quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from ohio we're in a quorum call. the senator will suspend. without objection. mr. brown: tomorrow i will do something i've never down. i will vote for a trade agreement, the first time in my career. i'm voting for that trade agreement because of the work that my colleague from oregon, senator wyden and i did to fix president trump's deal and secure new protections for american workers for the first time ever in spite of the president's intransigence, in spite of the president's lining up as he always does with corporate interests because our trade agreement for the first

time ever, ever put workers at the center of this agreement. every trade agreement that i've seen in my time in congress, north american free trade agreement, central america free trade agreement, the trade agreement with colombia and south korea, one after another, every one of these trade agreements, every one of these trade actions were written fundamentally in secret by corporate interests to serve corporate interests. workers were never at the center of these trade agreements. one of my proudest votes in the house was against the north american free trade agreement. i voted no ever since. again because all of these trade agreements were written by corporations to maximize profits and compensation for executives and to enrich stockholders always, madam president, always at the expense of workers. at the expense of communities like mansfield, ohio and like portsmouth, ohio, and toledo and

youngstown. i was talking to a friend of mine in trumble county. she knows. a former senator. she knows what's happened with these trade agreements w. know how that he undermine communities and hurt workers. always because these trade agreements were written by corporations in secret. we've watched the spread of the corporate business model. because of nafta and these trade agreements and because of trump tax policies where you pay a lower tax rate if you move overseas than if you -- than you pay in the united states, ranking member wyden in those days, despite his efforts to stop those kinds of tax breaks that go to the richest people in the country. but this business model as you shut down protection in lima, ohio or shut down production in zanesville or cleveland, you move over, you get a tax break. you move overseas and then you sell your products back in the united states. that's been the business model based on our trade policy for years. president trump, candidate trump

promised something different. he promised to renegotiate nafta. the problem is when he put that -- his agreement in front of us, it was the same old, same old. it was the same old economic policies. it again put corporate interests in the center of this trade agreement. it was a trade policy that was like all of our trade policies of the past. over and over again this president's portrayed workers from tax giveaways to corporations to his judges, his judges that put their thumbs on the scale always supporting corporate interests, corporations over workers, always supporting wall street over consumers. and as we know, down the hall where senator mcconnell's office s. almost every day he walks down here to try to confirm far-right extremist judges, always young judges that do that same thing, that put their thumb on the scales of justice, always supporting corporations over workers. and as i said, last year we got an initial draft of president

trump's agreement, another betrayal. his first nafta draft was nowhere near the good deal that the president promised. he had negotiated pure and simple another corporate trade deal. meant nothing for workers and it was a sellout to drug companies. in fact, the white house, madam president, the white house looks like a retreat for wall street executives except on tuesdays and fridays when the white house looks like a retreat for drug company executives. it took us, it took senator wyden and speaker pelosi and unions months and months and months working together to improve this deal. the president resisted and resisted and resisted but we finally approved a deal to put workers at the center of our trade policy. we have a provision that senator wyden and i will talk about. it says violence against workers is a violation of the agreement. might sound obvious. never been in a trade deal before. for the first time ever we strike -- we spell out workers' right to strike. again it should be obvious but never included before. if the workers don't have that

right to strike, not something that workers want to do very often if ever. my wife who's -- whose dad was a utility worker in the union for 35 years talks about growing up. they went on strike twice when she was a kid. workers never get back from a strike -- never really recover from that strike but sometimes they have to. it needs to be in trade agreements to make sure worker rights are protected. we've improved some of the league lease that since the beginning has been legalese has been included in trade agreements that make it nearly impossible to win a case when a country violates its labor commitments. most importantly we secured our brown-wyden provision that amounts to the strongest ever labor enforcement ever in a u.s. trade deal. the provision that senator wyden and i wrote and fought for is the first improvement to enforcing the labor standards in our trade agreements since we've been negotiating them. we know why companies close factories in ohio, in oregon and open them in mexico. they pay lower wages. they take advantage of workers

who don't have rights. they have weaker nonexistent environmental laws. american workers can't compete when companies move overseas and exploit low-wage workers. we essentially, madam president, get a race to the bottom on wages. the only way to stop this is by raising labor standards in every country we buy and sell to and every country with which we trade and export and import. raising labor standards making sure those standards are actually enforced. if corporations are forced to pay workers a living wage and treat them with dignity and really honor the dignity of work no matter where those workers are located, then we take away the incentives to make -- move jobs overseas. think about this. companies in the u.s., the missions state -- sort of the business practice of shutting down production in nice, ohio -- niles, ohio and moving overseas, they will be less likely to do that if the workers are paid decent wages. then those workers will be able

to buy our products you because they're more likely to be in the middle class. that's what brown-wyden is all way. it's a completely new way of holding corporations accountable. a worker in mexico will be able to report a company violating their rights. within months we can determine whether worker rights had been violated and we take action against that company. we apply punitive damages when companies cheat, break the law, stop workers from organizing, and if they keep doing it, the final strong enforcement, we stop their goods from coming into the united states. we in essence si okay, you're cheating. you're breaking the law. you're violating your workers' rights. you're not going to have access to the u.s. market. that's enforcement. when they have the power to form real unions and negotiate for higher wages, it helps our workers. mexican workers can be paid as little as $6.5 a day right now. the minimum wage in tennessee, ohio, minimum wage is higher in our country per hour. this is $6.50 a day.

we've been asking american workers to compete with that. we heard critic say that brown-wyden will force mexican wages to rise. i know a lot of c.e.o.'s that make $7 million, $8 million a year, want to keep wages low in other countries but they accuse us of forcing mexican wages to rise. that's kind of the point. that's what we want to do because it takes away incentives for those c.e.o.'s, those $7 million, $8 million, $9 million a year c.e.o.'s in america looking abroad to hire cheap labor and to exploit workers and make more money for themselves. i want to especially thank senator wyden. without him and his staff, without him endorsing the proposal, without him pushing aggressively, we would not be here. i want to be clear, though. we will be straight with american workers. it's not a perfect agreement. one trade deal that democrats fixed over the president's opposition but the democrats fix is not going to bring back auto plants like the president

promises. i have real concerns that the auto rules of origin are much weaker than the administration says they are. we know the administration always exaggerates its successes and doesn't tell the truth about many of the things it does. we know that this trade agreement was a corporate trade agreement, not a worker trade agreement. now workers are at the center. we'll be watching the president. he needs to ensure companies actually comply with these rules. i'll demand we strengthen them if we need to. one trade deal that democrats fixed also won't undo the rest of trump's economic policies. it is policies that put corporations over workers. we haven't raised the minimum wage. the president took overtime pay away from 50,000 ohioans by changing the rule on how overtime is paid. this deal isn't going to fix all that. this usmca isn't going to fix outsourcing when we have president trump's tax plan that gives companies a tax break to send jobs overseas. i'm going to keep fighting

president trump's corporate trade policies and tax policies, just as we did with this agreement. we have more work to do to make our trade agreements more pro-worker. i will vote yes, as i said at the outset. i will vote yes for the first time every on a trade agreement. but because by including brown-wyden, democrats have taken another corporate trade deal brought us to by president trump, democrats have made this agreement much more pro-worker, and, as the senator from oregon know, we have set an important precedent that brown-wyden will be included, must be included in every future trade agreement. mr. wyden: madam president, i'd like to -- the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. wyden: i i'd like to -- i'd

like to pose some questions to my colleague from ohio who has done so much on these issues, not just for the last few months, but for years and years. and i want to thank them h.r. foys extraordinary commitments to the rights of workers and to all these communities, senator brown, who you have pointed out essentially lose their economic heartbeat by trade policies that cheat workers. so i want to ask you about this. i've, and i've heard this lots of places, that people have said these ideas seem good, but are they really that consequential? and you've been at this for more than a quarter century. we've watched you come out on the floor, you know, year after year after year. and let me give you my calculation of what this package that we've worked on that you

deserve so much credit for consists of. as far as i can tell -- and we've worked on it with the staff -- this is the fastest enforcement process by more than 300% because of what you have done to speed up the time line for protecting workers. it is the toughest because for the first time it allows our country to hit the worst actor the hardest by stopping rip-off artists at the individual factory level and it's the strongest because it allows us to hit companies who repeatedly violate, you know, the law. we're able to stop the products

of exploitative labor at the border. now, my question you to -- and i want to ask you a couple, but i wanted to get this overview first. you've been at this for more than a quarter century. is there any trade enforcement regime that, in terms of those specifics, comes close to what that new regime would consist of? mr. brown: yeah, thank you, senator wyden. and thank you for your help in putting all this together. not even close. we've seen trade agreement after trade agreement that simply is not -- even when labor standards look fairly strong, they're not really ever enforceable. part of what we recognize -- we've seen this. we won't back and looked at what happens after nafta passes. what happened with calf tax we seen any attempt at labor enforcement, the companies or governments that don't want to

enforce labor laws find a way, as lawyers are really good at doing, they slow-walk. so whenever you push them to doing is, they end up staying in court. there was a central american case that we went on -- in guatemala, i believe -- that went on for seven or eight years. you can't really get -- you know the old saying, justice delayed is justice denied -- if the people who have committed the violation take forever. so speed is one thing. you mentioned that at the outset, how important that is. another thing is one of the things we knew would speed it up, number one, and would mean that enforcement would work was that the workers would have an ability to kick off the investigation, to start -- to literally call a toll-free number that they can register that they have seen child labor violations, they've seen workers

-- they've seen workers attacked -- violence aimed at workers, they've seen wages denied for all kinds of illegal reasons. the workers can then speak out and band together and go to a panel and get action and get quick action. and then, if a company keeps doing -- we found cases where a company would get a little slap on the wrist and they'd do it again and get a wrist and do it again. so what colloquy did, we -- so what we did, we increased the penalty. they get fines and the fine is proportional to the violation. so it is not a huge penalty. the second time it is more. the third time we can deny that company nafta benefits if they sell in the united states. so if you're going to attack workers, keep the union out illegally, if you're going to deny pay to workers who have earned it, you are not going to -- you are going to see your market dry up in the united

states. so that's the best incentive to stop. we literally keep the product out of the market, out of the united states, if you are a he a serial cheater -- if you're a serial cheater in a company that does that to its workers. you. mr. wyden: i appreciate you taking us through this, because faster, tougher, because itest goes at the individual -- because it gets at the individual factory level and stronger because it stops those repeat offenders who come up with products using exploited labor. and i want people to know and have it highlighted in the record that my take is that this, given what we've seen over the last 25 years, is far, far better than anything we've seen before. and, look, you and i have worked on a lot of enforcement efforts over the years. you'll recall, at one point i chaired the trade subcommittee

and we found people tripping over themselves to cheat because they were merchandise laundering. it was a little bit different than this. we set up a dummy website just to try to keep tabs on all the people that were cheating, and we would remember -- you didn't know whether to laugh or cry -- that all over the world people were coming forward to cheat. but that was useful. it didn't come close to the breadth of what has been done here. and let me just ask you a couple more specific questions because i think -- i want the -- because i've heard lots of people in all the campaigns and the like talking about was this modest or really was it a bold set of changes. and now we have just walked through how much stronger this is than anything we've seen in the last quarter century. now, if a worker reports --

because you mentioned about how they can use this hotline to enforce their rights. if a worker reports violations of their rights at a call center and the government believes that the complaint has merit, my understanding is then the government is obligated under the law to send labor inspectors to that facility. is that correct? mr. brown: yeah, and we -- whether it is a call center, whether it is an auto factory, that if the violations occur and there is evidence that there are violations, and if they are in many cases we know about them because workers have spoken out, then inspectors can go into those factories and, you know, one of the outcomes of this -- we know that corporations don't want that kind of punishment. we know corporations don't want to see inspectors there looking at their business because there have been legitimate, reasonable accusations of lawbreaking.

so that's going to mean corporations probably quit breaking the law, or those corporations that have decided they move to mexico because it's easy to evade labor law and they can pay low wages. l when they see we mean business, they see the usmca, which senator wyden and i took an agreement that was more -- another corporate trade agreement hand down by president trump and fixed it so it has these strong labor provisions, when they see that we mean business, we're going to enforce these labor lurks we're going to enforce an agreement that works for workers, some companies are going to think twice about shutting down production in youngstown or marietta and move overseas. that's part of this enforcement, too. mr. wyden: if you would, senator brown, take us through what kind of actions can be taken against a facility. in other words, my understanding is the labor inspectors find violations when they inspect it.

they have a host of remedies. you touched on this in the committee. but what kind of actions can be taken against that particular facility? mr. brown: there's -- first let me talk for a second about a sector that's really important in my part of the country, the auto sector. and if a trade -- if a company cheats in an auto facility in a mexican community, that company cheats, and we find labor violations and we take action against that company, the action is not just against that company's facility in that community -- if a company cheats and is trying to send illegal -- if a company cheats it's workers and has broken the law on any number of labor violations, that applies to any product that company ultimately sends in from any one of its factories in

mexico. so we don't -- it keeps sort of the whack-a-mole kind of attempts that companies might have while they cheat but they bring in products from somewhere else. so we look at that in a pretty broad way. but fundamentally it works this way. when you -- if we find a violation, the first -- first there is a fine, and the fine is essentially proportionate to the violation. so if they -- meaning that it's not as punitive -- the first offense is not especially punitive. the second and the third offense get more serious. the second offense, the fine is much greater, beyond proportionality, if you will. and the third offense is when we step in and deny them nafta benefits, deny them access to our markets, deny them the breaks they get under nafta at the border on the tariffs. so all -- by the third violation, whether it's a violation of labor law or if it's -- well, if it is a

violation of labor law, by the third violation, the enforcement and the penalties are such that the companies are going to quit doing it. i mean, that's the whole point. i don't want to levy these fines. i want companies to obey labor law that the mexican government has passed in their new labor law and that are under the nafta agreement. mr. wyden: so, senator brown, would you be saying that if it is found that there were labor violations at a car factory, the penalties could apply to any car that might come into the united states from that factory throughout the investigation, not just going forward? mr. brown: correct. and from that factory and also from other factories owned by the same automaker. so that you can't -- you can't cheat one place and expect to get all your autos into the united states without tariffs. and that's -- that's to make sure -- i mean, we thought a lot about this.

we looked at over the last 20 years, we looked at what's happened. we looked back over the last couple of decades working with the very good staff of the democratic finance committee and with our office and found every example we could about how violations occurred and how you stop those violations. so we built in a process -- it is pretty complicated and it took a while. and as i said, the president handed down another corporate trade agreement that helps corporations at the expense of workers. and we weren't going to let that happen this time. that's why the trump usmca took a long time to pass, because for a whole year they were resistant to good labor enforcement. they wanted to pass it -- they wanted to help their corporate buddies. you remember, senator wyden, there was a provision in there is to help the drug companies, a big giveaway to the drug companies. and we said no to that. speaker pelosi said no to that. we stripped that out of the agreement. we wanted this agreement to center on workers, not to help the drug companies, not to help

wall street, not to help and encourage those companies that outsource jobs. mr. wyden: senator brown, i have appreciated this colloquy. i have a couple town meetings at home here this weekend. working class neighborhoods where trade has been really important. one out of four jobs in my state revolve, around trade and those trade jobs often pay better than do the nontrade jobs. and if anybody says, well, ron, you think anybody is really going to be accomplished with what you and senator brown are talking about, i'm going to say i went through the entire enforcement process in terms of the key provisions and we laid out for the country and the senate that you have led an effort to speed up by more than 300% the time line for enforcement action. i mean, it used to take years and years sometimes.

you've shortened that by literally more than 300%. you have been part of an effort that's tougher because you can go after the individual factories. and then finally i think this enforcement proposal gets to the heart of what we need to be doing because it means if you rip off workers, we're going to stop products those workers have produced at the border. so my guess is there will be a lot more discussion. i see we've got another valuable colleague from the finance committee whose-- who has been heavily involved in these issues for a lot of years. but i want to again say that this didn't happen byes on mow sis -- by osmosis because when we got that flawed bill, i think everybody said well, they'll probably have some discussions about it and that will be pretty much it.

mr. brown: i saw this when you and i announced -- when senator wyden and i announced the success of getting brown-wyden into the bill, i heard from a lot of shall we say pro-trump, pro-corporate lawmakers in this body, mostly on that side of the aisle but all over and they were pretty angry because they thought this was going to be another trade agreement, usmca was going for be another trade agreement written by corporations, mostly written in secret that will serve corporate interests, that will pad the bottom line, that will help million dollar a year executives make multibillion dollars a year, that will help their major stockholders. they were fine with that because that's what too often this body does. and they found that oh, my gosh, this trade agreement actually puts workers at the center. that was your goal and my goal. that's why people at your town meetings in eugene and portland and bend and all over oregon are going to hear from you about all this will help the middle class

fundamentally. i appreciate the time. mr. wyden: madam president, i think that this has been central to what we'll be debating and voting on tomorrow morning. i want to thank senator brown. this bill would not have happened without tough trade enforcement led by senator brown. this bill would not have happened, period, full stop. and with that, madam president, i yield the floor. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. mr. carper: madam president, before the senior democrat, the ranking member of the finance committee leaves the floor and before the senator from -- my colleague from ohio leaves the floor, i just want to thank them both. we would not be here on this day without you and without your leadership, both of you.

and when the chair says he's never met a trade agreement he even wanted to think about supporting, thank you for making this one that virtually all of us can support. my highest regards. thank you. madam president. madam president, i have a speech that starts off by mr. president over and over again. i'm going to say madam president. i rise today to discuss the new treaty to replace north american free trade agreement professionally known as nafta. last week those of us who serve on the finance committee had an opportunity to evaluate new nafta. in fact, about a half dozen or so committees have had the opportunity to -- given different jurisdictions to do that with respect to this trade agreement. madam president, as you know, the trade deals are often dense agreements that have hundreds of provisions relating to any number of issues but ultimately, ultimately trade agreements and trade legislation moves through the senate finance committee.

