving our country. i do want to just point out that we are having a debate on the floor over the defense appropriations, the senator from south dakota spoke a little bit about that. and i just want to lay out from the democratic perspective what is at stake. it's not support of the military is at stake. because as an armed services committee member, i am devoted to make are sure we get at the right appropriations level for the department of defense. what is holding this up is not one party or the other not supporting the military. what is holding had this up is that democrats do not approve of the practice that has been engagedded in by president obama -- engaged in by president trump of rummaging through the department of defense fund to build a border wall which our military says is a nonmilitary issue. we do not believe once congress

appropriates money for the defense budget that the president should be able to use the funds to cannibalize the funds for the border wall. to the extent that there is a dispute, that is what the dispute is about. it is not support for the defense department or not, it's whether we should allow a rummage sale in the pentagon budget to fund a border wall. if you want to fund the border wall, let's do it separately but let's not cannibalize the department of defense's budget to do it. i wanted to talk about the historically black colleges and universities and other minority serving institutions. many of my colleagues have been talking about a bill called the futures act. which is bipartisan. it fosters undergraduates talents by unlocking resources for education, it has bipartisan support in the senate. i am hoping that because it has

bipartisan support, we might be able to move forward with it promptly. congress put in place a mandatory funding stream in title 3 of the higher education act to invest in these institutions. historically black colleges and universities, commonly called hbcu, tribal colleges and universities, hispanic-serving institutions. these institutions help boost educational opportunities for all students but especially for students of color. these schools serve a disproportionate number of students from low-income families. 75% of the students at hbcus and 90% of the students at tribal colleges and universities receive pell grants, combined with minority institutions serve nearly six million students which is about a quarter of all undergraduate students in the

country. the $255 million in annual mandatory funding of these institutions accounts for nearly half of all federal funding for these institutions. unfortunately, the mandatory funding expired, now more than a month ago on september 30, because of inaction by the senate -- inaction by the senate. the house has acted, and that jeopardizes the future of these colleges, but particularly the students they serve. the future act, which i cosponsored with senator doug jones and senator tim scott, extends this mandatory funding for all minority-serving institutions for two years. the bill is bipartisan. the bill has the support of the white house. it's fully paid for, and it's budget neutral. there are no budget gimmicks involved yet we are not able to take the bill up for a reason that i don't understand. let me talk about hbcus in virginia because we have five. virginia union university, which is in my neighborhood where i

live in richmond, virginia state university, and hampton university, norfolk state in norfolk and virginia university of lynchburg. these five institutions received almost $50 million in this annual mandated funding over the last ten years. norfolk state university's president, dr. adams gaston, she said that if the future act is not passed, quote, norfolk state's educational programs in both teacher preparation and stem fields will be put at risk at a time when we're working to increase diversity in our classrooms and grow the pipeline of diverse stem graduates to fill the jobs of the new economy, close quote. virginia state university uses their funding to keep student faculty ratios low, to provide distance education programs, to support curricular updates, faculty training, and technology enhancement, especially for social work, computer science,

nursing, and education degree programs. they also use the funds to prepare and support students to attend graduate or professional schools and to award scholarships to deserving students. virginia union in my neighborhood. yesterday, jalen hodges who is a junior biology major at union, was in the senate. she spoke about the impact of title 3 funds and that impact on her own education. jalen wants to pursue a career in medicine. fortunately, virginia union uses the funds on neuroscience and chemistry laboratories where jalen has been able to develop her technical and analytical skills. virginia union university also uses funding for technology resources, work force development programs and stem, and future careers, academic support services, such as academic counseling, updates to historic buildings, and hiring faculty. without passing the future act,

all of these programs are in serious jeopardy. the hbcu serve as a strong economic driver and generates significant economic returns year after year in virginia communities. i have also had the good fortune, mr. president, to be on hbcu campuses in florida, and i know they have the same impact in their communities and with students and in the entire state as those in virginia. uncf, united negro college fund, found that in virginia alone, the direct economic impact of our five hbcu's is more than $91 million. and it's not just the impact on the commonwealth that matters but the impact that these institutions have on individual students. one more quote. current student body president at norfolk state university, lenae woodson, expressed, quote, norfolk state university's supportive and culturally aware learning environment helped me to grow as a leader and put me on a path to success. i would likely not have had these opportunities at other schools. all students, regardless of

their socioeconomic background, deserve access to equality, higher education, and the opportunity to realize their full potential. in closing, the thurgood marshall college fund named after the titanic leader, civil rights leader and supreme court justice -- on a personal note, i was proud to have thurgood marshall's son, john marshall, serve as my secretary of public safety when i was governor. thurgood marshall college fund wrote a letter to senate leadership that even in the week since this program has expired at the end of september, campuses have already notified employees that their positions and programs might be terminated as of september 30, 2020, if not sooner. in the letter, they note these are real jobs held by people who interact with students every day and programs that play a critical role in graduating and retaining students in stem fields, among other disciplines. as a former governor,

mr. president, you and i share that experience. i know that the budget-creating process begins well in advance of the budget becoming effective, and for these minority-serving institutions, most of whom do not have significant endowments, they face unique fiscal challenges, and they count on this mandatory funding, any uncertainty in the funding creates a significant planning challenge for them and runs the risk of creating a financial nightmare for the students. today marks 51 days since the house passed the future act unanimously, unanimously. it's hard to act unanimously on things these days in congress. this bill passed the house unanimously. and 38 days since funding has lapsed for the schools in my state and minority serving institutions across the country. it's time for the senate to pass the bipartisan future act and pass it now. i urge my colleagues to join me in that endeavor. with that, mr. 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:

quorum call:

mr. cornyn: mr. president, i'd ask consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: mr. president, the senator from connecticut, senator blumenthal, and i have come to the floor to offer a unanimous consent on a bill called the affordable prescriptions for patients act. we're in consultation with our colleagues on the other side who have another bill that they'd also like to ask a unanimous consent for. we're going to continue the conversation during these two upcoming votes to see if we can work out holds on their bill, and we certainly consider to do

that. but we do expect -- senator blumenthal and i do expect acto offer a unanimous consent on our bill which would lower out-of-pocket costs for prescription drugs. which is something i thought we were all for. but working in good faith with our colleagues to try to work through these two issues, we're going to give it a little bit of time, as long as we can get that done before we leave today. i would just say thatness no agreement to pair these. if they could pass sequentially, i have no objection to that. but just to say that it would be nice at a time when we are so polarized here and put the dis back in dysfunction here in washington, d.c., to show that we can work together and pass a bill that passed unanimously in the judiciary committee and of which my friend from illinois is a cosponsor.

i understand they want to use this opportunity to get their bill passed and again i have no objection to that and don't intend to object. but there are others who apparently have some concerns that they -- we need to check w -- with. mr. president, before i yield the floor, i'd -- i have six requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have been approved by both the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. the assistant democratic leader. mr. durbin: i would say that my colleague and friend from texas has accurately stated the situation. but let me add a few sentences about the bill we are trying to couple with his effort. i totally support what he and senator blumenthal are trying to do. the end goal we all have in mind is to try to bring under role, or at least restrain the increase in prescription drug prices. they have their approach. what senator grassley, republican of iowa, and i have suggested with this approach is

direct-to-consumer advertising. the pharmaceutical industry spends about $6 billion a year on ads on television. if you haven't seen a drug ad on television, you clearly don't own a tv. we want to make sure each one of those ads contains, amid all the other information they give you, one critical piece of information -- the cost of the drug. we think that that will be at least an indication to the pharmaceutical industry, and we're watching how much they're charging. i think some people will be shocked when they see the actual cost of humira and some other drugs. but that's it, a c complementary approach. i hope we can do both. i think the american people want to see prescription drugs become more affordable. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the nomination. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll.

vote: