vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? if not, the yeas are 71, the nays are 21. the nomination is confirmed. mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table, and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader.

mr. mcconnell: on monday, republicans introduced a $1 trillion proposal to give american families more coronavirus relief. most urgently, the republicans want to continue a federal supplement to state unemployment insurance which is set to expire, as we all know, tomorrow. if our democratic dleetions had acted -- colleagues had acted with the urgency struggling people deserve we could right now be finishing up a major bipartisan package for kids, jobs, and health care. if our democratic colleagues had acted with urgency, unemployed americans wouldn't be facing a total elimination of this extra help. but instead jobless americans are staring down this cliff because speaker pelosi and the democratic leader have to negotiate. they've refused to move one inch from the speaker's far-left proposal that was so absurd and

so unserious that their own moderate democratic members began trashing it the instant it came out. this is the multitrillion-dollar boondoggle that would tax and borrow in order to provide a massive tax cut to rich people in blue states, the salt giveaway. fund diversity studies of the legal pot industry and do 1,000 other things with no relationship whatsoever to the crisis. just a few minutes ago our colleague from wisconsin tried to get consent to continue the unemployment assistance to prevent it from expiring tomorrow, and the democratic leader objected unless he got to pass the entirety of the massive wish list. republicans want to continue this aid before it expires, but the democratic leader says let them eat salt. this is what was written about their proposal, quote, privately several house democrats concede the bill feels a little more than an effort to appease the

most liberal members of the caucus, end quote. and yet now speaker pelosi and the democratic leader have declared that unemployment americans will not get another cent, not another cent unless the senate agrees to pass the entire bill that even democrats say is ridiculous. this is their position. unemployed people, schools, hospitals, and american families will not see another dime unless they get to cut taxes from millions in brooklyn and san francisco. that's what this is about, mr. president. sure they'll call republicans names for wanting to make sure the assistance doesn't pay people more not to work, but the democratic leader gave away the game this morning. he said on the floor that he now opposes even continuing the aid at the $600 level. they want jobless aid to expire tomorrow, speeder.

lest we forget a few days ago multiple democratic senators and the democratic house majority leader said they were prepared to land somewhere south of $600. military pell democrats said they were -- multiple democrats said they were open to continuing the aid at a level that doesn't pay people more to stay home, but the democratic leader has not only refused to talk, he has gone even further and declared he will not even let the aid continue at $600. the democratic leader has tried to rule out every option except the capital, concept -- except leaving the capitol today and begin this weekend with the unemployment set to expire. these aren't the actions, my friends, that would lead to any geament. -- agreement. they aren't the actions that will actually make a law. i'm not sure my democratic colleagues really agree that

hurting unemployment people is their side's best political strategy, but if that is their position, they'll have to vote on it for the entire country to see. in just a moment i'm going to make the senate vote on a privileged moment. it will be a motion to proceed to legislation which would be used to prevent the unemployment aid from expiring. there are a number of views on both sides of the best way to accomplish that. the bill would be amendable. nobody who actually wants to negotiate, nobody who actually wants a bipartisan outcome would be disadvantaged by merely proceeding to the debate. we've had enough rope a dope. we've had enough empty talk. it's time to go on the record. we'll see who wants a bipartisan outcome for the country and who's trying their hardest to block one. so, mr. president, i move to proceed to legislative session.

the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye. mr. schumer: i ask to be recognized to respond to the leader. the presiding officer: the democratic leader. mr. schumer: thank you, mr. president. well, we've had a lot of words from the leader. none of them talk about reality. one picture equals all his words. schumer, pelosi, mnuchin, meadows in a room negotiating where the republican leader can't even show up because his caucus is so divided, in his own words. 20 of his members don't want to vote for anything. and now faced with a crisis that they created. for ten weeks, ten weeks we have asked the leader to negotiate. and now finally they've woken up to the fact that we're at a cliff, but it's too late, too late because even if we were to pass this measure, all the states, almost every state says

people would not get their unemployment for weeks and months. all because of the disunity, dysfunction of this republican caucus. and of the leader, afraid to negotiate because he doesn't have his people behind him. the bottom line is very simple. this new proposal moves things even backward. instead of a 30% cut from what people are getting, it's a 33% cut. and we all know that the proposal that is in existence now has kept millions out of poverty. now, we hear talk from the other side this creates the deficit. this increases the deficit. we can't spend money. well, i'd remind them of the $1.5 trillion tax cut for the rich, tax cut for the rich. no one even thought about the deficit then. but when it comes to average folks, working people, we don't hear a thing.

unemployment is a crisis. there are many crises. all your states, the parents are saying why can't we open our schools safely. they need dollars. we can't negotiate that proposal. people are being thrown out of their homes. that's a cliff that happened thursday. nothing for that. the bottom line is very simple. this is the worst health crisis in a hundred years. this is the worst economic crisis in 75 years. and unfortunately, at this great moment of terrible trouble in our country, our republican friends are paralyzed and when they want to do something, it's a stunt, not a real negotiation that they know won't pass because their backs are against the wall and the american people, just look at the data, know who's to blame. and know who doesn't want to help people. so the bottom line is very

simple. we democrats know what the problem is and we are unified. we have a very strong proposal. and to look at the things in that proposal with the callousness that my friend, the republican leader, has done, to say that this is all politics when people are being thrown out of their homes and we want to give them shelter, when people are not being able to feed their children and we want to give them food, when small businesses, men and women who have struggled can't keep their businesses going, and we hear nothing. our proposal, the one the republicans objected deals with these problems in a serious, significant, and, yes, expensive way. but we know what's going on the other side of the aisle. it was said by my friend from indiana, let the private sector do it. well, my friends, this is a

moment where the private sector can't solve the problem. this is a moment when we do need strong, active, and bold relief, something that this caucus has been running away from, ignoring for far too long. my fellow americans, we are in an enormous crisis. we are stepping up to the plate on this side of the aisle. please let your senators know on the republican side of the aisle how deep this crisis is, how painful it is for people, and to step up to the plate, get in the room and negotiate a real deal and stop doing stunts that simply are political, get it off my back that you know cannot pass. i yield the floor. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on proceeding to the legislative session. 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: mr. president, i ask the chair to lay before the senate the message to accompany s. 178 and i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. there is a sufficient second. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? if not, the yeas are 47 and the nays are 42. the motion to proceed is agreed to.

the clerk: resolved the bill from the senate, s. 178 entitled an act to condemn gross human rights vitals in turkish muslims in xinjiang and harassment of these communities inside and outside china do pass with an amendment. mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i move to concur in the house amendment with a further amendment number 2499. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from kentucky, mr. mcconnell, moves to concur in the house amendment to the bill with an amendment numbered 2499.

the presiding officer: the senator from arizona. ms. mcsally: mr. president, i deployed to washington to be a pragmatic problem solver and for the past five and a half years i made it my mission in congress to better the lives of hardworking arizonans. in a time of toxic shpt, this is no easy feat.

it requires me to reach across the aisle to find where the ven diagram overlaps. today i'm calling on my democratic colleagues to be pragmatic, to meet in the middle on what we should agree on. i'm asking senators to extend expanded unemployment bistles for seven days while congress comes up with a solution. who could be against that? with the first of august approaching, americans out of work are counting on us for cash so they can pay their rent and put food on the table for their families. and while some states will get the expanded checks, we understand for the next week or two, arizonans have gotten their last expanded check. these arizonans are in my neighborhood, live on my street. they work paycheck to paycheck before this once in a century pandemic hit. i'm here to tell them washington, d.c.'s dysfunction and bickering is alive and well.

congress once again is using hardworking americans as pawns in their political games. for the many arizonans out of work right now, mr. president, this is not a game. americans, arizonans are calling out for help, and it's time we deliver it. so what i'm offering today is a simple seven-day extension of the extra $600 a week for unemployed americans while we work through our differences on how to move forward and see americans through this first in a century crisis. this is a reasonable proposal. who could possibly be against this? i understand as we work to defeat this virus -- which we will -- and support the economic recovery for our

country, we need to incentivize people to return to work safely when they are able. and there are agreements in this chamber on what that looks like, what the ultimate dollar figure or percentage will be, where we land and for how long. well, i know today congress needs to do their job and to prevent this desperately needed extra lifeline from fully expiring. in this uncertain time, everyone is doing the best they can. to make ends meet, to help each other, to help our neighbors, to stay safe. everyone, that is except congress. americans have lost their livelihoods out of no fault of their own due to this cruel virus, should not be collateral damage of political maneuvering. i'm calling on the senate,

let's do what we were sent here to do. let's do our job. in the face of the virus, we've asked millions of americans to go back to work when they can safely, to make hard decisions, to do what they were hired to do. it's time for the senate to do the same. this is a reasonable request. it is simply a seven-day extension of the expanded unemployment benefits while we continue to work out our differences. who could possibly be against this? therefore, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of my bill at the desk. i further ask that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. schumer: reserving the right to object. the presiding officer: the democrat leader. mr. schumer: now,

mr. president, this u.c. request is clearly a stunt, a one-week fix can't be implemented in time, and the senator knows that. plus, there are many other problems arizonans have in addition to this one. arizona parents are worried that schools won't open safely. arizona renters are worried they'll be evicted from their apartments. arizona parents are worried that they can't feed their kids. arizona businesses, small businesses are worried that they won't have the necessary help. all of those things are in the heroes act. plus not a one-week extension, which can't even be implemented, but an extension until january 31. so i would ask my colleagues to tell arizonans whether she supports the heroes act or not, which goes much further and is much stronger on unemployment and many other issues. i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard.

ms. mcsally: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from arizona. ms. mcsally: thank you, mr. president. this is disappointing and a political stunt and a game. and for all the normal people watching out there who don't understand why washington is so dysfunctional, we're just looking for a seven-day extension so they can get another check and pay their rent. i ask who could possibly be against this. well, we found out. it's the senator from new york. you can click the tape or put his picture on your refrigerator when you open it up, because it's the minority leader who's against this on his path to try to become the majority leader and that's unfortunate. arizonans deserve better. thank you, mr. president. the presiding officer: the democratic leader. mr. schumer: mr. president, i am going to ask once again that our republican colleagues support the heroes act.

this is a dramatic crisis affecting all of america in many different ways. we democrats have come up with a bold, strong plan, supported by the vast majority of people, average middle-class people. our proposal deals with the issue of unemployment all the way through january 31. not a one-week stunt which can't even be adapted in time. our proposal deals with schools and their ability to open. our proposal deals with small businesses. our proposal deals with so many of the issues facing america. our colleagues on the other side, we know, are tied in a knot. our colleagues on the other side can't come to an agreement on anything. they did an empty shell bill because the only thing they could support was an empty-shell bill with nothing inside of it. well, that's not what the american people want.

they want action. i would urge the republican leader to start negotiating in good faith and in seriousness. i would urge the president to do things about testing and tracing also in the heroes bill. i would urge we rise to the occasion of this enormous crisis we democrats are doing that in a bold and strong way. we haven't heard anything from our republican colleagues. so i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of my bill at the desk. i further ask that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider -- mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar 455, h.r. 6800, the heroes act,

that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. portman: we've already had this debate once today when the democratic leader chose to offer this motion knowing that of course it's not serious. what he's talking about here, just after having rejected a very commonsense proposal, which is a one-week extension for the unemployment insurance -- by the way, at $600, which is exactly what the democrats say they want. they want to keep it at $600 even though, as we know from numerous studies, that means that for many people, in fact 68% of the people on unemployment insurance based on the university of chicago study, for 68% of those folks they're making more on unemployment insurance than they can make at work. and i think all of us here in this chamber want to be sure that folks are taken care of.

in fact, we just voted on legislation to provide the ability to be able to debate this very issue and other issues. but to say that people should be making substantially more for not working rather than working is something that i think even a lot of my democratic colleagues do not find acceptable. but instead the majority leader is once again offering the heroes act as he's done before. this is the house-passed legislation that was passed actually a while ago, during different times, but it's $3.5 trillion. that's what the c.b.o. says, $3.5 trillion. that makes it of course the most expensive piece of legislation ever passed by either body any time in our history by far. by the way, it has a number of provisions that have nothing to do with covid-19. so here we are in the middle of this crisis. in many places it's getting worse, not better. we do need to act but we need to be sure we're acting in an effective way and putting things

out there, many of which have nothing to do with covid-19. it has immigration policies there. we can debate those separately. immigration policy issues are very contentious and are tough things for us to resolve in any context, but certainly we shouldn't put it in the covid-19 bill. it has unprecedented mandates on the states that says to the states you have to do elections the way congress wants to do, do mail-in balance lots and use the kind of useds we say you have to -- of ideas we say you have to use. a lot of my democratic colleagues agree it should continue to be in the province of the states to make those kind of detailed decisions on elections. it doubles the amount of money in the heroes act that goes to the state as compared to what even the national governors association is asking for. so $3.5 trillion begins to add up when you do things like that. you give twice as much to the states as the states are even asking for. and of course one of my favorite and i know again the senator from new york feels strongly about this from a tax policy

point of view, but it includes in the covid-19 bill a very expensive change in tax policy that actually is a huge tax break for wealthy individuals. that's repealing the salt changes that were made over 50% of the benefit of this goes to the top 1%. that's based on the tax policy center. based on our committee on taxation, a nonpartisan group here in congress, what they're trying to get through in their legislation, the heroes act, 40% of that benefit or more, according to the joint committee on taxation, goes to those with income over $1 million. what's that doing in the covid-19 bill? the democrat leader talked about the need for more money for testing. i couldn't agree with him more. and by the way, the proposal that was presented by senator mcconnell earlier this week has a lot more money for testing. also more money for antiviral med cases, for vaccines, for ensuring that workplaces can be

safe. it has the same amount of money, maybe a little more, the senator can tell us, for our schools, to be able to open our schools safely. there's a lot of common ground here. i think we can find it. i really do. i know that today has not been an example of that. we're even rejecting here a moment ago a seven-day simple extension of 600 bucks per week. but when i look at it, i see the schools' money being identical, the tax provisions that we have to help encourage people to go back to work, encourage companies and nonprofits to be able to put measures in place to make the workplace safe like plexiglass shields or more hand sanitizer or p.p.e., these are all things we can agree on. even on the issue of unemployment insurance. i talked to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle about this. i think there are ways we can get there. i think democrats realize $600 a week does create that disincentive because on average it's 130% more of what people were making in the private sector. we can have a return to work

bonus which has a lot of bipartisan appeal. so let's put aside these games. let's put aside these extreme positions. let's figure out how we can come together. this evening was not a good example of that having rejected the seven-day extension of the $600 per week on unemployment insurance. but i think now we have this opportunity with the legislation that was passed earlier today to begin to have that debate. we can have the debate on unemployment insurance. we can have it on a whole range of issues, how we deal with schools, how we deal with the health care crisis we s.r. the underlying crisis. we can deal with all these issues in a way that enables us to find common ground to create real solutions for the people we represent as we face this unprecedented pandemic. with that, mr. president, i object. mr. schumer: mr. president? the presiding officer: the democratic leader. the objection is heard. mr. schumer: two quick points. one, my friend from ohio -- and i know he has lots of good ideas

and a great deal of sincerity -- made my point. the vast majority of republicans oppose $600 for any time. that's why they're not calling it up for a vote and it shows what a stunt the senator from arizona has done. second, i would say -- i think all the points my colleague made about things that are extraneous are not. they're related to covid. but i'd make one thing not in our bill, one point -- $1.7 billion so the president's hotel doesn't get competition. that's an extraneous thing. it's not in our bill. i yield the floor. mr. alexander: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: mr. president, i ask through the chair does the senator from ohio wish to speak further? mr. president, i thought the senator from arizona made a very commonsense proposal. we're in a position here in the congress that we often find

ourselves. we have different opinions, dramatically different opinions in some cases. and what she said was, while we're working those things out, let's for seven days extend the $600 unemployment benefit so people aren't hurt. that's a commonsense proposal. and i regret that that wasn't adopted. i like what the senator from ohio said. instead of starting -- when you have a disagreement over several items, my experience is you don't start with the things that you disagree on the most. you start with the things that you agree on the most. and there are a number of things in the house-passed bill and in the senate republican bill that was introduced on monday which the president supports. let me repeat that. the house of representatives has passed a bill. they have the democrat majority. the senate has the republican

majority and we have a republican president. so we have a republican president and a republican bill. and we have a house-passed bill. and it's time to see if we can put the two together. that's why we have two bodies. but that requires senators and members of the house who are willing to sit down and come to some compromise or some resolution of the issues. there are some things about which we have big differences. one is the dollar figure. as the senator from ohio said, we've already spent $3.5 trillion. that's a number so big, most of us couldn't even speak it before we got to this era of the sneaky, dangerous covid virus. but let's look at the other side on what might we agree or many of us agree. we are not going to have a hundred percent of either side going to agree on most anything. we might start with schools. schools are starting up in the

southern part of the united states where the presiding officer is from florida, i'm from tennessee. schools are getting ready to go back. so are colleges. that means 70 million students who would like to go back to school or college. a hundred thousand public schools, 35,000 private schools, 6,000 colleges. so what help do they need? they need help reopening safely so that they can go back with students physically present as consistent with safety as is possible. now, i talked with the governor of tennessee bill lee yesterday. he said 93 of the 95 counties in tennessee had schools that were going to reopen in person. now, maybe not every student, maybe not every class, but in 93 of the 95 counties the governor said they know the children need to be in school.

and their parents need for them to be in school. two-thirds of married parents work outside the home. and this is a bill for the children, though. every teacher, every pediatrician, almost every parent knows that especially with young children, if they're left out of school for such a lengthy period of time, it damages them. it hurts them. there is a health risk in going back, yes, not very much to young children. but there's a bigger emotional, intellectual and physical risk if they stay out of school. what do we propose to do? we propose to help pay for the schools to open safely and to help pay for the colleges to open safely which most are doing. the chronicle of higher education said yesterday that 50% of our colleges plan to open this fall with students

physically present. and 35 more percent have a mix with students physically present and on-line instruction. that means only 13% will be all virtual. at least that's their plan. so if we could agree on that, why shouldn't we help them? well, we can agree on it because the house of representatives bill and the senate republican bill has almost exactly the same amount of money in it. about $1,250 for k-12 schools. that's a lot of money per students. about $1,500 per student for colleges to help them open safely. we could agree on that. we can agree on child care, i think. we ought to be talking about back to school, back to college, back to child care, back to work. it's hard to go back to work if you don't have child care. there are provisions in the house bill, in the republican bill that aren't so different. testing. we all believe, i think, that we

need a maximum advance on testing, especially point of care testing. quick, reliable tests. there's money in the republican bill and in the democratic bill to advance that effort. and then the small business loans called p.p.p. that probably was the most successful part of the early cares bill, but a bipartisan group of senators has worked on getting rid of some of the problems with it and come up with a proposal to extend that. now, those are several major points on which we agree and i think the senator from arizona's suggestion that we pass the unemployment benefit for another week while we work together to get agreement was a commonsense one. let me speak for just a moment because i see other senators who are here and would like to speak. so i'll respect that and be brief. one other area on which i think we could agree, and that's telehealth. take a look at what's happened

in the last four months. one of the most dramatic developments in the delivery of medical services ever and why we should make some of the changes that were made permanent. i recently heard from a psychiatric nurse in tennessee who's been seeing patients during the covid-19 pandemic which means she saw them over the internet or talked to them on the telephone. she told me one of her elderly patients who before the pandemic got to her appointments by walking from her high-rise to galton road, catching a bus and walking from the bus stop to the clinic. when the patient got to the clinic, she had to wait for her appointment. then what it was over, she had to do all that in reverse again and go home. this nurse said her patient was in tears out of appreciation because of telehealth she could not have that appointment from her home. she had access to health care without the long journey. she could still receive her

medications and that several of her other elderly friends felt the same way. because of covid-19 the health care sector and federal and state governments have had ten years of experience crammed in to about four months. in 2016, according to the centers for disease control, there were 884 million visits between doctors and patients. almost all of them were in person. a telehealth visit was rare. during the last four months that number of visits has virtually exploded. at vanderbilt university visits went from ten a day to 2,000 a day. in three months vanderbilt has had 100,000 telehealth visits. before covid-19, approximately 13,000 americans enrolled in traditional medicare program received telehealth visits in a week. in the last week of april that number was 1.7 million americans. in total over 9 million americans received telehealth

visits between mid-march and mid-june of those who were in traditional medicare. that's also made a difference in mental health services. in nashville which the presiding officer knows very well, tennessee center stone which provides treatment for mental health and substance disorder uses said it's providing nearly 2,500 telehealth visits per day and 30% more patients are keeping their appointments. we've taken away a lot of the reasons they say people don't follow through. and st. thomas health, the c.e.o. says they have nine hospitals in middle, tennessee, 800 physicians. he predicts that 15% to 20% of all their systems visits will be by telehealth. in other words, mr. president, we're up toward a billion doctor-patient visits in a year and very few of them being telehealth and we're about to get into a situation where

several hundred million of them will be in telehealth. congress and the administration reacted well to that. they made some temporary changes. in-home virtual visits, telehealth for patients in rural areas and rural clinic, telehealth for physical therapists, speech, language and other providers, telehealth for many other services including emergency department visits, allowing medicare, hospice and home dialysis patients to start their case with a virtual visit. now congress is beginning to build on what we learned during the pandemic. and here are the three steps -- and i'll summarize them and ask that my entire statement be printed in the record, if i may. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. alexander: so here are the three steps that congress could now take to build on what we did temporarily during the last four months in summary. one is to pass the heals act that was introduced by republicans on monday, which

provides telehealth access to part time and hourly employees and extends the administration's telehealth flexibilities and waivers through 2021 and the rural clinics and federally qualified health care centers provisions for five years. step two would be to expand the connect act. here i want to salute a group of bipartisan senators who back in 2016 -- senator wicker, senator schatz and others -- saw the importance of telehealth and have introduced a number of provisions for expanding telehealth services. and then step three would be to pass the bill i'm introducing today, which will go further than either of those first two steps and would make permanent inhome visits and the rural telehealth access and also make permanent the authority for the secretary to make the changes

that the secretary has made over the last several months. my speech specifies what those provisions are. they came following a hearing in our help committee on which experts testified. this recommends what all of the experts said we ought to do. there were 31 temporary changes in the telehealth policy of the government. this makes many of them permanent. the best result for the american people would be for congress to approve all three of these steps that i've described. the changes in the heals act that was introduced monday, the connect act for health that many senators have worked on since 2016, and then the legislation i'm introducing today. i don't think we want to miss the opportunity to make permanent the lessons we've learned during this last four months about one of the most important and beneficial changes

in the delivery of health care services ever. i thank the president. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from missouri. mr. hawley: mr. president, i came to this floor a few weeks to talk about the united states supreme court. i come today to revise and extend my remarks. there are now five republican ah.-aintertod -- there are now five republican-appointed justices on the court. republicans have appointed 11 out of the last 15 to the bench. but is this the conservative court that we have worked for? more to the point, is this a constitutionalist court? the only thing i can say for certain when looking at the results of this last term is is that in the words of the late-justice scalia, the imperial judiciary lives. this is a court that freely rewrites congressional statutes, that has protected the worst left-wing precedents of earlier

years, that in the final week of its term gave away half the state of oklahoma. for those who consider themselves constitutional conservatives, these decisions are a clarion call to wake up. and to acknowledge what is staring us in the face -- judicial imperialism is alive and well. it is marching on undaunted. and for religious conservatives, well, these decisions are a call to action. now is the time for us to be heard, and we can begin with what we expect of our nominees to the high court, what we expect them to understand, what we expect them to affirm. and that brings me to the case that propelled religious conservatives into activism and act victim in a -- activism in a few day. the case that made the supreme court the great issue of the day

-- roe v. wade. now, i know that when it comes to the supreme court, we're not supposed to talk about roe. that's the open secret on the right. it's certainly what religious conservatives have been told for years. don't mess up the supreme court nomination process by raising roe. it's imprudent. it's in poor at the same time it will divide our -- it's in poor taste. it will divide our coalition. no, we're supposed to stick to process, about methods, maybe talk throw in some stuff about umthe pires. but do not -- maybe throw in some stuff about umpires. roe is what the propelled generations of religious conservatives to vote for republican presidents and republican senators and republican politicians of every rank and station, all on the promise to reverse this travesty

of a decision, that moral and social injustice that in 47 years has taken the lives of 61 million unborn -- 61 million. republicans have said, vote for us. vote for us and we will undo this wrong. we will return this issue to the people. and yet all these years later, 11 republican-appointed justices later, here we are. the nation apparently no closer to the day when the supreme court will renounce this outrage, renounce its imperial pretensions, and arizona how the good and decent -- and allow the good and decent people of this nation to debate and decide this matter for ourselves. and soughs i say to my republican colleagues -- so i say to my republican colleagues, how long must this go on?

how many more elections must there be? how many more promises must be made? how many more justices must be appointed before we will expect of our nominees what the voters already expect of us? how long before we ask our nominees to the supreme court of the united states to recognize roe as the outrage that it is? let's just be frank. roe is an illegitimate decision. it has no basis in the constitution, none. it has no basis in the law. none of the constitution's specific and innumerated guarantees of privacy even begin to legitimize the taking of innocent human life. none are remotely on point. even liberal scholars recognize this. whole books are written about what roe v. wade should have said. roe marks the point at which the modern supreme court decided that they would just impose

their own views, their own social and moral and legal views on the nation, despite what the people want, despite what the constitution says, no matter how the laws are written. you know, in the words of the late constitutional scholar healy, who i would point out was a political liberal, roe gives no sense of an obligation to try to be. roe is the essence of judicial imperialism. it is a brazen power grab by unelected justices imposing their moral and social views on the nation. just like another group of justices did in a case called plessy v. ferguson, just like another group of justices did before that in a case called dred scott and, yes, i do mean to compare roe to those earlier cases because dred scott and plessy and roe belong together.

they are the worst miscarriages of justice in our history, the worst judicial opinions of all time. dred scott and plessy and roe are abusive, morally repugnant decisions that wounded the soul of this nation. they dishonored this nation's fundamental faith in the dignity and worth of every person. for these reasons, roe is no secondary issue, something to be pushed to the side of the nomination process. roe is central. roe is a window onto the constitutional world view of a would-be justice. it is a measure of their sense of what a justice should be, because if you believe that roe was rightly decided, then there just is no two ways about it. you are a judicial imperialist. if you believe roe was rightly decided, you believe that

unelected judges should have the power to enact their own social agenda, regardless of what the constitution says or what we the people have expressed preference for, voted for, enact into the law. and i would just add that it seems to be the case, inevitably, that when justices enact their views, they enact the views of a certain social class. oh, yes ... the highly educated managerial front row of american society, the class of the faculty lounge in the "c" suite. that's what you get when they govern america. the constitution says that sovereignty rests with we the people, that it should be the people who are in charge. it's what the american people want and have written in their fundamental law and in their statutes that should carry the day. the people have a right to run

their own government. they have a right to expect their views to prevail, to have their constitution be obeyed, and to expect that the justices appointed to their supreme court will abide by the constitution's terms, as we the people wrote them. and that is why, mr. president, i say today, i will vote only for those supreme court nominees who have explicitly acknowledged that roe v. wade was wrongly decided the day it was decided. i say again, i will vote for those nominees only and for those nominees alone. and when i say explicitly acknowledged, i think mean on the record, before they are nominated. i do not want private assurances, i do not seek them. i do not want forecasts about future votes or future behavior

because, frankly, is wouldn't believe them. i don't want promises of any sort. i want evidence that supreme court nominees will obey the constitution and the law. i want to see in the record clear acknowledgment that any nominee understands roe to be the travesty that it is. and if that record is not there, then i will not support the nomination. i don't care who does the nominating. now, some will say that this is yesterday's battle, that we should just accept roe and move on, that today's supreme court is the best we could possibly hope for. to which i say, every single life is worth fighting for, and i will not accept failure, and i will not accept defeat. i take this stand because i believe it is what justice and fidelity to the law requires in

our time of me and of those who would exercise the awesome power of judicial review entrusted to justices in article 3 of our constitution. and i also believe it's what the republican party owes the millions -- millions -- of americans who have made this cause the reason for their vote for many years. these men and women of good will and faith who labor still day in and day out, rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation, working for that time when justice will be done. mr. president, i yield the floor. ms. hirono: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from hawaii.

ms. hirono: mr. president, i would say that the views expressed by the good senator from missouri are not views widely shared by people in this country and to compare the decisions of plessy v. ferguson and the dred scott decision dishonors the memory of congressman john lewis, who only today was buried, put to rest in georgia. let me turn to another subject. mr. president, the covid-19 pandemic has laid bare the systemic racial inequities -- continue equality in our health care system. while the virus has touched americans of every race and nationality, it disproportionately impacts people of color. we all know that. people of color make up just 40% of our country's population but account for over 60% of all coronavirus cases and 50% of

deaths from coronavirus. these inequities manifest themselves differently in each of our states. in hawaii, for example, we are seeing pronounced disparities among our pacific islander community. particularly, among citizens of the freely associated states of micronesia and pall law. i'm focusing my remarks on this vibrant community today because our country has rarely done right by them. let me give you some background. after liberating their territory in world war ii, the united states administered the trust territories of the pacific which includes what are now the freely associated states for nearly 40 years. even in the most generous characterization, the united states failed to live up to its trust obligations to promote the political, social, and economic

development of the region p. in addition to chronically underfunding social programs like health care and education, the united states used the marshall islands as a base for dozens of nuclear tests over a 12-year period from 1946 to 1958, including the 15-megaton cass so bra very, the largest thermonuclear device ever detonated by the united states.

under the terms of this compacts, these three countries provide the military with exclusive access that lands in, change for security guarantees, economic and financial assistance and the right of their citizens to travel, work, and live in the united states without a visa. it is difficult to overstate the importance of a compact to our strategic instance. in the senate armed services committee last year, the commander admiral phillip davidson noted how the compact nations, quote, contributed way out of proportion to their population in our defense, end quote. this is particularly true with respect to china where our compacts with these island nations enables us to literally hold the line against aggressive chinese economic and military

expansion throughout oceania. if we are to ensure a free and open indo-pacific, we must treat the compact nations with the with respect they deserve. first and foremost, this means keeping the promises we've made to these partners especially on health care. our initial compact agreement stipulated that citizens were eligible for a range of federal programs as, quote, permanently residing under color of law, end quote, including medicaid coverage. the so-called welfare reform law of 1996, however, resulted in kofa citizens becoming ineligible for medicaid and other federal programs even as they can live in the united states legally and indefinitely. i've done some research as to what happened in the welfare reform law and there is absolutely nothing in the legislative history of that law to indicate why suddenly kofa

citizens were not eligible for medicaid coverage. according to a report from the university of hawaii economic research organization are the exclusion of kofa citizens from medicaid increase the mortality rate of kofa citizens by 20% and contributed to significant public health issues in my home state of hawaii. i've lived the fight to pass bipartisan legislation restoring medicaid eligibility for kofa citizens throughout my time in the senate and we've come close to righting this wrong on several occasions including in the bipartisan comprehensive immigration bill passed by the senate in 2013. the covid-19 pandemic injects a new urgency into this effort. all across the country kofa citizens work in essential industries like meat processing, food service and custodial services. these jobs put cofa citizens at increased risk and they are

suffering disproportionately from covid-19 as a result. in hawaii pacific islanders make up about 4% of our population but account for nearly a quarter of our covid-19 cases. in northeast -- northwest alaska, the marshalees make up no more than 3% of the population but have suffered half the deaths. in dubuque iowa, the community accounts for more than a third of the covid-19 deaths despite making up only about 1% of the city's population. a number of factors are driving these disparities but reduced access to health care certainly isn't helping. in fact, it's hurting a lot. the governmental accountability office estimates that 14% of cofa citizens in hawaii lack health insurance. nearly three times the state's average. nationwide 22% of cofa citizens

are uninsured. in the absence of restored medicaid eligibility which was certainly lower than -- which would lower the number of uninsured cofa citizens our community health centers are stepping up. my conversations earlier this month from the comprehensive valley services and west hawaii community health center reinforced the crucial role that these community health centers play in building reciprocal trust with the communities they serve. both community health centers have been working closely with cofa citizens to combat stigma and fear by reaching out directly to the community to encourage them to seek care. this includes providing testing and outreach services in multiple languages. they have also been coordinating food deliveries to family including cofa citizens, quarantining at home and assisting some families with alternate housing arrangements so they can isolate away from healthy family members.

our health centers are doing exceptional work with cofa citizens and i strongly support providing them robust funding in the next covid-19 relief bill. most importantly, we need to uphold our commitment to the compact nations and restore medicaid eligibility for cofa citizens who are legally in our country. we can do that by including my covering our f.a.s. allies act to restore medicaid eligibility for cofa citizens in the next covid relief bill. the house has already restored eligibility to this population in the heroes act and it's time for the senate to join them in righting an historic wrong. mr. president, i yield the floor.

mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar 11. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye. all 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, department of energy.

marks wesley mene diszes to be deputy secretary. mr. mcconnell: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of mark wesley menezes of virginia to be deputy secretary of energy 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 consent the mandatory quorum call be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. rosen: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from nevada. ms. rosen: thank you. mr. president, this nation faces a moment of crisis. the coronavirus pandemic has taken a serious and devastating

toll on our country. right now in every corner of america families are struggling to get by, and they're worried about what the future holds in store for them. americans are worried about where their next paycheck will come from. they're worried about whether or not they'll be able to keep their small business open. they're worried about how they'll be able to pay their mortgage, their rent, or their utility bills. and they're worried about how they're going to feed their children. as i said before, this is a time of crisis. but it's a moment that we can overcome together. we are a nation that in the face of great challenges has responded with caring and compassionate leadership. covid-19 is a major challenge, make no mistake about that, but we as a congress can bring real and meaningful results to the

american people. i'm sad to say that the legislation introduced by leader mcconnell, the heals act, does not do this. in fact, it does not even come close. this is a bill that slashes federal unemployment assistance for people who are out of work not due to any fault of their own. and because of a deadly pandemic and an unprecedented economic catastrophe. this is a bill that has no money for programs like snap to ensure that american children don't go hungry. this is a bill that provides no support to state and local governments so that they can continue to provide critical services during the pandemic. this is a bill that provides no support for the eidle program or eidle advance which provides

direct support to small businesses to pay their operating expenses. and this is a bill that doesn't even continue eviction moratorium putting countless americans at risk of losing their homes as soon as this weekend when the rent comes due. this is unacceptable. in nevada, our travel and tourism industry has been hit hard by the pandemic, hurting our entire economy. in april, unemployment reached over 30%. 30%. it's the highest in our nation. even now months later, unemployment is still in double digits. 15% by the last are count, more than four times our prepandemic level. and now just as nevadans feel like we can't take any more further pain, this bill, this bill plans to slash unemployment relief.

amidst our unemployment crisis, state and local governments, they're also struggling. in nevada and across our country, our public employees have been on the front lines of the pandemic fighting against a disease and working to ensure the safety and well-being of all americans, with little revenue coming in and significant costs going out, our states, our cities, our towns and our tribes are now facing massive budget shortfalls and will require cuts to critical programs which threaten the pay of our teachers, our firefighters, our first responders. and the heals act, the heals act, senator mcconnell's proposal has zero funds for any of them. and while the majority leader's party prides itself on helping business, our nation's small businesses too are left behind in this legislation. small businesses the economic engines that keep our communities going, have been

hammered by this pandemic. but the heals act, it has zero, zero additional funding for the economic entry disaster loan program which has benefited millions of small businesses nationwide, including tens of thousands of small businesses in nevada. senator cornyn and i introduced bipartisan legislation last week that would not only provide $180 billion in funds to the idol and idol advance programs but would also lift the small business administration's arbitrary caps on loans and grants that all businesses can receive. real bipartisan solutions are possible, but our bipartisan proposal to help small businesses, that's not in senator mcconnell's bill either. let's be clear. the heals act is not a bipartisan solution and it does not address all the needs of the

american people. just as the house cannot stand without support from a sturdy foundation, we cannot expect the american people to stand upon a bill that is the legislative equivalent of cheap drywall and a coat of paint. our constituents, my constituents, they need real support, a lifeline, not just window dressing. so i ask my colleagues in this body to rise to the challenge we face and provide that lifeline to the people of nevada and to all the american people. let's help people keep their homes. let's help families feed their children. let's help small businesses keep their doors open. we must come together and develop timely, targeted, and thoughtful legislation to protect both the lives and livelihoods of the american people during this crisis. they deserve no less.

across the country right now scientists and health care professionals are working around the clock, maximizing resources, developing innovative way to protect the health of our nation and save lives. as they work day in and day out, congress needs to do the same. the house passed a heroes act over two months ago. it is long past time for the senate to get to work. it is imperative that the senate remain in session and that senators remain in washington working tomorrow through the weekend until the senate passes a true coronavirus relief bill. working americans don't get fridays off and neither should congress. although we may not agree on every aspect of how to address this crisis, my democratic colleagues and i stand ready to work across the aisle to deliver

relief to the american people. and so i ask the majority leader, who controls our schedule, i ask him this. don't we owe it to our constituents to the american people, all americans to work through the weekend until we have an agreement? the essential workers on the front lines of this battle aren't taking the weekend off to rest and neither should we. i yield the remainder of my time.

a senator: mr. president.

ms. cantwell: i ask that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: the senate is not in a quorum call. ms. cantwell: thank you, mr. president. i'm questioning whether the heat of d.c. has gotten to people. clearly it has been a record july here with 90-plus temperatures every day. but the notion that we should somehow cancel the election in the fall is either the heat of the moment or just clear wrongheadedness. i've been waiting for some time to come to the floor to vote -- talk about our voting system and why it is important to protect it and why we should recognize that americans having to deal with the coronavirus have had the ability to vote and the ability to get there and the ability to be protected while they are voting, it has occurred in several election that's we need to be doing more. that is why i continue to support the efforts of our colleagues to make sure that we are doing everything we can to protect elections. i know that leader mcconnell

has proposed the heal act but it doesn't contain any money for helping the safe and secure elections in november, and i note that the house bill, the heroes act does help put money in place to keep polling workers safe during the pandemic. and i know that we have other legislation, whether it's senator wyden's bill, which i'm on, the vote by bill act, which would help eligible u.s. voters vote by mail or other legislation like my colleague, senator klobachar, to create security grants to help states improve their cybersecurity. i talked many times at many hearings about our challenges with cybersecurity, and i know that all these legislations, my colleagues have been out here on the floor and tried to bring them up, but to no avail. i think instead of suggesting the election be canceled, the president should be advocating

the congress pass aid and assistance to states to make sure that voting during the covid pandemic to make are sure things are in place so poll workers can get to their jobs on time, work effectively, and protect their health and security and protect the health and security of the public. what -- what i don't think he should do is diminish the very important role that mail-in ballot voting has been in the united states of america. i say that coming from a state where we have mail-in ballots, and the mail-in ballot system has grown over time to be the primary way in which we vote in the state of washington. and i say primary way because i'm sure there are ways that people can show up and vote at a particular election office, there are probably other things, but no, we don't have an election site. for those who always love going to the polling place as a way to exercise their democracy and their rights, i appreciate that, too. there is nothing better than participating in the democracy

of an election by going there and casting a vote. but you also, you also can increase the participation of the american public to vote by mail if you give them that opportunity. so, mr. president, it just happened to occur that on my way in today, i actually was trying to cast my own ballot. that is, i was trying to take my ballot for an august 4 election that is to happen next week and make sure that i fulfilled my constitutional duty to vote and to vote in the next election. and so i just thought it was a great opportunity to come to the senate floor and put a stop really to the myth that i think the president is continuing to create that you cannot vote by mail. so here is my mail-in ballot. here is the ballot that is sent to my home address in edmonds, washington, and it basically has the date of the election on it

and requires me to fill it out and return it. now, what's great about this ballot is that -- well, first of all, i love mail-in voting because even though i like going to the polling place, the thing you now get in addition to your ballot, a voter's guide is sent to you by the secretary of state. it's pretty thick now because you allow candidates to give you a statement about why they are running. so literally, the citizens of washington, weeks in advance, before getting this ballot, can sit there and leaf through the various positions of candidates, and they also include websites. so if you want to go to the candidate's website and look up more information about a candidate or see where they stand on an issue, it is a guide that helps you understand what your ballot is and who's on it. now, who doesn't think that that is a great way to inform the american people about voting? and because we have one of the highest voting rates in the

nation -- and i say that, i know there are states also that are not mail-in ballot states that also have high numbers in presidential election years. but the great thing about our vote-by-mail system is that we also have a pretty good participation by our public in off-year elections. so that means the issues of a school board election or a local county election or even a regional election gets an attention that i believe is important for democracy and voter participation. so in this case, i actually happen to -- happened to start filling out my ballot this morning, and so i am not going to show you everybody i voted for, but i will just show you on the front of the ballot what it looks like. i did vote already in the governor's race. so no doubt, i voted for a democrat. i'm a democrat. but at the top of this ballot, once i'm done, i get to tear off

this device right here. it says i voted. so there i go, i get a little boost to my democracy gene, i'm so glad i participated. but here is the actual number of this ballot and an i.d. for this, and i tear that off. i tear that off and keep this. i keep this, and this is proof that i mailed this ballot. so that's a great part of our system. now, the president is continuine who are really curious about this. i now have a privacy envelope. so now i'm done filling out my ballot. i stick it in the privacy envelope. now, why do i do that? because when i return this ballot, if somebody thinks that my privacy is violated because on the outside of this envelope i've signed my signature, they separate these two things. this privacy envelope separates this, throws the ballots that are legitimate to be counted in a different pile. now no one knows exactly whow i voted. but i take this in the privacy

envelope, and i stick it in an official document envelope that i am going to mail back. okay? and so i stick it in there. and guess what i have to do? i have to sign it and date it. that signature is the validation of this system. it is the validation of my signature, the same when i go into a voting booth, as we used to do, and signed my name, and it is the validation against someone who is trying to create mischief with this system. it is what makes the vote-by-mail system work effectively in our state. now, i say that because our state has had many close elections, and yet no one has ever contested the outcome of the final election because we go through this system. now, yes, we had some very interesting incidents. we had a very close governor's race once where, as they were

recounting the ballots and counting the official system, a georgia owned up that he had voted for his wife who had died. he was so worried that he was going to get caught under this system that he owned up in advance and said i'm sorry. i might be one of the seven final votes here in this decision. i just want to tell people i made a mistake. i know she was so enthusiastic, but she passed away. it was just a few days ago, so i went ahead and voted for her. okay. so no, that's not allowed under this system. this system works because we know who people are, and we have a validation of this system. and this system allows us to participate and understand the election process. so i don't know why the president won't let america vote, only if they vote in a way that he thinks is -- i'm not sure because now he is saying we should just delay the election. he is just saying that it should be delayed. i'm saying what the president should be doing to help the

constitutional rights of american citizens is protecting their right to vote by helping secure our election sites with enough workers of people who are working at the polls if they choose to go and do that and protect our mail-in ballot system by allowing those states who want to pursue a mail-in ballot to make sure that those ballots work and are delivered on time so that they can be counted. now, i don't expect every state in the union to adopt the same philosophy as the state of washington, but clearly our state allows enough time for those ballots to get there. that is, they allow so many days after the election. why? because we have a lot of military in the state of washington. we have ten military bases, and we have a lot of people from washington that are stationed overseas. and their ballots should not be made invalid just because they mailed them before the election

but somehow because of the travel time they didn't get there in a timely fashion. so our state considers seven days, i think, is the postmark after seven days if it's delivered. so i know for some people that this is all -- you know, they don't want to move to this. i guarantee you in 25 years, we will all be voting by mail. this system will be in place, and we will be asking ourselves why did we drag our feet? so i'm at least heartened to hear that my republican colleagues here in the senate have squashed the president's idea of canceling the election. now what i want to hear is are they going to help us get the dollars and the systems in place to allow america to vote? to allow them to vote with confidence, not to constantly hear an undermining of that process, but a support of that process, and not to undermine vote by mail because it's worked

in washington. it's worked. i was elected in the year 2000, and only won by 2,229 votes. not a lot cast out of the huge size of voters in our state. but yet, people had confidence in that system. it's not as if the numbers didn't change in a recount here, there, or somebody found a mistake here or there. it was that we had a system where you could find a mistake. so stop trying to cancel the election based on the success of what has empowered more americans to vote and be involved and be educated in our democracy. let america vote, and let's get about putting the securities in place that will help america get to the polling place in a secure fashion and get their ballots to the election official in a timely manner. i thank the president, and i yield the floor.

mr. lankford: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. lankford: is the senate currently in a quorum call? the presiding officer: no. mr. lankford: february 21, 1940, john lewis was born. troy, alabama. son of share croppers, born to be a person to bring good trouble to the nation. grew up on his family's form, attended segregated public

schools in pike, alabama. as a young buy he was inspired by the activism that surrounded him in montgomery bus boycott and the works of a leader named reverend dr. martin luther king, jr. he attended fisk university and organized sit-in demonstrations at segregated lunch counters in tennessee. in 1961 he started participating in freedom rides. he was just a young man. but he would get on board a segregated bus and he would dare to sit in the whites only area. just to make a simple statement that any person of any race should be able to sit anywhere they choose to sit in america and it be okay. he literally risked his life just riding on a bus in the wrong seat.

he became best known in 1963 when he helped organize the march on washington. he was part of what they called the big six in the civil rights movement. it was nationally recognized and we lose track of the fact in 1963 when he was one of the keynote speakers in the march on washington, he stood in front of the lincoln memorial at 23 years old. his focus on nonviolent protests, his focus on training people on how to be able to speak out for what is just and for what was right, his focus on challenging people to rethink justice and to be able to see all people created in the image of god, all people equal was a message that our nation needed to hear and was a nation he delivered over and over again, from his youngest days, he brought good trouble, as he

said it to our nation. -- to waken us. he led 600 peaceful, orderly protesters across the edmund pettus bridge in selma, alabama in 1965. they were going to march from selma to montgomery to demonstrate the need for voting rights changes in the state of alabama, but alabama state troopers met them there in what is known as bloody sunday. as he and other peaceful protesters simply marching were attacked, were beaten, for doing what's just. it's a telling thing john lewis' body this past week to cross that historic bridge one last time. as he crossed to have alabama state troopers stand on the bridge and salute his body he's

went by. because john lewis brought change to america. john lewis was elected into congress in 1986 for georgia's fifth congressional district where he served faithfully as being what was affectionately known as the conscience of the congress of the he was trained in religious teachings. he was often called the reverend, never lost track of his faith. treated people with respect, and even people he disagreed with, he would treat them with respect in a way that would honor god and honor them and honor his own family. it was interesting, some of the statements that john lewis has made over the years always struck me. in his quiet demeanor, in his stern way of addressing justice always came back to his faith.

a statement that he made really sticks with me when he made the statement in 2004 and he said, i'm deeply concerned that many people today fail to realize that the movement was built on deep-seated rlingsious -- religious convictions and the movement grew out of a sense of faith, faith in god, one's fellow human beings. many who were participants in this movement saw our involvement as an extension of our faith. he said we saw ourselves doing the work of the almighty. segregation and racial discrimination were not in keeping with our faith, and so we had to do something s and he did. representative lewis left a long legacy as a civil rights leader. he will not be forgotten in our nation. the big six leaders made significant changes. and i think about those changes that he saw just in his lifetime

and the changes that he personally was engaged in making in our nation. representative lewis once made the statement, when people tell me nothing has changed, i tell them, come walk in my shoes and i'll show you change. because representative lewis just in his lifetime, in the battles that he fought and led and changed, changed segregated schools in america, took away segregated water fountains in america, took away segregated movie theaters in america, took away segregated public transport in america, changed how people applied for jobs, got jobs, enjoyed their jobs, changed the opportunities for a person being able to live wherever they wanted to live in america, changed even how we vote in giving equal access for every american to be able to get to the ballot and vote.

that is just in john lewis' lifetime. he left a legacy of change. his nonviolent protests, his training and leading people stands in stark contrast to what i see some people who call it protest are doing right now. when i see what's happening in portland right now every night, in watching individuals gear up and literally attack federal law enforcement, throwing molotov cocktails at them, pointing lasers at their eyes, shooting large-scale fireworks at them, trying to set a building on fire -- when i watch that and those individuals try to say the they're protesting for judgment, they're not protesting for what's just. john lewis was protesting for what's just.

john lewis made the change in america and led a nation and led a generation, even as a young 23-year-old man, to do the right thing in the right way. the change that he brought is a gift to the generations for millennia in our nation. with that, i yield the floor.

mr. sullivan: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from alaska. mr. sullivan: mr. president, it's thursday afternoon and normally i come down to the senate floor talk about the alaskan of the week. i call that person. it's one of my favorite things to do in the senate. but, mr. president, i just witnessed something so remarkable, disturbing, that i actually wanted to come down to the floor and explain what just happened on the floor. because i think a lot of people probably missed it. if you're watching at home, maybe you didn't understand it, a lot of discussion going on here. but let me just say, the senate minority leader from new york just objected to extending the

current level of unemployment insurance in the cares act -- $600 a week -- to help american workers who have been laid off due to the pandemic. he just objected to that and stopped legislation that was moving on the floor to extend unemployment insurance for another week. so let me repeat that. the senate minority leader of the u.s. senate, when we were moving in good faith, as we're discussing and negotiating bills here, one element of cares is going to expire at the end of this month, unemployment insurance? the -- unemployment insurance in the cares arctic the senate minority leader just blocked that from happening. who knows why? but there'll be millions of americans in two days who will

lose that benefit and the senate minority leader just blocked it. i sure hope our friends in the media write that story, because chase exactly, exactly, exactly what happened. let me describe in a little bit more detail, mr. president. so as you would expect in a democracy in the united states senate, we have been debating, working on, negotiating a new relief package due to the pandemic. we passed unanimously in this body the cares act in march to try to bring relief to our fellow americans who we knew were going to be hurting from this pandemic. but we didn't have a crystal ball on how long relief could last or should last, unemployment for businesses, small businesses, for families, for hospitals, for schools, for

fishermen. so we are now working on, as you would expect in a democracy, examine we view as the appropriate next level -- what we view as the appropriate next level because this has extended longer than we would have thought and the impacts are very significant. so that's what we're doing here. the republicans put forward the health economic assistance liability protection and schools act -- heals. mr. president, i think it's a good bill. it's not a perfect bill, but it has very significant, very significant resources for schools, for hospitals, for families. and when i was home in alaska

and doing calls with my fellow alaskans and heard what their priorities are and heard what they said was really important for them to have in any kind of next relief package, part of my job is to listen and try and work hard to get that done. and there's a lot in the heals act that is exactly what my constituents have been pressing for, what they need, what i believe they need. let me give you a couple examples, mr. president. more flexibility for states and local governments on how to use the cares act funding that they already have. very high priority. additional funds for our fishermen. the presiding officer knows how important that is. but the original cares act had $300 million. that was a provision i got in the cares act for fishermen, not

enough but something important to this really critical part of the alaska and american and florida economies. the heals act has $500 million in it, because they've been hit so hard. there's economic assistance in terms of another round of paycheck protection for small businesses whose revenues have been crushed, like in the tourism industry. again, something my constituents have been asking about. allowing 501-c-6's to access the p.p.p. that's in there. allowing certain p.p.p. borrowers like fish hemen and seasonal businesses to request an increase in loan amounts due to changes that were in the interim final rules that came out of the treasury department. that's in there. dramatic expansion simplify testing, more funding for vaccine development.

everybody wants that. securing supply chains for crucial medical equipment and critical minerals, many of which we have in america. that's all in there. mr. president, it's a pretty good bill. it's not perfect, but it's a pretty good bill. the competing bill you may have seen, you may have read in the paper a couple months ago, came from the house, the so-called heroes act. it's a behemoth in terms of the price tag, and it has some things that actually are similar to the heals act -- school funding, hospitals. it has other things that aren't in the heals act, some things that i think would be completely unnecessary. a huge tax break for some of the richest americans in the heroes act? yes, that'sness there.

-- yes, that's in there. economic impact payments for illegal aim grants. i don't that's a priority right now. an overt attack on alaska native organizations, dozens and dozens of them, and alaska native corporations, stripping them of any federal funds they received in the cares act. that's in the heroes act, the house-passed heroes act. trust me, this that'll never pan the senate floor, because i won't allow it. but that's in there. highly inappropriate attack on 20% of the population of my state. but, mr. president, here's the point. these are starting points. this is what happens in the senate or at least i thought so, these are starting points. but i guess i was wrong because when my good friend from arizona came down and said, we're having negotiations on these bills.

we're having negotiations on how and to what degree to extend unemployment insurance from the federal government. she put forward a bill that we all agreed to that said, because we're negotiating right now and the one thing that expires at the end of this month is unemployment insurance, let's extend it at the current level it is right now. let's extend it so the people who are relying on it can have something for the next week while we continue to negotiate and debate. that's very reasonable. that happens all the time here. and the senate minority leader came down, and he blocked it. he blocked it. you're not going to be receiving a check next week, there's one

person you can blame. and what did he say when he blocked it? remarkably he said, in essence, if the other side doesn't accept the entire heroes act, that bill that i just talked about that attacks alaska natives, then i'm going to block everything. mr. president, that's what happened on the senate floor like an hour ago. now that's not working in good faith. i'm sure that the minority leader believes that the national media won't blame him. he's probably right. but it should. but it should. if you're one of the millions of americans who are worried about this issue because you're out of work, we just put forward a

very simple compromise. as we continue to negotiate, we'll continue the unemployment levels paid to americans that were in the cares act for another week. it the levels that currently exist. and it was blocked by the senate minority leader without a real explanation essentially saying take our nancy pelosi $4 trillion bill or nothing. i sure hope the media reports on what just happened. i don't have faith that they will, but that's exactly what happened. we're facing a national crisis. we don't always come together in immediate agreement on everything, but what we've seen

in the last several months is that we have come together in the congress. these bills haven't been perfect. the bills i just described, whether heals or heroes, aren't perfect. but what they require is compromise and working together. and when you can't get to a spot in a certain amount of time, you look at areas where, okay, this is going to expire right now. that's pretty important. let's extend it for a week or two. that happens all the time here, and people do it in good faith. what we just saw was bad faith. what we just saw, in my view, was the senate minority leader taking hostage this issue, hoping that his friends in the national media will somehow blame us. i think if you're telling the truth and you just watched what

happened on the senate floor, that's going to be hard to do. so, mr. president, my view is we've got to come together in good faith to help our fellow americans, my fellow alaskans, many of whom are still really, really, really hurting, and we had the senator from arizona who tried to do that just an hour ago on the floor, and it was rejected. and there's going to be a lot of people next week who are going to be hurting because of this, and i hope they accurately report why they're hurting, what just happened, and that's not the spirit of compromise that we're going to need to get through this pandemic. i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: the senator from alaska.

mr. sullivan: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the consideration of executive calendar 776 through 791 and all nominations on the secretary's desk in the air force, army, navy, and space force, that the nominations be confirmed, that the motions be -- that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate, the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, and the senate then resume legislative session. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sullivan: i ask unanimous consent the senate be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sullivan: mr. president, i have five requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the

majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. sullivan: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 315, s. res. 529. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 315, s. 529, a bill to establish national program to identify and reduce losses from landslide hazards, and so forth and for other purposes. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed. mr. sullivan: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the cantwell amendment at the desk be agreed to, that the committee-reported substitute amendment as amended be agreed to, and that the bill as amended be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection.

mr. sullivan: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 318, s. 914. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 318, s. 914, a bill to reauthorize the integrated coastal and ocean observation system act of 2009, and so forth and for other purposes. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. sullivan: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the wicker substitute amendment at the desk be agreed to, the bill as amended be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sullivan: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 413, s. 850. the presiding officer: the clerk will report.

the clerk: calendar number 413, s. 850, a bill to extend the authorization of appropriations to the department of veterans affairs, and so forth. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed. mr. sullivan: i ask unanimous consent that the sullivan amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to, the committee-reported amendment as amended be agreed to, the bill as amended be considered read a third time and passed and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sullivan: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to immediate consideration of calendar number 423, s. 2336. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 423, s. 2336, a bill to improve the management of information

technology projects and investments of the department of veterans affairs, and for other purposes. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed. mr. sullivan: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sullivan: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the judiciary committee be discharged from further consideration and the senate now proceed to senate res. 656. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 656, recognizing the importance of the blueberry industry to the united states and designating july 2020 as national blueberry month. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the committee is discharged and the senate will proceed.

mr. sullivan: i ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sullivan: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the consideration of senate res. 664 submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 664, designating the week of september 20 through september 26, 2020 as golden star families remembrance week. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed. mr. sullivan: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection.

mr. sullivan: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today it adjourn until 3:00 p.m., monday, august 3. further, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day. further, following leader remarks, the senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the menezes nomination. finally, notwithstanding rule 22, the cloture vote on the menezes nomination occur at 5:30 p.m. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sullivan: if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until 3:00 p

mr. mcconnell: on monday senate republicans released a senate republicans released a >> as the republicans do a disturbing if the proposal for the pandemic rescue package. here's what we want to do. continuous federal supplement to unemployment benefits that is otherwise about to expire. send thousands of