we just heard from two of our senior members. as another senior member of that committee for many years now, i considered many trade bills, looked at what im-- what impact those would have american consumers, producers, manufacturers, and businesses, and citizens. after all our economy depends on making sure other countries can sell to us and that we can sell to other countries, especially close allies like canada to our north and mexico to our south. following years of uncertainty thanks through the president's haphazard trade wars, i think this agreement will provide a measure of certainty for those who helped drive -- who help drive our economy. provisions included in the new nafta will help in our state on the delmarva peninsula, our poultry producers gain better access to canadian markets. it's not just important to delaware but important to maryland, virginia, and other places where they raise chickens. the trade deal increases market access for dairy farmers in

delaware, those across the country to sell their milk products like powdered milk to canada. the international trade commission estimates that this will allow for an additional $315 million in exports annually. that's $315 million increase in exports just on the milk side, the dairy side in sales to canada every year. when we evaluate the new nafta as what it is, a trade deal, i believe it makes significant improvements on past trade agreements including the original nafta. new nafta adds stronger language to ensure the obligations to all three counties under multilateral environmental agreements including the agreement to the montreal protocol can be fully enforced. i'll come back and talk more about that in a short while. thanks primarily to democrats, though, it's no longer the case that the failure of one nafta country to ratify an

environmental agreement can be used to prevent the others from being held accountable for failing to honor their obligations. new nafta also includes new provisions that have never been included in trade agreements before. environmental violations will now be treated as trade violations so when the unction does bring -- the united states does bring cases under the new nafta's environmental cases, those cases will be easier to win going forward. this agreement also includes senate new wins for coastal states, including binding provisions around overfishing, around conservation of marine species and marine debris. when we talk about marine debris, just keep this in mind. there is floating out in the oceans of the world something called the great pacific garbage patch. it's largely plastics. it is twice the size of texas.

not twice the size of delaware. not twice the size of maryland. twice the size of texas. an agreement -- it's $88 million for environmental monitoring, cooperation and enforcement. the new nafta creates an environment -- a mechanism that gives environmental stakeholders an expanded role in enforcement matters. this will go a long way toward ensuring that environmental violations can be investigated and remedied in a substantive and timely manner. so my colleagues heard me say before i have a friend, when you ask him how he's doing, he replies compared to what? well, compared to all the previous trade agreements that this body has considered, new nafta and its implementing legislation have the strongest environmental enforcement provisions that we've seen to date, period. that's good news. especially for a trade deal put

forth under this administration. now, does the new nafta include everything that my democratic colleagues and i -- and some republican colleagues would have liked to see with regards to environmental protection? no, it does not. this new nafta fails to recommit the united states, for example, to the paris accords. it fails to ratify the came goalie amendment i mentioned earlier to the montreal protocol which could bring the global community together to reduce hydroflora core bans found in air conditioners and freezers and prevent by the use of those products to h.f.c.'s, prevent up to half a degree celsius increase in global warming by the end of this century just by doing this one thing, one thing. like so many of the trump administration's proposals, the new nafta fails to even mention the word climate change.

but this trade agreement does add important tools and resources that were primarily negotiated by democrats to strengthen the deal, hold the administration accountable to enforce nafta, countries -- the presiding officer: the senate will be in order. mr. carper: madam president, would you say that again. the presiding officer: the senate will be in order. mr. carper: thank you, madam president. this agreement -- i'll say this again. but this trade agreement does add important tools and resources that were primarily negotiated by democrats to strengthen the deal. hold the administration accountable to enforce nafta, countries' environmental obligations and help ensure that those would break the rules are actually held accountable. mr. president -- madam president, madam president, as the senior top democrat on the environment and public works committee here in the senate, i am especially aware of the extreme and destructive environmental policies put forth by the current administration.

week after week i've helped to lead the fight against some reckless rollbacks, too many unbelievably qualified candidates and their relentless attempt to chip away at our nation's bedrock environmental protections. we know what to expect from this administration when it comes to environmental policy. as a result, i know the environmental provisions in new nafta thanks to the hard work of both from democrats in the house and senate and some republicans, too, are far stronger than where we started. certainly not perfect and we can and we must do more going forward. but it's better than we've ever done before and that must be recognized. i just want to pause here for a moment, madam president, to thank ambassador robert lighthizer and his staff, the trade ambassador -- the trade rep's office for their hard work and their willingness to engage with my colleagues and with me. it's been an extraordinary outreach, great responsiveness

and i just want to say thank you to the baferred and to his -- to the ambassador and to his team. reminds me a little bit of what we had with michael foeman when he was a trade rep with the last administration. let me end with this, madam president, if i could. while it's good news that we were able to reach an agreement on the new nafta, i want to caution my colleagues that the uncertainty caused by president trump's haphazard approach to trade is far from over. president trump's multifront trade war with our allies and our trading partners is approaching two years now. that's two years of american farmers, american manufacturers, retailers, and small businesses experiencing increased costs from president trump's tariffs while simultaneously being locked out of overseas markets due to retaliatory tariffs. that's two years of uncertainty and disruption for american businesses that have had to put investments and hiring decisions on hold. and two years of uncertainty for the american workers who aren't

sure if their jobs will continue to exist as trade wars drag on. and where has that gotten us? well, a limited trade agreement with japan that may be better than nothing but is largely an attempt to cover up some of the negative effects that withdrawal from the trans-pacific trade partnership, t.p.p. has had on our economy and global competitiveness. for those who don't remember, the trans-pacific partnership, as you recall negotiated in the last administration was a 12-nation trading block negotiated primarily by michael foeman and his staff that included 40% of the world's economy in one trading block, 12 nations. guess who led it? we did. guess who was excluded? china for the bad behavior that they sometimes follow. on the outside, they were looking in. and somehow we walked away from that. and what we have come up with in its place is something that's, in my view, not nearly as bold

and unfortunately not the path we've taken. i'm still reviewing the text of the phase one -- put that in quotes -- phase one china trade deal that was signed i think today. from what i've seen the agreement falls far short of the structure reforms to china's planned economy that president trump has trumpeted for some sometime. the best i can tell, the strublght turl reforms in china -- structural reforms in china's economy just did not make the final cut. so, as we enter this new year and a new decade, sincerely hope our president will -- will return to a multilateral approach much like we had on trans-pacific partnership where the united states works with our allies and trading partners to construct the global rules of trade. with that, madam president, i see one of my colleagues also from ohio rising toll address --

to address a welcoming audience. i yield the floor. mr. portman: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. portman: madam president, i appreciate my colleague from delaware and his comments on trade. i would also ask unanimous consent that my colleague from ohio, shear rod brown, be permitted to decrease the chamber for a -- to address the chamber for a brief tribute following my remarks. i'm here today to talk about international trade. what a week it's been. in the same few days we're seeing the culmination of nearly three years of effort by this administration to deliver wins for american workers, businesses, farmers, and consumers. with regard to really our three biggest trading partners -- china, canada, and mexico. so this is a big week. while the media is focused on impeachment -- and i can say that because as i walked in, that's all the reporters wants to talk about -- here we're on the floor talking about

something that directly affects the constituents we represent. i i think it's very positive in all three areas -- china, canada, and mexico. in a way, it's like the world series and the super bowl of trade all in the same week because these are big agreements that make a big difference. u.s.-mexico agreement being finalized. it will be voted on tomorrow. and then second, today the signing of phase one of the china agreement, something that many of us have been focused on over the past few years and wondered whether we would get here. and here we are. as a former trade representative under george w. bush and as one on the trade committee here, i follow these issues here. and most significantly i come from ohio, which is a state that depends on state and depends on that trade being fair to our workers and farmers, our service providers, our small businesses. we got a lot of manufacturing, a lot of agriculture.

in fact, 25% of our state's factory workers have export jobs, 25% of them. one out of every three acres planted in ohio is planted for export. so think about that. when you drive through our beautiful state and you see the corn and the soybeans out there in the field, one of every three acres is being planted to be exported somewhere else. that's great for our farmers. it gives them markets, and it raises prices for their product at a time when they really need it. and by the way, these trade jobs are good jobs, too. jobs dependent on trade pay on average about 16% more than other jobs, and they've got better benefits. so we like to be able to send more to the rest of the world. we've got about 5% of the world's population here in this country, and we got to be sure that with 25% of the world's economy here and 5% of the people that we are selling stuff overseas to the other 95%. it's always in our interests to open up overseas markets for our workers, our farmers, our

service providers. while promoting those exports, we also need to ensure we are protecting american jobs from unfair trade, from imports that would unfairly undercut our workers, our farmers. simply put, we want a level playing field. and with that level playing field, when you get fair and reciprocal treatment from other countries, we'll do just fine. the american workers and businesses can compete and they can win if it's fair. that's all we're asking for. to me, the sweet spot is balanced trade, where we're able to send our exports overseas without high tariffs and other barriers understand that we're able -- and that we're able to see imports coming in fairly traded into the united states. if we do that we'll be fine. the good thing about this week is both of these agreements -- the new usmca, which is replaces nafta, and this phase one of the china agreement -- are exactly focused on that, how to have balanced trade.

at times recently other countries have been wondering whether the united states is going to make progress on trade, to be frank. so this week is also important because the world is watching. and what the world is seeing is that we can fulfill our stated interest in renegotiating and improving trade agreements and trade relationships, concluding these two agreements proves that the united states can get to yes on these very big issues. we're able to work through our partisan differences here at home. we just saw this on the floor this afternoon where democrats and republicans alike are talking about their support for usmca and in tough negotiations with our trading partners. we've had some tough negotiations with canada, mexico, and china. we can reach outcomes that benefit our country and help to create that more effective balance for american workers. there's perhaps no better example of this balance than usmca. without it, by the way, we go back to the status quo, which would be nafta. that's a 25-year-old agreement

that had to be updated. just doesn't reflect the realities with the modern economy. thanks to important measures designed to strengthen our economy, create jobs and increase market access for american exports, this new usmca is going to help to level that playing field we talked about. first of all, usmca means american jobs and economic growth. the independent international trade commission has studied it. they have said that this new agreement will create at least 176,000 new jobs, that it will grow our economy. it also says that with regard to the auto industry, it's going to create tens of thousands of jobs. that's, again, very important to ohio. we're a big state for auto production. these jobs are going to mean a lot to workers in my state. part of the way it's going to create jobs is by leveling the playing field with enforceable labor standards. we just heard about this from the senator from oregon and the senator from ohio, my colleague from ohio, about how this agreement has new enforcement standards with regard to labor. it also, though, has higher

content requirements for u.s.-made steel and auto parts. this is important. i'll give you an example. usmca requires that 70% of the steel and 75% of overall content in usmca-compliant vehicles come from usmca countries. in other words, other countries can't come in and take advantage of the lower tariffs that we're providing under usmca by adding too much to the content of those vehicles. the 75% overall content requirement is up from 62.5% in nafta. that makes it 75% the highest percentage of any trade agreement we have. and it means more jobs, more jobs in the united states in particular, fewer imports, and fewer imports from countries like china, countries like germany, countries like japan that otherwise would come in and take advantage of this. now, some have criticized these content provisions saying that that's how protectionist.

i disagree. we're saying to those countries, if you want to have freer trade with us, enter into a trade agreement, lower your barriers, give us access to your markets as we're giving mexico and canada access to our market. that's what a trade agreement is all about. if you don't want to do that you shouldn't be able to free ride on our usmca. i think this makes sense. why should japan, germany, or china be a free rider on our agreement with canada and mexico? this incentivizes these other countries to do an agreement with us. if you do an agreement with the united states, it's balanced, it's fair. you'll have some benefit as well. the national trade commission also expects that the usmca r. double our economy by double the gross domestic product projected under the trans-pacific partnership. i say that because t.p.p. is one that members on the other side of the aisle have talked about as being such a great agreement. well, this grows the economy by more than double.

so again this is a big deal. usmca also means important new rules of the road for online sales. so much of our commerce today takes place on the internet but there's nothing to protect it or promote it in nafta. so the status quo, because it was done 25 years ago when there was hardly any internet business, doesn't have any protections. this usmca was written to fix that, and it does. it prohibits data localization requirements by banning tariffs on data online and by raising the de minimis levels on customs duties on sales to mexico and canada. our digital economy is one of our greatest advantages. for start-ups that do business online, that rely on small shipments, this is very important. the relief from the customs burdens and also the data localization requirements and the inability for other countries to put tariffs on data really important. so this is great for us as a

country. the third thing i want to mention is that american farmers are going to see unprecedented levels of access to new markets in canada, mexico under usmca. between bad weather, low prices even going into the bad weather, and the tariffs that were in place to get to this agreement with china in particular, farmers have been hit pretty hard, and so this is the light at the end of the tunnel. this gives them a chance under usmca to get some new markets. that's why nearly 1,000 farm groups around the country have announced publicly that they strongly support this agreement. a lot of politicians and pundits have their views on who won the negotiations on usmca. i can say, you can go back and forth on that. but in my view, thanks to the hard work of u.s. trade representative robert lighthizer, thanks to president trump pushing on this, the winner here is the american people. that's who i think benefits the

most. they're going to benefit from a new, more modernized trade agreement that's going to replace an agreement that's shown its age with nonexistent digital economy provisions and outdated rules of origin provisions that allow more automobiles and auto parts to be manufactured overseas rather than being manufactured here in the united states. so i think it's the american people that benefit. we all benefit. i'm glad we're going to have a chance to vote on this landmark agreement. i urge that tomorrow we pass it on a bipartisan basis. i think we will. getting this to the finish line is a significant achievement. but to do it while also signing onto the phase one agreement with china today is really incredible. so again it's been a strong week. i want to congratulate bob lighthizer, president trump and others who worked to bring this win to the finish line. when i was u.s. trade rep for george w. bush, we conducted the first economic relationship review with china. we issue add report and it

concluded that our trade relationship with china lacked equity, durability, and balance. equity, durability, and balance. and guess what? 13 years later, china still doesn't play by the rules. one reason the trade deficit with china has grown to be the largest in the world is because of that. in 2018 we sent china about $108 billion of exports and they the sent us about $560 billion in exports. meaning we had a resulting trade deficit of about $380 billion. the biggest trade deficit in the history of the world. so that's a problem. but it's more than just a trade deficit. that isn't the only way to measure trade. beijing routinely uses subsidies, state-owninged enterprises and lack of transparency by government control of their own economy in order to surpass the united states as the world's economic and innovation leader. china's current policies

undercut commitments china has made to us and other countries, agreements that they would open up their markets, protect international property rights, and meet it's w.t.o. commitments on trid practices such as subsidies which they provide. i encourage you to read the section 301 report on china. that's the basis for this phase one agreement and the basis for the administration putting those higher tariffs in place on chinese products over the past couple years. the report notes that in 2016 the multilateral organization for economic corporation and development ranked china the fourth most restrictive climate in the world. china's investment climate is four times more restrictive than that of the united states. that's why we needed to take some action and have a negotiation with china to come up with something mutually

beneficial. i've supported these 301 actions by president trump to create this more level playing field for american workers, farmers, and business owners. the only significant leverage we had to be able to do that was by controlling access to our own market by raising tariffs tax higher tariffs have collateral consequences, and we've seen that for our consumers and companies. but they have been necessary, a necessary evil to be able to hold china's feet to the fire and force them to the negotiating table and toest go the result we seem -- and to get the result we've seen today. these measures are paying off. think about it in what i said about -- equity, durability, and balance. in the interest of a more balanced relationship, phase one directly addresses that $380 billion deficit we talked about. china has agreed to increase its purchases of american products by at least $200 billion over the next two years. with additional increases likely in the future. that's going to help reduce our

trade deficit and provide some relief, particularly in the agricultural, manufacturing, energy, and service sectors. the agreement also includes provisions to make our relationship more equitable. that includes new commitments in intellectual property protection, new obligations on tech transfer, and a discipline on currency manipulation similar to what in the u.s.-mexico-canada agreement. specifically, beijing has committed to transfer their intellectual property to u.s. firms. this is a big deal. it is a critical step in addressing the i.p. theft that china has used to fuel its economic rise. china companies aren't forced to hand over their patents as a condition of doing business here in america and american companies shouldn't be forced to do the same in china. we will also be able to keep a closer eye on china's currency manipulation. when the treasury department found evidence of manipulation to boost chinese exports, they labeled china a currency manipulator for the first time

since 1994. that designation was just lifted because of phase one. this new agreement contains new transparencies and accountability commitments to ensure that american trade enforcers can better monitor future manipulation. the phase one with agreement is a good step toward creating a balanced and more equitable relationship between our two countries but our trade relationship will remain durable if we enforce these agreement. it is significant that these agreements include the option to reimpose tariffs. enforcement is critical. just as the rest of the world is watching our success at getting to yes on these trade agreements, they are also watching how aggressively we're going to enforce these commitments. that's why it is imperative that the united states utilizes the enforcement process swiftly should it find evidence that china violated its commitments. and congress is watching. such a big day for traid especially a couple of weeks

into the new year, it would be easy to ask if anything else is left for the the rest of the year. there's lots. tonight we should celebrate our accomplishments but tomorrow continues to bring a host of challenges and opportunities to advance a bold trade agenda. most importantly, the next step is to negotiate the phase two agreement with china that addresses additional structural issues i mentioned earlier. the subsidies, the state owned enterprises, lack of transparency that make doing business in china an uphill battle. resolving these issues will be critical to ensure our two economies are playing by the same set of rules, not different sets of rules. so between usmca and this phase one agreement, 2020 has already been a significant year for trade but there's even more progress we're set to make. i look forward to phase two negotiations with japan this spring, especially regarding new market access for made in america automobiles. i look forward to potential f.t.a. talks with switzerland and with the united kingdom post

brexit, new trade agreements to open up more market access. we want to ensure that the extension of the w.t.o. moratorium on tariffs on data continues. i hope we'll see renewed efforts at the w.t.o. reform efforts. we need to address america's long-standing fundamental concerns about the appellate body, be special and different rengs status and decline of w.t.o.'s negotiating function. we've got lots to do. i hope congress will consider new legislation on counter veiling duty laws. i hope we'll pass the trade security act to return section 232 to its original purpose of protecting genuine national security threats. clearly there's a lot work we can do in 2020, and i look forward to it. but today we should pause. we should congratulate the trump administration on these two successes we've talked about today. i've long advocated for balanced trade that prioritizes market opening and tough enforcement, and i believe that both the

usmca and the china agreement embody this philosophy of balanced trade. and most importantly, i believe our country is better off because of it. i yield back my time. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. brown: thank you, mr. president. i appreciate my colleague's indulgence also. i rise today to honor a dedicated public servant whom we tragically lost last week, chris allen. chris served in the senate for nearly a decade, most recently on the staff of senator grassley. i appreciate that senator grassley happens to be presiding right now as the president pro tempore of the senate. chris was a leader in our efforts to solve the pension crisis that threatens the retirement security of more than a million americans, including a number of people in the gallery today. my staff and i got to know him well working together to find a bipartisan solution. he was part of what we consider a sort of pensions family in the senate. we didn't always agree, but chris always understood the

stakes. he took this crisis seriously. he knew it affected people's lives in the most central way. he understood what collective bargaining was about. you give money up today in wages to protect your future. he was committed to finding a solution. most importantly, he always, as senator grassley knows, treated the retirees with dignity and respect for their work. he understood what this retirement crisis meant to those families and the pressure they were under. in 2018 when we worked together with him and the staff of senator grassley and chairman hatch and senator portman in our bipartisan pensions committee, we held a field hearing in columbus to hereby directly from current workers, retirees and small businesses. chris came to ohio for the entire field hearing. he didn't have to. a lot of staff members didn't. but the important -- but he understood how important it was to talk with the people whose livelihoods were at stake in this crisis. workers and retirees came from

all over ohio, companies often that had been in business for 100 years came from all over the region for that hearing. we had a 25,000-person rally outside the ohio state capitol. i would add again that the number of of people in the gallery today were at that rally. our staff was a little nervous about how chris might react when he saw that. his boss had some agreements with these folks and the best way to find a solution. but chris just looked out at that sea of people and he said that's cool. that empathy was a part of who he was. he was responsive. he was kind. he was thoughtful. he embodied the decorum of what the senate should be. he wasn't interested in partisan warfare. at a time when too many people retreat to their partisan corners, that was not chris allen. that spirit of cooperation, of mutual respect will be missed more than ever. he was dedicated to his work. he was dedicated to the people whom our work affects. he would meet for hours, do

whatever it took to work toward a solution. the only thing he stopped for was his family. chris was a devoted father to his two daughters, lucy and sophie. connie's and my heart goes out to them and to chris' wife linda. i know nothing we can say can erase the pain of a sudden death of a father and a husband so young, i hope they take some comfort in knowing how many lives, starting with senator grassley, how many lives chris touched. we miss him. we will continue to fight for a bipartisan solution that honors chris' memory and protects the pensions that american workers earned over a lifetime of work. i thank the presiding officer. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from washington state. ms. cantwell: mr. president, i thank my colleague for mentioning and honoring chris allen, and our sympathies to the family. thank you so much for talking about the hard work that so many of our staff do around the capitol that people don't realize. and while we have lost someone

on our side too, it's important to remember those who give so much of their time and energy to make our country better. mr. president, i rise to support the usmca agreement we're going to be voting on tomorrow and i want to thank all the people who worked on it including senator grassley, senator wyden, senator brown, speaker pelosi and many other people to get us a final product, something that i believe should move forward. it's very important to me that we continue to open up trade markets, but i hope my colleagues will also realize that the world economy has reached a tipping point. over half of the world is now either middle class or wealthier. so that means that we have more people to sell more u.s. products to. that means bigger market opportunities for u.s.-manufactured goods, for agricultural products, and a way for us to continue to compete in some of our most important industries. that is why i've always

supported making sure that we continue to open up trade markets in a fair way. and for us in washington state, the north american free trade agreement was a positive move. in the context, prior to the agreement for washington, maybe in mexico there was $300 million of business. now there's more than $2 billion. and they were one of our largest exports for washington apples. today canada, you can see a similar story. prior to the north american free trade agreement, our products into that country were roughly about $2 billion. today they're $9 billion. so continuing to modernize the north american free trade agreement is an important step for washington and for our economy. the important aspects of this deal help us open and get a fair playing field for wheat, for making sure that digital trade continues in a fair way, and that dairy products are accessed

into canada in a fair way and that our wine industry, believe it or not, canadians drink a lot of wine, particularly in british columbia, and they have not always given us fair access to that market. so it is very important that it will increase access to washington wines into canada, which is the largest market for washington wines buying about ten million a year. but as i mentioned, usmca will maintain a duty-free access for our dairy products. it will certainly make sure that our wheat products are on a level playing field and continue the access to digital trade. i want to thank my colleagues senator brown and senator wyden and speaker pelosi and all those in the labor movement who worked hard with getting an enforcement and capacity-building provision in this legislation. i'm sure this will be a subject of a lot of debate tomorrow on a couple of amendments. but what we're doing here that i know of for the first time is business and labor coming

together and saying we need to build the capacity within a country so that they can enforce trade agreements. this is a positive step, not just for mexico but a positive step for what we need to do around the globe. i wish we could just say to every country, yes, put up the regime to enforce these laws and make it happen tomorrow, and we can help you and your economy. but it just doesn't work like that. and when you retreat from trade -- and trust me, i believe this administration has retreated from trade when it starts with a tariff first approach. you cannot start the discussion with throwing out tariffs and then penalizing our farmers and then thinking that we're going to get the door open. so i'm all ears to hear what we're going to get with china. but i think my colleagues who did the hard work on this agreement to make enforcement and capacity building real for the first time.

why? because as we look at that world economy outside the united states, it's one of the biggest economic opportunities we will see. that is we know how to grow things. we know how to make things. we should make sure we're opening up markets in a fair trade regime to those products. so i will continue to work with our colleagues here to make sure that that is achieved. i hope the president will stop the tariff first approach, stop the continuation of the tariffs and the impacts that we're seeing now, and get down to continuing to negotiations with us being a leader for opening up markets. the united states can't lose shelf space to very, very competitive markets and then come back years later and try to regain it. let's be a world leader in establishing the rules for fair trade and pushing for provisions like we see in the mexico agreement so we can move forward making sure washington

products, u.s. products, american-made products get delivered to a growing, wealthier world. i thank the president and i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from vermont.

mr. sanders:i ask that the quorum call be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection, proceed, senator. mr. sanders: mr. president, i rise in opposition to the nafta 2 trade agreement negotiated by president trump. this agreement is opposed by labor unions like the international association of machinists and united food and commercial workers. it is opposed by numerous environmental organizations, including the sunrise movement, the sierra club, friends of the earth, the league of conservation voters, and virtually every major environmental organization in the country. further, it is opposed by the national family farm coalition which believes it will lock in rules that have devastated family-based agriculture and expand corporate control over agriculture in north america. i am proud to stand with these labor unions, with the environmental groups, and family farmers against president

trump's nafta. mr. president, i not only voted against nafta in 1993, i marched against it. in 2000, i voted against normal trade relations with china. i opposed the u.s.-korea free trade agreement, and other trade agreements. the bottom line is that we need trade agreements in this country that work for workers, that work for farmers, and not just the c.e.o.'s of large multinational corporations. there is no doubt in my mind that we need to fundamentally rewrite our disastrous trade agreements and create and protect good-paying american jobs, that we need trade agreements which will improve the environment and combat climate change, and we need trade agreements which end the destructive race to the bottom

where workers are forced to work for lower and lower wages. unfortunately, this revised trade agreement with mexico and canada does none of these things. it must be rewritten. while nafta has led to the loss of nearly one million american jobs, this agreement does virtually nothing to stop the outsourcing of jobs to mexico. under this agreement, large multinational corporations will still be able to shut down factories in america where workers are paid some $28 an hour and move to mexico where workers there are paid less tha. when donald trump was a candidate for president, he promised that he would stop the outsourcing of american jobs, the -- to mexico, china, and other low-wage countries. that has not happened.

the truth is since trump took office, over 170,000 american jobs have been shipped overseas. in 2018, we had a record-breaking $891 billion trade deficit in goods, a $419 billion trade deficit with china, and an $81 billion trade deficit with mexico. in 2018, for the first time in our history, manufacturing workers began getting paid less than workers overall. it used to be that manufacturing workers made really good wages compared to the rest of the workforce. not the case anymore. today manufacturing workers get 28.15 an hour while the average worker makes 15 cents an hour more.

last month, mr. president, we lost 12,000 factory jobs, and despite trump's rhetoric, we are in a manufacturing recession. mr. president, there is a reason why virtually every major environmental group is opposed to trump's nafta 2.0. this agreement does nothing to stop fossil fuel companies like exxon, mobil, and chevron from dumping their waste and pollution into mexico and destroying the environment. in fact, it makes it easier for fossil fuel companies to bring tar sands oil into the united states through dangerous pipelines like the keystone x.l. it does this -- this proposal does not even mention the word climate change. imagine in the year 2020, we have a major trade agreement that does not even mention the

words climate change. the existential threat facing not only our country but the entire planet. this deal preserves the disastrous investment state dispute settlement system for oil and gas companies, allowing them -- the president pro tempore: the senate will be in order. go ahead, senator. mr. sanders: this allows oil and gas companies to continue to put corporate profits ahead of our air, water, climate, and health. mr. president, at this pivotal moment in american history, it is not good enough to ticker -- tinker around the edges. the scientific community has been very clear. if we do not act boldly and

aggressively to transform our energy system away from fossil fuel and into energy efficiency and sustainable energy, the future of this planet is in doubt, and there is no question but that the nation and planet relief to our children and to our grandchildren will be increasingly unhealthy and uninhabitable. we have a major climate crisis, and no trade deal should be passed that does not address that issue. mr. president, in my view, we need to rewrite this trade agreement to stop the outsourcing of american jobs, to combat climate change, to protect the environment, and to stop the destructive race to the bottom. we have got to stop large profitable corporations that are outsourcing american jobs overseas from receiving lucrative federal contracts. it makes no sense to me that

your large corporations shut down in america, go to cheap labor countries abroad, and again online and receive very large federal contracts. we've got to stop that. and further, we have got to repeal trump's tax giveaway to the healthy which have provided huge tax breaks to companies that shut down manufacturing plants in the united states and move abroad. trade is a good thing, done well, but this trade agreement does not accomplish that end. thank you very much, mr. president.

the majority secretary: mr. president, a message from the house of representatives. the house clerk: mr. president, i have been directed by the house of representatives to inform the senate the house has passed h. resolution 798, a

resolution appointing and authorizing managers of the impeachment trial of donald john trump, president of the united states. the president pro tempore: the message will be received. mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that pursuant to rule 1 of the rules and procedure and practice, when sitting on impeachment trials, the secretary of the senate inform the house of representatives that the senate is ready to receive the managers appointed by the house for the purpose of exhibiting articles of impeachment against donald john

trump, president of the united states. agreeably to the notice communicated to the senate. further, that at the hour of 12:00 noon on thursday, january january 16, 2020, the senate will receive the managers on the part of the house of representatives in order that they may present and exhibit the articles of impeachment against donald john trump, president of the united states. the president pro tempore: is there any objection? if not, so ordered. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that pursuant to rules 3 and 4 of the rules of procedure and practice when sitting on impeachment trials, that at the hour of 2:00 p.m. on thursday, january 16, 2020, the senate proceed to the consideration of the articles of impeachment and that the presiding officer, through the secretary of the senate, notify the chief justice of the united states of the time and place fixed for consideration of the articles and request his attendance as

presiding officer, pursuant to article 1, section 3, clause 6, of the u.s. constitution. the president pro tempore: is there any objection? so ordered. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the presiding officer be authorized to appoint a committee of senators to, upon the recommendation of the majority leader and to, upon the recommendation of the democratic leader, to escort the chief justice into the senate chamber. i further ask consent that the secretary of the united senate e directed to notify the house of representatives of the time and place fixed for the senate to proceed upon the impeachment of donald john trump in the senate chamber. the president pro tempore: is there any objection? if not, so ordered. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that access to the senate wing, the senate floor, and the senate chamber galleries during all of the proceedings involving the exhibition of consideration of the articles of

impeachment against donald john trump, president of the united states, at all times that the senate is sitting in trial with the chief justice of the united states presiding be in accordance with the allocations and provisions announced into the desk, and i ask that it be printed in the record. the president pro tempore: is there objection? if not, so ordered. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the consideration of s. res. 471, submitted earlier today. the president pro tempore: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 471, authorizing the taking of a photograph in the chamber of the united states senate. the president pro tempore: is there objection to proceeding to the consideration? without objection, then the senate will proceed. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the president pro tempore: without objection, so ordered.

mr. mcconnell: now, mr. president, for the information of all senators, a few minutes ago, the senate was notified that the house of representatives is finally ready to proceed with their articles of impeachment. so by unanimous consent, we have just laid some of the groundwork that will structure the next several days. we have officially invited the house managers to come to the senate tomorrow at noon to exhibit their articles of impeachment. then later tomorrow afternoon, at 2:00 p.m., the chief justice of the united states will arrive here in the senate. he will be sworn in by the president pro tempore, senator grassley. then the chief justice will swear in all of us senators. we will pledge to rise above the petty factionalism and do justice for our institutions, for our states, and for the nation. and then we will formally notify the white house of our pending trial and summon the president to answer the articles and send

his counsel. so the trial will commence in earnest on tuesday. but first, mr. president, some important good news for the country. we anticipate the senate will continue the usmca tomorrow and send this landmark trade deal to president trump for his signature. a major victory for the administration, but more importantly for american families. so let me close with this -- this is a difficult time for our country, but this is precisely the kind of time for which the framers created the senate. i'm confident this body can rise above short-termism and factional fever and serve the long-term best interests of our nation. we can do this, and we must.

the president pro tempore: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call: