vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? if not, the yeas are 51, the

nays are 36. and the nomination is confirmed. the senator from washington. the senator will suspend. the senator for washington. ms. cantwell: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to speak for one minute on the next vote and the nomination to the f.c.c. i.g. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. ms. cantwell: thank you, mr. president. the f.c.c. is one of the most important independent agencies that we are counting on for the future of the information age. when you think about the fact that they regulate interstate commerce, radio, television, wire, satellite in all 50 states, it is imperative, imperative that we have someone who is the i.g. who understands these policies. i believe the next era of telecom is going to usher in 5-go. i do think we're -- 5-g.

i think we're going to solve our rural i.t. problems. i think we're going to connect schools. but if we have an i.g. who does not understand communication policy, has no experience in communication policy, never had a role in that, i say we won't accomplish the mission of oversight or the mission ultimately at the f.c.c.

this is a cloture vote. he's a marine. he's an accomplished attorney. he was reported s he was are reported on a unanimous bipartisan vote. the distinguished ranking member who just spoke seconded the, made the motion that chase johnson be reported. we are the victims this afternoon of some absences. we are also the victim this afternoon of some --. mr. roberts: mr. president, we don't have regular order. the presiding officer: the senate will be in order. the senator from mississippi. --. mr. wicker: differences that have arisen over extraneous issues. i would just urge my colleagues both on and off the committee to remember that this was a

unanimous vote out of the committee. this is an outstanding candidate, and he deserves to be confirmed. with that, i ask for a yes vote. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum call be waived. the presiding officer: is there objection? 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, do hereby bring to a close debate on the nomination of john chase johnson, of oklahoma, to be inspector general of the federal communications commission, 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 john chase johnson, of oklahoma, to be inspector general of the federal communications commission shall be brought to a close?

the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any other senators wishing to vote or change their vote, the yeas are 39, the nays are 48. the motion is nod agreed to. the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i enter a motion to reconsider the vote. the presiding officer: the motion is entered. mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the mandatory quorum call be waived. the presiding officer: is there objection? 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, do hereby bring to a

close debate on the nomination of eric j. soskin, of virginia, to be inspector general of the department of transportation, signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waive. the question is it, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of eric j. soskin, of virginia, to be inspector general dapt of transportation shall -- department of transportation, shall be brought to a close. yeas and nays are mandatory under the rules. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: does any senator wish to vote or change their vote? on this vote the yeas are 39, the nays 48 and the motion is not agreed to. the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: could we have order in the chamber? the presiding officer: the senate will be in order. mr. mcconnell: i enter a motion to reconsider the vote. the presiding officer: the motion is entered. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the mandatory quorum call be waived. 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 beth harwell of tennessee to be a member of the board of directors of the tennessee valley authority signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory qoirk has been waived. the question is is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of beth harwell to be a member of the tennessee valley authority shall be brought to a

close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any other senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? if not, on this vote the yeas are 61, the nays 25, and the motion is agreed to. mr. inhofe: mr. president. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, tennessee valley authority, beth harwell, of tennessee, to be a member of the board of directors. the presiding officer: could we have order in the senate, please? mr. inhofe: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma is recognized. order in the senate, please. members will take their conversations off the floor. the senator from oklahoma. mr. inhofe: mr. president, i

first want to meet with the then-republican nominee for president of the united states, donald trump. that was october of 2016. i was really struck by his commitment. it was kind of an interesting meeting. it was in the trump tower. they had ten people, ten of us were meeting. each one in one particular area of expertise, supposedly. we had people there on energy. we had one on health care. i was there for military. i was very honored to be the one to advise him as to some of the issues. the presiding officer: senators will please quiet your conversations. mr. inhofe: and we talked about that. the thing that surprises me, his commitment. you have to keep in mind, here is a guy who has been a giant in industry for many, many years, but he has never had anything to do with politics or government, really. and so it was a learning experience for him. he was actually listening.

that was not his reputation, but he was doing it. i remember we had a lot of questions that we asked and comments were made in our conversations that day started a very strong friendship that i had with him when he went on to become president trump. the president listened closely, asked good questions. our conversations that day were a strong friendship where i have been honored to offer him friendship, advice, guidance in the area of the military, and i think it served him well. one good example of one of the areas where he was listening to me against the advice of many of the people in his administration was on the issue of lagato and the president's advisors were trying to convince him to go ahead with the deal to sell off the g.p.s. adjacent spectrum, it was a good thing and so forth. i talked to the president, made

it very clear that allowing the lagato deal to move ahead would jeopardize our nation's g.p.s. system, impacting not just the military and the commercial aviation, farmers who rely on g.p.s. to maintain fields and so many more. the results would be devastating, not to mention costly. the president got it. and we worked together on that issue. i remember telling him how that happened. the f.c.c., the federal communications, they were to issue and to give a spectrum to lagato at that time. we were in recess, and so i went to them and i said don't do anything until we get out of recess so we can be in on this. there is a lot of objection to lagato. and so without listening to me, the f.c.c. just went ahead and did it on a weekend, i might add, that never happened before. they never did it on a weekend before, but they did in this

case. and they gave the order to la lagato. the interesting part of this was this had to do with protecting our low-band spectrum from interference. it had nothing to do with the good work the administration has made the bands of spectrum available to further our 5g development. that's how this happened. the largest group i have seen ever come together in the years i have been in the house and the senate on one issue was this issue. i'm talking about everyone. not just dodd, but the bureaucracy, the airlines, the farm bureau, and everybody else, they were all in on this thing. the president made the comment. he said, you know, any time you are dealing with a bureaucracy and they tell you that something has to be done, it has to be done on a weekend, it has to be done at night, then you know something's wrong with it. they rushed into it before they

had the opportunity to do it with everyone being present at the time, and that's -- but that's just another example of the closeness that we were. another example was space force. he wanted to do the space force, and i understand that. i was not initially all that concerned about it and supportive of it, but on the other hand you have countries like china and russia, our main opposition out there, they had their space forces, and i think it's really good that we consolidated all of our efforts that were really working well, but consolidating in that thing, and we did that and we did that together, and that was one of the areas that we worked together. i remember another one was the area of western sahara. it is something i have been on the floor talking about now for the last couple of weeks because western sahara has been -- we have had the same position with western sahara since 1966.

that is, they rejected from their land in that area of the world way back during the colonial days. in fact, at that time it was the spanish sahara. we were devoted at that time for a right of self-determination for the people of western sahara. i explained that to the president at that time. he didn't have a lot of interest. he didn't know where western sahara was. he really didn't have a lot of interest in that, but he did and he became committed to the idea that we have had a policy for over 30 years in our country that we would recognize their right of self determination. so he went along with that. we tried to convince him this year's national defense authorization act is -- someone told him or advised him wrongly -- i'm talking about maybe some of the people in the

president's administration, that how the ndaa -- the ndaa has now been passed by the house, it has been passed by the senate. it's going to be signed into law eventually. the president has talked about he might veto it. having something to do that it wasn't strong enough against china. i want to get on record right now on the senate floor and make sure everyone understands that this is the toughest thing on -- well, in fact, it's not just me saying it. the american enterprise institute, which is sometimes referred to as the -- the conservative voice of government, they said that this bill, the ndaa of this year, the one that we passed, we just passed, is the toughest bill on china in 20 years. now, here's why. the national defense strategy -- now, this is the book -- we have to remember, this is something we need to adhere ourselves to. this was put together by 12 of the most knowledgeable people in

america. six republicans, six democrats. they got together, and they did -- this is providing for our defense for the future. it's a short book, but it's one that we have been living by, and they are very specific in the -- in their strategy as to where china is. and so last week, president trump's director of national intelligence said this. this is a quote, mr. president. the people's republic of china poses the greatest threat to america today and the greatest threat to democracy and freedom worldwide since world war ii. that was what the director -- from everything that i have seen and everything our military leaders have told me, director ratcliffe is spot on on this. he said -- and this is another quote -- he said beijing intends to dominate the united states and the rest of the planet, economically, militarily, and technologically, and i believe that's true. we have already seen evidence of

this strategy within the last few years, china built its first military base outside of its own territory. this is kind of interesting because this is a major deviation with what china has been doing for decades. they have always initiated any kind of a military activity from their own city limits. it all starts in china. this has been going on for a long period of time. and so this is a major deviation from that. this is a threat that china has and that they are against us. china has changed. they had this major advance in djibouti. djibouti, that's the first time they started a military operation outside of china itself, so they did it from djibouti. and i have been down there several times. i have flown over the areas they have. now, china is not just in djibouti, but it's all over the

world, down in that continent of africa, they are as far south as the further extremes of -- of china all throughout and in southern tanzania, they are very active down there. this is something that's new. china's turning islands in the regions in the south china sea into military bases. it's another part of the world. they have been doing this. you all know about this. it's been going on for a long period of time. in fact, they had -- they now are up to seven islands. these are not legal islands in their possession, but they took them, they created them. they didn't take them. they created them. they made islands out of -- out there in the ocean. and if you go and look at what they proudly display on those islands, they have -- it's as if they are preparing for world war iii. that's china. a lot of our allies in that area are wondering where is america while china is doing all these

things? so we are very strongly attuned to this. and this is what is happening just today as we speak. and this is what we are addressing in the national defense authorization act on china. in south america, china's work secure port access to the panama canal, jamaica, bahamas, all throughout that area. that's next door to us and giving the chinese communist party an advantage right in our neighborhood. in all these cases, this is not just about military influence but economic influence as well. meanwhile, we're watching as china steals our intellectual property and uses it for their own gain. a perfect example of this is hypersonics weapons. hypersonic weapons, a lot of people are not familiar with that. that's state of the art. that's a new thing. that's what we have been racing with against our two

adversaries, both china and russia. guess what? china and russia are both ahead of us in hypersonic. people have this idea that america has the very best of everything. now, i have to say -- i don't say this critically of the obama administration, but during the last five years of the obama administration, that would be between 2010 and 2015, he reduced the funding for the military by 25%. this is the obama administration. i don't say it critically. he had different priorities. than i have and other people have. and so at the same time, he was reducing ours by 25%, china had increased in that same period of time by 83%. just stop and think about that. that's what is happening right now. the threat they pose is real. it's urgent. it needs a strong response. that's what the ndaa bill does. it takes strong action to push china back, to limit their influence, to counter their

maligned behavior, and to balance their military aggression. now, we know the best way to protect america's security and prosperity in asia and to ensure that the indo-pacific remains free and open for all is to maintain a credible balance in military power. there again this is what the ndaa does, it specifically singles out china in this effort. until now, the ability to do this was at risk. now with the ndaa, we are achieving the urgent change and significant scale that the n.d.s., again going back to the n.d.s. what it requires, we do so by establishing the specific deterrence initiative. we have -- remember, the last ndaa we had a year ago was the european deterrence. this one we've shifted to the pacific deterrence initiative. that is china. and to dissuade china from its current trajectory of increasing

aggression in the area, in that region, the p.d.i., that's the pacific deterrent initiative will enhance our foreign posture in the pacific and push the pentagon to get our commanders in theater -- to get what they need. and that's what we are doing now. that's what the ndaa is doing specifically against china. and for -- it will help us put the right capabilities and the right forces, and china understands that there is no quick and easy way to have victory against us because of the ndaa efforts that we're making as we speak right now. the pacific deterrent initiative also deepens our cooperation with our allies and partners in that region, building up capabilities that we need to protect ourselves. and our allies in that area. so that they know that we are with them. we are a team with them. the ndaa authorizes $2 billion this year for that pacific

deterrent initiative. more than the investment, we also include the tools that will help us make better long-term strategy -- strategic decisions about missions and priorities. we saw how well this worked in the european deterrence initiative. that was last year. last year we were concentrating more on russia. this year, it's china. and so we saw how well it worked in the european initiative, and we can now track our efforts and do the same thing with china and the pacific deterrent initiative. now, with the p.d.i., we are sending a strong signal to the chinese communist party, as well as our partners and allies, that the american people are committed to defending our interests and values in the indo-pacific. now, that's china we're talking about. the pacific deterrent initiative isn't the only way that we send

this signal. elsewhere in the bill, we take steps to strengthen our relationship with our critical allies and our partners in the region, including taiwan and india and vietnam and japan. the bill requires the department of defense to how we can improve our operations to prevent china and other competitors from seizing control of taiwan and threatening the territory and integrity of our partners in that area. the ndaa also invests in equipment that will help us counter china and to are attack submarines. this is equipment that we have in the ndaa. the attack submarines shall the precision-guided munitions, many of those, i might add, come from our state of oklahoma, the air and missile defense systems, electronic warfare equipment, counter-ship capabilities and a lot more. the reason i'm saying this is i

think someone has misled the president in thinking that we were not really as aggressive as we should be in china, and we are. and these are specific things we've never seen before. this is all against china. it invests in innovation that will help us build our capabilities. we need to take care of china in the future. the artificial intelligence, the hypersonic weapons, where they are still leading us as we speak, counter-computing and direct energy and beyond. it's all in the ndaa bill that we have passed -- just passed through the house and through the senate. so the ndaa takes steps -- these steps to support a forward posture and favorable balance of power, but we've also got to defend against the full spectrum of their behavior. part of the problem with china is not just that they are

modernizing equipment. it's that they are stealing our ideas, our technology and then building on it. they're taking a shot at us, and all this doing so illegally, but they're doing it very effectively. that's what china does. to protect our intellectual property, the ndaa -- this is the bill we're talking about -- it creates the mechanisms to restrict employees or former employees of the defense industrial base from working for companies owned by or under the direction of china. now, this is something that has not been done before. we would wake up. we find out that some of our industries that we're depending on for our defense are very close to china. and so we are taking steps to stop that now. further, we're requiring universities to, number one, share information on defense-funded research; number two, disclose external funding for grant recipients, so those

recipients of grants are not working with the chinese; and, three, limit funding for universities with the confucius institutes. the ndaa also directs the president to create a whole-of-government strategy to deter china's industrial espionage and large-scale theft of personal information. for the first time ever, we'll impose real costs on the p.r.c. for this behavior. we know a big part of china's strategy is to fly under the radar, so we established numerous provisions to give us a better idea of what china is up to. all this in the ndaa. right now, for instance, we don't have a great sense of exactly how much china is spending on their national defense. you know, they lie a lot. so we tasked the d.o.d. and the federal fund research and development center to conduct a full study of china's defense budget. this is something we haven't done before.

that's in the ndaa. we also establish an ongoing assessment of china's industrial base, require a list of chinese military companies operating in the united states to be publicly shared in the federal register and mandate that recipients of federal contracts disclose the beneficial ownership. we need to know who those people are, and that's set up in the ndaa. over the past few years, it's become clear that we are too reliant on china for everything from critical materials to complex manufactured items like parts of naval vessels and even for medical supplies, as we saw just this year. the pandemic really slowed us just -- and showed us what happened and how vulnerable we are. and we are. everybody knows that. the ndaa protects and reforms our defense industrial base to mitigate these risks and to

attract new performers to replace china. in other words, to get out of china any dependence that we have on china. it's all in the ndaa. that's why the american enterprise institute, which has always been the conscience, declared that this is the toughest legislation on china in the last 20 years. lastly, the ndaa takes steps to protect the u.s. bases overseas by requiring the secretary of defense to notify congress of how host countries using 5g networks from companies like huawei and z.t.e., that they're mitigating the security risks from these networks before we base new major weapons systems there. the last two ndaa's set the ball in motion when it comes to countering china. with this ndaa, i'm confident that we're findally achieving -- finally achieving the irreversible momentum we need to

effectively implement the national defense strategy against china. there is no turning back now. with the ndaa, we are sending china an unmistakable signal that whether it is today or tomorrow, there will never be a good time for china to test america's military. i will never forget that four years ago when we had that meeting in trump tower and we had ten of us in there, and we were talking about the military at that time. and that's when the president became convinced -- and that's why i know that i.t. not the president -- it's not the president, not president trump who's saying this about the national defense authorization act. it's the advice that he's getting from advisors who just are not doing -- telling him the right thing. and, mr. president, i want you to know, we've got our foot on the throat of china with our ndaa, and we're not going to let it up. and if any of your advisors tell

you any different than this, they're not serving america well. and that -- well, not quite. i had an experience -- today is a very special day, i'd tell everybody who cares. not many people do, but i do. this is my wife's and my 61st wedding anniversary, today, december 19. and on the floor of the senate yesterday i talked a little bit about that, and i made the comment that i don't want to be here on my wedding anniversary implying that i was not going to be here to vote. these votes that we're having right now are among the most critical votes had a we've had. i assure you i'm going to be here until the last vote is cast. with that, i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. vote:

quorum call:

quorum call:

a senator: madam president, i

ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. toomey: thawment -- i ask unanimous consent that not withing standing the provisions l rule 22 the senate vote on confirmation of bergt harwell. i further ask the cloture motion on noland ripen at 1 p.m. tomorrow. if either nomination is confirmed, the motion to reconsider be made and laid upon the table and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. toomey: and i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

quorum call:

ms. murkowski: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from alaska. ms. murkowski: request the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. under the previous order, all postcloture time has expired. the question is on the harwell nomination. the clerk will call the roll. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote: he

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: have all senators voted? does any senator wish to change their vote? the nays are 59, the nays are 25. the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the previous order is considered made, laid upon the table. the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. mr. gardner: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from colorado. mr. gardner: i ask unanimous consent that with respect to the dietz nomination, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and that the president be immediately notified of the senate's actions. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. gardner: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to a period of legislative session and be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. gardner: i ask the senate to lay before the clerk the message to as&p senate 1694. the clerk: resolved that the bill from the senate, s. 1694 entitled an act to require any

federal agency that issues licenses to conduct lunar activities, and so forth and for other purposes, do pass with amendments. mr. gardner: i move to concur in the house amendment, and i know of no further debate on the motion. the presiding officer: if there is no further debate, the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye. all those opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. gardner: i move to concur in the title amendment and i ask unanimous consent that the motion be agreed to and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. gardner: i ask unanimous consent that the foreign relations committee be discharged from further consideration and the senate now proceed to s. res. 458. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 458, calling for the global repeal of blasphemy, heresy laws. the presiding officer: without objection, the committee is discharged. the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. gardner: i ask unanimous consent that the lankford

amendment to the resolution be agreed to, the resolution as amended be agreed to, the lankford amendment to the preamble be agreed to, the preamble as amended be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. gar mr. gardner: i ask that the senate proceed to the consideration of calendar number 585, s. 2204. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. 2204, a bill to allow the communications commission to carry out a pilot program under which voice service providers could block certain calls and for other purposes. the presiding officer:, would. the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. gardner: i ask unanimous consent that the committee had of reported substitute amendment 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. gardner: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to it the immediate consideration of h.r. 7898 which was received from it the house. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: h.r. 7899, a bill

to amend the health and technology for economic health act and for other purposes. the presiding officer: without objection. the senate proceeds to the measure. mr. gardner: 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. gardner: i ask the chair lay before the senate the message to accompany s. 2683. the presiding officer: the chair lays before the senate a message from the house. the clerk: resolve, that the built from the senate s. 2683 entitled an tax cut to establish is a task force to assist states inempt kbring hiring requirements for child care staff members to improve child safety do pass with an amendment. mr. gardner: i move to concur in it the house amendment and no of no further debate on the motion. the presiding officer: if there is to further debate, the the question on the motion. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. gardner: i ask unanimous consent that at the motions to

reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. gardner: i ask the chair lay before the senate the message to are accompany s. 3989. the presiding officer: the chair. the clerk: the brill the senate s. 3989 an act to amend the united states semi-quinn centennial act of 2016 to modified certain membership and other requirements of the united states semi-quinn centennial commission and for other purposes do pass with an amendment. mr. gardner: i move to concur in the house amendment and ask that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and's. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. gardner: i ask unanimous consent that at energy committee be discharged and the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of h.r. 5459. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: h.r. 5459 an act to authorize the secretary of the interior to correct a landownership error within the boundary of rocky mountain national park and for other

purposes. the presiding officer: without objection, the committee is discharged. the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. gardner: i ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. gardner: i know of no further debate on the bill. the presiding officer: if there is no further debate, the question is on the passage. bill. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the bill is spaed. mr. gardner: i ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. gardner: i ask unanimous consent that when the senate committees its business today, at that adjourn until 1:00 p.m. sun someday, december 20. further, follow being the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be 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, and morning business be closed. further, following leader remarks, the senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the noland nomination under the previous order. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. gardner: if there is to further business to come before the senate i ask that it standaround under

the previous order. the previous order. statement to the senate today is working on judicial and executive branch nominations. about the house and the senate last night tested today continuing resolution extending government funding until sunday at midnight. they continuing to coronavirus relief package and federal spending. but reports indicate that there will be no deal tonight. back to book tv, nonfiction authors and books every weekend. >> hello everyone, i'm director of the cultural and constitutional studies of the enterprise institute organ it is my great pleasure to welcome you to this discussion of congress overwhelmed from the book edited by several. congress understands at the