vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any other senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? if not, the yeas are 51, the nays are 42. the nomination is confirmed. the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that with respect to the walker nomination, the motion 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. mcconnell: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar number 717. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all in favor say aye. those opposed, no.

the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, cory t. wilson to be united states circuit judge for the fifth circuit. mr. mcconnell: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the cloture motion. the clerk: cloture motion. we, the 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 cory t. wilson of mississippi to be united states judge for the fifth circuit, signed by 17 senators as follows -- mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the mandatory quorum call be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the

senator more missouri. mr. blunt: mr. president, over the weekend, we celebrated flag day where we honor our country's flag as a symbol of unity. it's also a symbol of all the struggles we have gone through as a nation and the struggles ahead of us. harry truman whose desk -- one of his desks he used on the senate floor is right here in front of me, once said that flag day is also a chance for us to consider what we want the flag to stand for. so i think it's appropriate that we're considering the best way we can make sure that the flag stands for all we want it to stand for and for all of us. senator tim scott has introduced the justice act that would bring us closer to that idea. i was glad to be a cosponsor of the bill. i think this bill has the potential to make a real difference in how we deal with the real important issue of --

and difficult issue of police reform, and making sure that our communities are both safe and secure. you know, you can be safe in the sense that you're not in danger, but people also need to feel secure, meaning they have confidence that they will remain safe and that they will be treated fairly while they are safe. we need to be sure that all the people of our country believe that justice can be blind, but they can also dispense justice without fear or favor. policing by its very nature is mostly a local function. there are around 18,000 police departments across the country. and most of the reforms can most be made at the local level or the state level. there are different ways that police systems are structured around the country. there are different levels of law enforcement and how they relate to each other. i don't think we're going to do

anything effectively in the congress to impact that, but i think there are some things we can do, both in the congress and the administration. i think senator scott has done a really good job of finding what many of those things are and how to make them happen with bipartisan support. there is a lot in this bill that just simply increases transparency and accountability. more reporting so the justice department has an idea of areas where problems seem to arise more frequently and maybe shouldn't. an area of reporting so a troublesome officer, as all of those troubled reported, if they have had problems with these issues of fairness or constitutional protection, and if that officer is applying at another law enforcement agency, that information should be readily available.

there are two important ways to give people a sense of security. we do that recognizing that the majority of police in this country are not only not a problem, they do an incredibly hard job, and they do it in an incredible way. it's a job that we have to have. it has to be conscientiously, professionally, and courageously done. law enforcement officers all over america do it. they get up and do a hard job every day. they run to danger when others run away. it's a hard job. frankly, i think the hardest job in america might be to be the spouse of a law enforcement officer. law enforcement officers really generally as a sense -- there are occasions when this isn't the case, but generally has a

sense whether they are in imminent danger or not. the person who cares about them, the person who wonders all day wonders what at this exact moment is that individual facing and are they safe or not? the problem in policing is really a very few officers and maybe even a much fewer number of police departments where there is a systematic problem. i think if there is a systemic problem in a department, it's hard for that department to solve that problem, and so some of what senator scott's legislation does helps create the tools that they might need to get that done or the tools that we might need as outside helpers to say here's a department that somebody needs to look at. his legislation can assure us

that that small group of people in law enforcement who aren't conducting themselves the way that everybody else in law enforcement does, that there is transparency, that there is reporting, that things can't just be swept under the rug, that an officer can't go from one department to another without the new department knowing exactly what they are getting. this legislation sets up more funding to make sure that body cameras are widely available and have to be used if you have them. i think there is plenty of evidence since 2014 when we had really the beginning of the modern body camera movement that if you have got those cameras on your body and you have got them on, that the escalation of violence, for whatever reason,

happens much less frequently. both the police officer knows that camera is on and the person they are dealing with knows that camera is on, and it seems to make a difference. reporting when there are death or serious injuries due to the use of force, and those are investigated i believe in every department in america, but there is no reason they shouldn't also be reported to see if there is a pattern that involves either an individual officer or a pattern that involves a department that needs to be looked at. sharing records as i said before critically important so that one bad officer doesn't get passed from one department to another there are things in the realm of training where this legislation helps officers get training on tactics to de-escalate a situation when it comes out of control. officers want this kind of training.

officers want the kind of training that makes it easier for them to understand if they are in a situation where mental health is the problem or opioid addiction is the problem or drug addiction is the problem. are you dealing with a real criminal here or are you dealing with somebody who has gotten themselves in a situation that you need to figure out how to get them in a different and better place. while we need to move quickly to take up this legislation, i think there are some areas where the administration can act and is acting based on announcements that were made this week and things that weren't announced this week. i talked to attorney general barr a couple of weeks ago as these incidents began to become more clear in the sense of problems that could be within entire police departments. and encouraged him to restore more of the pattern and practice

reviews that were part of what the justice department used for about a decade. they were in place until november of 2018. i think they need to be back in place. now, we know from past usage that they don't have to be used on any situation or every situation, but they can be used. we've seen them used in my state, in ferguson, missouri, in surrounding st. louis county that had a much bigger department, asked for a voluntary review in the city of st. louis which has a big police department but not as big as st. whether that review was voluntary or even if it involved a consent decree, i think that the case can be made that things happened in those three departments that might not have happened otherwise. the attorney general and i both

agreed that if you don't have a tool in the toolbox, you can't use it. and the importance of seeing what you need to do to put every tool in the toolbox, even if it's a tool that you have previously taken out and said well maybe we don't need that any longer, if you don't need it, you don't have to use it but you're certainly not going to be able to use it if you don't have it. president trump took some additional steps that i was supportive of and talked about earlier this week when you and i were at our leadership stake youtout,mr. president. officers with better tools to deal with mental health, homelessness, addiction issues, excellence in mental health. missouri is one of the eight excellence in mental health states. this is legislation, bipartisan legislation that i've worked on for several years with senator stabenow from michigan. it allows law enforcement to

connect people with the help they need and wind up having them some place more appropriate than either jail or court. in fact, mr. president, the department of health and human services in monitoring this program says it's led to a 60% decrease in jail time. now part of that is a lot of people just don't wind up going to jail because it makes it more possible for people in many of the departments in my state and others to have a constant contact with that mental health professional. maybe it's on the ipad that they're carrying with them where they can get that 24/7 connection with a health care professional. certainly benefits from the training that many missouri officers have had now in crisis intervention in kansas city and st. louis county and st. louis city and spring field.

i've written to officers and talked to officers and watch how this happens. and that builds confidence. senator scott's bill builds the same kind of confidence. now, i've heard some of our friends on the other side say, well, i'm for 80% of what's in that bill. no, they don't even say that. they say i'm for 80% of the bill. now what's the difference? being for 80% of the bill means there are things in it that you don't want but they also say more frequently, no, that bill has 80% of what i want in it already. well, let me remind our friends how you make a law. you make a law under the constitution. the house passes a bill and maybe you like that better. the senate passes a bill and maybe the senate has 80% of what you'd like to see in the final bill, in the senate bill.

and then you go to conference. it was taught in every civics school book that every member of the senate studied and we don't do it much anymore. you can't get to conference unless there's a senate product. no matter how much you love the house bill, if you're a member of the senate, you don't get to weigh in on the house bill unless you have a senate bill that allows you to go to that conference. this would be the perfect time when members of the senate say and you and i should be listening carefully over the next few days, when they say 80% of what i want is in that bill or 85% of what i want is in that bill, particularly if -- usually they say there's nothing in the bill. i don't want it. it just doesn't have everything i do want. well, if 80% of what you want is in the bill and the house passes another bill that you like better, maybe you come out of that conference with 90% of what

you want. if a solution that gets you 90% of what you want or 80% of what you want is the alternative to zero percent of what you want, if you want to be a legislator, you've got to figure out that that is a better path for you to take than the zero percent path. it would be tragic next week if the result of a us deliberation and -- of a house deliberation and this month the senate deliberation is that -- there's no further discussion because everybody decided if it wasn't everything they wanted, they didn't want to have the process that we used to call -- and the constitution calls and civics book calls the legislative process. these are not the first struggles we face together as a nation. we have come a long way.

we still have a long way to go. remember, the constitution doesn't talk -- doesn't even promise a perfect union. it promises a more perfect union. you get to a more perfect union one step at a time, not all at once. my guess is we'll always be on the journey toward a more perfect union. but senator scott has given us an opportunity to take some of the important steps on that journey and make the union more perfect than it is right now. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator for missouri. mr. blunt: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection.

senator mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from from alaska. ms. murkowski: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, on tuesday, just a few days ago, i convened a hearing on the energy and natural resources committee. we were focused on the impacts of covid-19 and how this pandemic has impacted our nation's energy industry. we've had a lot of discussion about the impact of covid on our nation, on our economy. i think it's probably clear to say that every facet of our society has been impacted. but it's certainly clear to me as a senator for the state of alaska and as chairman of the energy committee that the energy

sector has suffered perhaps uniquely and i think acutely. we've seen limits on business, on travel, on social activities, and when you think about those limitations, the far-reaching consequences that they have for our nation's energy producers -- whether it is -- those that produce oil and gas, coal, renewables, advanced technologies such as nuclear power, all those who help us produce our energy and use our energy more efficiently -- all aspects have been impacted. and at that hearing, we had some pretty good testimony. but our witnesses were able to explain and quantify some of those impacts. we heard that u.s. oil production has declined by almost two million barrels per day. spot prices for liquefied natural gas have effectively

collapsed, creating challenges for export projects. domestic electricity consumption projected to decline by 5.7% this year. largely due to the closure of businesses and then of course the shelter-in-place orders. but it's not just the oil and gas sector. the renewable energy sector has also faced substantial supply chain disruptions, the efficiency sector has faced health and safety restrictions in homes and buildings. overall what we were told, the energy industry has lost an estimated 1.3 million jobs since early march, including more than 600,000 jobs associated with clean energy. so good -- good reminder in terms of where we've seen this

direct impact and the impact on jobs. but our hearing was also a reminder that the energy industry can be a key leader, really, be a sector that can really help lead our nation's economic recovery. when you think about -- when you think about energy itself, this is a finished product, it is a feedstock, it's a raw material, it's an input, it's an output, it is value added, it's a natural resource, it's a tradeable commodity, it's a precious asset, it is critical infrastructure and emergency reserves, it's financial collateral and it's a source of high-paying an high-skilled jobs in its own right. i think we recognize that current low prices are good for

us. we're seeing our families pay less and thus they can devote more to other priorities. so underlying message here is the energy industry is -- is an important component to how we move to this phase of economic recovery. so -- so what can we do to help this industry and thus the broader economy recover? it was interesting because we had a panel of five -- five witnesses before us. several of those witnesses all pointed to the same piece of legislation as one of the answers as to how we can help the economy recover, and that is a bill that those of us on the energy and natural resources committee developed throughout last year. we called it the american energy innovation act.

i just refer to it as our energy bill. but it will ensure that the u.s. remains a global energy leader while strengthening our national security, investing in clean technologies and securing our nation's supply chain. it's a pretty -- priet wide- -- pretty wide-ranging bill. it covers everything from energy efficiency to renewables. we have a strong focus on carbon capture, a big anchor piece is energy storage, advanced nuclear plays a key role, vehicle technologies. we also focus on mineral security recognizing the key aspects of -- of secure supply chains, grid and cybersecurity, workforce modernization. really all areas that will work to help our economy, boost our

international competitiveness and protect human health and the global environment. at the hearing on tuesday one of our witnesses described this energy bill, or american energy innovation act, as foundational. and i really think that it is just that. it is foundational. so where are we with this foundational energy bill that -- that has been the work of such a good, strong collaborative committee process? it was clearly timely for the senate to be considering this in this year and certainly before the pandemic and it's even more critical, even more timely that we consider it now. and when we -- when we had an opportunity to bring this to the floor earlier, there was -- there was a desire and an

interest in making sure that we were focusing on -- on our clean and on our renewable energy sector. we do that within that bill. it's been interesting because in -- in the past several weeks we have heard -- we have heard calls from members of this body to -- to prioritize what they say -- prioritize a robust clean energy recovery plan. so there was a letter from 24 members of the senate who urged senate leadership to, quote, prioritize a robust clean energy recovery plan. and in their letter they call for investments in renewable energy, energy storage, energy efficiency, clean vehicles, clean and efficient infrastructure, clean fuels and workforce development. sounds pretty much like what we

included within our american energy innovation act. i sent many of them just a quick letter detailing how our bill really does accomplish just that, including the specifics that focus on each of these priorities and encourage them to help me pass it. as you may recall, mr. president, we have the american energy innovation act on the senate floor at the end of february just before the pandemic took hold. again, i mentioned the collaborative process that went into building that bill. we spent a lot of time in the energy committee working through a lot of the issues that had some conflict to reduce that conflict so that we could get a good, strong bipartisan product, and as a consequence, we have a bill that contains the priorities from more than 70 senators, it's supported by more than 200 organizations.

we incorporated 18 amendments here on the floor working through that process, but the senate ultimately denied cloture on -- on march 9. this was just before the shelter in place and the work from home orders began. so we hit -- we hit a -- we hit a wall there. and the unfortunate reality is we hit that wall, we were derailed with this important legislative effort not because of an impasse that we had with the -- the contents of our bill but it was an unrelated dispute from another committee. it was not something that, as chairman, i could have anticipated. there was no warning it was going to be an issue for our bill, and in fairness, we didn't have any power as the energy and

natural resources committee to work it out for this other committee. we -- we were hamstrung by it and effectively what happened then was a year of good, strong committee work by the energy committee is now being held hostage in a fight in another committee. and i've -- i've been patient with this but i would -- i would remind colleagues that -- that we're not getting any more extra legislative days being added. the clock is ticking here. and this is a matter that, again, when this came before us while we were on this floor trying to work out the last of the amendments, this came up at

the last minute and we were promised a resolution at that time. we'll have this fixed in a month. well, it's been over three months now since this became an issue and, again, we have lost valuable time. and because of these -- this issue from within the e.p.w. committee, it is holding back a strong bipartisan bill that would allow us to modernize our nation's energy policies for the first time in more than a dozen years. so in a week where i have certainly been reminded about the importance of energy and -- and again heard good, strong support for our energy bill, i would -- i would ask my

colleagues -- we need to redouble our efforts on this to advance this bill. we need to -- to unlock this energy bill, a good bill that is ready to go from the complications that have been created within another committee. i -- i like to pride myself on -- on being a pretty good team player around here, and i want to give people space to work their issues out, but i think it is time, again, for those who are able to hold the key to this to help us unlock this so that we can move a significant priority, not just for the energy and natural resources committee, but a significant priority for every member in this chamber. because it doesn't make any difference if you're a republican or democrat, if you come from an an urban area or a

rural area. when it comes to the strength of our nation's economy, the foundational interest here, the foundations rest so solidly on -- on energy. and so an opportunity to update and modernize our energy policies in a way that benefits us all is something that i would hope that we can all agree to. so i want to get this bill moving. we had a -- we had a win this week that originated in the -- in the energy and natural resources committee when it comes to some of our lands and conservation measures. the great american outdoors act passed by a -- by a strong margin. it was the work of a lot of good people, but it began, both measures the land and water

conservation fund as well as restore our parks act began with the good work of a committee working together to move those pieces of legislation through the committee process, not perfect in my view, but i knew these were good policies that many members across -- on both sides of the aisle wanted to place a priority on. so let's figure out how we can make something like that happen. so i am proud of the fact that we can -- we can move good initiatives through this committee. and i will just remind you that we've got another good initiative that we're ready to go on. mr. president, i want to end my few moments on the floor with -- with a -- an acknowledgment of where we're going to be next week. it's been made clear that we're going to have an opportunity to take up or -- or bring up for discussion legislation that has been drafted by senator tim

scott from south carolina, along with a group of fellow colleagues over here, focused on matters relating to policing reforms and -- and my hope -- and it's more than a hope, it's really a prayer, mr. president. my prayer is that we will come to this floor next week as -- as colleagues and as individuals who want to bring to bear good policy for a country at a time that is so desperate for leadership, that is responsive,

leadership that has demonstrated a willingness to listen to -- to the -- just the raw emotion of what we have seen expressed across this country in the few weeks since the -- the terrible death and killing of george floyd. but recognizing that it is more -- far more than -- than the horrible death of one individual, it is a history that in many parts of our country is -- is raw and open and needs to be addressed. and so my prayer is that we can come to this floor not -- not here to debate through a

partisan lens but here to debate those issues that are so important and so imperative for the american public to hear. that the response is not a republican effort versus a democratic effort. but that it is -- these are matters that we -- we must address, whether it is how we -- how we ensure that there is -- is full and fair accountability, whether it relates to -- to safe policing practices, whether it is how we address the concerns with modern policing when there are issues before our law enforcement officers that -- that span the scope of -- of how we address mental health issues,

those with addiction, how we respond from a broader -- broader view and lens. but do so with our hearts rather than -- than trying to project through our political -- political alignment. and i even hesitate to say because some would ask well, exactly what do you mean by that? i guess what i'm asking for us to do is to come here and debate honestly about -- about where we are as a nation when it comes to ensuring that when we -- when we speak of justice, that we speak of justice for all in a way that

is inclusive, that is fair, that is equal, and that is compassionate, that we recognize that the men and women who get up every morning or stay -- stay out late every evening to protect and defend, that we're there with them and for them as they serve us. so i'm asking for us to -- to come into our work next week with open hearts and open minds having listened well, and if we do that, i can only suspect that the outcome will be good. so with that, mr. president, i thank you, and i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk

will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to executive session for the consideration of the following nomination, executive calendar 702. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent -- -- the presiding officer: the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, national science foundation, sethuraman panchanathan of of arizona to be director. mr. mcconnell: i ask that the senate vote son the nomination with no intervening action or debate, if confirmed, the motion be inquired and laid on the table the and the president be notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. question is on the notion.

all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nomination is confirmed. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following nominations, executive calendar 642, and 651. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report the nominations. the clerk: nomination, department of justice, peter m. mccoy, jr. of south carolina to be united states attorney for the district of south carolina. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the senate vote -- the clerk: vincent f. dee marco of new york to be united states marshal for the eastern district of new york. mr. mcconnell: i ask that the senate vote on the nominations en bloc, if offered, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table en bloc,

the president be needly notified of the -- immediately be notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the nominations en bloc. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the snogs are confirmed en bloc -- the notions are covid en bloc. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the 0 senate proceed to the consideration of calendar number 713 sand 716. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report the nominations en bloc. the clerk: united states, united states postal service, william zollars of kansas to be a governor. donald lee moak of florida to be a governor. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the senate vote on the nominations en bloc with no intervening action or debate, that if confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, en bloc, the the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection.

the question is on the nominations en bloc. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes do have it. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nominations are confirmed en bloc. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the injunction of secrecy be removed from the treaties transferred to the senate by the president of the united states -- extradition treaty with the republic of croatia, convention on the suppression of unlawful acts relating to international civil aviation, protocol supplementary to the convention for the suppression of unlawful seizure of aircraft. i further ask that the treaties be considered as having been read the first time, they be referred with accompanying papers to the committee on foreign relations in order to be printed and that the president's message be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the senate resume legislative session.

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i have two requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the committee on judiciary be discharged from further consideration of s. res. 616 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 616, designating june 12, 2020, as women's veterans appreciation day. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. mr. mcconnell: i further ask the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the consideration of s. res. 630, submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 630, designating june 20, 2020, as american eagle day and so

forth. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the consideration of s. res. 631, submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 631, honoring the life and service of david doran and expressing condolences to his family. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the bill? mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the preamble be agreed to and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 3:00 p.m. monday, june 22,

following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, morning business be closed. following leader remarks, the senate resume to executive session to resume the wilson nomination. finally, i ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding the provisions of rule 22, the cloture vote on the wilson nomination occur at 5:30 p.m. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: if there's no business to come before the senate i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjou