resolution to organize the pretrial proceedings at the desk. >> the clerk will report. >> senate resolution 16, to provide for related procedures concerning the article of impeachment against donald john trump, president of the united states. >> i ask for the yeas and nays. >> is there a sufficient second? there is a sufficient second. roll.erk will call the [roll call] [roll call] >> we will leave this program at this time for congressional coverage. you can finish watching this@c-span.org. the use senate is about to gavel in a day after being sworn in as impeachment trial jurors for donald trump. the trial begins tuesday

february 9. today the senate has no votes scheduled but that may change. live now to the senate floor on c-span2. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. o god our father, thank you for

the gift of this day. lord, we're grateful for the blessing of your unfailing love, for your mercies endure forever. keep our lawmakers on the proper path. lead them to strive for righteousness and humility. as you show them the path to choose, give them the wisdom to live for your honor. remind them that you are a friend to those who possess reverential awe. rescue them from the traps of their enemies. lord, you are our hope for the years to come.

we pray in your holy 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 presiding officer: the senator from new mexico. mr. heinrich: i suggest the absence of a quorum call. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: are we in a quorum? the presiding officer: yes. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: mr. president, it's been three weeks since a mob of domestic terrorists stormed the u.s. capitol in an effort to thwart our democratic system of government. in the weeks since the underlying threat of violence to our government remains a great concern. one of the most important responsibilities of the new administration, of any administration is to protect our country and its citizens. the senate must continue the process of confirming president biden's cabinet by installing alejandro mayorkas to serve as secretary of homeland security. in truth, we should have been able to confirm mr. mayorkas days ago. he is supremely well qualified for the job. the son of immigrants whose

family escaped from the holocaust, a prosecutor, a veteran of seven years who led the agency's response on ebola, cybersecurity, border security, counterterrorism and domestic terrorism. just four years ago president trump had his secretary of homeland security installed on inauguration day. as four previous secretaries of homeland security under presidents of both parties wrote recently, after the attacks on the capitol on january 6, it is more urgent than ever to have in place an experienced, capable, and senate-confirmed leader. that person is mayorkas. that was four previous homeland secretaries from both parties. unfortunately, because of the objections of one member, the senate has not been allowed to vote on this nomination yet. it's the senate's responsibility to make sure national security officials are on the job,

keeping our country safe. my friends on the other side don't have to agree with mr. mayorkas on the finer points of every policy, but surely we can all agree that he knows the department, he understands the threats to our nation's security, and has what it takes to lead d.h.s. the senate must confirm his nomination in very short order, and we will make sure that happens. we must continue on to the rest of the president's cabinet as well. the president's nominee for secretary of transportation was voted out of committee this morning on an overwhelmingly bipartisan vote, 21-3. with cooperation, the senate can and should confirm mr. buttigieg soon as well. today president biden is set to

announce a slew of executive actions on climate, including critical measures to increase the conservation of federal lands, reduce oil and gas development, and place environment justice, green jobs and, yes, science at the heart of our nation's climate policy. i think americans are saying welcome back, science, we're glad you're playing a role in the decisions we make and not being ignored. trampled on like the previous administration did. understanding that the united states cannot defeat a global threat on its own, the biden administration has already wisely joined the paris accords and will also propose convening an international climate summit this year on earth day. these executive actions are a very strong opening push by the biden administration to refocus our nation's energy towards the threat of climate change.

president biden's commitment to deal with climate change is unquestioned. he is off to a fast start, and it couldn't come soon enough. now, the federal government has a great deal of power to set the direction for our nation's environmental and energy policy, but climate change exception an existential threat to our country and our planet. every tool in the toolbox should be brought to bear. in my view, president biden should consider the declaration of a national emergency on climate change. former president trump, of course, issued an emergency declaration to divert funds towards an expensive and ineffective border wall when there was no emergency at all. declaring one for climate change, an actual emergency, would be a giant step in the right direction, and it would allow president biden to tap additional resources and pursue additional policies in the fight

against climate change, even if republicans in congress remain intransigent and unable to recognize the severity of this crisis. japan, the united kingdom, new zealand, and scores of regional and local governments have declared states of emergency over climate change. the united states would send a powerful signal to the world about our commitment to defeating climate change if we did so as well. now, on covid. as i mentioned yesterday, the senate will soon begin the process of considering legislation to help the country defeat covid-19 and provide relief to those americans who are still suffering great economic hardship. there has been a lot of action in washington recently. we inaugurated a new president. the new administration is getting off the ground. an impeachment trial of the former president will commence in a few weeks. but covid-19 hasn't gone anywhere, unfortunately.

americans are still losing their jobs. american businesses are still closing. americans are still getting sick. americans are still dying. the needs in our country are still great, and the country must pursue a bold and robust course of action to defeat the disease and get our country back to normal. we must not, we must not repeat the mistakes of 2008 and 2009 when congress was too timid and constrained in its response to the global financial crisis. the congressional budget office has told us last fall that covid-19 -- the covid-19 pandemic has taken more than $17 trillion out of our economy. $17 trillion. out of the economy. the danger of undershooting our response to covid-19 is far greater than overshooting it. so congress must pursue a bold

response to the prevailing crisis of our time. here in the senate, we want that work to be bipartisan. let me say that again. we want the next legislative response to covid-19 to be bipartisan. we want to work with our republican colleagues if we can to include their ideas and input if they will offer them. that's our preference, but if our republican colleague -- if our republican colleagues decide to oppose the necessary, robust covid relief that is needed, we will have to move forward without them. it's not our preference, but dealing with this crisis in a bold and sufficient way is a necessity. the senate is going to respond to the country's needs and deliver help to the american people fast. now on impeachment. finally, i want to address the vote the senate took yesterday on the point of order raised by the junior senator from kentucky. i regret to say for 45

republican senators to vote for a spurious constitutional objection to the coming impeachment trial was deeply, deeply irresponsible. the trial is still two weeks away. the constitutional objection has been completely debunked by more than 150 constitutional scholars, representing the entire breadth of the political spectrum, including very prominent conservatives. but only five republican senators were willing to take a principled stand against this reckless and ill-advised effort by members of this body who are eager to excuse president trump's campaign to overturn the election and apparently to excuse his incitement of the mob that every one of us experienced in this capitol. i would simply say to all of my colleagues, make no mistake, there will be a trial, and the evidence against the former

president will be presented in living color for the nation and every one of us to see once again. no one will be able to avert their gaze from what mr. trump said and did and the consequences of his actions. we will all watch what happened. we will listen to what happened. and then we will vote. we will pass judgment. as our solemn duty under the constitution demands. and in turn, we will all be judged on how we respond. i yield the floor. i'm glad to see my colleague from vermont here, as well as my colleague from illinois. mr. leahy: i thank the distinguished leader.

mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: yesterday, we confirmed antony blinken as our new secretary of state. like the director of national intelligence, the secretary of defense, and the secretary of the treasury, this is another big bipartisan vote here in the senate. four years ago, senate democrats subjected mainstream nominees to the state and treasury to a full gauntlet of partisan delay tactics. they forced cloture votes. those were nearly party line. so were the final votes. neither got on the job until february. but this president's mainstream

nominees to key posts are receiving fair consideration in a timely process. republicans have no shortage of substantive policy differences with the new administration. we will be discussing them with secretaries austin, yellen, and blinken in the course of normal committee oversight. but unlike what took place four years ago, republicans are not gratuitously delaying people who are mainstream and qualified whom the new president has asked to serve in key posts. if we find somebody unfit, unqualified, or outside the mainstream, you bet we'll oppose them. but i just spent four years arguing that presidents deserve some latitude to assemble their team. i meant it, and i mean it now. with my vote to confirm mr. blinken, i wanted to reinforce the need for true bipartisan consensus on the core

objectives of our foreign policy. yesterday, while discussing the legislative filibuster, i talked about the chaos that would ensue if every domestic policy swung wildly back and forthwith every election. the same goes for our foreign affairs. american statesmen should make commitments and issue threats that can endure beyond their turns in office. -- terms in office. to be clear, presidents bear the primary responsibility for foreign policy, and i'm not suggesting different leaders should not have different ideas. but they would be more successful and their legacies more enduring if they make the effort to build bipartisan support among congress and the american people. neither america nor our allies will like the world that results if the world's leading nation starts over like an etch-a-sketch every four years. for starters, in several important areas, the new

administration should build on bipartisan consensus that actually already exists. let's start with china. the trump administration helped bring about a long overdue american awakening to the reality that we are in strategic competition with the p.r.c. that beijing will not magically conform itself to the so-called international community. and that these challenges demand fast and serious action from the u.s. and from our friends. president biden and his new cabinet must keep working with congress to continue building a whole of government, whole of economy approach to checking china. we need secretary austin to keep focus on modernizing our forces, deterring chinese threats from the indo-pacific to space and cyberspace, sustaining robust defense funding and investing in defense partnerships across the world. we need secretary yellen to keep focused on the coercive

manipulation the p.r.c. uses to ensnare the developing world in its orbit. we need secretary blinken to keep clarifying the china threat to our allies and european partners, powfd on contesting their growing influence in africa and the middle east, and to hold beijing accountable for its unacceptable repression in places like tibet and hong kong and hostility toward taiwan. now, we know china is not the only great power with whom we need to hang tough. in concrete policy terms, the united states just spent four years developing a more clear-eyed approach to russia. rather than chasing naive resets with the kremlin or worshipping arms control like a religion, we leaned into military assistance to ukraine, serious sanctions, cyber countermeasures against meddling and other strong steps. the biden administration will find willing partners on capitol

hill as it builds on this process, keeps imposing real costs on moscow, pushes back on expansionism in the eastern mediterranean, and importantly encourages our allies to join this effort. great power competition is key, but of course it does not exhaust the threats that we face. in the middle east, i know president biden will face political pressure from the left to rejoin obama's iran deal, just as president trump faced pressure from the right to abandon it. had president obama not tried to circumvent congress and pursue a partisan policy, this critical national security challenge might not have become so polarizing. but that's where we are. there is no question iran is the biggest threat the u.s. and our partners face in the region. it poses threats beyond just its pursuit of nuclear weapons.

sponsoring terrorism, the sectarian agenda has worked to undermine its neighbors' sovereignty, its development of ballistic missiles and lethal drones and its appalling, appalling record on human rights. confronting this will take bipartisanship at home and solidarity with israel and our aarab partners -- arab partners abroad. this needs to exist before making major changes or racing to rejoin a deal and our new president must be ready to respond to violence with force as the trump administration did when they removed qasem soleimani from the battlefield. i have vocally stood up against both parties about withdrawing our limited forces in afghanistan and syria too rapidly or without a smart plan. a supermajority of the senate joined me warning against

abruptly leaving battlefields recklessly on bad terms. this work will require we keep our friends close. the u.s. needs to be a partner that neither strains alliances unnecessarily nor hands out free passes. president biden should continue prodding our partners to honor their promises, pay their share and put real capabilities on the table and reemphasize that we have their backs. one early test for the new administration and congressional democrats will be the defense budget. if president biden and his team are serious about contesting china, russia, and these other threats, they'll need to show it without continued robust investment in a modern global forced presence, american leadership would be little more than hollow rhetoric. i vowed to get bryan's top

foreign policy advisors swiftly and i hope it leads to frequent, close and bipartisan work with the senate. the presiding officer: the leadership time is reserved. under the previous order, the senate will be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. mr. durbin: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority whip. mr. durbin: mr. president, today, january 27, mark an anniversary in a way of an event that occurred in this chamber three weeks ago, an event on january 6 which some of us will never forget. we're in the midst of preparing for an impeachment trial of

president donald trump for any responsibility that he bears for that day's events. some have said we shouldn't do that. we shouldn't have an impeachment trial. the former u.n. ambassador and governor of south carolina, nicky haley said in an interview on fox television, it's time for america to get over it. get over it. she's not the only one who's expressed that point of view. i was in the airport in chicago last week in a waiting area to get on a plane when someone seated nearby said, hey, senator, get over it. let this president ride off into the sunset. those were his words. get over it. it's hard to get over it if you

lived it. and many of us in this chamber did. last night there was a vote as to whether we should go forward with the impeachment. all of the democrats, 50, voted in favor of having the trial. since we received that article from the house, five -- five republicans joined us. 45 republicans voted to end the impeachment proceeding, voting in favor of a poirnt of -- point of order raised by the senator from kentucky. i don't know what was going through their minds when they joined the senator from kentucky's point of order. i don't know it was a

constitutional issue they were thinking about, whether it was loyalty to donald trump or whether it was fear of trump's followers in their home states that led them to vote to end the impeachment inquiry. but we should go forward. we should go forward, as lincoln reminded us, because we cannot escape history and we certainly shouldn't be party to rewriting history. with almost 50% of trump loyalists refuse to believe that the events of three weeks ago in this capitol occurred or if they occurred that they had anything to do with president trump, we need to make a record -- a record of fact, not just for our current deliberations, but for history. how can anyone who was in this chamber on january 6 really

argue that something critical and important and horrific occurred? do you remember when 2:15, the secret service went up and grabbed the vice president by his arms and out the door to take him to a secure place? we were stunned by that. i was. they told us to sit here. do you know what i saw next? two men, plain clothes security people, i don't know what what agency they were working for came right down here in the middle of this well. why do i remember why they were there? because one of them had an automatic weapon around his neck in the senate chamber. and then we were told by a capitol policeman who stood in front of us, sit down, stay in your seats, we're bringing in your staff and line the wars and

this will be a secure room and they closed the doors off to the public and we sat here for a few minutes and then the same policeman said, leave, evacuate quickly, out the doors. the crowd, the mob was advancing and getting closer to the senate chamber. we went out the back corridor and down the steps and as you go down the steps, it there's a window that looks out on the sidewalk near the capitol building and i saw this mob coming at us with trump flags and american flags and signs coming right at us. we hurried down those steps and through the long tunnel to, we hoped, a safe location in one of the office buildings nearby. i'll never forget it. do the 45 senators who voted against the impeachment trial last night still remember it? i certainly hope they do.

and i certainly hope that he can recall, as they watched the videotapes, the mountain of videotapes of what happened that day and, of course, i hope we all remember what the capitol police went through. for those who say they love law and order, take a look at what they went through when this mob came after them. they were beaten. one gave his life and we can never forget it. so how did this come about? was this just a respond tanus -- a spontaneous gathering of people who decided to come 0 to capitol -- to come to capitol hill? far from it. the president of the united states, donald trump, requested his followers to come to washington on january 6. why did he pick january 6? because the constitution says that shthe day when congress

will count the electoral votes and determine who will be the next president. and because president trump refused to accept the reality of his loss on november 3, and continued in every imaginable way to try to change the numbers coming out of states like georgia, he called his followers to washington on that day and held a rally on the ellipse. we have a tape of that rally, and it should be part of the record as to what this president said to his followers who had gathered on that day, how his rhetoric inflamed them. we can see it. it's a matter of record. and then he pointed to the capitol building, this building, and told them to come up here. why?

because we were in the process of counting the electoral votes which would finally end constitutionally announce that he had lost the election. it was his last desperate gasp to keep the white house even at the expense of the constitution and reality. and then the crowd turned and advanced on the capitol. we've seen those videotapes as well as they overran the flimsy barricades that were set up in the hopes that they would discourage and stop them. and they broke through windows and doors and came into this building, invading it for the first time since 1813. it was 1813 when the british forces came into this building, burned it as an invasion. well, this was a new invasion, an invasion by those who were either inspired by this

president or for whatever political reasons decided to try to stop this government. it was the -- it's the first time that ever happened since 1813. i'll never forget it. and i'm sorry to say that the 45 senators who said, stop the investigation, stop the impeachment may not as clear a memory as i do. mr. president, each year we have a commemoration of george washington's farewell address and a different member of the senate is asked to read it on the floor of the senate. i'll have to tell you honestly i don't come to the floor and listen carefully. it doesn't have the impact it once had. it's a commemoration, which is honor ific, but doesn't have the real power to create a memory.

doug jones was a former senator from alabama, and he said on martin luther king's birthday, we should come to the floor to hear the reading of a letter from the birmingham jail. i think that is perfect. how will we remember and commemorate january 6? maybe it's too soon to think about that? but how can we forget what happened that day? how can we possibly get over it? i don't want to get over it. i want to face it squarely and honestly with the facts. history demands it of us. those of husband who were honor -- those of us who were honored to serve in this chamber have the responsibility to keep the facts alife, -- alive not let those who wish to ignore them or rewrite history have the last word. we now have a responsibility to

go forward with this impeachment trial to make a record and decide as a united states senate. we owe it to the people we represent, that's for sure, but more important, we owe it to future generations to show them just how fragile a democracy can be when a mob turns on the united states capitol and tries to stop the business of this government. the good news is this. if there's any source of elation, it's this. we returned to the capitol that same day, january 6, and finished our business counting the electoral vote, in the early morning hours of january 7, joseph biden was announced the winner of the presidency. and just two weeks later -- two weeks later to the day, he was sworn in as president of the

united states. our democracy you -- our democracy survived this mob that came forward in an insurrection against our government and we are now in the beginning of the second week of the biden presidency. he has spoken to the american people and told them we are going to come together, we're going to unify. bless him for doing that. we owe him this opportunity. we owe it to our country. i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call: mr. thune: mr. president. the presiding officer: the republican whip. mr. thune: is the senate in a quorum call? the presiding officer: yes. mr. thune: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: mr. president, last friday we observed the 40th anniversary of roe v. wade, the supreme court decision that legalized abortion through all nine months of pregnancy. it's a somber day every year as we contemplate the millions of lives lost to abortion since the roe v. wade decision. gallup has been polling on abortion for decades, and if you look at the polling on the

issue, one thing becomes clear. the majority of americans do not believe in unrestricted abortion. some believe that abortion should be completely illegal. some believe abortion should be legal under certain circumstances. but the majority of americans do not believe in unrestricted abortion. why is that, mr. president? why, despite the best efforts of the far left, do the majority of americans think there should be at least some restrictions on abortion? i suspect the answer is that every person knows on some level that when we're talking about abortion, we are talking about a baby. a human being. it's not rocket science, mr. president. it's biology 101. human moms and dads have human babies. take one look at an ultra sound at a baby girl sucking her thumb or a baby boy kicking his feet,

and it's pretty hard to argue that that's just a clump of cells. and i believe that this is why, despite years of fierce abortion advocacy from the far left, the majority of americans do not believe in unrestricted abortion, because they know, they know, mr. president, the unborn child is a human being. and they know that human beings deserve to be protected. even when they're small and weak and vulnerable, especially when they're small and weak and vulnerable. the truth is advocates of abortion are fighting an uphill battle. now it doesn't always feel like that. after all, they've got a lot of support from the entertainment industry and magazines and media outlets and democrat politicians. the pro-abortion left has a lot of money. they've won too many victories, and too many babies have been

killed. but despite their money and platform and advantage, in 48 years, advocates for abortion have not won their fight. they've not managed to convince anywhere close to a majority of americans that abortion is an unqualified good and should be available unrestricted and on demand. and that is because for all their advantages, they are fighting an unwinnable battle. because they are fighting against reality. they are fighting against truth. they're fighting against science. and they are fighting against the knowledge that's written on every human heart, a truth that gets obscured but is hard to completely erase, and that is that every human being has value and deserves to be protected. mr. president, last week i came down to the floor to praise president biden's call for unity, and i suggested that one way he could show that commitment was by nominating

individuals for key posts who represent a majority of americans instead of the far-left wing of his party. and i think that several of the president's nominations have demonstrated his commitment to unity. while perhaps not the people that i would have chosen, i believe that a number of his nominees will serve americans well, and i have voted accordingly, casting votes in favor of president biden's choice for director of national intelligence, secretary of defense, among others. but unfortunately, president biden has also nominated some individuals who represent the extreme left of the democrat party rather than mainstream americans. and nowhere is that more true than with his radically pro-abortion nominee for secretary of health and human hn services. as a member of the house of representatives, javier becerra accumulated an overwhelming pro-abortion voting record, even opposing a ban on partial

birth abortion, a procedure so heinous and repulsive, it's difficult to describe. as attorney general of california, he used his position to advance the pro-abortion cause. on top of that, he has showed a disturbing tendency to use his position to attack freedom of religion, freedom of conscience. as california attorney general, he sued an order of nuns who care for the elderly poor to try to force them to offer health insurance benefits that violate their faith. that's right. he thought it a good use of his time as attorney general to sue an order of nuns who care for the elderly poor. he also enthusiastically sought to enforce a california law that forced crisis pregnancy centers to advertise abortion services. the case went all the way to supreme court, which overturned the california law because it violated the free speech

protection of the first amendment. mr. president, it is bad to support evils like abortion. it is worse to not only support an evil, but to attempt to force others to participate in it in violation of their consciences. i know the president is a man of faith, which makes it particularly perplexing why he would choose to nominate an individual who has used his position to attack freedom of religion and freedom of conscience. as head of the department of health and human services, mr. becerra would have the ability to not only push an extremist abortion agenda, but to roll back important progress made to protect individuals' conscience rights. i'm disappointed by the president's choice. xavier becerra's pro-abortion views do not represent the views of a majority of americans. i'm also very disappointed by

the announcement that president biden will overturn the mexico city policy which protects taxpayer dollars from being used to finance abortion in other countries. this is not a unifying action. americans were not clamoring to have their tax dollars start supporting abortions abroad. this is only a priority for the pro-abortion lobby. mr. president, as i said, i am disappointed in the president's actions, and going forward i hope he will not let his presidency be hijacked by abortion extremists. but whatever policies this administration pursues, i and many of my colleagues will continue to work to promote a culture of life in this country. the arc, the arc of the moral universe is long, but i believe it does bend towards justice,

and i look forward to the day that we will secure justice for unborn human beings by ensuring that they are protected. mr. president, i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mrs. blackburn: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mrs. blackburn: thank you, mr. president. i ask that we suspend the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection.

mrs. blackburn: thank you, mr. president. as we move through what is appearing to be a choppy start to the 117th congress, i think it's worth reminding ourselves of the standards that guide our work here. the mandate that we have does not come from the 24-hour news cycle or from lobbyists or advocacy groups, but it comes very simply from the constitution. it is the foundation of the rule of law, our nation's constitution. and it really serves as a pretty good policymaking guideline. the american people are looking at what is going on here, and they see the cracks that washington has made in the foundation of this constitution. these realizations have eroded

their confidence in our ability as a body to perform the basic functions of government without devolving into partisan chaos when faced with disagreements. many times i will hear tennesseans say, what happened to robust political debate? what happened to being able to agreeably disagree and have a discussion? are those days totally lost? or can we return to them? they are asking themselves how many shortcuts, like executive orders, that washington is going to take before the shortcut becomes the rule or the

norm. and how many times can washington chip away at the standards that govern our country before those standards start to crumble or are not relevant. restoring the trust of the american people will not be easy because this fundamental lack of faith in our institutions has caused americans to question their very safety and security in the physical space and also in the virtual world that they have been forced into by the covid-19 pandemic. i like to say we've got a lot of security moms that are out there, moms and grand moms like me. quite frankly, they are out in full force alongside millions of other americans who now have

cause to wonder if their own government will bother making their security a priority. what about their communities? what about their neighborhoods? what about the universities where their children go to school? what is going to be done about riots? what about the virtual space? as they have seen their children move to online school. as more of their daily functional life and their trans actional life has moved online, how do they keep their families safe? how do they protect their rights to privacy? well, in the physical space, yesterday we got some good news that a federal judge has granted a temporary restraining order barring the department of homeland security from implementing a nationwide pause on most deportations. that pause was mandated by a

d.h.s. memo signed by the acting secretary on day one of the biden administration. not such a great start for the administration's immigration policy team, but the american people will benefit from having the time that has come to them to ask questions about proposed shifts in existing policy. people want to be safe. and i would like to just stipulate for the record that immigration law is very complex. and while most americans aren't experts in the finer points of immigration law, they do have, and most of us have a very common touchstone that we relate to, and that is having a secure border. this should be a basic concept.

let's secure the border. let's secure our country. but somehow we've managed to politicize that point, that advocates at the highest levels of the federal government for what? a weakened border. just imagine that. you have individuals at the highest level of the federal government that are saying let's weaken our border. that is stunning, absolutely stunning to tennesseans. why would you not protect your border? why would you not want to know who is coming into your country? why should i be forced to accept a lax border?

why should i be accepting of allowing drug cartels to run those drugs into the country? why should i be told i should accept human trafficking, i should accept gangs, i should accept sex traffickers coming in across the border? mr. president, when we have a weak border, this is what you get. every town, every town becomes a border town. every state becomes a border state. because of the impacts, the negative impacts of drug trafficking, sex trafficking, human trafficking, and the toll that that takes on our

communities. last week, i introduced two key pieces of legislation that attack specific vulnerabilities in our body of immigration law that thousands of bad actors used to game the system every year. the first, the stop green-lighting driver licenses for illegal immigrants act. it does exactly what it sounds like. it blocks certain federal funds from reaching the coffers of sanctuary states. this includes states that defy federal immigration law or that allow individuals to obtain a driver license without providing proof that they are here legally or without providing proof that they are who they claim to be. this is no small penalty, and here is why. in 2020, our nation had 15

states plus the district of columbia that have decided to give illegal immigrants a valid state-issued i.d. a driver license. now, these 15 states and d.c. got $53 million in j.a.g. grants from the department of justice. now, these are funds -- these are justice assistance grants that are given to local law enforcement and criminal justice projects to do what? enforce the law. so if you're not going to enforce the law, why should you get the money? those funds should go to entities that have said we will abide by the rule of law.

that is where those funds should go. now, the second bill is the ban birth tourism act. this would amend the immigration and nationality act to prohibit pregnant foreigners from obtaining a temporary visitor visa they could use to enter the united states specifically for the purpose of giving birth here. yes, you heard me right. there is a loophole in the law in the immigration and nationality act, and because of this, we have some pregnant foreigners, primarily from russia and china, who circumvent the law and they get a temporary visitor visa, and they come here working with some of this multimillion-dollar a year birth

tourism industry, they get coached, they come here, they go to a facility, they give birth. the child becomes a citizen. and then they return. primarily this is wealthy russians and wealthy chinese. our citizenship is not for sale. no indeed. it is hard fought, it is hard won, it is hard kept. and the american people are right to expect better than this. tennesseans want to see something done about this. that is why i once again have filed this legislation. now, mr. president, the american people are not unreasonable. they do not lack compassion. they just don't understand why

officials who are charged with upholding the law would act in their official capacity to undermine something as basic as border security. as basic as national security. and we have got a lot of security moms out there that understand that it is no small task keeping things secure at home. all of these security moms out there know that there are plenty of threats online, threats that they cannot see. but they know that there are a lot of these threats that come into their homes and onto their computer screens and onto the devices of their children because of a lack of privacy online. now, we curate and protect our

virtual you, as i call it, as critically important because it defines who we are to the people that we do not see in person. and as i mentioned earlier, more of our functional and transactional life is now online. so tomorrow, to mark national data privacy day, i will once again reintroduce the browser act. and, mr. president, as you and i served in the house together, i know you remember how i would introduce this bill. the browser act. to secure online privacy for millions of americans. now, at its heart, this is an effort to inject awareness, transparency, and accountability into the relationship between technology platforms and their users.

this legislation sets up a very basic federal compliance framework that tech companies can use as a guide to update their privacy policies online. make it something that is going to give you the ability to say this is information that i want to share. it would require companies to secure an opt in from consumers before collecting their sensitive data and for less sensitive information, you, the consumer, would have the ability to opt out and not share that browsing history with that company. now, companies would not be able to deny you service if you want to practice your right to privacy. that makes common sense.

it happens in the physical space every single day. and it should also be a right reserved to the individual in the virtual space. now, this also would put the federal trade commission, our online privacy regulator, in charge of watching what's happening in the virtual space, applying these rules equally across the entire internet ecosystem. our right to privacy. being secure in our communities and our homes. that is something that not only tennesseans but millions of americans are wanting to see. mr. president, i ask that the remainder of my remarks be entered separately into the record. the presiding officer: without

objection. mrs. blackburn: thank you, mr. president. this week, team blackburn is saying goodbye to heath huck hue who came to us last january as part of a fellowship program between my office and the oak ridge national laboratory which is located in oak ridge, just outside of novel, tennessee. it's been an interesting year, to say the least, but heath has risen to the occasion and impressed each and every one of us with his breadth of knowledge and his ability to adapt to the hectic pace of life in the senate. we did our best to persuade him to stay with us a little longer, but i'm confident that his colleagues at oak ridge will be happy to see him return, as well as his wife emily and little elliott. they are looking forward to having him home. it was an honor working with him this past year.

we will miss him, and we wish him all the best as he heads back to tennessee. i yield the floor. i notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. sullivan: madam president? the presiding officer: the junior senator from alaska. mr. sullivan: madam president, i ask that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sullivan: madam president, the senate is focused on one of its constitutional roles right now, which is meeting with and discussing with the new biden administration's cabinet. our advice and consent role. the consent role, obviously, is confirmation votes here on the floor of the u.s. senate, which we're doing a number of these on the floor, in committee. but there's also the advice role given to us by the founding fathers on the advice -- fathers. on the advice we're providing, whether we vote for some of these nominees or not to the cabinet. that's a big part of the senate's role.

so, madam president, i'm going to take a minute to provide a little bit of advice to some of the new incoming biden team. now, look, we are seeing it, particularly in the foreign policy realm. a lot of the biden team is actually -- has actually come from the obama-biden team, maybe too many. you worry about stale thinking because when they were in power four years ago or a little bit over four years ago, there are a lot of things that have changed in the world, particularly on foreign policy. a lot has happened in the world. so you need fresh views. but we are where we are. but an example of this kind of stale thinking that i was shocked to see recently at the white house is the use of the term, quote, strategic patience as a foreign policy concept. now, this was the phrase the

obama administration used to describe its policy towards north korea. and i think most people would recognize, democrats and republicans, that that was not a very successful policy, a pretty failed policy. now, granted north korea is difficult. there's no doubt. but the policy that was known as strategic patience was the policy that enabled the north korean rogue regime to massively build up a nuclear arsenal. so kind of like leading from behind the obama administration's term strategic patience became synonymous with the passive and even weak foreign policy approach as it related to north korea certainly. so i was very surprised yesterday to hear the white house press secretary trot out this term again, strategic patience, but this time when talking about the biden

administration's policy with regard to china. now, this is almost certainly music to china's ears. the leadership of china -- because it's kind of a subtle green light to xi jinping and the other authoritarians in china that it's failure to uphold promise after promise to the united states -- something i refer to as promise fatigue that we have here -- or continuing to call itself a developing country when it's not or continuing its attempts to dominate the south china sea with the militarization of that important strategic sea lane or continuation of intellectual property theft or all the challenges that we have with china. the idea that we're going to have strategic patience, i

think, sends a signal to the chinese that we don't take these issues urgently. and, madam president, that's the wrong message. these are urgent issues. and in my discussions during the confirmation process and in hearings with now-secretary of defense austin and secretary of state blinken, i sense that they had a sense of urgency. as a matter of fact, they both acknowledged that the previous administration -- the trump administration's national security strategy, national defense strategy that says we need to turn to great power competition with china as the pacing threat for the united states they agreed with. and even in general austin -- now secretary austin's confirmation hearing, one of my colleagues, senator blackburn, actually said this term strategic patience doesn't seem to be the right term and pressed

them on it. so, madam president, here's some continued advice in the senate's role in terms of our constitutional role of advice and consent -- words matter, especially from the white house podium. we need a strong bipartisan and lasting china policy from the united states of america. this is the biggest geostrategic issue that we will be facing as a country for the next 50 to 100 years, but it is also a challenge that is here and now. the challenge that needs immediate action. so here's my advice. ditch the strategic patience phrase. the vast majority of the senators in this body -- democrats and republicans -- want to know that the biden

administration is focused on this challenge now and its serious challenge that china poses to the united states now. and strategic patience sends the wrong message to the senate, to the american people, and to china's leadership. so they need to do better. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senior senator from texas. mr. cornyn: madam president, let me express my gratitude to the senator from alaska for his words. i could not have said it better than he did, and i'm grateful to him for coming and articulating that important message so clearly and emphatically.

chris wray, the f.b.i. director, is a britt laidback guy. as a matter of fact -- is a pretty laidback guy. as a matter of fact, i tell me, i reminds me of a typical g-man, not a lot of emotion. but the f.b.i. director who i think has been doing an outstanding job gets positively and the mated when it -- antimated when it comes to china and the threats there. he is principally in charge of the counterintelligence mission against foreign countries like china that try to steal our intellectual property, spy on our country using a number of unconventional means, and i just want to say to my friend -- our friend from alaska, thank you for making that point. it's really, really important. madam president, yesterday afternoon we confirmed another one of president biden's cabinet

nominees. antony blinken has led an important career in the public sector and is well-versed in the responsibilities of the state department as well as the diplomatic challenges we will face in the months and years ahead, not the least of which -- the most important of which is china but not china alone. while mr. blinken and i have policy differences -- some of them very serious -- i have confidence in his ability to represent our nation on the global stage. it's important for a new president, whether they be a republican or a democrat, to have qualified, senate-confirmed officials in their cabinet without delay. over the past week, we've worked to confirm nominees from -- for some of the most critical federal departments and agencies. secretaries of state, defense, treasury, as well as the director of national intelligence have each been confirmed by the senate with broad bipartisan support.

and we will continue to process more of the president's nominees in the days ahead. four years ago our democratic colleagues approached president trump's nominees with a grab bag of antics including everything from intentional delays to brazen theatrics. in most cases, this behavior wasn't a reflection on the nominee or their qualifications but of our colleagues' antipathy toward president trump. clearly we are adopting a different approach, and i hope one that will de-escalate these battles and this unthat will serve the national -- and one that will serve the national interest rather than harm it. throughout my time in the senate, i've tried to evaluate nominees based on their qualifications, their integrity, and their ability to carry out the responsibilities for the job that they've been nominated for. and i'll continue to either

support or oppose nominees based on those merits and those criteria, not based on the party of the president. madam president, we know it's been the tradition of the senate to prioritize nominees for national security positions, and there's never been a more critical time to ensure that president biden is surrounded by an experienced and capable team. from the threats posed by an increasingly hostile iran to those by an unpredictable north korea, there are many, many challenges on the horizon. one of the first that the administration must confront is the expiration of the new strategic arms reduction treaty also known as new start. this is the only remaining bilateral strategic arms agreement between the united

states and russia, the world's most powerful nuclear states. and it's set to expire in a matter of days. last fall the trump administration advocated for a one-year extension of new start, with the condition that both countries would cap nuclear weapons -- nuclear warheads during that period. unsurprisingly, russia preferred a clean five-year extension with no warhead limitations. president putin delayed the final stages of talks in the hopes that the potential biden administration would strike a deal more favorable to russia, and it appears now at least as things stand today that president putin has hedged his bets correctly. following a call yesterday between president biden and president putin, the white house

announced that the white house and russia are set to extend new start for five years with no conditions attached. this was president biden's first major foreign policy test and, unfortunately, he played right into russia's hands. for starters, it's no secret that new start was deeply flawed from the beginning, and it's no secret that russia cheats, which is why verification is so essential. the counting mechanisms in new start don't effectively keep our countries on a level playing field, which is the primary goal of any arms treaty because it promotes mutual deterrence. the treaty limits the number of bombers each nation can possess but places no limit on the number of warheads each bomber can support. making matters worse, the limits

only apply to strategic, not tactical, nuclear weapons. russia has taken advantage of this loophole in new start, amassing some 2,000 tactical nuclear weapons compared to only 500 for the united states. russia's nuclear doctrine signals its increasing willingness to use those tactical nuclear weapons in a conflict, particularly in europe as it warily eyes nato. another five years under new start will allow russia to continue growing its arsenal of tactical weapons and cement its advantage over the united states, perhaps permanently. once that happens, the likelihood of russia deploying and ultimately using these weapons goes higher. these treaties ought to make the world safer, not a more

dangerous place due to imbalances, the potential for mistakes, or miscalculation. beyond sheer numbers, there's also the question of trust -- or, i should say, of verification because it's hardly confrontational to say that russia isn't the most worthy partner. last fall the kremlin attempted to poison a kremlin opponent using a nerve agent. russia has launched massive cyberattacks against agencies whoer in the united states -- here in the united states, the latest being the solar winds attack. last year it attempted to steal coronavirus vaccine data from the u.s. and some of our closest allies. in short, russia does not play by the rules, and new start does little to prevent further cheating. by granting putin's request for

a clean five-year extension of new start, the biden administration will not only be rewarding russia for its hostile actions against the u.s. and our alive, but also enabling russia and other nuclear states to continue growing their stockpiles while the united states plays by outdated rules. no cap on nuclear warheads, no enhanced verification measures. in short, no need for russia to follow the rules laid out in new start. the expected treaty extension by the biden administration wouldn't address any of those blinking red lights. the biggest failure of a clean five-year extension, though, is relinquishing the leverage that we currently have to take a more comprehensive approach to nuclear disarmament. as i said, the u.s. and russia are the most powerful nuclear states in the world, but

together we account for only two of the five nuclear-armed states recognized by the nonproliferation treaty. two of the other countries -- the united kingdom and france, both of which provide regular information about the size and makeup of their nuclear arsenals -- are not a problem. but the fifth and final power is china, one of the world's biggest secret keepers. it's a police state, and opaque as we learned once again when it came to the virus from wuhan province. all we need to do is look at the covid-19 pandemic. the first cases of covid-19 appeared in china as early as november of 2019, and the communist party of china willfully withheld information from the rest of the world as it

sought to downplay the potential impact of the virus. china reading of the amendmentedly silenced -- china repeatedly silenced the brave men and women of its own country who tried to sound the alarm and, as a result, countries around the world were ill-prepared for these critical early stages of the fight against covid-19. now, more than 2.1 million people have died from this virus, including more than 420,000 americans. it's impossible to gauge how many of those lives could have been saved by earlier intervention. but this should serve as a cautionary tale when it comes to managing the threat from china. we cannot allow china to continue sitting on the sidelines while the four other nuclear states play by the rules, as we hope they will.

the administration must push to get china into the negotiating table -- at the negotiating table. the thick cloak of secrecy surrounding the chinese communist party has made it nearly impossible to verify information about the breadth and the depth of china's nuclear capabilities. what we do know is that china continues to pursue a nuclear triad and experts estimate china to have about 300 nuclear weapons. assuming that figure is correct, it puts china slightly ahead of france and the united kingdom in terms of raw numbers. that makes -- that would make china the third most powerful nuclear state in the world. and we have every reason to believe that the size of its arsenal will continue to grow.

in may of 2019 then-director for the defense intelligence agency general robert ashley said china is likely to at least double the size of its nuclear stockpile over the next decade. he referred to this effort as, quote, the most rapid expansion and diversification of its nuclear arsenal in china's history. close quote. despite this already large and constantly growing nuclear threat, there are virtually no measures in place to hold china accountable or to bring them to the table. a simple extension of the new start treaty leaves in place a framework in which the russians cheat and the chinese are not at the table and the united states is playing by the rules of a bygone era. this must change, madam president. it must change.

if you think about the fact that since hiroshima, nuclear weapons have not been used on this planet. it is as a result of tough negotiations and a system of mutual deterrence because we know were nuclear weapons to be used, that it could result in the extermination of the planet. so that's why deterrence is so important. that's why reciprocity and transparency are so important. a cold war era approach to nuclear disarmament does not make sense in the modern world. rather than enter a five-year extension of new start, the administration should use its leverage to convene multilateral talks. america should invite the other

nuclear nonproliferation treaty states, russia, china, france, and the u.k. to the negotiating table and encourage multilateral talks aimed at limiting the growth of nuclear arsenals globally. there's far too much at stake to merely cave into the demands of president putin and moscow and cave in as well to the recalcitrants of beijing to come to the table. the administration must pursue a multilateral comprehensive approach. it's the only practical and workable solution to the vast nuclear threats posed by both china and russia. madam president, i yield the floor. and i would note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call: 4

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. blunt: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from missouri. mr. blunt: mr. president, this is a week of the 48th -- the presiding officer: the

senate is in a quorum call. the. mr. blunt: i move we suspend the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. blunt: this week is the 48th annual march for life. it's an event where thousands of americans come together to advocate for the value and protection of unborn human life. they'll be coming together this year differently than they have for almost 50 years, but for almost 50 years millions of people have marched to capitol to try to build a culture where every human life is valued and every human life is protected. that includes tireless women and men and children from my home state of missouri who come to washington both individually and along the missouri life caravan every year. it will be a first time in a long time that i haven't spoken to that group in person. as they meet virtually, their cause is just as res. gnat as it

-- res. gnat as it is in person. i know that missourians will continue to advocate for life and recognize the unborn and those we lost from abortion. this year's theme of the march is together strong, life unites. that's a pretty hard theme to argue with no matter how you feel about this particular topic. unity doesn't mean believing the same thing about everything, but it does mean agreeing about one very important thing in terms of this event and that important thing, of course, is the value and protection of life. this belief -- this belief in life cuts across religion, cuts across party lines, cuts across geographic boundaries. people in organizations from all religious backgrounds and even those who have no religious affiliation are part of the

pro-life movement and they oppose abortion in almost all cases. polling shows that more than a third of democrats in america support protections for life and there are groups dedicated to showing that pro-life is not a partisan issue, and, frankly, that's a move in the right direction where you don't feel like you're included in one party or excluded from one party because of your view on this issue. last year's geneva consensus declaration brought together more than 30 countries to promote women's health and strengthen the family, including the preservation of human life. we need to do everything we can to save the lives of babies and of mothers, maternal mortality is a big problem in our country and around the world. it's become a focus of the congress in recent years and needs to continue to be. even though the issue of life so often is polarized in the united states congress, i'm still

encouraged by the ways that we see a powerful commitment over and over to protecting the unborn and how that breaks through in other areas outside of the congress. for the past four years we've seen an unprecedented advance in the protections for the unborn in state legislatures. in the next few years we can expect to see efforts to try to move things in another direction, to weaken or remove life protections. for instance, the title 10 family planning program or in our foreign aid programs. there's a well-funded effort to abandon the hyde amendment which prevents taxpayer funding of abortion or abortion coverage of federal health care programs. as the chairman of the labor, health and human services appropriations committee, i

oversaw the yearly renewal of the hyde amendment which is included in the bill for the past 40 years. i won't be the chairman of that committee in this congress, but i'll still be fighting to see that we reach this -- maintain this area where there's been great consensus that went beyond political parties. i'll continue to support and advocate for the hyde amendment and the permanent federal protections for the unborn through legislations like the pain-capable unborn child protection act and the no taxpayer funding abortion act among other things. though the pro-life movement can expect challenges in this congress, there are still many signs that one day we'll succeed in creating a culture where every human life is valued and protected. for now, however, i want to thank the men, women, and children who dedicate their time and talents to making this happen, who did are marching virtually as they join together to talk about this important

