hear from kurt voelker, special envoy to ukraine in timothy morrison initial socratic counsel director for russia. you can watch live coverage of the impeachment inquiry hearings on c-span3 and online@c-span .org, also listen with the free c-span radio app. the senate about to reconvene here and we will have live coverage. now live to the senate. vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: any senators in the chamber wishing to change their vote or wishing to vote? hearing none the ayes are 64, the nays are 31. the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table, and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's actions. the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of barbara lagoa of florida to be united states circuit judge for the 11th

circuit, signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the manned manned -- mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is is it the sense of the senate that debate of the nomination of barbara lagoa of the united states circuit judge for the 11th circuit shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? seeing none, the yeas are 80, th are 15. the motion is ad to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, barbara lagoa, of

florida, to be circuit judge for the eleventh circuit. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from louisiana. mr. kennedy: madam president, i have five requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. kennedy: thank you, madam president. madam president, i want to spend a very few minutes today to say thanks. i want to thank chairman ajit pai and his colleagues at the federal communications commission. the chairman announced yesterday that he was going to put 5g

technology and the american taxpayer first by holing a public auction -- by holding a public auction as opposed to a private auction of what we call the c-band. it was a courageous decision that he made against a lot of pressure. and allow me, madam president, for just a few minutes to explain why that's important. we've all heard about 5g. 5g, which stands for fifth generation, is a brand-new wireless technology. it means incredibly fast internet and cellphone calls. it means the ability to deliver

as much as 100 times more data through wireless technology than we can do today. we'll notice it in our ipads, we'll notice it in our computers, but we'll notice it also in our cellphones. and, as you know madam president, a krl phone is really -- a cellphone is really a sophisticated walkie-talkie. a cellphone is just a very sophisticated, much more complicated walkie-talke. how does it work? radio waves. the scientific term is electromagnetic radiation. really a radio wave is just a --

a -- what it says, a wave that goes from my krl phone, -- cellphone, say, to the president's cellphone through an antenna and a transmitter and a receiver. a radio wave and the air through which it travels and the right to send a radio wave is a sovereign asset. it belongs to the american people. the american people own that radio wave and the right to send it. and our f.c.c. gets to decide who gets to use those radio waves and who has the right to send those radio waves. there's a particular type of radio wave that is absolutely perfect for 5g.

it's about 180 megahertz and 300 megahertz. why are these radio waves so perfect for 5g? well, because they strike a balance. first, these radio waves in that spectrum as it's called can go a fairly long distance and they can carry huge amounts of data. that's negotiation to make -- that's going to make possible driverless cars. we've heard about those. the internet of things. that's going to make possible remote surgery where a doctor in one place physically through the internet using a robot can perform surgery on someone a thousand miles away.

5g going through this -- these special radio waves is going to make all that possible. it's going to change our lives. those radio waves, i'll call them the c band spectrum. right now, as i said, they're owned by the american people. they're being used by three satellite companies. two from luxembourg and one from canada and some other companies. they're satellite companies. they don't own those radio waves. they don't even have a license to use those radio waves. they didn't pay anything to get to use those radio waves. the f.c.c. said they could use them. it's sort of like a month-to-month lease or rental agreement where you don't have to pay any rent. some time ago those three companies came to the f.c.c. and

said even though we don't own these radio waves you are allowing us to use and even though the american people own these radio waves, which are per effect for 5g, -- which are perfect for 5g, we're willing to give them up to use for 5g, but here's what we want you to do. the three foreign companies said we want you to give us those radio waves and then we will auction them off to the telecommunication companies who want to use the radio waves for 5g. and -- this was the kicker -- the three foreign corporations said we want to get to keep the money. and investment bankers estimate that through that auction being conducted by those three foreign corporations, as much as $60

billion would have been generated. that's how much telecommunication companies would pay to get the license to use these radio waves. and some people encouraged the f.c.c. to do that. they said well, the reason we without to do it is because these three foreign companies, they can do an auction faster than the f.c.c. can. even though the three foreign companies had never done an auction of spectrum and even though the f.c.c. has done over a hundred auctions, a hundred public auctions and other radio waves that the f.c.c. has auctioned off, and by doing that the fine men and women at the f.c.c. who are in charge of these auctions, they've been

doing them for 25 years, they brought in $123 billion for the american people. that will build a lot of interstate. it will educate a lot of kids. it will pay a lot of soldiers. but our three friends, these foreign satellite companies, still said even though we have no experience, we can do it faster. if we let the f.c.c. do it, it will take them seven years. well, that just wasn't accurate. i've spoken to the people in charge of doing auctions at the f.c.c., and in fact they're going to appear before a subcommittee that i chair on thursday and we're going to talk about it some more. i don't know where this figure of seven years came from but it's just not accurate. nonetheless, the f.c.c. came --

there are swamp creatures in the government. we know that. and there are some of these swamp creatures in and out of government put an awful lot of pressure on the f.c.c. these swamp creatures are trying to help some of their friends in the telecommunications business. one of the foreign corporations spent about half a million dollars lobbying. i'm not saying there's anything wrong with that. we all have the right to petition our government. but that's just a fact. i don't need a -- sense. so the f.c.c. was under a lot of pressure. but yesterday the chairman of the f.c.c. ajit pai looked at all this. he resisted the pressure and he announced that we're going to have a public auction. we're going to let every telecommunications company in america that wants to bid on these valuable airwaves come

forward and bid. we're going to do an auction within a year and probably less, not seven years. and the money that's going to be generated is going to go to the owner of that radio wave, those radio waves. not the foreign companies that through our benevolence are using those radio waves now, but the money is going to go to the american people. i know what you're thinking. you're thinking, gosh, how was this ever even an issue. this should have been a no-brainer. well, it wasn't. that's part of what's wrong with washington, d.c. in my judgment. sometimes -- not always but sometimes the american people aren't put first. but yesterday ajit pai, our chairman at the f.c.c. put them first. and i just wanted to stand up today and tell him a genuine and heartfelt thank you.

i yield the floor, madam chair. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: mr. lankford: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. lankford: i ask unanimous consent to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. lankford: the last 40 years, we've had 21 government

shutdowns, 21. 21 times congress and the president have not been able to agree or the senate and the house have not been able to agree and so as a result of that, federal workers around the country face the consequences of members of congress not finding agreement. so help me understand this. 21 times in 40 years federal workers that get up every single day and serve the american people and serve their neighbors have faced the consequences of furloughs because members of congress could not come to a resolution. now, it's not that it's gone unnoticed. for a decade or more, there have been solutions that have been proposed. ten years ago i had a proposal on the house -- actually bob portman had a great proposal in the senate at that same time to deal with government shutdowns.

to say if we get to the end of the fiscal year, we'll just have a continuing resolution but then we'll cut spending every few months to be able to press congress to get their work. the problem is hardly anyone on the other side from my party agreed with that. we couldn't get any bipartisan support for it. so my colleagues on the other side of the aisle proposed that if you get to the end of the fiscal year, you would have a continuing resolution and every couple of months the spending would go up and it would just continue to go up and up and up until it's resolved. well, they didn't have anyone on my side of the aisle saying we're not going to put in a mechanism that just increases spending over and over and over again without congressional involvement. so they got no bipartisan support. there was an idea that was floated to say just cut the members of congress' pay but really it wasn't cutting their pay. it was taking their pay and putting it in an escrow account and just kind of holding it for them so that when everything was

resolved, they would get all that money back. it really wasn't a reduction in pay. it was a shell game to be able to push those dollars to another side and get it all back later just to make it look like you got a cut in pay. but that hasn't had wide support either. in fact, a lot of people have real concerns about that because quite frankly, some members of congress are very wealthy. some members are not. some members don't notice their congressional pay. some do. it's kind of a disproportionate piece of leverage to be able to resolve this. but what's interesting is, in all of those proposals it acknowledges one simple thing. this is a problem. it needs to be resolved. federal workers are facing the consequences. members of congress are not. so about five months ago maggie hassan and i, as this chamber knows well, the senator from new hampshire, she and i started working together to say what is a nonpartisan, not just bipartisan, what is a nonpartisan way to be able to

solve government shutdowns. and we had two very simple proposals. there's two problems here. we need to solve federal workers getting hurt when there's a shutdown, to make sure those families are not hurt. the second thing is we want to actually get to appropriations, not continuing resolutions. because when you do a continuing resolution for any length of time like what we're in right now, we're in our eighth week of a continuing resolution right now, when you do one that long, it hurts temporary workers that are federal workers, they're laid off in the process. other folks are not. but many of these agencies need those temporary workers and those temporary workers are counting on that salary. it hurts contracting, that everything can't start in a continuing resolution. you have to wait until there's real appropriations. so no new programs can start. you can't stop old programs. you can't do purchasing. so it creates this tremendous inefficiency in government. so our simple idea was this.

let's find a way to be able to protect federal workers and get to appropriations. the solution we came up with is pretty straightforward. it is when we get to the end of the fiscal year, which right now is the first of oaf owe the 1s of october. if appropriations r not done, there's a continuing resolution that kicks into effect to protect federal workers, but members of congress and our staff and the white house office of management and budget, none of us can travel. and members of congress, we're in continuous session seven days a week until we get appropriations done. and one more thing. we can't move to other issues other than appropriations. we're locked into that box. so basically if your work is not done, we all have to stay until the work is done. now, i had folks say that's not really a big consequence. a lot of folks do that all over

the country all the time. at the end of their work day, if their work is not done, they have to stay to get it done. small business owners know that full well. it's not like you can punch a clock. if the work is not done in a small business, you stay until it actually gets done. here's the thing. go back to last december. when the shutdown started last december and we got to an impasse here between the house, the senate, and the white house, members of congress and our staff all left and went home. federal workers across the country all took a big, deep breath as they walked into the holidays because they were on furlough. but members of this body walked out. that should never happen. never. so senator hassan and i are proposing something very simple. the pressure shouldn't be on federal workers. they can't vote to solve this. the pressure should be on us. and for everyone in this body that says i don't like that kind of artificial pressure, well, why don't you feel what it's like to be a federal worker for

a while. and those federal employees. they don't like that pressure on them. so let's flip it. let's put the pressure on us where it should be and get it off the folks where it should not be and let's stay until we get our work done. this side overly simplistic, but interesting is for the first time in a did there is an -- in a decade, there is an idea that has support. there are members of this body that are looking at it, contemplating it and then nodding their head, saying i would rather the pressure be on us than on federal worker families. let's solve this. we shouldn't have government shutdowns. we should have arguments over debt and deficit. we should have arguments over the budget. that's why people sent us here, to be able to solve how their money is going to be spent most efficiently and to be ail to argue out -- to be able to argue

out about issues of debt and deficit. but in the meantime why would we want to hurt the very people that are serving their neighbors that are federal employees around the country? let's keep them out of it. let's keep them still serving their neighbors and let's keep the fight right here where it immediates to be. let us argue this out until we get it resolved. let's not quit until we resolve it. it's a simple idea. senator hassan and i actually believe it will work. in the decades to come, people will look back at the time when we used to have government shutdowns and will shake their head and say, i can't believe that there was a period of time in the federal government when they used to just shut down when they argue. now we stay until we get the issue settled. pretty straightforward idea. i would hope that more of my colleagues would join us in this absolute commitment to solve this for the future generations. with that, i'd yield the floor.

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

mr. bennet: madam chair? the presiding officer: the senator from colorado. mr. bennet: thank you, i'd ask the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. bennet: i want to spend a few days today to recognize our late colleague and friend, senator kay hagan. kay and i both came to the senate? 2009. i had the privilege of working g with her on two committees, health and banking. as a former vice president of the north carolina national bank, she had a lot more to offer to that committee than i did. and i tried to learn from her whenever i could. kay and i both came to the senate in the middle of the worst recession since the great depression. we were losing 700,000 jobs a month. millions were losing their homes. it was an incredibly difficult moment for the country, but it brought out all of kay's best qualities. everyone knew that kay faced some of the toughest politics of

any member of our caucus, but in those early days, i saw her take vote after vote on some of the hardest issues. she never wavered. she voted for the recovery act to save the economy when we were in freefall. she voted for dodd-frank to restore accountability to the financial sector, something she knew quite a lot about. she spoke out about amendment one in north carolina and for marriage equality, and she cast the decisive vote for the affordable care act. none of those issues were easy to take, as a democratic senator from north carolina and as a freshman senator. but she knew they were the right places to be for her state and for the country. since kay did what she did, millions of americans except jobs they would have lost, millions of americans gained quality, affordable health insurance for the first time in

their lives, and in her own state the lgbtq community had a senator in washington who for the first time in history was willing to fight for their full and equal rights. one of our colleagues, the senior senator from tennessee, likes to say, if you've come to washington just to hear yourself talk, just stay home and get a job on the radio. it's not worth the trouble of your coming all the way here. kay didn't come to washington to talk. she came to work and to lead. and over her term kay was a fierce and principled advocate for north carolina. as member of the arm services committee, she help prevent cuts to tuition for programs for veterans. she sponsored the lilly ledbetter act to help change the gender pay gap across the country. she worked across the aisle to promote conservation and door recreation, something we appreciate in my home state of colorado. she was a lot less interested in

empty politics of this town and a lot more interested in making progress for the people of north carolina and for our country. she was a voice of reason, of pragmatism, and humility in this body. which sorely lacks all three. in other words, kay took her job seriously but never herself. she never failed to put the people of north carolina ahead of the politics of the moment, no matter how difficult they might be. and it's why she earned deep respect to both sides of the aisle, not only for her work ethic, her kindness and warmth and grace. there was not a room in this complex, including the one i'm standing in right now, that wasn't brightened the moment that kay hagan walked in there. to her husband chip, their kids jeanette, tilden and carey, i hope you know how proud we aller

of kay. she represented the both qualities of north carolina. that's why her colleagues adored her, that's why her staff loved heard and revered her. that's why all of us who had the privilege of working with her in this body will miss her terribly. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. and i'd note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. wicker: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from mississippi. mr. wicker: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. wicker: madam president, i rise this afternoon because there is a legislative deadline in front of this body that we

dare not miss. even as i speak, our colleagues in the house energy and commerce committee are considering the satellite television extension and localism act reauthorization, or stellar. for 30 years, stelar and previous versions of the law have allowed people who live beyond the reach of a broadcast signal to receive broadcast programming nonetheless. some senators believe that in 2019stelar has outlived its usefulness and want it to expire. but other senators want to extend some of these provisions, at least in the short term, to prevent consumers from losing these broadcast signals. still others want to use the sul stelar reauthorization legislation as a vehicle to implement other reforms.

i have introduced new legislation -- the satellite television access reauthorization, or star -- to move this program forward. the existing stelar statute expires december 31. so absent congressional action before the end of the year, the provisions included in stelar that enable nearly 870,000 americans to access broadcast tv signals will no longer be the law of the land. these americans, who depend on stelar are mostly in rural parts of this country, like my home state of mississippi. they include truckers, tailgaters, and r.v. drivers, and they include americans living in very remote areas. i say to my colleagues, now is the time for senators to make their positions clear. over the course of this year, i have been polling members to

ascertain what this body wants. as chairman of the senate commerce committee, i will act according to the majority wishes, but time is running short. many people point to the fact that the media landscape is changing. there are more options for video content than ever before. new programming is coming out every day that is being streamed through new services. those are all great things. as i said at a june commerce committee hearing, we are living in the golden age of television. the commerce committee has been working to close pentagon digital divide -- to close the digital divide between rural and urban america to make sure all families can access those choices. h-and all families can be part of the golden age. but there are still americans without internet access and without broadcast signals. they deserve the ability to view basic television services, just

like everyone else. without the reauthorization of stelar, many americans will not be able to watch broadcast news or enjoy access to programmings that is available to the rest of the country. they will be on the wrong side of the digital divide, and there will be a widening cultural divide as they would be cut off from the flow of programs and information. if members of this body are of a mind to move forward with some extension of this statute, we will work with our colleagues in the house. that may include improvements and enhancements to stelar that address food-faith requirements -- good-faith requirements, remote access to programming and ensure robust competition. but we don't have much time u after this week, senators will go home for thanksgiving. many of those across the country who benefit from stelar in our

states will watch football games and the macy's thanksgiving day parade thanks to the stelar law. they'll enjoy time with their families, and i look forward to doing the same. but when congress returns, there will be just two weeks, ten legislative days, to finalize any legislation and send it to the president for his signature. madam president, in this body, taking no action is easy. it comes naturally. but in this case, no action equals the repeal of the stelar law in its entirety, and members should know that. we have ten days to ensure 870,000 americans will be able to watch the same programs next year that they are seeing this year. or we can let stelar expire and take the risk of letting the

chips fall where they may. to repeat, my colleagues should be advised. they need to make their voices heard on whether the stelar legislation needs to be extended or expire. thank you, madam president. and i yield the floor. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. casey: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania. mr. casey: i ask consent that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i rise today to urge immediate passage of the bipartisan future act, which is h.r. 2486, to restore critical funding for historically black colleges and universities known by the acronym here in washington as hbcu's as well as minority serving institutions, so-called msni's. the $250 million in funding that hbcu's and m.s.i.'s rely on lapsed on september 30 of this year. both the historically black colleges and universities and

the minority serving institutions are under resourced and don't have the flexibility to operate in the red in the hopes of potential reimbursement later on. campuses are already feeling this impact. just two weeks after this program expired, some campuses notified employees that his positions and programs may be terminate. and we're talking about real people losing their jobs and programs being cut that play a critical role in graduating and retaining students in the stem field, science, technology, engineering, and math fields. all of this is impacting students across the country. presidents of some of these institutions have told us that planning has, quote, all but stopped, unquote. this funding lapse is urgent and it must be addressed now. from the perspective of my home state of pennsylvania, we have

two of the oldest historically black colleges and universities -- two of the oldest in the whole country. cheney university as well as lincoln university and in addition to that, a growing hispanic-serving institution, in this case the redding area community college. we know that the investment made by the future act will support college colleagues and academic opportunity at these and all historically black colleges and universities and minority-serving institutions across the country. the future act is fully paid for. it would not add to the deficit, has strong bipartisan support in both chambers. my colleagues in the majority are holding this funding hostage in an effort to pass what i would argue is a partisan bill, and that's not just my argument or my opinion. some of my republican colleagues

have said this is the reason they are holding up this critical legislation. instead of passing a bipartisan comprehensive reauthorization of our future higher education law which my colleague, senator murray, is pushing for, some republicans want to force democrats to support a partisan bill. instead of working in a bipartisan fashion to fix our current system so that it works better for students, families, and teachers, they want to support -- they want us to support a so-called micropackage, unquote, the student aid improvement act. this is act, in my judgment and the judgment of others, fails to address a number of critical areas, including improved campus safety, also access to higher education, affordability, and

accountability. and because of that, maintains the status quo. make no mistake, the student aid improvement act is a partisan bill. the bill fails to address the challenges students are facing in obtaining a college degree, including child care, housing, food, and mental health, among others, nor does it address the needs of first-generation students, students of color or students with disabilities. but let's debate these issues. let's come to the table to negotiate on a bipartisan overhaul but not -- let's not hold up historically black colleges and universities and minority-serving institutions, hold them hostage in the meantime. we can get something done in the short run that will be beneficial to these institutions. we need to ensure that colleges and universities have the resources to provide support to all students they serve, including students with disabilities. a couple of examples of some of my bills, the higher education

mental act which is supported by over 250 colleges and university presidents, including 15 in the historically black colleges and universities would help incidenting using toes of higher education identify the resources and services needed to support their students with mental health needs. the second bill of mine, the rise act would make it easier for colleges to provide support for students with disabilities by assessing students from high school and smoothing the transition to higher education and the third bill would increase the funding for trio programs that serve first-generation students with disabilities and make higher education more accessible. these bills would provide the resources needed for students to be successful as they pursue higher education but without a comprehensive bill, the needs of these students will continue to go unmet. rather than blocking vital resources from flowing to our

nation's historically black colleges and universities, we should immediately pass the future act. this would restore funding while providing us time to work on a comprehensive reauthorization that addresses the needs of all students. therefore, mr. president, i would ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 212, h.r. h.r. 2486 -- i'm sorry. let me restate that and start over. i ask unanimous consent that, as if in legislative business, the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 212, h.r. 2486. i ask unanimous consent that the murray amendment at the desk be agreed to, that the bill, as amended, be considered and 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? mr. alexander: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: reserving the right to object. i have a better idea, which i'm going to offer to the senate once again which is permanent funding for historically black colleges at the level of $255 million a year. the distinguished senator from pennsylvania has said he doesn't want a piecemeal bill. he wants a more comprehensive bill. i offered such a bill, introduced it in the senate. i'll describe it in a few moments when i ask unanimous consent to pass it and it will include not a two-year short-term fix based upon a budget gimmick, which will have difficulty passing the senate,

but permanently funding of historically black colleges and minority institutions. it will include simplification of fasa, the form that eight million minority students fill out every year, which in our state is the biggest obstacle to minority students having an opportunity for higher education and a variety of other bipartisan proposals. i'm ready to pass a comprehensive bill. i offered one before. it was blocked by my democratic friends. i'm going to offer it in a minute. we'll see if they will agree to it. i don't think we should pass a piecemeal bill. i agree with the senator from pennsylvania. i think we should be more comprehensive. and not only that, we should do permanently funding of historically black colleges. and the last point i'll make before i object. the u.s. department of education has written all of the presidents of the historically black and minority serving institutions and said there is sufficient funding in the

federal government for the rest of the year, fiscal year until october 12 of -- october 1 of next year. while we need to finish our work, there's no crisis at the moment. so let's do the job right, and i will offer in just a moment the way to do that, which is permanent funding of historically black colleges and minority institutions. i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. alexander: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: mr. president, for the convenience of the senator from pennsylvania, i'm going to offer my unanimous consent agreement at the beginning of my remarks and then if i wishes to stay, he can, but if he has another place to go in his schedule, he may do that. let me just say that -- that the provision i'm going to -- let me

preface it in this way. i know very well the value of historically black colleges. one of my favorite stories is the story that the late author alex haley, the author of roots and the autobiography of malcolm x, i suppose the two best-selling books ever on the history of the african american used to tell about his father, simon p. haley, who wasted away as a youth. he was allowed to go to college, and he went to at&t, he was ready to drop out and got a summer job on a pullman train to chicago and a man talked to him at night asking him for a glass of warm milk. he got the glass of warm milk. thought nothing about it, went back to north carolina, at&t, an historically black college.

the principal called him in. the president of the college called him in. simon p. haley thought he was in real trouble. the president of the college said the man on the train had sent enough money for simon p. haley to pay his tuition to graduate from college. so alex haley wrote for the reader's digest the man who helped his father. he went to cornell and became the first black graduate of cornell and went back to lain college, one of the six historically black colleges in tennessee where he taught and raised a son who is a lawyer, later ambassador to guabia, two daughters, he raised a son, an architect, and raised a son who he thought would not amount to anything and ended up writing

roots and malt com x. i know of la moin owing and america's baptist college, and i want to help them. and the request that i'm going to make is that the senate pass a small package of bills that are sponsored by democrats and republicans, 29 senators, 17 democrats, 12 republicans, and the first provision would be permanent funding -- that's $255 million every year permanently -- for historically black colleges and minority institutions, a second provision, and i ask consent to use this document on the senate floor. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. alexander: this is the fasa. this is the document that 20 million americans fill out every year. we know how to reduce it. it's the biggest impediment to

minority students going to college today. we're ready to pass it. eight million minority students filled this out -- fill this out. the president of southwest community college in memphis tells me he loses 1,500 students a semester because of the complexity of that. there are other provisions in this package that includes the portman-kaine legislation, the provision for pa roll -- pell grants for prisoners who are eligible for parole. an increase in the number of pell grants, an increase in the amount of pell grants, all of that is in this package that i've offered but it starts with permanent funding for historically black colleges and since there is time until october 1 of next year, the department of education said there is plenty of federal funding for all those institutions. there's no reason why we can't

agree to my package today, send it over to the house of representatives, send it to the president and let all these institutions know they don't have to worry about funding permanently instead of for two years. so i ask unanimous consent that the committee on health, education, labor, and pensions be discharged from further consideration of s. 2557 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. i ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion 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 pennsylvania. mr. casey: reserving the right to reject. i just want to make a couple of comments about i way of response. i really want to go back to what we said earlier. there's no reason why we can't at least get this piece of legislation done. i'll say it again. these institutions are underresourced. they don't have the flexibility to operate in the red in the

hopes of potential reimbursement later on. we're also told that these -- by the institutions themselves, that planning is all but stopped. i put that in quotation marks, all but stopped, unquote. campuses are feeling this impact already. just two weeks after this program expired, some campuses notified employees that their positions and programs may be terminated. so i would argue that the present circumstance is not acceptable. i realize that the chairman wants to proceed to other issues, and i respect that but when you consider what he's proposing, there are some changes that should be pointed out. first of all, when you consider the proposal he has in compare whag it would do, for example -- comparing what it would do, for example, on the second chance

pell proposal, that only limits limited repeal the band rather than full repeal the band. making short-term programs eligible for pell grants, the bipartisan bill introduced excludes for-profit colleges. this micropackage that the chairman is preeping, -- is proposing, the for-profit colleges are added back in. number three, just by way of some examples here, the grassley-smith bill on financial aid award letters, changes were made to that on financial aid award letters that weren't contemplated by the bill's original authors. our bill, our legislation is fully paid for. it reinvests up to $55 million in the pell grant program. so for several reasons by way of contrast but also by way of what's happening right now to -- with regard to these institutions, for those and

other reasons i would object. the presiding officer: the objection is heard. mr. alexander: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: mr. president, i know that the senate is a deliberative body but we've been working on higher education for five years in our committee. and suddenly out of the blue comes a bill from the house that said we have an emergency in the -- in one provision of the higher education act. don't take it through committee. that's the way we usually do things. the gshedz senator from -- distinguished senator from louisiana is a member of this committee. the senator from pennsylvania is a valued member of the committee. we have a pretty good reputation for working together despite our differences in taking -- fixing no child left behind, 21st century cure, opioid legislation. we came out with -- health care is a contentious issue but we brought out a bill to lower health care costs. -- to lower health care costs. yet the suggestion is we take

this bill to the senate floor without any consideration by the committee. that's not the way we usually do things. let me reemphasize. the u.s. department of education has told every one of the historically black colleges of minority serving institutions that there's sufficient federal funding between now and october 1 of next year. there's no reason to cut anybody's pay, no reason to stop planning. that's -- that's what the federal government has told those institutions. that is plenty of time for us to take a provision such as the one i have proposed or such as the one that the distinguished senator from pennsylvania has proposed through our committee and recommend to the full senate what we ought to do. and let's not minimize what else there is to to do. we -- there is to do. we literally have been working for five years on simplifying this fafsa, another eight million minority students who fill it out every year.

i think we should be concerned about the 300,000 students who attend historically black colleges and universities. many of them fill this out. i'm told by the former governor of tennessee this -- filling out this complicated form is the single biggest impediment to low-income students having an opportunity to go to college because their families think it's too complicated. well, we know what for do about this. senator bennet, democrat of colorado and i began work on this five years ago. senator murray, democrat from washington and i recommended to the senate that it pass legislation getting rid of 22 questions that were double reporting. you have to tell the i.r.s. some facts and you have to tell the department of education the same facts. and then they come in the middle of a semester and try to catch you having one answer here and another answer there and so 70% of the student body has their --

has their pell grant verified and some of them lose their federal funding while they check to see if the information you had to give to two federal agencies is different. we've passed the senate with that. senator murray and i did that last year. so why should we wait on this? i don't think we should wait on permanent funding for historically black colleges, but why hold this hostage to that? so i'm ready to move ahead on permanent funding for historically black colleges. i'm ready to move ahead on simplifying the fafsa for eight million minority students who fill this out every year. i'm ready to move ahead on short-term pell grants. i've been working with the senator from washington on this and with other members of the senate. i think we're moving on a consensus. we have time to do this right. let's take it through committee. let's send it back to the house of representatives a permanent

solution. i think it's very important that we make it clear to all the presidents and all the students and historically black colleges and minority serving institutions, number one you've got a year of funding ahead of you. number two, you have a proposal here by the chairman of the education committee that will permanently fund what you're doing. number three, our democratic friends are asking that the senate pass a short-term funding that will create another funding cliff within a matter of months and that is funded by a budget gimmick that will never pass muster in the senate. that's not going to happen. so we need to work together as we normally do and come to a conclusion on the higher education act, including permanent funding of historically black colleges and minority institutions. i'm ready to keep doing that. but i'm also ready to keep urging the passage of not only

the provisions that i've introduced and that i asked for permission to pass today and which the senator objected to, other provisions that might be included. but i think five years is long enough to work on the higher education act. i'm ready to come to a conclusion. we have time to do it. and i look forward to being able to say to our six historically black colleges in tennessee the result of our hard work and our debate and discussion has been permanent funding so you don't have to worry about federal funding at your institution after this. a senator: mr. chairman, would you yield? i thank the chairman for yielding. mr. burr: i'm here as living proof that he's not the lone ranger on this, that the commitee has diligently -- we may not be as passionate but the committee has worked diligently to try and get higher education done. it's a farce to come in here and think we're going to pass a

two-year house bill to fund historically black colleges. nobody has more historically black colleges in their state than i do. what they want, they want predictability, permanent funding. the chairman is willing to do that. but part of the condition to do that is sit down and now quit talking, pass higher education. reduce the application to one page. let these students go out and their parents and be able to fill this out and not miss an education because they can't go through the laborious process. what the chairman has laid on the table is reasonable. the committee has talked about it for years. now it's time to act. it's not time to act on one little piece of it for a temporary funding. it's time to provide permanent funding for that and to do the rest of higher education. as proud as i him being the home of the majority of historically black colleges and universities, i also have about 70 other colleges and universities in

north carolina. and they're the beneficiary of everything else that's in this education bill. compromise is not about take what i've got and not give anything else. we've been trying to work through the chairman and the ranking members working together to find compromise for five years. many times the chairman has come to me and said i think we can do it this year. well, we've got to have willing partners on the other side of the aisle. and today is a live example of where it's either their way or no way. now, i hope we can get back before we leave this year. we can get this package passed. it's real simple. just commit to do what we've all sat down and talked about for five years. if there are minor changes that need to be made, then let's make them in the next day or to. but to say we're going to wait until next year and be here a year from now when the time frame has run out, let me assure

you if the chairman is not here to object to this request, i'll be here to reject to this request. the time -- object to this request. the time is to act now. i thank the chairman for yielding. mr. casey: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania. mr. casey: just a couple of points on where we are. there's no question that in my judgment that if you have more time to consider these issues for a full reauthorization, we could address some of the shortcomings of what's been proposed already. i mentioned earlier issues that are not addressed like child care, housing, food and mental health, the needs of first generation students, the needs of students of color, students with disabilities, we could do that if we can get through this short-term period. we're only asking for help for a very limited time frame so that we can work through these other issues. and the second point i'd make is that -- i can't stand in the

shoes of the leaders of these institutions, but when they tell us that they're in a difficult circumstance in the short run, i'll take their word for it. the word of the department of education in my -- just from my point of view doesn't compare to what these institutions are telling us. so i think we should rely upon the representations by the leaders of institutions and act in a short-term fashion all the while committing ourselves to do -- have a longer process to fully explore and try to reach consensus on a range of issues that come under the broad per view -- purview of a reauthorization. mr. alexander: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: i want to thank the senator from pennsylvania for coming to the floor on this issue. i know he cares about it. i thank the senator from north carolina. we're accustomed to working together.

we're accustomed to getting results. and i want us to get a result on this. so i agree with the sentiment of both senators in this sense. i think it's time to send a signal to the historically black colleges and minority-serving institutions that they don't have to worry about funding for the future. they don't. for the next year, the u.s. department of education has told me you've got the money for the next year. and it shouldn't take us a year to finish our work. so i look forward to sitting down with the senator from north carolina, the senator from pennsylvania, working out the differences on the provisions that we've gotten. we've got the basis for a very good higher education bill. the permanent funding for historically black colleges, the simplification of the fafsa which affects 20 million families every year. we have broad bipartisan consensus on simplifying how you pay back student loans. there are nine different ways now.

we could reduce that to two. that affects 43 million families. the short-term pell grants make a big difference. so we have a number of provisions and i'm working well as i always do with the senator from washington, senator murray. i'd like toe bring this to a conclusion as rapidly as we can. i think this debate has been useful in doing that. i thank the president and i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. whitehouse: thank you, mr. president. for this 259th climate speech,

i'm going to return to the theme of corruption. before diving into the how, let's start with the why because the scale and the remorselessness of the scheme of corruption the fossil fuel industry has run is hard to comprehend without understanding why. so here's the why. the fossil fuel industry reaps the biggest subsidy in the history of the planet. i'll say that again. the fossil fuel industry reaps the biggest subsidy in the history of the planet. the i.m.f., the international monetary fund, estimates the global subsidy for fossil fuel in the trillions of dollars every year.

that's globally. in the united states alone, the fossil fuel industry got a 650 billion -- that's with a b -- $650 billion subsidy in 2015, that's from the i.m.f. that's $2,000 out of the pocket of every man, woman, and child in the united states. here's that i.m.f. report. look it up. read it and weep. stop for a minute and understand this subsidy. some of it is favorable tax deals and other direct subsidies that pour public taxpayer money into the pockets of this polluting industry. in recent years that's been estimated at around $20 billion

annually. so the vast bulk of this $650 billion is something else. it's people getting hurt. it's the cost of people suffering economic harms. it's the cost of your home burned in a wildfire or swept away in a storm by rising seas. it's the cost of farms withered with unprecedented droughts or crops drowned in unprecedented flooding. it's the cost of fisheries that are lost or moved away as oceans warm and acidify. it's the lost day of work with your kid in the emergency room waiting out a climate-related asthma attack on the e.r.'s nebulizer. it's the cost of tick-borne an

mosquito-borne illnesses that didn't used to be where you live. it's the cost of a dive tour of tourists seeing dead white coral reefs instead of vibrant underwater gardens or the cost of moose tours going through mud instead of moose and when you see moose, seeing emaciated moose with thousands of ticks killing them. it's the cost of military resources to conflicts of climate migration and the cost of rebuilding a naval station in nor falk folk, it's the cost of trout streams with no trout, it's the cost of millions of acres of healthy forests killed off by pine beetles, it's the

cost of phoenix of staffing up emergency services because it's not safe to work outside because it's too hot or lost flights out of the airport when the tarmac melted. it's the myriad costs of basic operating systems of the natural world gone haywire because of climate change. all of this pain, all this loss, all this suffering has a bloodless economic name, ex internalties, the social costs imposed on others by the use of a product. pollution, of course, is the obvious example. in economic theory those social costs should be baked into the price of a product. that's why courts and companies

and countries around the world apply a social cost of carbon calculation. but destroying the basic operating systems of the planet, that's a high price ex intern -- ex personality. by the i.m.f. report $216 billion in 2016 just in the u.s. because so much of this harm is hard to calculate a price for, that's a low-ball estimate. for instance, we could estimate the loss to the dive shop of the coral reef off the coast dying, but is that really the cost of the dead reef? there's a lot more. so the externality is well over

$650 billion. let's, for comparison look at the five major oil companies earnings. the five major oil companies earn somewhere more than $80 billion in profits last year all around the world. all right. global profits, $80 billion. versus $650 billion in destruction and harm they caused just in the united states. so make those oil companies follow the rules of market economies, make them put the cost of the harm of their product into the price of their product. $80 billion versus $650 billion. guess what. their business is in a

$750 billion-plus hole. that's why the fossil fuel industry is so corrupt. it knows it needs to break the laws of market economics in order to survive. and it knows it needs political help to do that. fortunately for the fossil fuel industry up against that $ 650 billion subsidy, politicians come cheap. they could put $650 million into politics every single year and it would earn them a thousand to one return on that expenditure. if it protected the $650 billion subsidy. so that's the why of fossil fuel corruption. it pays. it pays hugely.

simple as that. they are corrupt because it pays. so now let's look at the how. by the way, they have some expertise in this area. these companies operate in the crookedest countries in the world so they know how to work crooked deals in politics, but how about here in the united states? what happened here? well, i saw it happen. the big change came when five republican supreme court justices gave this industry, and other mega industries, big new political artillery. it came in the disgraceful citizens united decision that let unlimited special interest money into our elections. and i'll tell you, there's no special interest more unlimited than fossil fuel.

fossil fuel front groups were all over that supreme court case, by the way, signaling to the five republicans on the court what they wanted them to do, and sure enough they did it. of course it does take some fun out of spending unlimited money in politics if people can tell who you are. now, in theory we were supposed to know to get to the outcome the fossil fuel industry wanted, the five republican justices had to pretend as a legal matter that all this political spending, all this unlimited political spending they were authorizing was going to be transparent, that we'd know who was behind it. well, that transparency was not going to work very well for exxon or koch industries or

marathon petroleum, so they cooked up all sorts of schemes to hide behind, tax deductible 501-c-4's appeared that can hide their donors, trade groups like the chamber of commerce got taken over and co-opt ded -- co-opted. an enterprise call donors trust was established whose sole purpose is to launder the identity of big donors. by the way, back to citizens united, those five republican justices would have to be idiots not to see this apparatus of phony front groups out there mocking their assurances of transparency, assurances are at the heart of the citizens united decision. but those justices have

studiously ignored this playing rantly obvious flaw and -- flagrantly obvious flaw and made zero effort to clean up their dark money mess. i was told as a kid you are supposed to clean up the messes you made, that's not a message that got through to the roberts five. we've addressed this flawtilla of front groups on the floor before. we call it the web of denial. academics who study these groups have documented well over 100 of them in the last decade. that sounds like a lot, 100 front groups. but, remember, there's $650 billion a year riding on this. and it's a really big help if you can pretend your, say, americans for peace and puppies

and prosperity instead of exxonmobil or the kochs or marathon petroleum. people tend to get the joke when the ad says brought to you by exxonmobil. so you have the motive and the means to spend millions of political dollars and to do so from hiding. how much do they spend? well, that's hard to tell because the whole purpose is to hide. responsible watchdogs won't even venture a guess as to how much dark money is sloshing through the political system. but total dark money spending on federal elections is at least $ 700 million since the citizens united decision. that's according to the center

for responsive politics. the lion's share of that dark money is probably from fossil fuels because first nobody else has the same corrupt motive on the scale of fossil fuel plus when you look at the spending it's usually groups that can be connected to fossil fuel, and for most the activity is climate denial and obstruction, so it's fossil fuel work being done. so it's pretty easy to conclude who's likely behind all of this. for colleagues who weren't here before 2010, let me tell you, things were different then. in 2007, in situate, in -- 2008, in 2009, those were my first three years here, there were lots of bipartisan climate bills kicking around the senate, real ones, ones that would have

headed off the crises we are rocketing in right now. heck, in 2008, the republican nominee for president ran on a strong climate platform. after the citizens united decision in 2010, all of that was snuffed out. an oily curtain of denial fell around the republican party as the fossil fuel industry brought its new political weapons to bear. the before and after comparison is as plain as day. and it has cost us a decade of inaction when time was of the essence. it has been a high cost. except, of course, for the fossil fuel industry whose lying and denying, whose front groups and dark money, whose political obstruction and threats still remain fully dedicated to

protecting that $650 billion subsidy. do the math just for a second. at $650 billion a year, from january 2010 until now, citizens united let the fossil fuel industry protect nearly $6 trillion in subsidy. $6 trillion in losses to our constituents, $6 trillion that this industry dodged the laws of market economics to foist on everyone else. and you wonder why they work so hard to take over the courts. the fossil fuel's denial operation and obstruction operation is likely the biggest and most corrupt scheme in human

history. i can't think of one that's worse. and it is still operating today right now as i stand here and speak. its oily tides pollute our public debate with deliberate falsehoods and nonsense, grease our press to steer away from this subject, slosh slime i -- slimily through this very building and grip the supreme court in a web of oily dark money influence. and here we've become like people who have lived in the shadows so long, we've forgotten what sunlight, what free debate, what laws based on facts can look like. the fossil fuel industry has polluted our american democracy

on as massive a scale as it has polluted our atmosphere and oceans. for those in our history who gave up their lives, who died in the service of our democracy looking down on us now, that pollution of the democracy they died defending must be a bitter spectacle. as a boy there was an ominous hymn that we often sang in chapel about how once to every man and nation comes a moment to decide. in the strife of truth with falsehood for the good or evil side. truth, the hymn went on, is forever on the scaffold, wrong forever on the throne.

but though the cause of evil prosper, yet tis truth alone is strong. so now is our moment to decide. do we finally bring down fossil fuels, false babylon of corruption or in the strife of truth with falsehood do we keep protecting the evil side. i yield the floor. mrs. blackburn: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mrs. blackburn: thank you, mr. president. it really has been quite a year here in washington for drawing out policy battles. it's november. we're still fighting over defense spending trade, the results of the election that long ago was decided in 2016. but a quick flip through this morning's world news sections

served as my daily reminder that americans really do have so incredibly much for which to be thankful. you might even feel inclined to say that we are really lucky to live here in the united states. but i will tell you luck really doesn't have a lot to do with it. our freedom was bought with the blood of thousands, thousands who instigated a revolution in spite of being outspent, outmanned, out gunned by the global -- outgunned by the global superpower of their time. thank goodness they had that fighting spirit, the same absolute belief in the right to self-determination went on to fuel the abolitionists, the women suffragists, the civil rights warriors, and today their fearlessness inspires freedom movements that we are seeing all across the globe. just a few months ago heads

turned toward china as thousands of hong kong people poured into the streets and said no to beijing's stranglehold. but just saying no wasn't enough. now their neighborhoods and universities have morphed into war zones and chinese authorities have long since justified shoot be live rams of ammunition into the crowds. imagine the intensity of that fear that it takes to push a government to fire ole their own people when the entire world is watching. beijing is worried but beijing will also not hesitate to use any force it deems necessary to tighten their grip on hong kong. now here in the senate we're working on a few pieces of legislation to let the chinese

and the hong kong government know that the united states is watching. we've included a bill that will prevent u.s. companies from exporting crowd control supplies to the hong kong police force. but it's important for everyone to understand that the motivating factors behind political oppression have nothing to do with tear gas or with stun guns. that's only so much that legislation can do. governments in iraq, vietnam, algeria, lebanon are also hard at work doing whatever they can to prevent their citizens from stepping out of line because they know what will happen if their citizens are free to criticize the state and they are

terrified at losing power. this month the entire world looked towards central europe to commemorate the fall of the berlin wall. when east berliners first stepped into the western half of that city, they revealed to the rest of the world the horrors of living under a political regime that sustains itself by consuming the autonomy of their subjects. history serves as an enduring warning against the dangers of the all powerful state. but as we watched mass protests play out half a world away, many americans still see social chaos not as a stop of a disease but as a spontaneous expression of some nebulous desire to be free. they don't stop to recall what sparked the first feelings of unease long before the molotov

cocktails starting flying through the air. this is why here in the u.s. my colleagues in the majority have forced many conversations on the perils of degrading the foundations of our republic. we have debated ad nauseam the constitution's place in civil and legal discourse asking does it provide a workable standard or is it just an outdated piece of paper now rendered illegitimate by the male whiteness of its drafters. mr. president, i think you know my response. we defend the constitution and the system of government it created because we know from studying history and from observing current events that freedom does not suddenly

expire. freedom begins to witter the -- wither the moment those in power convince themselves that a reprieve from uncomfortable policy debates over speech, self-defense, or the size of government will be worth the risk of shelving the standards that protect individual liberty. the current blase tolerance and in some cases incomprehensible enthusiasm for socialism and other authoritarian philosophies is sending a strong message to the rest of the world that the standard for global freedom is up for debate. if we acquiesce to the argument that america's founding principles have passed their expiration date, we will have failed as a people and as a world leader. that failure will change the course of our history and will be used as a weapon to quash

dissent elsewhere in the world. i yield the floor.

a senator: mr. president? mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. rubio: is the senate in a quorum call? the presiding officer: it is not. mr. rubio: mr. president, in a moment here, my -- as my colleagues gather, we hope to be able to pass the hong kong human rights and democracy act. i want to first acknowledge all the people who worked so hard on it, our staffs obviously and in addition, senators cardin, risch, menendez and over 50 cosponsors who will join us this evening. i also want to thank leader mcconnell and senator schumer for helping us get here and thank chairman crapo who has helped us make some important changes at the end that will make the sanctions easier to implement. a lot of people have been watching on the news the protests that are going on in hong kong and wondering perhaps the depend lts of would it's -- depths of what it's all about. when the united kingdom handed

hong kong to, they signed an agreement known as the joint declaration and guaranteed a high degree of autonomy and freedom to the people of hong kong. as a result of that agreement, the united states has treated commerce and trade with hong kong differently than it has commercial and trade activity with the mainland of china. but what's happened over the last few years is the steady effort on the part of chinese authorities to erode that autonomy and those freedoms. the most recent protests really began with a proposal to pass an extradition law that would allow the chinese government to basically arrest and ebbs extra diet -- have arrested and extradite someone in hong kong over to the mainland. and there was a huge push back against that. and those protests emerged as a result of it. even after the hong kong government pulled out from pursuing that agreement or pursuing that law, the protests have continued because the

people of hong kong see what's coming. they see the steady effort to erode the all ton my -- autonomy and their freedoms. and the response by the hong kong authorities under tremendous pressure from beijing is violence and oppression. so far over 5,000 people have been arrested in hong kong. the youngest was 12 years of age. the oldest 82. hundreds more have been injured by both violence committed by police authorities but also by street gangs, criminals, thugs empowered and encouraged by chinese authorities. and this effort by china to exert control and remove autonomy continues unabated. just some examples, there was a law that was passed that banned wearing masks and a hong kong court ruled that that ban was unconstitutional. well today the so-called national peoples congress in beijing ruled that hong kong courts have no authority, no power toreview hong kong

legislation. under pressure from beijing, hong kong's government threatened to can -- cancel november 24 elections, elections that china has been interfering in. they pushed the ban critics like joshua wong, seven candidates who are running have been attacked by street gangs during the campaign. two candidates have been arrested while campaigning. now in the latest move, china is pushing the hong kong government to pass what they call a new national security law, a law that would allow them to arrest political critics and opponents, and this -- if this passes, if that happens, that's the very definition of control and de facto proves all loss of autonomy. by the way, china is also pushing for something called patriotic education. what china is really pushing for in hong kong is moving from one country two systems to one country, one system -- the chinese system. and so the bill that we'll bring up here in a moment with tremendous bipartisan support

requires five quick things that i'll touch on. first, it's most important element is that it requires the secretary of state to annually certify whether hong kong warrants being treated differently than china. it says that students in hong kong shouldn't be barred from entering the united states and get a visa to study here becaus they've -- it says for the next seven years the secretary of commerce is going to report on whether export controls and sanction laws are being enforced by the government of hong kong or whether china is using hong kong to evade as a backdoor to evade export controls and sanctions f says that if hong kong ultimately returns and passes that extradition bill that china wants, the president has to present a plan to protect americans from this law. and last but not leakers it asks -- it requests that the president -- it mandates that the president identify and

sanction foreigners, the president determines based on credible information foreigners who are responsible for arbitrary detention, for torture, forced confessions inside of hong kong or any other human rights violations in hong kong. and by the way, would also allow blocking the assets of these persons if those assets are located in the united states. and so in a moment here as we continue to gather -- we're awaiting the arrival of companion legislation -- i would yield the floor because i know we have a lot of important sponsors that are here that want to speak on this subject. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from idaho. mr. risch: this is an important step we're taking here. this is a matter that we've been discussing for a long time. there's been a lot of action on this. i want to thank senator rubio and senator cardin, who are the lead sponsors of this bill and who have on behalf of the committee done yeoman's work

getting it together and getting the bipartisan compromise to get the language here. also on virtually all members of the committee have had fingerprints on this bill, and so in that regard, i think it's going to pass quite handily. i want to thank the banking staff, particularly my colleague from idaho, senator crapo, who of course has the expertise in the banking committee and has the expertise on these kinds of things, on sanctions. they were very helpful in hammering out the language that we needed for the sanction. i want to thank the banking committee staff that was helpful. i want to thank the staff of the foreign relations committee who worked for us, both the minority staff, senator menendez's staff, and mesa, the majority staff, for doing this. and all of the people who worked on this. so thank you to all of you. look, since june millions of people in hong kong have taken to the streets protesting the erosion of their rights and freedoms. hong kong was supposed to maintain a high degree of

autonomy after china regained sovereignty over the territory in 1997. this wasn't just a verbal understanding. this is -- was in the treaty that china signed with great britain. however, since that time, china has gradually chipped away at hong kong's autonomy and this is now becoming a real problem. china refers to its treaty with great britain as, quote, an historic document and says it is no longer bound by its terms. this is just one of many examples to show that the chinese government has no respect for the rule of law. after two being dids of broken commitments, it is past time that we hold the chinese communist party accountable. what it is doing in hong kong is just wrong. that is why i'm proud to join senator rubio and senator cardin and all the others who have had hands on this bill in bringing the hong kong human rights and democracy act to the senate floor. this bill is the result of a strong, strong, bipartisan

consensus that we must act and support -- in support of the hong kong people. thank you all for helping. we'll get to the unanimous consent in a little bit. i would like to yield to senator cardin. mr. cardin: madam president? er if officer senator cardin. mr. cardin: let me first thank senator rubio for his leadership this issue and senator menendez and senator risch for their lure in our committee and so many others who have been involved because tonight we have a chance to reaffirm our commitment for human rights and democracy. that's exactly what our legislation does. it recognizes the fact that for 24 consecutive weeks the people of hong kong have been asking for their basic democracy and freedom. it's been reported yesterday that police fired 1,40's 58 rounds franchise tear gas, 4491 rubber bullets, 325 rounds, 265

grenades. that's just yesterday. on peaceful protesters who are asking nothing more than to exercise the rights that they were told would be protected, to express their views and to be able to have democracy in hong kong, which is the way it was under the previous time. so senator rubio and i introduced legislation that the chairman and ranking member of the foreign reese relations committee, senator risch and menendez joined us and we passed this bipartisan legislation on june 14. it reaffirms the principles set forth in the united states-hong kong policy act of 1992 which supports democraciization, human rights in hong kong. senator rubio already talked about this, but this is a really important thing.

we gave hong kong a special status in its relationship with the united states that china does not enjoy. and we gave them that special status upon their protecting democracy and human rights in hong kong. that was the commitment. and if they don't comply with that, the special status should no longer be available. and this legislation requires that we get information on a regular basis as to whether china is respecting the rights as we put in our legislation in 1992 that they notify us on a regular basis -- regular time frame. that's an important point because if they don't, we shouldn't give them that protective status. it identifies persons who have suppressed basic freedoms, similar to what we've done in what's known as the magnitsky sanctions. so those who are taking away the

human rights of the people of hong kong would be subject to the same type of visa restrictions to visit america and to use our banking system. that makes a great deal of sense, and we know that's pretty effective. so it's time that we backed up our words, our commitment to supporting hong kong's democratization, human rights and autonomy with action. let's make sure the people of hong kong know that the united states congress and the american people stand in solidarity with them -- solidarity with them as the chinese authorities, as we speak, are repressing the legitimate rights of the people of hong kong. we can stand with the people of hong kong for democracy and human rights by our actions this evening. i yield the floor. mr. menendez: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from new jersey. mr. menendez: i rise in support of the motion that shortly will be made by our colleague from florida. i want to congratulate senator

cardin and he for their leadership in this regard. i think appreciate the chairman and myself, having joined them in moving this expeditiously through the committee, and i'm looking forward to its critical passage on the floor. time is of the essence. the people of hong kong are fighting for their lives. six months ago millions of hong kong citizens took to the streets to peacefully protest the erosion of their democracy and their rights. now a half a year later we find mounting anger and unrest with the violence against students and protesters, most dramatically in the crackdown of hong kong's polytech university only getting worse. people are being shocked. the violence perpetrated by the authorities in hong kong and by extension beijing are turning the city into a battlefield. this is not the hong kong that any of us want to see. the special character of hong kong is one of the world's great

success stories. the vibrancy of the people of hong kong, especially its young people and the rising generation of leaders standing up for democracy and self-governance, should inspire all of us. we admire hong kong's success as a bush johning economic -- burgeoning economic powerhouse and we admire the society and civic life that has flourished under the one-country, two systems principle. hong kong is one of the remarkable success stories of the indo-pacific, one of the most remarkable success stories of the china and chinese people, and it is a success worth protecting. so i call on the police to act professionally and to treat its fellow citizens with respect and restraint. we call for beijing and the hong kong authorities to address the legitimate aspirations of the people of hong kong and in these turbulent times the congress of the united states must lead with our values. we must stand on the side of freedom and human dignity, and we must send a clear and

uncompromising statement that america stands with the people of hong kong in their quest to maintain their self-governance and autonomy, to safeguard their human rights, to exercise their democratic freedom, to determine their own future. the house of representatives has already passed their version of this bill and the situation in hong kong grows more tenuous by the day. that's why the united states should and must act today. i look forward to its passage, without delay. let us work to hold klein accountable for the erosion of democracy in hong kong. let us together send a message to the people of hong kong that their cries for democracy and freedom have be heard through both chambers of the united states congress and that america stands with them in their call for justice and self-determination. with that, i yield the floor. mr. cotton: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from arkansas. mr. cotton: the hong kong human rights and democracy act is really about promises, making promises and keeping promises. unfortunately, the chinese

communist party has a long history of making promises but not keeping them. you can ask a rice farmer from stetgart, you can ask a factory work from fort urge smith, a christian mercy from cerci. in this case, china promised in 1984 they would uphold the one-country, two-systems approach to hong kong when it took over in 1997. it promised to preserve the freedoms that have made hong kong distinctive, the freedom to practice one's religion as one seize fit to speak one's mind and participate in the political process. but that's just another process they're on the -- promise they are a he on the verge of breaking. apparently the one-country, two-systems approach can't satisfy beijing's rapacious appetite. they look and covet at hong kong's wealth and they fear and loathe its freedom, which stands in shining contrast to the orwellian oppression on the mainland. in fact, they fear that mainland

chinese might look across the bay and start to get ideas. so the chinese communist party has been breaking its promises to hong kong and to the world, waging a brutal campaign to absorb hong kong into its dystopian high-tech dictatorship. hong kongers are bravely resisting in the face of this kind of escalating violence. in recent days, hong kong security forces have shot a protester in the stomach. they've trapped hundreds of students in a university using rubber bullets and tear gas on them and they've threatened them with mass arrest. beijing's prop begannivitis have been hinting that even harsher measures are on the way. an article in the party-controlled daily argues that hong kong must integrate with the mainland and then reeducate hong kongers just like they were doing with the uighurs. let me say it again.

it would be a grave mistake of historic proportion. surpassion -- surpassing the massacre at tiananmen square if they were to crack down on hong kong. the hong kong human rights and democracy act is about more than china making and breaking promises. it's also about the united states finally enforcing china's promises. we have a shot to avert catastrophe, protect the people of hong kong, and to finally enforce beijing promises or hold them accountable for breaking those promises. very soon the senate will pass this legislation on a unanimous bipartisan basis to give you a sense of sentiment in the congress. this legislation will require the secretary of state to certify hong kong's you a ton autonomy from -- autonomy from the maintained each year otherwise they will lose the special privileges that u.s. law

grants to hong kong. the bill will freeze the assets and travel 6 officials who are responsible for abducting hong kongers, like the journalists and book sellers who have been vanishing without a trace since 2017. and it will ensure that pro-democracy protesters can get visas to the united states, despite their specious arrests. but if the chinese -- but the chinese communist will simply pull back from the brink, if they will keep their promises, if they will respect the one-country, two-system approach, none of that will happen. so beijing has a promise. keep its promises or give americans and the world one more reason to treat china like an outlaw regime. so choose wisely, mr. general secretary xi.

mr. durbin: madam president. madam president, i want to thank my colleague, senator rubio, cardin, menendez, and representative chris smith for moving the hong kong human rights and democracy act in both chambers, legislation which i am proud to cosponsor. with the situation deteriorating by the hour in hong kong, the passage of legislation couldn't be more timely. i urge my colleagues in the house to take action quickly after we have acted. this bill sends an important message of bipartisan support from the u.s. congress for the democratic aspirations of the broad majority of the people of hong kong. some of you may realize that we just a few months ago celebrated the 30th anniversary of the bloody crackdown that ended the peaceful democracy movement in tiananmen square. who among us can forget those riveting weeks during which there was real hope and possibility of china opening its political system that got us a democracy statute modeled after our own statue of liberty and sadly the jarring image of a

protester standing to try to block the onslaught of a tank. the crude propaganda and disinformation used by communist hardliners to brainwash conscripts to turn on their own people is both heartbreaking and infuriating. remembering those days, we must not sit by idly and quietly to allow hong kong's freedoms to be similarly threatened. i have moved in the face of increasingly excessive use of force by hong kong police in one of the most vibrant cities in the world. what exactly are the hong kong protesters fighting for? the freedoms we in america take for granted every day. the freedom of assembly, suffrage, speech, due process, and rule of law. rather than sitting down with the protesters, hong kong authorities have increasingly used excessive force instead of engaging in constructive dialogue. ultimately, i believe the hong kong government and the protesters are capable of finding a solution, and i hope

that they do. let me end by appealing to the leadership in china to show the courage to allow the continued, prosperous democratic autonomy enjoyed by the people of hong kong. hong kong's continued special status is a sign of strength and confidence, not weakness. i yield the floor. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. scott: i rise today to speak about the greatest threat the united states faces in the next century, the threat of communist china. i have been saying it for months, communist china is not our friend. they are stealing our technology, refusing to open up their markets to foreign goods as required by the w.t.o., militarizing the south china sea, even after promising president obama they wouldn't. holding over one million we gers in prison -- uighurs in prison camps just for their religion. and communist china is intentionally pushing fentanyl to the united states, killing americans every day.

chift china continues to strip the people of hong kong of their basic rights. i was the first u.s. senator to visit hong kong sits the protests started nearly six months ago. i had the opportunity to meet with protesters, students, parents, and grandparents who are fighting to regain the freedom they were once promised. i heard their stories, horrible and frightening stories of police brutality, threats against individuals and their families and mysterious disappearances. six months in and no signs of communist china loosening their grip. their efforts to crock down on the protests in hong kong reflect their commitment to denying basic human rights and snuffing out any opposition to their totalitarian goals. we cannot stay silent. general secretary of the communist party xi is trying to be the dominant world power. it's hong kong now. then it will be taiwan. communist china believes that in order for them to be stronger, other freedom-loving countries must be weaker. as communist china becomes more and more aggressive, we must ask

ourselves is this the next tiananmen square? we all remember that famous image. times have changed, but one thing stays the same. wherever the totalitarian regimes exist, it will be brave freedom fighters who will stand up against injustice and stand for human rights. that's what we're seeing in hong kong today. beijing soldiers have been appearing on the city streets, raising questions about the army's future role. will communist china once again use its military might to quash peaceful protests? will they again stand against those fighting for human rights and democracy? and will the united states stand by and allow this to happen? we're seeing americans like michael bloomberg putting profits above human rights and propping up the chinese government by continuing to host huge events in communist china. it's time for the world to stand and present a unified force front against communist china's aggression and that starts with

supporting the brave people of hong kong. we must do everything we can to communicate our commitment to democracy, freedom, and human rights. i'm proud to stand in support of the hong kong freedom and democracy act which will give the united states more authority to reevaluate beijing's influence on hong kong. this bill makes it clear that the general secretary of the communist party xi is to comply with what china agreed to in 1997. communist china must give hong kong its autonomy or the united states will continue to ramp up pressure on communist china. we cannot underestimate this threat. we must be vigilant. we must be aggressive. america's role of fighting for freedom and liberty worldwide depends on it. the future of our children and our grandchildren depends on it. to the brave and resilient people of hong kong, the united states is with you. your fight will not be in vain, and it doesn't go unnoticed. and to communist china and general secretary of the communist party xi, consider your next moves carefully. the world is watching. i won't stop fighting until america's economic and political future and the freedom of

nations across the globe is secured from the threat of china's influence. i want to thank senator rubio, senator cardin, and all the senators in the u.s. senate for their support of this bill. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from missouri. mr. hawley: madam president, just two brief points this evening. the first is that i'm proud to join not only as a supporter of this measure but as an original cosponsor, and i want to thank the other senators, senator rubio, especially senator cardin for their leadership on this issue, senator risch. but i want to be clear that we are here today in this chamber, and what we are doing is possible tonight because of the bravery and the courage of the protests in hong kong. many of them very young people who are risking their very lives, taking to the streets, standing for democracy, standing for the promises that were made to them by beijing many years ago and fighting for them now, putting everything on the line, and i just want to say to those protesters that you are making a

difference, that your lives have made a difference. and to those who even now are trapped inside polyu. in this siege that the hong kong police force has created, this humanitarian crisis that the hong kong police force has fostered, what you are doing is inspiring the world. what you are doing has moved this body. what you are doing is changing the world. so thank you for your encourage. thank you for your bravery. thank you for believing in your city. and thank you for believing in hong kong. and the other thing i would say, madam president, is that while today is a good day in the struggle to preserve the freedoms of this city and the struggle against a totalitarian regime in beijing, it is not the last day. and although this step is an important step that this chamber takes, it is not the last step that this nation may need to take in order to hold china to its commitments made in 1984 in order to protect the autonomy and the liberty of the city of

hong kong, because make no mistake, we are in for a long struggle with communist china. we are in for a long struggle with beijing. we know what their ambitions are, to dominate hong kong, to dominate taiwan, to dominate the region and ultimately to impose their will on the entire international system. and we are going to have to stand against that for freedom, for liberty, for our security, and our prosperity. so there is much to do, madam president. there is a long road ahead of us. but today is a good day, and i hope that the people of hong kong will see that the people of the free world are awake, that they are with you, and we are ready to stand together. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mrs. blackburn: thank you, madam president. i want to thank senator rubio for the work he has done this a few minutes earlier. today i spoke about the cause of freedom and how we are seeing people around the globe stand up for freedom, and yes, indeed, we

see this in hong kong, and it does inspire us, and the message that we are sending to beijing is that indeed we are watching and we are paying attention, and to the hong kong protesters for them to know that we are watching what they are doing and that we are standing with them. it's important to note that china has really earned its place atop the list of the world's most notorious human rights violators and over the past few weeks hong kong's descent into chaos and bloodshed has provided a much-needed reminder of the horrors, the absolute horrors of authoritarian rule. there can be no change without accountability, and beijing needs to know we are focused on that accountability, which is why today i am so pleased to stand with these other members

of this chamber in support of the hong kong human rights and democracy act. the bill does demand accountability, not only from beijing but also from us. it will require us to monitor hong kong's progress toward autonomy and china's behavior toward hong kong people who choose to exercise their internationally recognized rights, those rights that we have spoken of in this chamber today. the bill will help us identify the tactics beijing uses to capture hong kong's dissidents and then to trap them on mainland china, and will also ensure that no peaceful protesters are denied visas to the united states because of the alleged crimes. now, i will tell you the bill is a great start, but the time and the work that we put in it will

be wasted unless every single member of this chamber makes a commitment to hold us accountable, to hold china accountable. i would encourage my colleagues to view their support of this legislation as a promise to these protesters in hong kong that their cries for help are not going to go unanswered. i yield the floor. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cruz: madam president, today, brave men and women, boys and girls, are standing up and demanding that the chinese communist party protect hong kong's autonomy, protect free speech, and defend human rights. despite these peaceful protests, the chinese communist party is fighting back with brutality and violence. the police brutality that we have seen and the communist

chinese communist party's larger assault on the people of hong kong has been shameful. just this past weekend, the hong kong police began attacking young, innocent students who were peacefully protesting that brutality. they were attacked with tear gas and rubber bullets. these students' college campus was turned into a war zone where no one was safe. and today we have the opportunity to tell the world these blatant human rights attacks and this campaign to bully hong kong into submission are not okay, and america won't stand for it. last month, i traveled to hong kong. i met with many brave men and women who are standing up. i met with the dissidents, the pro-democracy protesters who are speaking out for hong kong's autonomy and free speech and basic human rights. along with them, i dressed in all black to express my

solidarity with the peaceful protesters who have taken to the streets. right now, in response to that protest, tear gas, sponge grenades, rubber bullets are being fired at university campuses in hong kong. in shin jiang province, millions of uighurs and other minorities are languishing in chinese concentration camps. and across china, practitioners are captured and murdered so that the communist party can harvest their organs. freedom from the brutality and the tyranny of the chinese communist party is the battle cry of the dissidents in hong kong. what have they been waving american flags and what this very been singing? the american national anthem, reciting quotations from our founding fathers who risked everything for freedom in america. madam president, i want to thank senators rubio and cardin. i want to thank senator risch

and senator menendez and all of the members of the senate foreign relations committee, both republicans and democrats, who have joined together this legislation the senate is preparing to pass, the hong kong human rights and democracy act is important legislation, it is bipartisan legislation. i urge the house to take it up and pass it and pass it promptly. the people in hong kong are engaged in an existential battle for liberty. and they should know, and they will know by our actions in just a few moments that the people of america stand with hong kong. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. rubio: as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 238, s. 1838. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 238, s. 1838, a bill to amend the hong kong policy act of 1992, and for other purposes.

the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. mr. rubio: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported substitute amendment be withdrawn, the rubio substitute amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to, 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? without objection. mr. schumer: madam president. the presiding officer: the democratic leader. mr. schumer: madam president, i want to sincerely thank my colleagues. this has been a great bipartisan moment on the floor of the senate for a very important issue. i want to thank particularly my colleagues from florida, senator rubio; maryland senator cardin, new jersey senator menendez and senator risch. the senate has just sent a resounding message to the chinese community party and

president xi that the united states stands with the democratic protesters in hong kong. the bipartisan legislation, with the great help of the chair and ranking members of the foreign relations committee, will safeguard hong kong's democracy and autonomy and hold accountable any responsible for human rights abuses and the bipartisan legislation that will soon be offered by the senators from oregon and texas will make sure that u.s. companies don't sell lethal equipment to hong kong. we have sent a message to president xi. your suppression of freedom, whether in hong kong, in northwest china, or anywhere else will not stand. you cannot be a great leader, and you cannot be a great country when you oppose freedom, when you are so brutal to the people of hong kong, young and old who are protesting. when you are so brutal to the

uighurs in northwest china. and when china is censored so the chinese people can't get the truth. history has shown that that always fails, president xi. always fails. and yet china has taken dramatic steps backward in the curtailment of freedom. as my colleagues well know, the protests in hong kong have now taken an ominous turn. the hong kong police, no doubt at the behest of the communist party in beijing, have undertaken increasingly violent crackdown on student protesters. as the ruling party in beijing continues to flout hong kong's independence while perpetrating suppression of minority groups from one end of china to the other, america's support for the democratic rights of hong kong citizenry is paramount. to the people of china, we stand with you in freedom. to the kids in hong kong, the

students and the adults, we stand with you. to the uighurs who simply want to practice their religion, we stand with you. and freedom will prevail, and the chinese system will either change or fail. i yield the floor. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. merkley: i ask my intern olivia juden be granted privileges to the floor for the remainder of the day. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. merkley: on june 9 the streets of hong kong filled with over a million individuals peacefully protesting what they saw as an unjust law and attack on democracy. it was an incredible visual of people standing up for democracy and standing up for human rights. here we are five months later, the images are much different. you'd be forgiven if you saw them and thought we were in a war zone.

hundreds of student protesters barricaded themselves in a hong kong university surrounded by armored riot police, pummeled by rubber bullets and tear gas, fires raging, destruction, devastation and smoke everywhere. five months of protest, rising anger and tension. five months of police crackdowns on peaceful protests spurring further protests and resistance, and u.s.-made -- u.s. exported police equipment being misused by the hong kong police to violent the human -- to violate the hoom rights of protesters. so far over 10,000 rounds of tear gas have been fired into the crowds of protesters. we believe in free speech, freedom to assemble, freedom to protest, not state-sponsored oppression and violence.

it is time to ban the export of u.s.-made police equipment to hong kong that is being used to abuse their human rights. that's why i'm so pleased to introduce in partnership with my colleague from texas, s. 2710 that prohibits the export of munitions and crowd control equipment to the hong kong police force. since the protests in june, over 1,700 hong kong residents have been injured. over 5,000 arrested. amnesty international verified incidents involving the dangerous use of u.s. made pepper spray, batons to beat protesters. one young woman was clubbed from behind with a police baton and was continued to be beaten even after she was on the ground with her arms zip tied behind her. we saw tear gas fired into

confined spaces in violence of the u.n. basic principles on the use of force and firearms. we have seen brutal police tactics that continue even when women and men are held in captivity or in custody, report after report of violent assaults taking place inside police stations. we cannot turn a blind eye. it's time to stand with the people of hong kong who are demanding a democratic future and against the violent suppression of free speech. the bill that the senator from texas and i have introduced lays out a series of products that we will no longer export to the hong kong police force. tear gas, pepper spray, rubber bullets, foam and bean bag rounds, pepper balls, water cannons, stun guns and tasers. this bill is backed by many colleagues on both sides of the aisle.

i huge thank you to them. senator markey, senator blackburn, senator coons, senator inhofe, senator gillibrand, senator wyden and braun, ?ord -- senator gardner and senator van hollen. i am really proud to stand here in a bipartisan representation tonight, to stand with my colleagues who have introduced the hong kong human rights and democracy act and to stand together in a bipartisan fashion to ban the export of these brutal crowd control stadges being misused -- strategies being misused in hong kong by the police to abuse protesters. i turn to my colleague from texas. mr. cornyn: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: madam president, for months the world has watched as the brave citizens of hong kong have sustained protests against china's decades-long degradation of their civil liberties. the u.n. high commissioner has found credible evidence of the

hong kong police force using nonlethal crowd control weapons in ways violating international norms and standards. that's why i'm proud to support the bipartisan protect hong kong act as described by our colleague, senator merkley. the hong kong protect act would direct the president to ban the issuance of license for commercial export of riot control weapons like tear gas, pepper spray, rubber bullets, stun guns and tasers to the hong kong police force. this ensures that the hong kong pro-democracy protesters are not subject to police brutality using products made in the united states of america. madam president, i'm also proud to support the just-passed hong kong human rights and democracy act. i think the statement being made by the passage of these two pieces of legislation and the presence today of so many of our colleagues on a bipartisan basis standing with the people of hong

kong against this oppression by their communist overlords is very, very significant. now more than ever the united states must send a clear message to china that the free world stands with hong kongers in their struggle. madam president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from new jersey. mr. menendez: i just want to take a moment to congratulate my colleague from oregon, a member, a distinguished member of the senate foreign relations committee, who has worked this issue alongside of senator cornyn, has worked this issue with great skill in a way that allowed the legislation that we just passed to take place, which he strongly supports, and to make his legislation along with senator cornyn a reality shortly. and he's been very adept about it and very constructive, and it's going to be a great moment when we send a message that u.s.

weaponry isn't going to go to be part of the oppression of the people of hong kong. i want to salute you in your effort. i want to join you in the effort. i ask unanimous consent to be included as an original sponsor of the legislation. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. merkley: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. merkley: on behalf of myself and senator cornyn, i ask as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent the committee on banking, housing and urban affairs be discharged from further consideration of s. 2710 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. 2710, a bill to prohibit the commercial export of covered munitions items to the hong kong police force. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the committee is discharged and the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. merkley: madam president, i further ask the merkley amendments which are at the desk

be considered be agreed to, 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 with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. merkley: thank you, madam president. .

mr. cornyn: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: madam president, 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. mr. cornyn: madam president, i have one request for a committee to meet during today's session of the senate. it's been approved by bots the -- by both the majority and noornls. -- minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. cornyn: i ask that the senate proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following senate resolutions which were submitted earlier today, s. res.

430, s. res. 431, s. res. 432, s. res. 433, and s. res. 434. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measures en bloc? without objection. mr. cornyn: madam president, i ask consent that the retioning be -- resolutions be greed to and -- agreed to and the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table all en bloc. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. so ordered. mr. cornyn: madam president, i now ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of h.r. 4258 which was received from the house and is at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: an act to authorize a marshal of the supreme court and the supreme court police to protect the official guests of the supreme court outside the supreme court grounds and for other purposes. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the

measure? without objection. mr. cornyn: madam president, i ask 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: without objection. mr. cornyn: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the postcloture time on the lagoa nomination be considered expired at 11:30 a.m. on wednesday, november 20. i further ask if confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: and finally, madam president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10:00 a.m., wednesday, november 20, further, that following the prayer and the pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date,

the and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, that morning business be closed, than the senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the lagoa nomination under the previous order. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: madam president, if there's no further business to come before the senate, i ask that we stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the the presiding officer: the the senate today working on judicial nominations they wanted to convert robert locke and to limit debate to the u.s. court of appeals judges for the 11th circuit which clippers alabama, florida and georgia. this week lawmakers plan to vote in the nomination of zuckerman to the u.s. ambassador to romania, and will work on the short-term spending bill funding through december 20th and with the tip set returns, watch live coverage right here on c-span

two. that has intelligence committee continues open hearings in the impeachment inquiry against president trump. scheduled to testify wednesday, u.s. ambassador to the european union, martin sunderland, deputy assistant defense secretary laura uber and edith hale, state department undersecretary for political affairs. watch live coverage beginning at 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span three. you can also watch online at cspan.org or listen on the free c-span radio app. cemex senate republican and democratic leaders other weekly news conferences and first robert calkins talk about the impeachment inquiry hearings. followed by democrats calling on senate majority leader mitch mcconnell, to bring legislation from the house to the senate floor. [background