have been happening for decades to black people. some of you may be in a different stop but i feel like these videos show our humanity and show it being destroyed undermined and obstructed by law enforcement. the thing that breaks my heart is thinking about the children. thinking about the little girl in the backseat while [inaudible] was shot right before her very eyes and listening to her try to calm her own mother down. through that horrendous incident and there was another incident. >> we leave this live event here. you can continue watching online at a website, c-span .org. u.s. senate is about to gavel in. this is part of our long-term commitment to bring you live gavel to gavel coverage of congress. the senate will work on a judicial nomination today with the procedural vote set for 5:3. live senate coverage here on the

skin two. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. black, will open the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. mighty god, teach us to trust you more fully, to wait quietly for the unfolding of your providence, to pray fervently,

and to worship more humbly. reassure us with your wisdom, power, and love, that your providence will prevail. lord, you are our shelter for every storm. remind our lawmakers to remember how your purposes have prevailed in our nation's history so they need not fear for the future. provide them with a firm faith that will enable them to meet the daunting challenges of these times. lord, lengthen their moments of prayer until their lives

become a continual aspiration after you. we pray in your matchless name. amen. the president pro tempore: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

mr. grassley: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: i ask for one minute for morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: the poisoning of russian opposition leader alexis navaldny, this happened last month, was a very disgusting thing to hear about. but such action in russia or by russia is not unprecedented. in 2015, the leading democracy advocate in russia, boris netov, was gunned down within the sight of the kremlin. the square in front of the russian embassy in washington is now named in his honor, echoing

the effort that i led to name the street in front of the old russian embassy after the dissident andrei sakarov. netov's protege and the russian opposition murza was then poisoned, poisoned twice but miraculously survived, and continues to work for russian democracy. the good news is that mr. neva mr. nevalny is reportedly conscious. now, a silver lining may also be that putin's latest attempt at assassination is bringing our allies towards a consensus to treat putin as a pariah. there are reports of senior german politicians reconsidering their support for nordstream 2

pipeline which divides our european allies. this pipeline is opposed by countries like poland and baltics who truly understand that putin will use it as a strategic influence tool as well as by the trump administration and bipartisan majorities in congress. so i hope all of these happenings is the start of a new era of cooperation with our russian allies to counter russian influence. i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. 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: whm i addressed the -- when i address the situation in the middle east, it's often for discuss instability, terror, or other threats to the united states and its partners, like israel. those threats still exist, but i'm very glad to be speaking today about peace breaking out.

and it's breaking out more quickly than we can even stage the official ceremonies it memorialize the diplomatic achievements. a few weeks ago with major help from the united states and the trump administration, israel and united arab emirates reached the first arab-israel peace deal in 26 years. the abraham accord is named for the shared religious roots that christians, jews, and muslims all hold in common. it will make the u.a.e. just the third arab nation and the very first in the gulf to normalize relations with israel. in the words of the prime minister benjamin netanyahu full official peace, full diplomatic agreement with embassies, investment, commerce, tourism,

and direct flights between tel aviv and dubai and abu dabi. we've come along way indeed. what a moment. leaders in both countries made sacrifices to make this deal possible. prime minister net and the sheik understand that both arabs and israelis will benefit from the peace and prosperity that tearing down barriers can bring. america will also benefit from these two regional friends working more closely together and reducing tensions across a challenging region. now, to be sure, work is not finish and no single step like this should be confused for an overnight miracle. in this case we in congress have

an obligation to review any u.s. armed sales package linked to the deal. as we help our arab partners defend against growing threats, we must continue ensuring that israeli's qualitative military edge remains unchallenged. but the winds of change are blowing, mr. president, and they're bringing good news for peace all across the region. of course a few extreme voices perhaps correctly sensing that their moment is slipping away are not at all happy. a predictable cast of characters wasted no time condemning the agreement and branding the u.a.e. as traitors to the arab or muslim world. but, unlike iranian clerics or al qaeda terrorists, everyone who's actually living in the 21st century is celebrating this major progress.

this major step forward is being documented aality signing ceremony -- documented in a signing ceremony at the white house tomorrow. but between the abraham accord and the official ceremony tomorrow, another arab state has joined the parade toward peace. on friday, september 11, israeli and bahrain announced their agreement to open formal diplomatic relations. after egypt, jordan, and the ut a.e., this makes the fourth historic step toward normalization by israel's arab nation. along with president trump, prime minister netanyahu and king had a mad of bahrain called the agreement, quote, an historic breakthrough to further peace in the middle east. and, indeed, reports suggest that still more arab states may not be far behind. this is a new course with the potential to fundamentally --

fundamentally -- change the middle east. dennis ross, former advisor to president obama and a longtime practitioner of the peace process, wrote just yesterday that these agreements are a bonafide breakthrough that are changing the political landscape of the middle east and the israel-palestine state mate for the better. that's dennis ross from the obama administration. that's how former obama administration officials are praising the trump administration's successes. i'm grateful for this administration's work to encourage peace. i'm proud of this historic opportunity that american leadership and diplomacy has made possible. now, mr. president, on a totally different message, i had hoped -- and republicans had hoped -- that the american people had hoped that the senate would be

spending this week finishing up another bipartisan agreement on coronavirus relief. we want to get hundreds of billions more dollars into the pipeline for kids, for jobs, for health care, but, unfortunately, senate democrats chose to block it all. our democratic colleagues voted against hundreds of billions of dollars to help americans fight the virus. this wasn't even a vote on final passage, just a procedural vote to break the democratic leader's filibuster and move forward with something. senate democrats, nevertheless, filibustered the aid. and then just a few short days later they went right back to signaling that a democratic national majority paired with a president joe biden would abolish the filibuster and permanently vandalize the institution to more easily force radical change. radical change on the country.

this threat to permanently disfigure -- to disfigure the senate -- has been the latest growing drumbeat in the modern democratic party's war against our governing institutions. there was former senator reed starting the nuclear exchange back in 2013. there have been years of unprecedented tactics to try and deny president trump the government the people elected. there's been the latest -- has been the least fair, least thorough,and most rushed impeachment inquiry in important history. and now, mr. president, the most shameless -- the most shameless -- hypocrisy. senate democrats happily use the filibuster to block coronavirus relief and senator tim scott's police officer reform bill at the very same time they're conspiring to destroy that very tool so they can ram through their radical agenda if they

ever win power. grade-a hypocrisicy. grade-a hypocrisy. nothing more. we've had former president obama called for, quote, eliminating the filibuster -- another jim crow relic. about one month after his party used it to kill senator tim scott's police reform bill. we have some of former vice president biden's allies in the senate daydreaming -- daydreaming -- about ending the filibuster even as they them self use the filibuster to kill pandemic relief for working families. democrats want completely different sets of rules depending on whether or not they hold power, a different set of rules depending on whether they hold power. new england want to assert -- they want to assert minority rights when they have the minority and steam roll them if

they get a majority. here's nbc news -- democratic insiders are assembling a coalition behind the scenes to wage an all-out war on the senate filibuster. veteran party operatives, activist groups, and supportive senators are coordinating message and strategy. this takes measuring the drapes to a new level. the democratic leader and his colleagues aren't just measuring the drapes, they're calculating how much kerosene it could take to burn the drapes down. they aren't just threatening to pass radical policies like medicare for none or the green new deal. no -- no no. the far left wants to hotline democrats itself. things like packing the supreme court with new seats or packing

the senate by handing out new statehood to one individual city. i said it a few months ago -- today's democrats have lost patience with playing by the rules and want to wage war on the rulebook itself. they're saying as much out loud. perhaps our colleagues think promising a shameless power grab is the only way to radicalize their considering energize their far-left base. but the real effect is to make the stakes in these issues completely and totally clear to the american people. the framers designed the senate to be the country's firewall against ill-considered and radical change. that's what the senate was all about from the beginning.

if our democratic friends have concluded their worst ideas could never clear the high bar, if they think their ideas could never clear the high bar, it's their bad ideas that need to be scrapped, not the core checks and balances of our government. the presiding officer: under the previous order the leadership time is reserved. morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the following nomination, which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary. mark c. scarsi of california to be united states district judge for the central district of california.

mr. rubio: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. rubio: in the events of the last few months we'll be seeing on the streets, the protests, all the issues that surround that i think it forced the country to grapple with our history on the issues of race. and in particular the -- what we teach young americans about what that means and how it fits in the broader story of america. is america in fact a nation founded on racism, one that makes our very founding and its principles almost irredeemable? it's an important question.

you can't ask americans or any generation to sacrifice or defend any nation so deeply flawed. so it is one i think we need to talk about. this country was founded in the year 1776. it was founded by this declaration that all men are created equal, that your rights come from god, from your creator. now, we take those words for granted today. they were extraordinarily radical ideas 244 years ago. up until that time, every person on earth was told that your rights were whatever the sovereign allowed you to have, whatever the king allowed you to v you didn't have any rights that were natural to you. so the very principle itself is pretty radical. the problem is that from the very beginning, many of the people, including who put their name on that document and our laws at the time, did not reflect that founding principle. and our story can largely be summarized as a 244-year journey

to more fully i have up to the promises made at our founding. for our first 89 years as a nation, human beings were owned as slaves. and beyond just the who arers of slavery, they were the subject of torture, of rape, of seeing their children sold away, away from them, never to see them again p. when that horrible institution finally came to an end, it was followed by another 100 years of separate & unequal. black americans were told where they could live, work, go to school, and more. they were told where they could eat, where they could sit or not, where they were allowed to stay overnight. they were even told what side of the road they would be allowed to walking on in many parts of this country. they were denied right to vote, either directly or through intimidation or threats. and it was a time when any black

man was one false accusation awade from losing his life to the hands of a lynch mob. that is sameful truth, an undeniable part of our history, a stain on our legacy as a nation. but it is not the whole story. from the very beginning, it was clear that the promise of our founding and our failure to live up to it, these two things could not ultimately coexist. from the very beginning, within a year -- and even before the founding of our nation -- there were already americans working to end slavery. sometimes they paid for it with their lives. ultimately, it became the single most divisive issue in the country to the point that it was only resolved through a blood did i civil war. -- through a bloody civil war. for the next is 00 years, during

the era of separate but unequal, it was also americans who worked to end segregation and jim-crow laws. americans of every walk of life. little children who braved angry mobs to desegregate a school, protesters and those in the streets who faced down bull connor's dogs and beatings. little girls who died when their church was bombed. ours is not simply the story of a people who for 189 years failed to live up to the promise of america. ours is also the story of the americans who ultimately succeeded in making us a nation that was closer to who we were supposed to be. that's why at least for me when they play the national anthem and the flag that i face and put my hand over my heart to honor,

that flag -- that's not the flag of slave owners. that's the flag of the abolitionists. that's the flag of harriet tubman and frederick douglass, who were american heroes. the flag that i pledge allegiance to, it's not the flag of the segregationists. it's the flag of the freedom riders. of the people who made the march from selma to montgomery. that's the flag of rosa parks and dr. king. our history does not simply belong to the villians. it belongs even more so to the heroes who frankly made us more american in each successive generation. i have heard in some corners people suggest that our founding documents themselves are documents embedded in racism because, i imagine, many of the people who signed it indeed were

or did not live up to the words they signed their names onto. but that would be forgetting the fundamental fact that every single great movement in american history, every movement for equality in the history of this nation -- in the history of this nation, has not been a rejection of our founding documents. has not been a rejection of our founding principles. has not been a call to overthrow the constitution or the declaration of independence. every one of these movements, great movements in the history of this country towards equality has been an appeal towards those principles, a demand that we live up to those principles. dr. king said the magnificent words of the constitution and the declaration of independence, an appeal to our founding documents, which he called a promissory note to which every american was to fall heir. as we talk now about what is taught to our children in our

schools and in our lives, i think our children deserve to know the truth about their country. all the truth. we must teach our children about the times in which our nation fell short. we must teach them about the people responsible for us falling short. we must point to the times, even now, when we fall short. that is the only way you learn the lessons of history, the only way to avoid repeating them. but we must also teach them that it was americans who dedicated and even lost their lives to end these evils. while we're at it, we should teach them too about the greatness of our country. teach them about the young americans who died far from home for the freedom and liberty of others, who lost their lives in iwo jima and qa guadal canal,

in san juan hill and manila bay. teach them also, teach them about how when disaster strikes anywhere on this planet, it is their country who responds first and with the most, to fukushima, japan, and west berlin, after an earthquake hit haiti, after floods impacted pakistan. how it's americans and their charities and their government who has literally saved the lives of millions of people on the african continent from starvation, from the ravages of hiv-aids. and teach them how on a summer night in 1969, the entire world stopped and watched with amazement as man first stepped foot on the moon and there planted the flag of their country. our children deserve to know the

truth about their country, that in the history of mankind there has never been a great power that has used its means to help more people and more places than anywhere in human history. no other great power in human history has done what the people of this nation has done both individually through the moneys we give to charities and to their government. this is also true about america. our children deserve to know that they are citizens not of a perfect country, but of the single greatest nation in the history of all of mankind. they deserve to know that they are the heirs to a 244-year journey to achieve in one land a nation where all people are viewed as equal under the law, whose rights come from their creator. and they deserve to know that their country is a special one, one worth defending, one worth

protecting, and one worth passing on to the generations that will follow them. mr. president, i yield the floor.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. wyden: mr. president, because of raging fires, my home state of oregon, many communities in my home state have been reduced to ashes. a number of others are experiencing what is known as the icebox effect, where in effect smoke blocks out the sun

and it gets quite cool. virtually all of oregon is now choking on smoke. that's whether you're inside or outside at this point. countless thousands of oregonians are under evacuation orders. many are quite literally fleeing for their lives and abandoning their homes as the flames approach. when i was home this weekend, i initially thought that a number of my communities had been hit by a wrecking ball. that, mr. president, really understates the situation, because usually when you get hit by a wrecking ball, there's a

little bit left. it's not just ashes. now thousands of people in my state have lost their homes, they've lost their businesses, they've lost life-long memories. it brought a picture to a family of a loved one that they cherished, and it just struck me that it's those kinds of memories and losing them that are as painful in many instances as losing houses and businesses and the like. the death toll has been rising. others are still missing and unaccounted for. amid all the panic and loss, one of the aspects that left me

as i came back to washington with a bit of hope is that we lost so much, but we didn't lose our spirit. we didn't lose what we call the oregon way -- neighbor helping neighbor, volunteers helping evacuees get food and water and shelter. everybody steps up when the crisis arrives. he nobody cares a wit about everybody's politics. so i have come to the floor today with a specific purpose, mr. president, and that is to ask the united states senate to match the same standard i saw of volunteers, neighbors, and oregonians helping oregonians this weekend, to show the same kind of can-do spirit.

but the senate needs to act on a different cause. the president of the senate is new to this body. he has a state with a lot of rural terrain. and i'm going to be asking him and every member of the senate, all 100 of us, to say let us make today the day when the senate chose to finally get serious about the cause of fire prevention that has harmed so many these last few weeks. let's make this the day when the senate chose to take a dilapidated and out-of-date fire policy and replace it with a modern strategy for the real

on-the-ground conditions that have caused fires to magnify the pain that is being felt by millions today. and the reason i am making this request of the senate, that the senate replace the way forest policy has been made in the past , is that those past processes -- and as my colleague already knows since he has been here now, the senate moves often with glacially slow senate processes. and those processes are now being totally overwhelmed by the massive infernos that are blanketing our communities and

blanketing the west with smoke that is literally up to our eyeballs. the president of the senate is a tall fellow. i'm 6'4". that's what i felt this weekend. i and everybody else had smoke up to our eyeballs. and the process the senate has for dealing with these new kind of forest calamities -- and there's no other way to describe it -- those old procedures lack the urgency, lack the speed, lack, frankly, the resolute discipline for the incredibly big job that needs to be done, and done quickly. so today i want to begin by offering three policies, three

policies that i believe could be supported by every senator, democrats and republicans, and they're built around what i saw over the last few days. the first is the congress should pass a 21st century civilian conservation core act. and i've actually seen press in missouri actually calling for this kind of approach, where young people are involved, securing jobs where they pay a living wage, and they can go in and shore up these communities threatened by fire. and i want to emphasize, mr. president, that having served on the energy committee now for several years, having

authored the two major bills in the forestry area -- the bill with senator crapo, so we no longer waste so much money budgeting for fire, brought about the end of fire burrowing, the big fires get taken care of in the disaster fund, don't shortchange prevention. and then secure rural schools, which i think is also a policy that benefits people all over the country in rural forested areas. and we need to have these young people come up with all kinds of new policies to really ensure that added measure of safety. and i'll just offer the first. all over america, there are millions of acres of overstocked

timber stands. there are hazardous fuels. and it is urgent, urgent that we go in there, and we can use these hardworking young people to clean out those overstocked stands and reduce the risk of fire. fire is inevitable. i know of no bill, none, that can abolish fire. the question is, can we take concrete steps to reduce the suffering and the damage of these big fires? i just gave one example of what the 21st century civilian conservation core could do -- conservation corps could do in my home state. there are more than two million

acres backlogged in terms of these hazardous fuels that need to be reduced, that you could have the 21st century conservation corps, thousands of young people going into every state and taking action to reduce these risks. a lot of other things that could be done by the 21st century conservation corps. i learned this weekend we're going to need to deploy new cell phone connectivity because a lot of people have lost those connections. in fact, madam president, one of the challenges in trying to determine how many people we have lost is we believe that a lot of people when the fires hit went to a friend's house, and then the friend's not able to communicate because they lost cell phone connectivity. so having young people work on

communications, having them clean out hazardous fuels, having them work on stabilizing soils to prevent massive flooding because make no mistake about it, madam president, all over the west, in oregon, washington, and california, we are going to need those soil stabilization projects to prevent massive flooding this spring. as sure as the night follows the day. it will be a problem. using the 21st century civilian conservation corps can deploy folks into the forest and into our wildland urban areas where there is a connection, an interface because we have got a lot of fires in those areas. and the conservation corps can reduce hazardous fuel, prevent

catastrophic fires, and they can do it on a grand scale. and an ideal part of it, one of the reasons i think this will appeal to democrats and republicans is there doesn't have to be a fight over carrying out our curn's environmental laws. as i mentioned, in oregon alone, there is already backlog of more than two million acres that needs to be treated. without those treatments, madam president, a lightning strike, a carelessly dropped match can start yet another inferno. just picture that. after everything that we have had over the last few days, you've got all of these hazardous fuels built up, and you have a lightning strike or a carelessly dropped match and all of a sudden you have ripped through thousands of other acres in the blink of an eye.

oregon's forests, the forests of the west badly need this care and investment. it would really be an updated version of one of the most popular programs the government has ever pursued came out of the new deal, and it would be a huge economic boost to rural communities. i see the president of the senate from iowa, rural communities that feel like government's left them behind. so that's my first proposal, madam president, the first of three that i believe can help us not only come together as a senate to reduce the devastating toll of these fires that are not your grandfather's fires. they are bigger and they are hotter and they are more powerful. we could do it together.

the second area that i want to see the senate focus on is addressing the fires means a lot more than spending all your money on just putting big fires out. forest science has shown that wildfires are a part of the natural life cycle of certain parts of the nation. if all you do is focus on putting out fires all the time, you disrupt the cycle, and that can lead to bigger fires down the road, but america no longer gets just manageable natural fires. instead, we get these huge infernos like the ones we have got in oregon, fires that are hot enough to melt a car and sterilize the soil. i would ask the president of the senate to just imagine how hot

it's got to be to melt a car. so there is a need for another tool to help reduce the devastating effects of these great fires. it's supported by scientists who have been looking at the various tools for dealing with these horrors. democrats, republicans. and it basically involves a prescribed fire that can be done safely in the off season, say, in the winter months. during those months, there is less risk of spread. you can limit the smoke.

civilian conservation corps workers, working with the scientists at the u.s. forest service, the bureau of land management, the oregon department of forestry, and our counties can target, target carefully these prescribed fires during the off season and help prevent catastrophic fires in the summer and the fall by using the concept to clean out the dead and dying undergrowth. here's the essence of my second proposition, mr. president. if you use prescribed fire to burn a little when it's safe in the off season, you can save a

whole lot later, a whole lot later on by preventing catastrophe during those hotter months of summer and fall. i've got a bill that i have been developing with the energy and natural resources committee. i say to colleagues, this approach, like the 21st century conservation corps, will be ready for cosponsors later this week, and i'm going to be going to all of my colleagues to ask for support for this second commonsense approach to catastrophe avoidance. the third proposal brings it all together. the congress must finally kick its aversion to making long-term budget investments and treatment and fire prevention.

managing our forests requires an investment that we essentially look, look to beyond the next 36 hours. managing our forests for wildfire resilience needs to be approached as a longer term proposition, one that can make our communities safer while generating jobs, timber for mills, improving recreation opportunities, and yet, this has been an investment the senate has been unwilling to spend. clearly, not enough has been done to deal with fire prevention, and the fact that the congress has constantly been shorting fire prevention is contributing to what is being

seen in oregon and throughout the west right now, shorting fire prevention is the wrong way to go, and this item number three is literally a matter of life and death. somehow, this senate can produce hundreds of billions of dollars for tax breaks for special interests. there are outrageous, indefensible subsidies for fossil fuels that compound the climate crisis. now, senator crapo and i, my colleague who sits just a few feet away, republican of idaho, worked for years in a bipartisan way to end what's called fire borrowing. this is actually the first year when our bill has gone into

effect. it got to the point where we needed over 300 citizens groups to pass this bill because so often the big fires were fought with prevention money, it was borrowed from the prevention accounts, and then the fire just got worse. so senator crapo and i said this is foolish, even by washington, d.c., standards, and we were able to get a special fund created where the big fires would be fought from the disaster funds. but still, even with the beginning that senator crapo and i have made on a bipartisan basis, the budget for fire preparedness and prevention is still so, so woefully short. more has to be done to limit the damage from staggeringly

powerful forest fires, and one of the best ways to do it is to start building up that prevention fund that senator crapo and i started here in the united states senate. we have laid the foundation, but it's clearly not enough. i checked actually a couple of days ago. there is $3 billion that is now in the fund for fire suppression we're sure going to need that because we have scores of fires still burning in oregon, but we're going to need to build up preventative funds and still, prevention as of today, september of 2020, is woefully underfunded. the forest service has the technical tools it needs to

improve forest health, to reduce the risk of fire, but as i mentioned, the two million-acre backlog just in oregon, multiply that all over the west, all over the country where there are forests that are under the jurisdiction of the federal government, and it's pretty clear. america has got to decide it is urgent business to build up the budget for fire prevention. by allowing the fire prevention backlog i have described to build, the congress is just racking up more debt, dangerous debt. the devastation and the smoke in oregon and across the west today is the debt coming due.

for those of us in the west who fear it's going to be impossible to pay the enormous bill that we have been handed through a combination of lousy forestry science and a disinterest in real policies that reduce climate change, we know the job is going to be hard, but we can and must do it by coming together like i saw oregonians do just this last weekend. now, before i wrap up, i just want to mention there have sure been some misguided priorities on all sides of the political spectrum. on one side, some in the timber industry have skipped past active management to pursue the golden calf of eliminating environmental laws. on the other side, misguided nonmanagement priorities beat back every attempt to manage our

forests based on science. now, add to that ridiculous new lies and delusions you're seeing online about the causes that these fires, and you have a recipe for distraction from how the senate must move forward. just today visiting california, the president was asked about climate change and fires. and he said, no problem. the president said, and i quote, it will start getting cooler. and then he blamed -- and i quote -- explosive trees. sending that kind of nonsense across the land is cold comfort to the families mourning the loved ones they've lost in the

fires or the thousands of oregonians who barely made it out before their homes and families went up in flames. the senate has an obligation to act, an obligation to act because around this country -- it's not just in my state but across the west, big hearted neighbors, animal lovers, county employees, administrators, teachers, nurses, retirees, all of them are stepping up and pitching in. they're bringing food and clothes and towels. they're helping with mental health services. and i particularly want before i wrap up to thank the incredible firefighters, the firefighters who are working on hardly any

sleep. and the first responders, the people, the police and others who are doing so much. they're helping with cell phones and service. my staff and others in the delegation have been working with these folks. and i see my friend from virginia who knows a lot about what it takes to maintain communications networks and that's what we're working on this afternoon. one problem that's come up there is networks and equipment burn. there's a major strain on the resources for people on the front lines fighting the infernos. for example, the repeaters that can amplify a signal and keep our firefighters connected. so i'm hearing that this country doesn't have enough repeaters in stock to begin to address such a crisis that the west is experiencing. it's another example of what happens when you ignore year

after year the urgent need for serious fire prevention. and i told some friends before i left oregon, i said i'm going to try and bring the senate together around fire prevention. one said you're going to be mr. fire prevention. i said no, that's not how it works. i would like to make this the senate that's known for fire prevention, the senate that said between there and here there are a hundred united states senators. we have differences of opinion. lord knows that's the case. i'm just going to mention one. but i also offered concrete proposals, 21st conservation corps prescribed changes in the

budget that democrats and republicans can come together on. the rein i say that is because we've already done it. that's how senator crapo and i ended fire borrowing. so i'm going to close with this. what i saw this weekend was heartbreaking. thousands of families mourning unthinkable logs, trying to figure out how to move forward when their homes and possessions have been reduced to ash. but when you talk to them, they'll tell you that they also know that the problem is not going to get better all by itself. and that is -- and i know there are senators who want to debate this -- that is because the climate crisis is here right now, today. it is no longer a far off hypothetical danger for senators to debate in comfortably air

conditioned buildings. the american west, my state is on fire. whole neighborhood, whole communities are being reduced to ashes. our air quality has the dubious recognition over the last couple of days as being some of the worst in the world. the climate crisis is happening now to us, to our kids, and america and the senate ignores it at our peril. i brought today three proposals, three concrete proposals that i think makes a serious contribution to reducing the pain and suffering that has been seen across oregon and across the west the last couple of days. i want this to be the day the senate gets serious about fire prevention as part of a

comprehensive effort to fight the climate crisis. the ideas i've outlined, the three major proposals ought to become law soon. they ought to have bipartisan support. they are policies that will protect our communities, the families who live in them, protect jobs, protect homes, protect businesses, and they sure are a lot cheaper, a lot cheaper because they will prevent fires rather than force a bigger price tag to rebuild communities out of the ashes. madam president, i yield the floor. mr. warner: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from virginia. mr. warner: madam president, i came to the floor today to talk about a different subject, but i want to just commend my good friend, the senator from oregon, for his comments. i think we've -- we all watched with horror this weekend the

images from your state, in washington and california. it was literally something out of dante's inferno. and i have enormous respect for the senator from oregon. he can count on me to be behind him on these proposals. i know they'll be reasonable. i though they'll be straightforward. bi, o boy, -- boy, oh boy, if we're not able to step up in a common sense and bipartisan and quickly response, then shame on all of us. so i commend the senator for his leadership and look forward to working with him. the remarkable thing, madam president, is as if that isn't enough or if the challenges we face with close to 200,000 of our fellow citizens dead from coronavirus and still no

national plan on p.p.e. or testing. my fear we'll see a repeat of the mistakes we made on testing and p.p.e. happen on vaccinations if we're not careful. what i actually came to talk about today is to remind my colleagues something also the senator from oregon will be very, very involved in, express my grave concern that we're only 16 days away from a potential lapse in government funding. now, it's encouraging that secretary mnuchin and speaker pelosi seemed to have reached at least an agreement in principle on this must-pass stopgap funding. but i've now been around here long enough to know that when negotiations between and within two chambers on supposedly must-pass coronavirus relief legislation broke down and stalled, that breakdown lasted for months. we cannot let government -- let

the funding of our government get mired in the same complacency and lack of urgency. i hope and pray that the devastating impact of the 2018-2019 government shutdown is still in front mind for awfully my colleagues here in -- for all of my colleagues here in the senate. but it's been a long year. so here's a little recap for those who need it. that government shutdown over the holidays in 2018 into the beginning of the new year in 2019 was the longest shutdown of the federal government in history. not in this congress, not under this administration. in our country's history. for 35 days the federal government did not hold up its end of the bargain with taxpayers or the public servants who dedicate their lives to delivering services to them.

the economic impact and human toll were devastating. more than 380,000 federal workers were furloughed. and another 450,000 were forced to work without pay. while federal employees eventually received backpay, furloughed workers who happened to be contractors still have not been made whole. to put that in context, contractors, including those who serve the federal government as custodians, cafeteria workers, and security guards, had to figure out how to pay rent and buy medicine and put food on the table after two entire paychecks just evaporated. and the economic effects weren't just personal either. the congressional budget office estimates that the 2018-2019 government shutdown cost taxpayers, cost all of us about $3 billion. it actually registered as a

decrease in 2019's gross domestic product of about two-tenths of a percent. those will be losses that we'll never recover. as bad as that all sounds, that was only a partial government shutdown. nine out of is a departments and several agencies were closed. what we're facing in a couple of weeks would affect the entire federal government. and to state the obvious, that's when we weren't in a global pandemic and economic recession. virginians and people across the country continue relying on services from the federal government to help keep their families and businesses afloat. i'm sure the administration will take steps to ensure people continue receiving their most essential things like snap benefits to keep their families fed and p.p.p. loans to keep their busines businesses afloat. shutting down the entire federal

government would lead to disruptions and bare bones contingency matters. the american people need and frankly deserve better. the food insecurity, housing instability, and job loss all on the rise, now is the time for the federal government to do more to help everyday people, not by turning the lights out. shutting down the government just as we're expecting a surge in covid-19 cases post-labor day and as the flu season is starting and as we're needing to double time -- to work double time to secure the november election and as the postal service needs relief and as senator wyden just indicated, as the entire west coast is burning, boy, oh boy, calling it a self-inflicted injury doesn't even cut in. if we were to shut down, it would be more like kicking

ourselves. failing to reach an agreement on funding, the government could be absolutely disastrous. i can only hope that there's bipartisan agreement on this point and that we'll be able to put aside any of the unrelated policy differences to fulfill one of our most basic obligations as lawmakers. funding the government and keeping our commitments to both our constituents and the federal workforce that works so tirelessly to serve them. madam president, i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from west virginia. mrs. capito: thank you, madam president. the presiding officer: senator, we're in a quorum call. mrs. capito: i ask that you vitiate the quorum. the presiding officer: yes. without objection. mrs. capito: thank you. madam president, today i rise to address broadband connectivity

and broadband access in rural states like your home state and my state of west virginia. our nation has experienced a very tough couple of months because of the coronavirus pandemic. with the new normal consisting of telelearning and virtual learning, there is no question that this has forced us to recognize and to reckon with the digital divide in this k the ability to have affordable and reliable service is more valuable than ever. however, in 2020, my state remains one of the least connected states in the country. over the last few months, i've heard from many constituents -- hundreds of my constituents -- who are having difficulties properly and efficiently working from home, helping their kids with the homework because they lack robust internet access. i think about those children who either don't have connectivity or don't have an adult in the home who can really help them do

their digital learning. we've got to get our kids about a being in school, but in the meantime we've got to get internet connectivity. randy expressed his ability to not be able to access the internet. he was driving to a hotspot. laura from wheeling expressed her concern that her children will fall behind without access their homework online. and man did i from elkins needs internet because of required online learning. these are just examples of the few of the concerns that i have heard from my constituents, but unfortunately there are many, many more just like those. i'm sure you are hearing them as well in the great state of iowa. the reality is that broadband build-out in rural areas of west virginia and across our country are extremely expensive and take more time to complete because,

in our case, we have those beautiful west virginia mountains. i was always said that if we can communicate with somebody on the moon, we can surely find a way to deliver broadband to individuals, families, and businesses all across this nation. fortunately, the f.c.c. chairman ajit pai understands this and has been working with the other commissioners at the f.c.c. to structure the future of rural broadband deployment. the f.c.c.'s upcoming world digital opportunity fund -- i'm going to call rdof, which is how we address it -- is the largest federal investment aimed at closing the digital divide. rdof will award $20.4 billion over the next 12 years with a special emphasis at the beginning on those that are totally unserved and then moving to those who have some senior senator but it is inadequate. the first phase will be up to

$16 billion deployed through a reverse auction which is slated to begin next month. on friday, i talked with chairman pai for an update on the rdof program and when it will mean to west virginia. we also discussed where my state stands in the process. west virginia is set to receive a significant amount of funding over the next ten years to connect 121,000 eligible homes -- so that's probably over 200,000 individuals -- particularly those in the underserved areas, as i mentioned. i received assurances that the f.c.c. has been working to get as many providers into the rdof program as possible. the f.c.c. has already provided feedback to providers on their short-form applications so that they may be prepared to bid in the upcoming auction next month. another partner in my quest to close this digital divide is west virginia governor jim

justice. recently, the governor signed an executive order to help expand broadband capabilities in west virginia. very innovatively, i might add. his executive order would remove the regulatory cap on the amount of mo enthat west virginia's e.d.a. can provide as loan assurance for broadband projects. in other words, the state is going to stand behind these providers to make sure we get our share of the rdof money. this is an innovative and bipartisan federal-state partnership that will hopefully allow more local providers to successfully bid on the majority of the rdof census blocks in our state. these areas are oftentimes the most challenging to serve, and we need to enshould you are that our local providers that are ready and able to connect their communities with high-speed broadband have the ability to compete with the upcoming auction. our governor's bipartisan effort is supported by leaders in both

the majority and minority party of both chambers of the west virginia legislature. it would include senate president mitch carmichael, our house speaker roger hanshaw, rowman presioso, and also house minority leader tim miley, who is also leaving. i would like to thank him for his service. what's next? on the one hand how do we continue to improve on this progress? one major undertaking is improving the f.c.c.'s broadband maps with more granular data. far too often these maps so rural areas that are covered in reality, if you're living in and around the asian you know they're not -- around the area, you know they're not covered. this data collection and correction is a tedious but critical as these maps often determine funding levels and what areas are prioritized, naturally. as cochair of the national

broadband caucus, i cosponsored the broadband data act, which this body passed last-year-old and president trump signed into law in march. this new law will lead to the creation of a single federal broadband map with new, more granular data collected by the f.c.c. from state and local governments, consumers, and other third parties and will be updated biannually. it would create an online mechanism where individuals can challenge the maps. let's say you live in an area that they're saying is covered. you out in darn well they're i have in a place that is uncovered. you can submit that data online and it will be submitted -- it will be submitted to the providers. it also requires regular auditing of data submitted by providers, allowing for crowd sourcing verification. this is important, too, because if you're grading yourself, you're going 0 give yourself a better grade. but if you're grading yourself and then you have a third-party verifier, who is actually making

sure that the data you're putting forward is correct, you might be just a little more circumspect in how much that data -- how accurate that data is. another step forward would be dovetailing road infrastructure with fiber broadband bummed-out. we also recognize broadband is infrastructure and it did once approach would sure -- a did-once approach would sure save time and money. we only want to dig once if we have to dig through the mountains. this is why the federal highway administration in midaugust made an announce of a new real to improve coordination and the use of highway rights, a way to support the installation of broadband technologies. they are a making it regulatory easier at the federal level to move forward. this proposed rule would help ensure that the digging required to install utilities would also be utilized for broadband infrastructure.

it makes sense, doesn't it? this would help cut down on the expense in rural areas. the good news is this is one of the few issues that lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are eager to work on together. we will continue to have obstacles ahead as we seek to close this digital divide. but i believe it is important to note the progress that we've made up to this point. five years ago i created my capito connect plan, which is a road map for bringing affordable, high-speed internet access to homes, businesses, and classrooms in my state of west virginia. each year we've made significant strides and i am proud of the accomplishments mated. are we all the way in? no. that's why i'm talking about it today, how important it is, especially in this covid environment. so, for example, there's the facebook fiber project. i personally asked founder and c.e.o. mark zuckerberg during a commerce committee hearing for

his commitment to partner with west virginia on rural fiber deployment. they announced they are investing 275 miles of long haul fiber right through the southern portion of the state. i can see the big coils and they're moving with that. other investments like the state's first fiber infrastructure investment from zaio, a similar build through the northern part of the state. i've also worked to leverage federal agencies like the usda. since the launch of my initiative, i successfully delivered $37 million in funding for residential broadband projects through the usda programs. we're continuing those efforts. last month i was in rural preston county where i witnessed firsthand as broadband service was being installed to the home of beverly and jeff steffel. this fiber installation project

was funded by a program made possible by those initiatives. i also visited lincoln primary care in hamlin, west virginia which received a grant from the f.c.c. to help provide better care in southern west virginia. they have a great plan they are going to put in their school base, community health centers. we've had a great deal of success of also receiving -- also identifying new areas for cell towers. as you can see, all levels of government, along with the municipalities and our local leaders, have stepped up to the plate to work toward this common goal. capito connect is making a difference of connecting thousands of west virginians. i've worked with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle through my committee work and also worked with the administration, which has truly

prioritized this issue. perhaps one up side to the pandemic -- or i would say better maybe lessons learned dosh is it has helped us better appreciate the time we can spend with each another but lessons learned that we cannot disadvantage certain parts of this country because you don't have what i consider to be one of the essentials in order to do business, to have health care, and to learn. and that's the deployment of high-speed broadband. getting back to the human convection, -- the human connection, it's so important. but it makes our work on broadband all that much more important. i yield back, madam president. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mrs. blackburn: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are, senator. mrs. blackburn: i ask it be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. blackburn: thank you, madam president. it seems every other week we turn on the tv to hear a pundit declare that we are living in the most divisive time in the history of our nation. now, as i'm sure many would point out, especially if we were having this discussion on social media, those who lived through the civil war and other contentious eras might have something to say about that. but we can all agree it is a

contentious time. but what i know for sure is thie the american people losing the hope they once had in the absolute and viability of our fundamental right to free speech and expression. they may not be too worried about official action changing those rights, but what they do see is a dwindling respect for what those rights mean outside of the done text of what lawyere context of what lawyers and lawmakers understand as freedom of speech. they're not thinking about supreme court cases. they're wondering what changed in the hearts and minds of their country men to turn simple disagreements into all-out war. they long for the days when they

would have friendly banter with their neighbors and with their friends. and discuss the issues of the day. well, over the past few months, i have watched this national discourse spiral to the point where most people i talk to back home believe that civil debate is just about impossible. and it worries them. what happened to mutual respect? what happened to point-counterpoint? what happened to civil discourse and the -- in the public square? what happened to sitting around the table after a sunday school class and talking about how what you have discussed applies to the issues of the day?

have we lost it? i've witnessed obvious efforts to threaten and intimidate conservative activists. i've watched these go unchecked by powerful liberal figureheads who should have known better. and what's worse, these threats and intimidation tactics have spilled over into the online platforms millions of americans use to check the news, stay connected to friends, and share updates on the lives of their families. now i think we can agree that most of our friends in silicon valley who were in charge of those platforms harbor some liberal bias. that being said, i think we can also agree that doesn't mean they can't be objective when it comes to things like content moderation. of course, that's not how it

works out in real life. the modern era's hostility toward debate provides those platforms with a perverse incentive to just flip the switch, shut down conservative voices, and then suggest that we had it coming all along. you shouldn't have been saying such. well, we all know that this seems to be a one-sided argument. now, those in this chamber who follow technology policy know that big tech uses the liability shield granted under section 230 of the communications decency act to justify this type of censorship. in part, this statute reads no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account

of any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material if the provider or user considers to be lewd, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable. whether or not such material is constitutionally protected. remember that otherwise objectionable catch-all? that is going to be important. congress originally constructed those provisions to protect start-ups and innovators from frivolous content moderation lawsuits that could either bankrupt their firms or severely restrict their access to venture capital, but in reality, big

tech has abused this privilege. listen to this part because this also is as important as that otherwise objectionable phrase. congress originally constructed these provisions of section 230 to protect start-ups and innovators from frivolous content moderation lawsuits that could either bankrupt their firms or severely restrict their access to venture capital. now, this was done because the internet was in its infancy. people wanted to make certain they could get their sea legs underneath them, have a little space, be able to innovate. if they made mistakes, they would be able to rectify those

mistakes and not get sued. those days are long gone, and yes, big tech has abused this privilege. they became very comfortable with looking at section 230 and using it as a way to issue takedown notices, as a way to restrict content, as a way to manipulate prioritization. it came in line with their thought processes and their ideas, but in reality, we know that this has become an excuse to censor content if they disagree with in principle, and in doing so, they have damaged perhaps in some ways irreparably

the integrity of the national discourse. the problem isn't just that they have unilaterally proposed their own content filter into the browsers and news feeds of millions of americans and manipulated the availability and quality of the information. it's that in the process of doing so, they have trained their customers to expect that filter to cover their real-world interactions with people whose beliefs are much more diverse than those of the silicon valley's wealthiest residents. you know, mr. president, this is one of those hollywood versus the heartland sort of issues. they think they know better than the people across this country,

so they feel that they can impose their own filter onto your browser and nor news feed, and thereby manipulate the availability and the quality of information to which you are going to have access. and they are doing it because they can. they think because they have been using 230 as their shield. last week, i joined my colleagues, senators wicker and graham, to introduce the online freedom and viewpoint diversity act, and i thank them for their willingness to work with me and to move a product to completion and introduction, and to

introduce this legislation means we are introducing accountability into our dealings with this notoriously opaque and unregulated industry. to be clear, this piece of legislation isn't meant to construct a new set of guide rails that will let washington dictate the inner workings of a platform's content moderation strategy. what it does is change the language of the existing statute to clarify some ambiguous terminology. basically, you're clarifying who can use liability protection, when they can use it, how they can use it, where it can be applied. first and foremost, the bill clarifies those scenarios when an online platform's decision to restrict access, restricting it,

censoring, diminishing, pushing it back, when they can restrict access to certain types of content will result in their losing that section 230 shield. if they do it because they wanted to -- did they do it because they wanted to or do -- did they do it because it is language that should be shielded and take a day off. this provision will address those famously vague content moderation policies that are almost impossible for users to challenge. how many times have you looked at terms of service? how many times have you looked at community standards and said i can't figure out what this means? guess what? most people cannot. and the online platform, it's fine with them if you can't figure it out. it gives them more latitude.

next, it conditions the content moderation liability shield on a reasonableness standard. in order to be protected from liability, a tech company may only restrict access to content where it has an objectively reasonable belief that the content falls within a certain specified category. so the purpose of this is to take away the benefit of the doubt. we want them to really think before restricting content. what they have done is just take it down. no fear that their hands would be slapped. and what do we know about big tech? they are going to push the envelope until they get their hand slapped. so instead of giving them the benefit of the doubt, the next

time they decide they are going to go in here and they are going to take something down, we want to give them pause. they need to think before they do that. our update removes the otherwise objectionable standard that i mentioned previously, and it replaces it with some specific terms that would protect platforms when they removed content that promotes terrorism, promotes self-harm or is unlawful. you know, it's a good thing, mr. president, when congress can be specific in what they mean, when they can be specific in the intent of the law, and changing this language would provide that specificity that is needed.

last but not least, the bill clarifies the definition of information content provider to include a person or entity that creates, develops, or editorializes information provided through the internet or any other online platform. now, mr. president, this will help online publishers and periodicals and websites that are news websites, but then you have big tech block them because somebody puts up something in the comment section that big tech doesn't like. and, of course, we all are familiar with mark zuckerberg saying his company, facebook, worked more like a government than a corporation. so this pulls back on what they

have used as their control. now, there has been a lot of discussion in this chamber regarding the best way to handle section 230. many argue that we would all be better off if congress wiped the statute off the books. just get rid of it completely. but i will tell you, i fully believe that is a misguided approach. that strategy won't temper the effects of big tech's bias because their bias stretches far beyond interactions that raise section 230 concerns. this isn't a simple issue. those of us who have been working on section 230 for years are still studying the ripple effects these changes will bring. but what we know for sure is that simply closing the book on section 230 via congressional

decree would be like casting a protest vote against big tech's bad behavior. it would be absolutely pointless. until we recognize the importance of clarifying and preserving liability protections for the internet we have now and not, not the internet we had in 1996, big tech will keep pushing the boundaries until private corporations become judge and jury over not only how americans discover new information but what information is actually there to discover. it is time for the united states senate to step up to do the work and to write those changes into law. i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call: quorum call: quorum call:

quorum call: the presiding officer: without objection. 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 c. scarsi of california to be united states district judge for the central

district of california, signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of mark c. scarsi of california to be united states district judge for the central district of california shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? if not, the yeas are 77, the nays are 12. the motion is agreed to.

mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding the provisions of rule 22, the confirmation vote with respect to the scarsi nomination occur at 10:30 a.m. tomorrow. further, if cloture is invoked on the blumenfeld nomination, the postcloture time with respect to the blumenfeld nomination expire at 2:15 tomorrow. the senate vote on confirmation of the nomination and following disposition of the blumenfeld nomination, the senate vote on the motions to invoke cloture on the holcomb and robinson nominations in the order listed. further, if cloture is invoked on the holcomb nomination, the postcloture motion expire at 5:15 tomorrow and the senate vote on the confirmation of the nomination. i further ask that if cloture is

up voked on the robinson nomination, the postcloture time expire at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the democratic leader on wednesday, september 16. finally you if nist nominations are confirmed, the nomination 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 ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to legislative session for a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i have one request for a committee to meet during today's session of the senate. it has the approval of the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly note. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the consideration of s. res. 690 submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 690, designating september 2020 as national workforce development month. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure.

mr. mcconnell: i know of no further debate on the resolution. the presiding officer: if there is no further debate, the question a option do of the resolution. all in favor say aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the resolution is adopted. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent 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: finally, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10:00 a.m. tuesday, september 15. further, follow the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed. further, following leader remarks, the senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the scarsi nomination. under the previous order, final lurks the senate recess from

12:30 to 2:15 to allow for the weekly conference meetings. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: so if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until senate stands adjourned until >> u.s. senate gambling out, this week there working on a number of judicial nominations . this month will also have debate on extending government funding which is sent to expire at midnight on september 30th and here's some of today's floor speeches beginning with oregon talking about the wildfires in his state. >> because a raging fires, my home statef of oregon, any communities in my home state have been reduced to ashes a number of others are