on the table or not been able to pay the rent and these are things that are the reality for millions of people in america and so congress has to step up and make it possible for everyone to do the right thing to protect their health, the health of the families and health of their communities. without that we will continue to thsee people making rational choices that say hey, i will not tell anyone and if i give my friends name up my friend could nlose their job and they could lose their home and they could lose the ability to put food on the table. these things are real in america and if you really want to get this under control we have to make it possible for everybody to protect their health. >> host: i know we are close to time here, dr. besser, but it's almost 4:30 a.m. in hawaii. >> washington journal live everyday at 7:00 a.m. eastern and available anytime at c-span .org. we leave this to fill our 40 plus year commitment to congressional coverage. u.s. senate is about to gavel

in. lawmakers will start the day considering the nomination of janet yellen to be the next treasury secretary. final confirmation vote is scheduled for 5:30 p.m. eastern. after that we will see house impeachment managers walk the article of impeachment over to the senate where the trial of donald trump will take place in february. now live to the senate floor on c-span2. ident pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. almighty god, the rock of our salvation, teach us to live as contemplative activists, reflecting your sacred guidance and obeying your commands.

remind our lawmakers that you direct the steps of good people, leading the faithful to a destination you have chosen. lord, stir the hearts of our senators until they possess a holiness that strives to carve tunnels of hope through mountains of despair. we offer you our hearts, mighty god, for we trust your preveiling providence. we trust in your great 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.

a senator: mr. president. the president pro tempore: the senator from hawaii. ms. hirono: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the president pro tempore: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. schumer: madam president. the presiding officer: the democratic leader is recognized. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: thank you, madam president. now this week the senate will continue confirming president

biden's highly-qualified and history-making cabinet nominees. in a few hours we'll hold a vote on janet yellen to serve as the next secretary of the treasury. janet yellen is no stranger to this chamber. she has been confirmed by the senate no fewer than four times and was reported favorably to the floor by a unanimous vote of the finance committee on friday. the bipartisan support for ms. yellen's multiple nominations reflects her breathtaking range of experience and just how well suited she is to manage the economic challenges of our time. ms. yellen, i'm proud to report, is a native of working-class brooklyn, the daughter of a schoolteacher and a physician, raised during the great depression. she went to fort hamilton high school, one of james madison's high schools rivals. she has taught economics as some of the world's most prestigious universities. she is best known for her tenure

as chair of the federal reserve. overseeing a period of falling unemployment and steady economic recovery from the global financial crisis. few people possess the experience and expertise that ms. yellen would bring to the treasury, particularly during this moment of economic crisis. at the treasury department there are long hallways on the third floor where the portraits of all 77 treasury secretaries hang. all of them men, all the way back to alexander hamilton, the first secretary. i am thrilled today to vote to confirm the first woman to ever hold the position of treasury secretary and someday add her portrait to that hallway. on that note, i would add it was a great pleasure to read the biden administration's announcement today that the treasury department intends to speed up the plans to add the portrait of harriet tubman to the $20 bill. this is an issue i have long

championed and something that should have been done a long time ago. i feel particularly strong about it since harriet tubman was an auburn, new york, resident and our office worked for years to successfully make her home in upstate new york a national historic monument. and i'm glad the biden administration is reversing the trump administration's foot-dragging. this is the kind of things they did. no excuse, no reason. just didn't do it. but now the biden administration is reversing the trump administration's foot-dragging and will press forward with plans to circulate new currency celebrating her life and legacy. after ms. yellen's confirmation tonight the senate will continue to process nominations to president biden's cabinet. the secretaries of state, homeland security, and transportation. with cooperation, the senate could complete both confirmations this week.

again, those are the secretaries of state, homeland security, and transportation, in addition to treasury this evening. i remind my colleagues that president trump had his secretary of homeland security installed on inauguration day. we cannot allow our national security, our domestic security to be compromised in any way by the prolonged delay of mr. mayorkas' nomination. on impeachment, as i announced on friday, the republican leader and i have come to an initial agreement about the timing of the impeachment trial of donald trump. this evening managers appointed by the house of representatives will deliver to the senate the article of impeachment and will read the article here in the well of this chamber. tomorrow senators will be sworn in as judges and jurors in the impending trial and the senate will issue its summons to former president trump. after that, both the house managers and the former

president's counsel will have a period of time to draft their legal briefs, just as they did in previous trials. once the briefs are drafted, presentations by the parties will commence the week of february 8. i want to thank the republican leader for working with us to reach this agreement which we believe is fair to both sides and will enable the senate to conduct a timely and fair trial on the article of impeachment. the schedule will also allow us to continue the important work of the people, including confirming more members of president biden's cabinet. but i want to be very clear about that last point. the senate will conduct a timely and fair trial. i want to be very clear about that because some of my republican colleagues have latched on to a fringe legal theory that the senate does not have the constitutional power to hold a trial because donald trump is no longer in office. this argument has been roundly

debunked by constitutional scholars from the left, right, and center. it defies precedent, historic practice, and basic common sense. it makes no sense whatsoever that a president or any official could commit a heinous crime against our country and then defeat congress' impeachment powers by simply resigning. so as to avoid accountability and a vote to disqualify them from future office. this isn't merely a hypothetical situation, madam president. in 1876, president grant's secretary of war implicated in a corruption scheme literally raced through the white house to tender his resignation mere minutes before the house was set to vote on his impeachment. then as a matter of historical record, he burst into tears. not only did the house move forward with five impeachment articles against him, but a trial was then convened in the senate. of course the question came up

as to whether the senate could try officials -- could try former officials. and guess what? the senate voted as a chamber that mr. bellnap could be tried, quote, for acts done as secretary of war notwithstanding his resignation of said office. those are words the senate voted in 1876. now, mr. bellnap was ultimately acquitted but the record is clear. the senate decided it had the power to try former officials, and the reasons are obvious. a president or any official could, for example, wait until their final two weeks in office to betray their country knowing they could escape accountability or resign moments before the senate decides to convict and disqualify them from future office. the theory that the senate can't try former officials would amount to a constitutional get out of jail free card for any president who commits an impeachable offense. now it's certainly appropriate

for the senate to take the resignation of an official into account. after all, the house decided not to impeach richard nixon because in that sense nixon took some responsibilities for his actions. but to state the obvious, president trump did not resign. he has not demonstrated remorse. he has not even acknowledged his role in the events of january 6. and he has never disavowed the lies that were fed to the american people by him about who actually won the election. just to put a final nail into the coffin of this ridiculous theory, i remind my colleagues, if a president is convicted on an article of impeachment, the senate holds a separate vote to bar them from future office. once a president is convicted of an impeachment charge they are removed from office. in other words, they become a former official. if we are to believe that the senate can't hold former officials to account, then the senate could never proceed to that second vote of

disqualification which is provided for in the constitution, even for a sitting president. in saying this, i'm expressing the view of legal scholars across the political speck is trump. -- spectrum. a prominent scholar at the university of texas wrote in "the new york times" that donald trump is, quote, the poster child for why the conviction of the next president is not just constitutionally permissible but necessary. more than 150 legal scholars signed a letter last week stating that an impeachment trial of a former president is constitutional. among the signatories, one of the co-founders of the federalist society as well as one of president reagan's solicitors general, among other prominent conservatives. it is so obviously wrong to suggest that impeaching the president is unconstitutional, that impeaching a former president is unconstitutional, so why are some suggesting it? well, there seems to be a desire

on the political right to avoid passing judgment one way or the other on former president trump and his role in fomenting the despicable attack on the capitol january 6. there seems to be some hope that republicans could oppose the former president's impeachment on process grounds rather than grappling with his actual awful conduct. let me be very clear. this is not going to fly. the trial is going to happen. it is certainly and clearly constitutional, and if the former president is convicted, there will be a vote to disqualify him from future office. there is only one question at stake, only one question, that senators of both parties will have to answer before god and their own conscience. is former president trump guilty of inciting an insurrection against the united states. i yield the floor.

i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: madam president. the presiding officer: the republican leader is recognized. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: madam president, our nation has spent nearly a year locked in this terrible battle with covid-19. this virus that spread from china around the world has taken more than 400,000 american lives. it's effectively cost many children an entire school year. it made us slam the brakes on one of the best job markets in modern history. and threw millions of families into financial chaos. thanks to a lot of hard work in 2020, the dawn of 2021 has brought a turning point.

the genius of science and the support of operation warp speed produced vaccines in record time. and in december, after months of delay, democrats finally let congress move ahead with another major rescue package. the light at the end of the tunnel is getting closer, and both republicans and democrats want to continue working together to accelerate victory. curiously, the president's candidate to run the department of health and human services is the famously partisan attorney general of california his recent experience in health policy seems largely limited to promoting abortion on demand and suing groups like the little sisters of the poor who dare to live out their religious convictions. in an interview just yesterday, mr. becerra compared the current state of vaccinations inherited by the biden administration to an airplane in a nose dive, a disaster.

he contrasted the status quo with the new administration's stated goal of one million vaccinations per day which he called, quote, ambitious. there is a problem here. even the press has repeatedly pointed it out that our nation is already meeting that very pace. already meeting the very pace. that's not a big new goal. that's exactly what they inherited from the trump administration and operation warp speed. inauguration day, thursday and friday each topped one million vaccinations. as of today, we're averaging 1.16 million shots per day over the last week. they're claiming the exact same number can either be a total catastrophe or a smashing success i guess depends on

whether democrats are in power. so much for science without politics. here's how "the washington post" put it. the accelerating speed of the vaccine program undercuts assertions by some biden advisors that they were left no plan by the trump administration and suggest they need only keep their feet on the pedal to clear the bar they set for themselves, end quote. yesterday, mr. becerra was asked about increasing vaccinations in the month ahead. here's what he said. i first have to be sworn in to give you a timeline. perhaps that's like the time the speaker of the house famously said she has to pass a bill before the public could learn what was in it. the new administration campaigned heavily on having a new master plan to fight the pandemic. well, now they are in office, president biden has said, quote, there is nothing we can do to change the trajectory of the pandemic in the next several

months, and his administration is apparently content to maintain the same vaccine pace they actually inherited. let's talk about congress' role in pandemic relief. our democratic colleagues spent last summer and fall using the legislative filibuster to delay the next rescue package until after the election. now, that would be the same tool that some senate democrats now suddenly say they oppose as if they hadn't leaned on it liberally over the last six years. but finally, last month, they let us act. we passed another package totaling nearly $900 billion in urgent relief. we provided more than $80 billion to help k-12 schools, $280 billion for the paycheck protection program, billions more for federal unemployment insurance supplements, nutrition, and rental assistance, and direct cash aid and massive new investments in purchasing and

distributing vaccines. some of that money has already gone out the door. other portions are still unspent. a massive, historic, almost trillion-dollar package that was passed into law just five weeks ago. since last march, washington, d.c., has spent an historic amount of money standing up one of the most enormous policy responses by any government to any emergencies that the world has ever seen. nobody thinks the support has been perfect. far from it. but it has been historic and strong. for example, a nonpartisan study in november showed that because of the historic emergency legislation passed through congress, american personal income was actually -- listen to this -- higher in september than it had been before the pandemic. last month, larry summers, president clinton's treasury secretary and president obama's n.e.c. director, confirmed that

relative to our underlying economy, our multiple rescue packages have brought american household income all the way back to a level that equals or even exceeds what he would expect if we weren't in a crisis. so to be clear, madam president, nobody thinks our bipartisan work fighting this pandemic is completely finished. nobody's arguing that. and we all understand that overall national statistics do not explain away the terrible struggles facing many families. but experts and economists from the left to the right agree any further action should be smart and targeted, not just an imprecise deluge of borrowed money that would direct huge sums to those who don't need it. that's why the administration's first draft of their sprawling proposal misses the mark, and press reports make clear this is not just a republican view. multiple democratic senators agree that it's not the right

path forward. so as the $900 billion package from five weeks ago continues to come online and as remaining needs continue to come into focus, republicans will be ready and eager to continue bipartisan discussions about smart steps forward for the american people. bipartisan action helped our nation endure the last year. bipartisan action helped us turn the corner. and it will be smart bipartisan actions that help us finish the fight. now, on a related matter, this afternoon, the senate will confirm dr. janet yellen, the former chair of the federal reserve, to serve as president biden's secretary of the treasury. her speedy confirmation will contrast sharply with the way the senate democratic minority handled many of the last president's key cabinet nominations four years ago. secretary mnuchin had to sit through a stunt where senate democrats literally boycotted

his committee hearing. he was not confirmed until mid february. dr. yellen came out of committee on a unanimous vote and will be getting to work five days after the inauguration. that's even faster than secretary geitner's nomination in 2009 in the midst of the financial crisis. this certainly isn't because drs economic policy views have unanimous support here in the senate. i expect we will have no shortage of spirited policy discussions with dr. yellen in the months ahead, especially if some democrats keep trying to use this historic emergency as a pretext, a pretext to push through permanent far-left policy changes. the 50 senators on our side have great confidence in our pro-job, pro-worker vision that helped build the greatest job market in living memory. but the simple fact is that when the american people elect a president and when the president selects qualified and mainstream

people for key posts, the whole nation deserves for them to be able to assemble their team. i will be voting to confirm dr. yellen today. i look forward to working together on pro-growth policies that will help rebuild a thriving economy for american workers that was in place just one year ago. 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 consider the following nomination, which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, department of the treasury, janet louise yellen of california to be secretary. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the time until 5:30 will be equally divided between the two leaders or their designees. the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: i suggest the

absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum quorum call:

quorum call:

a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from ohio brown thank you. i ask unanimous consent to dispense withed quorum. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. brown: thank you, madam president. good for see you, the senator from hawaii as the presiding officer. i rise today to honor workers in this building, something that senator hirono does every day of her life in this job, to honor workers in this building who are too often overlooked but whose work is essential to the functioning of our government. our capital custodial staff. in the days after the january 6 insurrection, when domestic terrorists stormed this building, we rightly honored

capital police officer eugene goodman and many other police officers who put their lives on the line to protect all of us, to protect our democratic process, to essentially protect our democracy. last week i joined a bipartisan group of colleagues in introducing legislation to ward off -- award goodman the congressional gold medal. he saved our lives and protected our democracy. they did it without the support they needed from their leadership. they did it without the support from the trump white house on down. but those officers aren't the only ones who deserve our honor and our gratitude. they are not the only ones who put their lives on the line serving our country. on january 6 or over the past year during this pandemic. every day capital custodial staff do their jobs with skill and dedication and dignity. they show up for work during this pandemic even when many in this building didn't take it seriously and put those workers'

health at risk by not wearing masks. capital custodial workers were here january 6 doing their jobs when white supremacists stormed this building, barging into this chamber, acting as though no one could ever possibly hold them accountable because the president was on their side. they thought they were invulnerable. and when the rampage was over, it was largely the black and brown custodians who were left to restore dignity and respect to the capitol. their work allowed us to continuing hours that night certifying the electoral votes, securing our democracy, the election and our democracy. many americans were so moved to see those workers still doing their job. that's what service looks like. that's what love of country looks like. that's what the dignity of work is all about. unfortunately it tells you a whole lot about the problems that have been allowed to fester for too long in this country. white supremacists make a mess. black workers clean it up. we have a lot of work to fix

that to ensure that hard work pays off for all workers in this country. we simply don't value and respect all work the way we should. i think of the words of dr. king who as you know died fighting for workers. sanitation workers in memphis. he said if a man is called to be a street sweeper, he should sweep streets even as mike al anglo painted or beethoven composed music or shakespeare wrote poetry. he should sweep streets so well that all the hosts of heaven and earth will pause to say here lived a great street sweeper who did his job well. dr. king said no work is insignificant. all labor that uplifts humanity has dignity and importance. no work is insignificant. all labor has dignity. we ought to treat it that way starting with honoring these workers. in the days after january 6, pictures of capitol workers cleaning up after these terrorists were reported on the

news captured by dedicated journalists who also risked their lives to do their jobs that day. these photos struck a chord with so many people. americans began writing thank you letters to the architect of the capitol to pass on to custodian staff, police officers, and to others. many of these workers are represented by local 626 which gives workers a voice on the job, is also working on ways to honor its members. members of congress should do the same. in the coming weeks i'll be introducing a senate resolution to recognize the capitol custodial staff for their bravery and their service to our country on january 6. i hope my colleagues will join me, all of them, not as republicans or democrats but as members of this body, as americans all. this capitol is the people's house, the insurrectionists ransacked it. the capitol custodians picked up the pieces. they deserve our eternal gratitude. to all the custodial -- capitol

custodians who come to work in this building each day to ensure our democracy functions, thank you, thank you, thank you. madam president, i ask that the following be put in a different place in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. brown: thank you, madam president. a few days after our first woman vice president was sworn in, we're about to confirm the first woman to step into our economy. janet yellen is about to make history as secretary of the treasury. she'll be the first person to ever have held all three of the top positions in our economy -- chair of the council of economic advisor, chair of the federal reserve, secretary of the treasury. and now more than ever, we need her leadership, her vision, her appreciation for what makes it country work. as fed chair and as a labor economist, janet yellen made it clear she understands what

drives our commitment of it is not the stock market, it is people. she knows that our economy is is built by americans. whether you punch a clock or swipe a badge or work for tips or take care of children. i remember when she came to cleveland and cared th alcoa plant not far from my house. she showed the kind of leadership we need, the kind of leadership that president biden is putting into the top jobs. people that will get out of washington and visit every sort of community in the heart of the country, people who will act on what they learn from workers in chillicothe and springfield and youngstown and moline, illinois. there is a lot more to our economy than a quarterly earnings report. janet yellen understands that. we're in the midst of a public

health cries and economic cries. you wouldn't know it if you only looked at the stock market or corporate profits. but under new leadership in the senate and janet yellen, we're done measuring the economy that way. we're going to think about the economy the way workers and their families do, in terms of paychecks. whether they can make rent or pay the mortgage this month or afford child care or pay for their prescription drugs. by those measures, people are hurting. we hear a lot about what some people called the k-shaped recovery. that's one way of saying that the rich are getting richer while the middle class and low-income families continue to struggle. it was a problem before this virus, madam president, as you know. the pandemic has only made it worse. it is layered on top of systemic racism and inequality that have been allowed to fester for too long. we have a tax system that favors

the wealthy and gives corporations a tax break when he they move overseas. americans' hard-earned savings are at risk from the financial instability of climate change. china is aggressive, confident, and continues to threaten american jobs. the internal revenue service wastes time and taxpayer money auditing working families, often black and brown families, instead of going after wealthy tax cheats. wall street rewards corporations. it devastates communities around the country and in ohio. i have confidence that janet yellen understands this, that she'll get to work immediately to create a better, more prosperous economy. she knows we can build new, cleaner infrastructure that puts pooh emto work at good-paying union jobs. we can invest in the country, including the small towns and industrial cities of southeast

ohio and southern illinois and the black and brown communities in our cities that too often get left behind. we can make it easier for people to afford housing and transportation and child care. we can treat a tax code that rewards work instead of wealth, starting with the dramatic expansion of the child tax credit and the earned income tax credit. we can give people more power over their lives and their own money with options like monthly distribution of the child tax credit and no-fee bank accounts. that's the vision janet yellen and joe biden and senate democrats are committed to, one where the middle class is growing and everyone has the opportunity to join it. janet yellen had the experience, talent and commitment to serve us to deliver results. she is the right person for these times. she will rise to meet this moment to help our economy build back better. i ask my colleagues to support janet yellen for secretary of the treasury.

i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: madam president, i would ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: madam president,

last week, the country and the world watched as our nation carried out one of its most sacred traditions, the peaceful transfer of power. which is the hallmark of american democracy that has defined our country since its earliest days. between the pandemic and heightened security concerns, this inauguration looked far different than those of former presidents, but the will of the people was carried out just as it has been following every presidential election throughout our nation's history. president biden in his inaugural address stressed the importance of unifying our country. i agree and i hope the president and our democratic colleagues in congress lead by example. our first order of business has been to fill critical positions throughout the federal government, and the senate's already confirmed both the director of national

intelligence and the secretary of defense, both of whom i supported. this afternoon, we'll vote on the confirmation of janet yellen to be treasury secretary, who i intend to vote for as well. and there is a slate of other important positions that we need to be filled in the coming days and weeks. i should note that voting to confirm a nominee under the words of the constitution providing advice and consent is not a rubber stamp of the administration's policies. i know there will be important issues that we disagree on. but if elections mean anything, they mean that the prevailing party should not be kneecapped as unfortunately our democratic colleagues did in the previous administration when they tried to install a new cabinet and agency heads. but rather, i believe the tradition has been to accommodate one another when we can so the administration can carry on and carry out their

duties. this morning, i had a very good conversation with judge merrick garland who president biden has nominated for attorney general. judge garland's extensive legal experience makes him well suited to lead the department of justice, and i appreciated his commitment to keep politics out of the justice department. that is my number one criterion for who should be the next head of the department of justice as attorney general. and i think both sides should support a depoliticized justice department, and that's what i hope judge garland, once confirmed, will deliver. i look forward to talking to him more during the confirmation process, but unless i hear something new, i expect to support his nomination before the full senate. it's in the best interests of the country to have qualified senate-confirmed individuals leading our federal departments

and agencies. as we look beyond the confirmation process, there are many opportunities for republicans and democrats to work together. in those places where we agree. and i know additional coronavirus relief as it's needed is high on president biden's list. approximately one million americans are being vaccinated every day, and while the light at the end of the tunnel is getting bigger and brighter, we're still not in the clear. congress has provided trillions of dollars in relief to strengthen our fight on both the health care and economic fronts, but we need to remain vigilant in the final critical phase of this battle. i don't support president biden's pandemic relief proposal in its current form, but i do believe it's a starting point for bipartisan negotiations. i'd gladly support a reasonable, targeted bill as we determine

precisely as we can where the needs truly are. we all agree we need to bolster vaccine manufacturing and distribution, that some americans need additional financial support, and that main street businesses and their workforce are still struggling to survive this economic recession. i hope the administration would be willing to work with congress to reach an agreement that receives broad bipartisan support as each of the previous bills that we have passed has. during my time in the senate, i have worked with folks across the aisle on our shared priorities, and i have no plans of changing that practice now. but make no mistake, i will push back forcefully, respectfully when the president and i disagree. one of the things i have learned, though, is that there is a difference between what some elected officials say and what they actually do, and rather than listen to what they

say, i really prefer to watch what they do and see if those were consistent. only hours after being sworn in and speaking of unifying the country, president biden unilaterally canceled the permit for the keystone x.l. pipeline, and that same day, the administration halted all new entering leasing and permitting on public lands and waters. well, with these unfortunate actions, president biden is killing thousands of well-paying u.s. jobs and kicking the u.s. energy industry while it's still struggling with the pandemic. i had hoped -- i still hope to work with president biden on an all of the above entering strategy that prioritizes our fossil fuels -- we have 280 million cars on the road. people are going to still need gasoline for the foreseeable future -- but also renewables

and innovative technologies that help us harness our most prevalent and reliable energy sources. and one of the things that i think is exciting about some of the research that's being done is on carbon capture technology, which ought to be, again, something that we can all agree on as we transition to the next forms of entering. as we begin a new congress and welcome a new president, i'm once again reminded of the words that were quoted from ruth bader ginsburg, recently deceased, justice of the united states supreme court. she didn't originate it, but she did make it popular when she said you can disagree without being disagreeable. of course, democracy itself is -- expects a competition of ideas, but not necessarily the mudslinging and name calling that have become -- namecalling that have become all too common. i hope we can return to the respectful battles in the days and months ahead and know that

there is no better battleground for that to happen than in the senate where sometimes, sometimes, we live up to the billing as the world's greatest deliberative body. madam president, the primary feature that separates the senate from the house or any other legislative body is free and full debate. that's why it takes 60 votes to cut off debate so you can then have a vote and pass a piece of legislation with 51 votes. it forces us to do what we ought to do anyway, which is to have fulsome debate, allow minority views to be presented, and then once the debate is concluded, then to have a vote on the underlying bill. but fundamentally, the founders saw the senate as a place that protected minority rights. and i have been here long enough to be in the majority and in the minority, and we know what goes

around comes around in the united states senate. it's as sure as day follows night. and that's why we're called a deliberative body. in the house, you have 435 members, and in order to pass a bill, all you need is the majority. got the votes? jam it through. but there has to be some place, somewhere in a nation of 330 million souls where competing ideas can be seriously debated. and that's why our founders created the united states senate. george washington was famously said to have told thomas jefferson that the senate was meant to be a saucer to cool house legislation like a saucer was used to cool hot tea. well, partisan bills are the hot tea, then the senate cloture requirements are the saucer. rather than a simple majority, here in the senate, you have to

get 60 out of 100 senators to support a bill in order for it to advance. i know we all would love to see each of our ideas passed into law without any delay or extended debate, but that's not the way the senate is supposed to work. it forces us to do what we ought to want to do anyway, which is to do the hard work of bipartisan negotiation and compromise. come up with an 80/20 solution that can leave the 20% you don't agree on for another day and another battle, but to pass into law and make progress on behalf of the american people with the 80% we can agree on. well, neither party has had a trouble-proof majority since the late 1970's. as a result, senators from red states and blue states have had to work together, as they should, to reach agreements on nearly every piece of legislation that has moved through this chamber in the last four decades. the only real exception is the budget reconciliation process

which by court rules can be done with 51 votes, but otherwise, in the main, 60 votes, a bipartisan majority is required in order to move legislation. when bills require bipartisan support in order to pass, they are more durable. the fact is if you pass a partisan piece of legislation, the next time the minority -- majority flips, they can undo it. well, i think it's useful in terms of our comity, in terms of our relationships, in terms of our ability to get things done for the american people to try to figure out how to do things on a bipartisan basis. and while i know bipartisanship isn't necessarily popular with the political bases of either party, it's critical to our democracy. unfortunately, some of our colleagues on the other side have expressed an interest in using their newly gained powers in the majority to flo up the

filibuster -- to blow up the filibuster and to shatter that important cooling saucer. make no mistake, that would do irreparable harm to this institution and inflict serious damage on our democracy. without the 60-vote cloture requirement, both chambers would be majority-rule institutions, with a steady flow of partisan legislation moving through congress. if the same party controls both chambers and the white house, the party -- that party could pass strictly partisan legislation that would quickly be signed into law without a single vote from the opposing party. does that feel good? well, if you're on the winning side, yeah. is it good for the country? no, it is not. it's efficient, but it's not effective. it's not lasting. it's not durable. it doesn't provide the sort of stability and ability to plan that the current structure

provides. well, all the reasons i've given for not doing away with the senate cloture requirement is the reason no majority has ever tried to blow it up before. during the past four administrations, the trump, obama, and clinton administration when with both parties controlled both chambers of congress. if you go back in history, you will find dozens of examples, but no senate, until now, has been so shortsighted to get rid of the cloture requirement and the filibuster when it comes to legislation. if democrats carried out their threat to do that today, they'd clear the path to pass a radical agenda that would fundamentally reshape our country without a single republican vote. as a reminder, we have a 50-50 senate and in the house there are 221 democrats and 211

republicans. in all of congress there are ten more democrats than republicans, out of 535 members of congress. that's far from a progressive or a radical mandate. as i said, elections happen, majorities change, presidents come and go, as do united states senators. in two years republicans could win the majority in either or both chambers and in four a republican could win the white house as well. if we were to do away with this restraint on snap decisions and partisan legislation, what would the succeeding republican administration likely do? it would simply undo everything that had been done on a partisan basis. well, what our democratic -- would our democratic colleagues support a rules change to blow up the filibuster when

republicans control both houses and the white house? would they believe the senate minority should be silenced as they believe now? as i say, what goes around comes around and the shoe is always on the other foot eventually. the good news is we doubt have to wonder what the answer would be because we already know it. in 2017, the republican-led senate, house and white house when we held both houses and the white house, there was fear by some folks across the aisle, actually both sides of the aisle, that the filibuster would be eliminated in order to clear a path for the republican agenda. that's when 61 senators, a filibuster majority, wrote a bipartisan letter to then-majority leader mcconnell and democratic leader schumer urging them to protect the filibuster, that was 61 senators. among the cosigners were 27 current democratic senators.

one of the signatures on this bipartisan letter is that of our newly sworn-in vice president kamala harris. leader mcconnell has no -- had no interest in eliminating the filibuster when he was majority leader or even now as minority leader, because he knew the institutional damage this would cause and the damage to our democracy. unfortunately, leader schumer refuses to acknowledge that most basic fact. the two party leaders are now in the process of negotiating and organizing a resolution on the new reality of how a 50-50 senate will operate. there's been precedent on how this was done and they have shown interest in the 2001 agreement negotiated by tom daschle and trent lott. because of the newfound obsession of some on the left of

uprooting the cornerstone of the senate, leader mcconnell asked for assurance from leader schumer. it is not unreasonable to ask your negotiating partner committed to not breaking the rules which is all that leader mcconnell is asking for. senator schumer said that it falls outside the bounds of the 2001 organizing resolution. but i'd like to remind our colleagues that in 2001 the majority party was not threatening to blow up the senate rules to advance a partisan agenda. that's why it wasn't the subject explicitly of that negotiating organizing resolution. there's no need to ask for assurances on the protection of the filibuster because it wasn't even a question to be answered. our democratic colleagues have relied on the filibuster while republicans have held the

majority. i can think of time after time after time we tried to pass more covid-19 relief bills that our democratic colleagues felt was inadequate and time after time after time, they used the filibuster to prevent passage of that bill, which was their right. i think a mistake, but a decision -- a decision i disagree with, but their rights under the senate rule. republicans have also relied on the filibuster while democrats held the majority. we all recognize that at some point the shoe is always on the other foot which is why no one has been so foolish as to eliminate the legislative filibuster or even seriously to consider it before. i hope our colleagues on the other side will avoid making this tragic mistake in order to pursue short-sighted political goals. and in an encouraging sign on friday, the white house

indicated that president biden does not support getting rid of the legislative filibuster either. president biden has served in this senate for, i believe, 36 years. he understands how this institution works, how it's supposed to work, and his advice, and it's only advice since he's the president and not a member of the senate anymore, is don't go there. i encourage our more than two dozen colleagues who repeatedly voiced their support for maintaining the legislative filibuster to insist that this critical stabilizing force in our democracy be preserved and the organizing resolution currently being discussed by senator schumer and senator mcconnell. i truly believe that if we don't do that, if the legislative filibuster is eliminated, that we will all rue the day.

madam president, i yield the floor and i note -- i yield to my colleague. mrs. blackburn: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mrs. blackburn: thank you, madam president. i tell you, i'm going to follow right along with the comments that my colleague from texas has made because in tennessee, whether someone's a republican or a libertarian or an independent or a democrat, they have very high expectations of what this congress is going to be able to accomplish and they also have high expectations for this administration. what they are doing is looking there and they are saying

politics and politicians are not what this is all about. they don't necessarily matter. policies matter. and as my colleague is saying, maintaining the filibuster rule in the senate, allowing robust, respectful debate so that we arrive at a sense of compromise and we do what is best for the american people. and today i was talking with one of our tennesseans and they were talking about it doesn't matter what's being said on social media, on twitter or facebook or parlor or any of the social media platforms, that when you strip it all away, good policy is good people. and that is what matters.

good policy is good policy. it is good for the people, and that is where the emphasis should be. so when i said they have high expectations, i don't only mean that they want good policies, they want this to focus on them. they want it to focus on their concerns, their communities, their schools, their right to feel secure, their right to enjoy free speech, their right to pursue their happiness, their american dream, their right to celebrate and protect life. it's about them, not

politicians, not politics, it's about the american people. from their perspective, we can spend hours debating the budget or immigration reform or data privacy, which i'll talk more about later this week, as long as at the end of the day whatever compromise we reach not only meets their needs but recognizes that the people are the most important part of this entire equation -- the people. every member of this body understands that when the balance of power shifts, sometimes that means that the guy across the aisle is going to get the upper hand. things change. but it would be a mistake for my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to assume that that means we're willing to set our

priorities and our principles aside. it doesn't mean that we're going to submit to their agenda, it doesn't mean we are going to conform to their agenda. it means we're going to stay true to our principles, represent our states and work -- work diligently for what is going to be best for the people. we may have had a changing of the guard here in washington, but it doesn't mean that any of us have set aside the promises that we have made to the people we represent. and that's why i came out so strongly against the biden administration and the

president's executive order that really crushed the jobs and the potential for energy security that came with the building of the keystone xl pipeline. this was a project that had achieved bipartisan support. and what are we seeing now? lost jobs, lost livelihoods, more money being taken out of the taip's pocket -- tape's -- taxpayer's pocket. i joined with the paris climate accords and reversed our departure on the world health organization. for me this isn't about politics, it's about the policies this new administration has decided to unilaterally say yes to without consulting congress, without including the

people in the discussion. and just so we're all aware, president biden said yes to more unit unilateral policy changes on day one than any president in our nation's history. more than any president in our nation's history. the biden administration looked at those new policies and decided that the result achieving that outcome was worth whatever it would cost the american people to get it. so over the next few weeks we'll also be examining the president's cabinet picks to get a sense of the tradeoff they'll be willing to make. safety is at the forefront of everyone's mind back home in tennessee, not just safety from covid but from the bad actors

and the foreign adversaries who continue to show us just how far they are willing to go to undermine us on the world stage. back in tennessee, we have a saying, when somebody shows you who they really are, you better believe them. and i will tell you that they are paying attention and i will tell you that they are not very impressed right now with some of this so-called soft talk that they are hearing on proposed policies toward iran and the communist regime in china. this is why i chose not to support the confirmation of our new director of national intelligence, admiral haines. i also had some pretty tough questions to ask secretary of state nominee blinken about some

of these same issues dealing with iran, dealing with china. and many of the proposals that i'm hearing from them have sounded strangely familiar from years gone by. we don't have to look overseas to find some very real policy differences between what tennesseans have said they expect and what the biden administration is signaling that they want to deliver. in his hearing before the commerce committee, transportation secretary nominee pete buttigieg signaled to the panel that he would put the administration's environmental goals ahead of some very basic changes to federal policy that would lighten the regulatory load on county and city mayors trying to get their transportation projects off the ground. as i told him, many times the regulations at issue don't just slow the projects down.

they kill the project, and that town's prospects for growth. for a better life, for people in the community. hopefully he's going to keep in mind what it means to these mayors the next time he's asked to consider the benefits of removing unnecessary red tape. these trade-offs many times are just too destructive to say yes to. and i would encourage all of my colleagues to look at the compromises the president is asking each and every one to make, not just in terms of what we stand to gain but what is going to be the cost, what is the monetary cost, what is the cost of freedom, what is the opportunity cost that will be delivered to the american people in order for the administration

to have their way, to get their income. that is the question we should each ask. what is the cost to the american people in order to protect them, in order to meet the expectations that they have? and we should be listening to the people. this, policies, are about them. i yield the floor. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from or gon. mr. wyden: i have one request for committees to meet during

today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. wyden: madam president, it is a pleasure tonight to be making the case for janet yellen, former chair of the federal reserve to be the next secretary of treasury. it is an awfully easy case to make. chair janet yellen deserves to be in the senate confirmation hall of fame. she has already been confirmed four times for key economic positions. tonight the senate can deliver an especially important economic judgment. confirm janet yellen a fifth time and know that she will work

with every single one of us to get our workers, our small businesses, and all americans from sea to shining sea back on solid economic footing. tonight i'm going to spend just a few minutes discussing several important matters we learned from chair yellen's confirmation hearing. first chair yellen is an exceptional economist who has a rare gift. she can take complicated economic theories and put them into understandable language all while showing a real heart for the millions of americans who are hurting through no fault of their own. i asked chair ye yellen at her

confirmation hearing what will give americans the most bang for the economic recovery buck. and chair yellen simply walked through the priorities, particularly going to bat for our small businesses. i come if a state where we have only a handful of big businesses whereoverwhelming a small business state. at her confirmation hearing she spoke clearly about those small business needs, and she talked about the concerns she has for innovative and important approaches to expanding unemployment, expanding unemployment benefits, excuse me, to make sure that we're meeting the needs of our people. and she also focused on reducing

hunger and approaches that will help stretch antihunger dollars. second, chair yellen knows that it would be a big mistake for the congress to go small on economic relief. she's acutely aware of what happened in 2009 when the government took its foot off the economic gas pedal too soon and recovery was compromised as a result. and she alsounderstands that emergency -- also understands that emergency economic relief like unemployment compensation needs to last as long as the emergency. it cannot be tied to arbitrary expiration dates where potential agendas come or potential

political agendas come before human needs. there's a reason why the finance committee approved her nomination unanimously on friday morning. and i touched on some of those factors, and i'm going to amplify a little bit. for example, nobody deserves more credit than chair yellen for the longest economic expansion in american history. it lasted until the pandemic hit. as federal reserve chair, she led an important change to the status quo in economic policy. previously there had been two great -- too great a focus on inflation and deficits. chair yellen said let's zero in more on unemployment, income, and inequality. and she believed that the economy could run a bit hotter. the record shows that the yellen

approach was right on. unemployment went down. wages went up. and a lot of people were better off than they were before. that's exactly the kind of thinking america needs again because confronting the covid economy is hammering working families in particular. again, another clear reason why janet yellen is the right pick to be the next treasury secretary. the most recent economic data shows that 1.4 million people nationwide had filed new claims for until employment benefits in the last full week of the previous administration. so, it's not hard to figure out what that means. it's an economic catastrophe. eight more than -- it's more than twice the highest figure in any single week of the great recession. that means 1.4 million people,

so, so many working families are suddenly walking on an economic tightrope. every single day balancing the food costs against the fuel costs, the fuel costs against the rent bill, worried about finding a new job, getting a badly-needed shift at work, falling behind on rent or the mortgage, feeding their kids, paying the electric bills, paying medical bills, worried that the recovery is headed in reverse, and worried about whether the congress will be gridlocked. the country lost 140,000 jobs last month. by home state lost more than 25,000 in part because the senate in something that just defied common sense waited around for the recovery to peter out before passing any more relief.

thousands and thousands of neighborhood restaurants and bars and mom and pop businesses have been shuttered. nearly 11 million workers are out of a job. another four million americans have fallen out of the labor force entirely since this time last year. unless the congress acts boldly and quickly with more relief, the damage from the covid economic crash will long outlast the pandemic itself. that must not be allowed to happen. the key, of course, is for the senate to get down to work and one of the best ways you can do it is to confirm someone who is eminently qualified, chair janet yellen to be treasury secretary. as i touched on, we are looking at working with her on a coast

-- on a host of key economic issues. as i've said as the new chair of the finance committee, my first priority will make sure that this congress does not commit again the mistake of 2009. in 2009 the sense was well, maybe we're getting there on economic recovery. we'll be able to come back later if maybe we didn't do enough. well, we all know that a missed opportunity is a missed opportunity. and in 2009 the congress said all right, we can take our foot off the gas now. it was too early and there wasn't any next effort to make up for the damage. i'm committed to making sure that doesn't happen again. suffice it to say in 2009 it

took seven and a half years for the unemployment rate in oregon to return to its prerecession levels. this time around, the congress has been warned. the warning i'm giving about making sure the congress doesn't take its foot off the economic relief pedal too soon. it's not the first warning. chair powell, for example, made it clear that the biggest danger lies in not doing enough. increasing relief checks to $2,000 is key. the congress needs to increase and extend unemployment benefits for the entirety of the covid crisis. and you do that by in effect tying the benefits to the real world, to economic conditions on the ground. and that's been my proposal for some time.

other colleagues have long advanced similar ideas. it is not a revolutionary proposition to say emergency relief should last as long as the emergency. simply stated and not be held up -- not be held hostage by the arbitrary political agendas of members of congress. if you don't do it, just function and gridlock in congress creates still more havoc for people who have done nothing wrong and just need help. a decade ago that help went away too quickly because benefits expired arbitrarily and congress did not keep up with extensions. the congress needs to do better. and i believe that should include important upgrades as well to unemployment insurance, which was created in the last century. i don't think it's too much to say we at least bring critical

safety yet program into the relevant century. now, sometimes these programs look a little rusty in the modern economy. sometimes it's because of outright sabotage. but workers suffer, particularly black and hispanic workers. and so there are steps that need to be taken in addition to modernizing the benefits, increasing base benefits, bringing all workers into the system, and ensuring it can hold up in a crisis. finally, chair yellen had some important comments on fixing america's broken tax code. and i will tell you, madam president, i start with a proposition that a nurse who's treating covid patients and paying taxes with every single paycheck should not face

themselves in a disadvantaged position when compared to billionaires who in effect do no such thing and can postpone and postpone and postpone paying their taxes. now, there's a lot of work we need to do to repair the 2017 bill. the previous administration actually increased the incentives for corporations to fix -- to ship jobs overseas. i want to fix that mistake. i want to work with secretary yellen on energy policy because so much of it deals with the tax code. suffice it to say, those are just some of the challenges that are chair yellen will face when i believe she is confirmed tonight as treasury secretary. supremely qualified, a member, in my view, of the senate confirmation hall of fame.

a proven economic policymaker. and finally i say to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, it is long past time to have a woman lead the u.s. treasury department. chair yellen's got my full support. as colleagues come for this vott economic policy vote, make no mistake about that -- i just ask colleagues to reflect on the fact that chair yellen was approved by the finance committee 26-0. sometimes i say about this place, i have questions whether you can get a simple decision like ordering a sandwich decided on 26-0. she was approved unanimously because she gives public service a good name. i urge my colleagues to support

janet yellen for secretary of treasury when we vote in just a few minutes. madam chair, i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: the senator from kansas. mr. moran: madam president, thank you. i want to visit this evening on the senate floor and take this opportunity to recognize a public servant, a leader, our former secretary of the army, the honorable ryan d. mccarthy. secretary mccarthy led our nation's army from september 30, 2019, to january 20, 2021. and during that time, he made it a more modern, agile, and lethal fighting force. weave worked together on a number of projects for kansans and those who serve or have be served on our nation during his tenure as secretary, acting secretary, and under secretary of the army. and i've grown to consider him a good, solid friend. one of my most memorable

experiences in the senate is visiting the first infantry division, soldiers in germany and poland -- soldiers that come from fort riley, kansas -- with the secretary, followed by our trip to afghanistan to meet with troops on the front lines in the global war on terror. those visits marked the beginning of our friendship and since then i have appreciated his guidance and his support during his visitors to kansas and our discussions in the nation's kansas. he joined me to visit sykes elementary school on fort riley. he was instrumental in helping to find funding for this school in 2011 when he was the special assistant to defense secretary robert gates, a kansan. he joined me in kansas to visit the school and its students that he helped create in 2019. we met with fort really leadership traveled to wichita

to meet with leaders to discuss the future of army procurement. these personal touch points were soldiers and with the army community were some of the reasons why secretary mccarthy was universally respected within the army family. while i will always appreciate our personal engagements with soldiers, i will also remember our efforts to support soldiers and veterans when they step off the battlefield or separate from military service. this past veterans day, we coauthored an editorial that discussed parallel efforts to support the mental health and well-being of soldiers and veterans. reports show veterans across the country are feeling isolated and alone, including our nation's service men and women and veteran populations. between my efforts as chairman of the senate veterans' affairs committee to implement the commander john scott hannon veterans mental health improvement act and secretary mccarthy's effort to build interpersonal connections between soldiers, we are working to give soldiers and

veterans the tools they need to overcome mental health challenges they face. as secretary mccarthy transitions out of the watchful eye of public life, i rise this evening to express my appreciation for his leadership, his character, and his moral compass. he never let politics or convenience influence his decisions and that has significantly benefited soldiers, army civilians and veterans in kansas and across the nation. as the chairman and now ranking member of the senate veterans' affairs committee i will always strive to help veterans find success after service. secretary mccarthy, i have no doubt you will find success and happiness after your service to our country. i wish you and your family, and i thank your family for support of your public service, but i know you and your family will find a quality life with purpose and meaning as you enter the next phase. madam president, i yield the floor.

a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from louisiana. mr. cassidy: i ask unanimous consent to complete my remarks before the scheduled roll call vote. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cassidy: madam president, i rise today to recognize and thank three long-serving aides who have served my office, but more importantly, served our nation proudly, and they are now moving on to the next chapters of their life. first, chris jolette. chris was my legislative director and for eight years has been my right hand person on policy. he never failed to take the ideas we discuss together and craft the actual policy needed to make a meaningful difference in the lives of folks in louisiana and the lives of all americans. he was a master at navigating the partisan divide to find areas of consensus upon which we could build to advance real solutions.

he's on a first name basis as the legislative director of and fill in the senator's name. he had a sense that in the era before zoom calls that we go out and have a beer on a regular basis, and that helped us tremendously. we saw this fully on display recently as chris was a central figure in the so-called 908 coalition which jump-started stalled covid relief packages. and it wasn't just the relationships between the senators, but again as i spoke, between the different legislative directors from both parties, all offices. his efforts strabl to passing -- have been central to pass legislation to surprise medical billing, a two year effort that will have a direct impact onlting pocketbooks of american families. he was crucial in our effort to make health care more be affordable, pass generational tax reform for every major

legislative pursuit i could rely upon chris. what many in louisiana may not know, he's also been a central figure engaged in some of the most pressing issues affecting our state including offshore energy production, revenue sharing, energy regulation, permitting, the national flood insurance program, and public works related to flood protection, all important to the well-being of our state, the folks who live there, as well as our entire country, and all these were regularly under assault. chris was a fearless advocate for energy production and for the jobs that energy production creates to not only help meet america's energy needs but to meet the individual families' financial needs. he has been on the front lines to prevent changes to revenue sharing that would gut the money used in my state for hurricane protection, flood mitigation, and coastal, environment renewal.

he defended the national flood insurance program to ensure that this critical lifeline remains accessible to people across the country and, importantly to those in louisiana. thank you, chris, for all that you've done for me and for those of louisiana. the next person i will speak of is allison mersaly. allison is a minnesotan. she says she grew up on the upper end of the mississippi but found a home in the lower end of the mississippi, or at least the office that represented louisiana. she joined my staff at the beginning of my first senate term as a scheduler, but through sheer excellence became deputy chief of staff and a close confidante. trust is so important. i learned i could always trust her judgment and her ability to accomplish anything. she is irreplaceable. she has had an impact on this office ensuring that we better serve louisiana, but that impact has meant that we will

better serve louisiana even after her departure. examples -- for any office to succeed, it needs to run efficiently and effectively. i knew this that we had to have systems, ally figured out the systems, she implemented them across all the offices here in louisiana and d.c. she kept things running smoothly. and she has a skill of identifying an individual strength and helping that individual leverage those strengths into results that contributed to the whole but also to the future of the individual. i'm about to say this about ally but i could say it of chris and also of david who i'm about to speak of. mark chapter 10:42-45, jesus speaks about servant leadership. the greatest among you shall be your servants. ally is someone who served others and helped others serve as well, whether it be our staff, our mission, our constituents, the state of louisiana or the united states

of america, she served creatively and tirelessly. she will be greatly missed but i am looking forward to all that she achieves as she enters the next phase of her career. now let me speak of david mills, a louisiana native, a man of tremendous character and deep faith who has served for five years on my staff. he came to washington because he felt called to give back to his state and nation through public office, through public service. he was working in congress for the right reasons, and his work reflected that. david handled pro-life issues and other legal issues for my office. he was key in last year's impeachment trial as an attorney, providing quick, reliable research to supplement my understanding of the testimony that we heard. david also has the ability just to note something others don't notice and then very gently

suggest some modification of how i would handle a situation, and that modification, low nuanced, could be so important. and i really learned to trust those insights. david also handled privacy issues, and he's laid the foundation for work that will continue after he has left us. as society becomes more technologically centered, we must ensure the data privacy laws keep up. david was on the forefront of that, thinking how do we protect the privacy of consumers. as i mentioned, this will be an important issue in this upcoming congress. just let me be specific, david developed legislation on questions regarding the data that is collected from a wearable, a smart watch, a contract tracing app and other information that provides personal health information but which is not covered by current personal health information laws. our office will continue to build on david's work in those

areas, and i thank david for all that he has done. sometimes, madam president, people say oh my gosh, those folks who are younger than those of us in the senate, is there something lacking? i can promise you among these there is nothing lacking. they are the leaders that will take your place and my place as we pass the baton to the next generation and in turn they shall pass to another to leave our future brighter than it has been in the past. and with that, madam president, i yield.

the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the question is on the nomination. the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: does any senator wish to vote or change their vote? if not, the yeas are 84. the nays are 15. and the confirmation is confirmed. -- the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senior senator from minnesota. ms. klobuchar: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to legislative session and be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for

up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sullivan: madam president? the presiding officer: the junior senator from alaska. mr. sullivan: madam president, i want to be one of the first senators to congratulate dr. yellen, now secretary yellen to be secretary of the treasury of the united states. you saw it was a strong vote and there's no doubt that she has the credentials, the experience, the qualifications to be secretary of the treasury, former chairman of the fed. i mean, her resume is off the charts. and i know her nomination is historic for so many women across the country, including my three daughters. so, madam president, i'm mentioning this because i certainly intended to vote for

now secretary yellen and i was a no vote. and i want to explain my no vote. because i had a very good conversation with her just the other day. we covered a whole bunch of topics, everything from aclass came -- alaska native corporations to the strength of the dollar to our debt and deficit, big macro mick issues that are important -- economic issues that are important to the country, important to my state. but we got to the topic of energy. we got to the topic of energy. and reluctantly i am saying this now because i was a bit shocked that despite a long, robust discussion, it was very difficult to get her, from my perspective, to commit to being a secretary of the treasury, the most important economic player in any cabinet, in any

government in the u.s. government besides, of course, the president, to commit to being a strong advocate for a robust all-of-they-above energy sector for the u.s. economy. now, madam president, this is not a radical proposition. i would argue that every secretary of the treasury since alexander hamilton has been a robust supporter of resource development in our energy sector. again, all of it, renewables, oil, gas. and the reason is because it's been such an important driver of economic growth and jobs for pretty much our entire nation's existence. and now that we're in this recession, deep recession, and we need job growth, good job growth, and we need a strong

recovery, to me having the secretary of the treasury be a strong proponent in the debates about policy for the energy sector i thought was a no-brainer. as a matter of fact, i think pretty much every secretary of the treasury has been that person. again, the 2008-2009 recession, the deep great recession, the number one driver of economic growth and job growth and capital formation for the u.s. economy was the energy sector. and it was supported. democrats and republicans for decades have supported a strong energy sector. but despite a long respectful debate with now secretary yellen who i certainly want to have a good relationship with could not get that commitment which i thought was surprising.

as a matter of fact, i thought it was shogging, -- shocking and it was the reason i reluctantly voted no because again she is very qualified. madam president, what's going on here is we're starting to see policies that i believe need a national debate, a national debate. we're starting to see policies -- yes, we all want renewables, clean energy, but we have a really important strong energy sector. prior to the pandemic we were the world's superpower of energy again. one of the reasons we won world war ii is because of our energy sector. and the men and women who have been producing energy, all of the above energy are great patriotic workers who have been doing it for decades to the benefit of every single ame american. but we need a debate.

because what i'm starting to see with the new administration, unfortunately -- and i've had discussions and hopefully they're not going to go down this path -- is executive actions that are going to target certain sectors of the energy sector of the u.s. economy. natural gas. we can be dominant in natural gas for a hundred years. we're going to start targeting workers in the natural gas sector? oil. i know some people don't like oil but it's important. we can do all of this, but right now there seems to be hostility towards this sector and the workers and no debate. we should have that debate. it's an important debate. it's really important to my state. but i think it's really important to america. every secretary of the treasury for the last three, four, five,

six, seven decades since world war ii has always sought the goal of getting america back to energy independence. that's good for jobs. it's good for low-cost manufacturing. it's good to reduce the heating and energy bills of american families. it's good for our national security. it's good for our foreign policy. and we are pretty much on the verge of doing this. and now we're going to start to unilaterally disarm? we've gotten to the point where i can't find anyone -- and i hope i'm wrong -- in the biden administration cabinet who's going to be a proponent of a strong energy sector. who is it? i was hoping it was going to be the secretary of the treasury. maybe in our long discussion i misinterpreted where she's going to be on this issue.

but pretty much every previous secretary, democrat, republican, in the history of our great nation has really, really been an advocate for the men and women who work in this sector and for the economic growth it brings. and and for the help it brings to families and the good jobs it brings. so, madam president, that's the rationale behind my vote. you know, right now i think we're starting to see, whether it is the keystone pipeline decision, the men and women in the building trades who have built this country through hard work, they're being laid off by the thousands. we've had a big scare back home in my state. all weekend i was working this issue of these executive orders from the biden administration, where it looked like it was going to send hundreds of people home unemployed. oil and gas workers in my state.

why? i hope that's not the case. especially during a recession. but we need a debate on it, and i certainly hope somebody in this administration, when there are principles meetings, talk about how we get good jobs, strong working class. i've noticed the national security advisor, jake sullivan, keeps talking about how we're going to base our policies on working-class families. you can't get more blue-collar, strong middle class than these energy-sector jobs. so i certainly want to have a good, constructive relationship with the secretary of the treasury and her team, but given the people i represent and what i'm starting to see right now, i could not in good conscience vote yes when the basic question of are you committed and will be a strong advocate for a strong energy sector -- all of the above, you name it; renewables,

natural gas, wind, solar, all the above. and because i couldn't get that commitment, i reluctantly voted no on someone who's got a background and experience in these other areas that's important for the country. i yield the floor. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. whitehouse: madam president, i have hastened to the floor because i was upstairs waiting for the house managers to bring the articles over, and i heard my friend, the distinguished senator from alaska, talking about his concern about the fossil fuel part of the energy sector and his dissatisfaction with what the secretary of the treasury was able to assure him in that

regard. and i just wanted to note that i missed a moment of the senator's remarks when i came walking down here, but as best i could tell, the senator never mentioned the term climate change. never referenced carbon emissions. and i have to say, if we are going to deal with our energy sector, we have to deal with it in a way that takes into account carbon emissions and climate change. you can't just whistle past those things, madam president, and pretend that they're not real and act as if we can continue to go forward the way we always have releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, poison something our oceans with acidification, warming the planet, putting coastal communities like mine at grave risk from sea level rise and storm surge. we have to address those things. and as we go forward in this new

congress, i very much hope that my friend, senator sullivan, and i will be able to work together to address that exact problem, to make sure that not only is our energy mix strong for our economy but to make absolutely sure that we are not sacrificing the safety of our planet, the economic security of our future generations, the health of people all around the planet who have really no choice but to live close to the land and feel the pounding of climate change in their immediate lives every day. we have to address those things. and i hope we will. so, having heard his side of the argument, i just wanted to come back to the floor and offer the other side and somewhere between us there is a resolution because i know perfectly will that the state of alaska -- perfectly well that the state of alaska is getting hit by the acidification and warming side, by the sea

level rise and storm surge side of this problem just as much as rhode island is. and perhaps because, as my friend constantly reminds me, alaska has a huge advantage of size over rhode island, one could even imagine that they're having even more of an effect on rhode island. so with those comments and with affection and regard for my colleague from alaska, i yield the floor. mr. sullivan: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from alaska. mr. sullivan: as a lot of our colleagues here know, senator whitehouse is not just a distinguished senator but one of my very good friends here in the u.s. senate. so i always respect what he has to say, and is appreciate his words, and he and i have done a lot of work, some key work, particularly on issues of the environment, cleaning up our oceans, ocean acidification and i look forward to continuing to work with him.

my point is that -- and climate change is certainly happening in my state. we're seeing it, no doubt about

mr. raskin: mr. president, the managers on the part of the house of representatives are here and present and ready to present the article of impeachment which has been preferred by the house of representatives against donald john trump, former president of the united states. the house adopted the following

resolution, which with the permission of the senate i will read. house resolution 40. in the house of representatives, united states. january 13, 2021, resolved, that mr. raskin, ms. degette, mr. cicilline, mr. castro, mr. swalwell, mr. lieu, ms. plaskett, ms. dean, that a message be sent to the senate to inform the senate of the appointments and that the managers so appointed may in managers so appointed may in

the senate earlier hearing from the impeachment manager with a historic vote approving janet yellen as a next treasury secretary. about 84 -- 15. she becomes the first woman of head treasury. next up in the senate antony blinken, secretary of state his nomination was approved by the foreign relations committee earlier this evening by a vote of 15 to three.

need senate continuing and a quorum call there on the way to gobbling out for the evening pretty should not be long now they've proved it janet yelled to the next treasury secretary minutes ago they heard from the house impeachment managers led by jimmy raskin of maryland who read the impeachment against the president, the article of impeachment, the one article incitement of insurrection. we are going to show you that

reading here in the quorum calls much as we can until the next senator steps up to the microphone.

>> on the other hand, he is in a tight spot. you do see a lot of other senate republicans including john cornyn who has hopes of succeeding mcconnell at some point as a top republican leader saying it would send a bad precedent and be unconstitutional and there has never been a trial of an ex-president before. sort of open up a pandora's box and right now there's only a handful of republican senators who have been really critical of the president and said what happened was impeachable.

we don't really have anybody saying they will definitely vote to convict. it's a tough question here for mcconnell on exactly how he will vote. >> clearly the specter of january 6, the attack will hang over this. even from the start our producer craig kaplan pointed out that jennifer hemingway the acting senate sgt in the arms led them into the chamber of the house and called the senate to order to hear the impeachment articles, she is acting sgt in arms because the sgt and arms of the senate and the house in the capitol police chief all resigned in the wake of the attack on the capital on januar. as we get underway what else are you looking for not only from the inside the senate but from public reaction. >> i think one thing that is really different is a previous impeachment was about ukraine, our country probably most

americans cannot find on a map. this is something that happened right here in the heart of democracy, a capital police officer is dead and another one committed suicide and this happened to these lawmakers. they were the target of the mob. they were chased out of that room where they're going to be hearing this trial. i think there is going to be some interesting soul-searching from some of the senators. i think one of the things that probably has not got enough attention is not so much the speech that trump gave with a two-month city spent to pressure governors to overturn the election results, it's the hours that they spent in that room and people like susan collins a republican senator of maine saying they were on the phone trying to get white house officials to get trump to tell

the mom to leave. and he did not do that. it took him hours to get to the point where he said to go home. that is something i think will be really problematic for trump's defense. probably why you're seeing a lot of republicans not really defending trump's behavior. they are instead saying they are making process arguments about whether it's a good idea, whether it will divide the country, whether it's constitutional and very few people say hey trump really won the election and he was within his rights to send the crowd to the capital to pressure us to overturn it. >> stephen dennis we appreciate your reporting we will look forward to more and he's on twitter as stephen t dennis. they get so much for being with us. >> anytime. >> the senate continuing in the

quorum call as you can see they have largely finished their business for the day as we just discussed article of impeachment introduced by the house managers earlier and the approval today, earlier the confirmation of janet yellen to be the next treasury secretary about 84215 the first female treasury secretary in the department 231 year history.

>> a little over an hour ago the impeachment manager of the house came over to the senate and granted the one article of impeachment against former president donald trump the senate will gobble in tomorrow 1:00 o'clock eastern they will swear in senators, the senators acting in impeachment trial as the jurors, it'll be patrick lahey the democrat from vermont who is the president under the new 50/50 senate, the democrats and the majority now with vice president kamala harris. patrick lahey will resign and they will come in and swear in and file some motions and begin the process of the trial but the trial itself will not start until the week of february the

eighth. if you saw earlier the democratic side of the aisle on the left side as we look down on the floor, fairly full of senators, on the right side there were just three senators according to a couple of reporters and producers on the room, mitch mcconnell the minority leader, mitt romney and the new senator from kansas roger marshall, those are the only three republican senators in the room of the article of impeachment was read by jamie raskin of maryland he is the lead house impeachment manager. there's nine others -- eight other managers. their job, once a trial starts is to present the case of the u.s. house, the houston pizza president one week after the attack on the capital. so january the 13th and today 12 days later presented article of impeachment on the senate floor, the senate quorum call but we don't expect any

significant legislative work or speeches for this evening.

>> are we in a quorum, madam president? >> majority leader. we are. >> i asked that it be dispensed with. >> without objection. >> madam president i ask unanimous consent that not a standing rule three the senate rules of impeachment at 2:30 p.m. tomorrow january 26, 2021 the senate proceed to the consideration of the article of impeachment of donald john trump, former president of the united states. >> without objection, so ordered. >> madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the consideration of senate resolution 15 submitted earlier today. >> the clerk will report. >> senate resolution 15, authorizing the taking of a photograph in the chamber of the

united states senate. >> is there an objection to proceeding with the measure? without objection the senate shall proceed. >> i ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to under the motion reconsidered be made and laid upon the table without enter intervening action or debate. >> without objection, so ordered. >> madam president, ask unanimous consent that upon the conclusion of morning business tuesday generally six, 26 the senate proceed to executive session of foreign relations committee be discharged from the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of the nomination of anthony again to be the secretary of state further, at the time until 12 noon be divided equally between the two leaders or the designees with senator menendez permitted to speak up to five minutes and then up to 12 noon and then at 12 noon the senate vote without intervening action or debate on the nomination that it confirmed the motion to consider be made and laid upon the table and the

president be immediately notified at the senate actions. >> is there objection? without objection, so ordered. >> madam president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today and adjourn until 10:00 a.m. tuesday, january 26. further, following the prayer and pledge of the morning hour be deemed expired and 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, that upon the conclusion of morning business the senate proceed to executive session to consider the lincoln nomination as provided under the previous order. following the confirmation vote on lincoln the senate be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each and that senator paul be recognized to speak up to 15 minutes for debate only finally, following the debate the remarks of senator paul the senate recess until 2:15 to allow for the weekly time for its meeting.

>> is there objection? without objection, so ordered. >> i note the absence of a quorum. >> clerk will call the roll. >> i ask unanimous consent of the corm deep be dispensed with. >> without objection. >> i would like to clarify that he and 783 the nomination of anthony lincoln to be secretary of state calendar number three.

i withdraw the motion and i even vitiated the motion to discharge. >> without objection. >> okay. okay. all senators will be alive quorum at 2:15 p.m. senators are asked to report to the floor at that time. at 2:30 p.m. the oath will be a ministered to the presiding officer and members of the senate for the impeachment trial of donald john trump, former president of the united states. if there is no further business to come before the senate i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. >> the senate stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow morning. >> and the or in the morning tomorrow they will take up the nomination of anthony lincoln to be secretary of state with a vote expected tomorrow. then in the afternoon we are

hearing from the majority leader that will swear and senators for the impeachment trial of former president donald trump. they will file some deadlines and set deadlines for filing briefs and issue a summon for the former president to respond to and that is tomorrow and we expect opening arguments to begin in the trial, impeachment trial of donald trump, on tuesday february 9. it was the nine impeachment managers earlier this evening delivering the impeachment article over to the u.s. senate in that group of members led by jamie raskin of maryland also diana to get of colorado, david cellini of rhode island, texas and california's eric swallow well, ted lewis california and a delegate from the virgin islands and madeline dean of pennsylvania and joe negus of colorado. the president already has his lawyer, reuters reports that the president has chosen a south carolina lawyer and his name is

butch bowers and has experience in the state and representing two former governors, governor nikki haley in 2012 and before that the former governor mark sanford in an ethics investigation in south carolina. that is butch bowers of south carolina. as we mentioned, at about 7:00 o'clock this evening the house managers made their way from the u.s. house across the capital to deliver the article of impeachment.