cause and remember the theme of this year which is together strong, life unites. i'd yield the floor and i believe a quorum is not present. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. cardin: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. cardin: i would ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cardin: madam president, i have five requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leader. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. cardin: madam president, today the world comes together

to remember the horrors of the hholocaust. we honor the six million jews and five million others, roma, afro germans, gay men and women, people with disabilities and more who the nazis brutally murdered. and we stand in awe in celebration of those brave souls who managed to survive. it is difficult to comprehend the terrorists that took place in europe between 1939 and 1945, but we carry on an obligation to those who perished and those who survived to prevent further genocide and mass atrocities. it is critical that will we understand what happened to them show that we can prevent it from ever happening again. one of the most important things to understand about the holocaust is that while a limited group of particularly evil monsters orchestrated it, they could not have succeeded without the active or tacit

support of millions of average people. men and women agreed to turn over their neighbors, patrol the ghettos, drive the cattle cars, guard the death camps and line people up to shoot them down. men and women decided to avert their gaze and did nothing to stop the atrocities. i don't believe that all of those people were born villians. i think they were taught by their communities to adopt any level of anti-semitism and prejudice that likely would have been recognizable to many of us today and that the nazi propaganda people exploited those feelings. that terrifies me because it means the holocaust was not an anomaly. it means that under the right conditions, a similar atrocity could happen again. the hatred that gave rise to the holocaust is still very much alive.

the antidefamation league's 2014 global index of anti-semitism found that more than one billion people, nearly one in eight around the world, harbor anti-semitic attitudes. over 30% of those surveyed said it was probably true that jews have too much control over financial markets, that jews think they are better than other people, that jews are disloyal to their country, and that jews -- and that the people hate jews because of the way that jews behave. such sentiments too often translate into violence, leading 40% of european jews to report in 2018 that they lived in daily fear of being physically attacked sadly you these trends bear out closer to home, too. jews make up fewer than 3% of of the american population, but the majority of reported religious-based hate crimes targeted jewish people or

institutions. in 2019, the a.d.l. reported that anti-semitism in america had hit a four-decade high. according to the 2020 survey by the american jewish committee, more than one-third of american jews say they have been verbally or physically assaulted during the past five years, simply because they are jewish. i believe that the world looks to the united states for moral leadership. when we allow anti-semitism, racism, or other kinds of intolerance is flourish here, other countries take that as a license to do the same. moreover, we need to recognize the nexus mean those who traffic in hate and conspiracies in the united states and other like-minded individuals and groups around the globe. combating the most dangerous forms of this bigotry will require understanding, the ways in which such groups are reinforcing and learning from each other.

unfortunately, the last four years, beginning with white nationalists chanting jews will not replace us in charlottesville, and ending with the insurrectionists wearing a camp ash wits sweatshirt -- wearing a camp auschwitz sweirt -- we fail ourselves and we fail the rest of the world. now we have the ability to become leaders once more in fighting anti-semitism and all forms of hatred around the globe. it will not be easy. it is something we have to do. and it starts with education. in the a.d.l.'s 2014 global survey, 35% of the respondents had never heard of the holocaust and 28% of those who did believed that the number of jews that died in the holocaust had been greatly exaggerated.

the 2020 survey of the general public found that nearly one-quarter of americans know nothing or not much about the who the holocaust and nearly one half are not even sure what the term anti-semitism means. how can we hope to learn from the horrors of the holocaust if so many people either do not know or believe that it happened? how can we root out anti-semitism if not even half of us understand what it is? we must educate the next generation on the horrors of the holocaust and the dangers of intolerance. i am proud to have led efforts to provide the full funding of a bill on which our presiding officer was very much involved with, the never again education act. and i thank our presiding officer for her leadership on that issue. that bill expanded the reach in the united states holocaust memorial museum's world-renowned education program. this will allow educators to

access age-appropriate succor almost on who will call of the. it will also bolster the u.s. holocaust memorial museum's continued collection and use of survivor testimony so that tomorrow's leaders will see and hear from their -- for themselves why we must never allow hatred to thrive. at the same time, we must fight against the holocaust denial in any form in any bart of the world. -- in any part of the world. as the organization for security and cooperation in europe's parliamentary assembly special representative on anti-semitism, racism, and intolerance, i am committed to countering attempts to erase or revise events of the holocaust, such as poland's efforts to punish those who speak the truth about the three million jews killed there. i'm deeply disturbed, for instance, by the news of a slander lawsuit against two polish scholars about their writings were jews forced into hiding during the nationalcy

occupation a i am also appalled that hungary's victor orban has erected a monument that tries to whitewash the murder of more than a half a million hungarian jews. i remember, too, that one out of every three jews who died there were hungarian. the holocaust happened, and it can happen again. it can. we made a promise to our grandparents and to our grandchildren that it would never happen again. i believe that we are all each responsible for keeping that promise, so let us heed the lessons of the past in order to build a more peaceful, just, and compassionate future for all. thank you, mr. president. -- thank you, madam president. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. barrasso: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. barrasso: thank you, madam president. i come to the floor today to discuss some of the first actions that have been taken by the new administration. at his inauguration, president biden spoke about the importance of uniting the country, bringing us together, the importance of unity. well, i agree. we have been much too divided it as a nation. we have been much too divided as a nation. we need to bring america together. yet just a few hours after his inaugural address, president biden issued one executive order after another that i believe is only going to drive america further apart. hasn't really reached out, hasn't really tried to work with

us. at a time when millions of people across the country are struggling with unemployment and the effects of a global pandemic, president biden has taken actions that will actually raise the cost of living on people all across the country. in particular, president biden has taken aim at american energy. in wyoming, energy production does a lot more than just keep the lights on. it puts food on the table, and it does it for thousands of families. it pays for our school, our education, our roads. in wyoming, we produce coal and oil and natural gas, uranium as well for nuclear power. we also have incredible renewable resources. in wyoming, in many ways -- and wyoming, in many ways, has world-class wind. we're experiencing that today in casper, wyoming.

wyoming has some of the largest reserves of energy in terms of resources anywhere in the country. in wyoming, we produce 15 times more energy than we use in our state. it actually makes us the country's largest net energy supplier for rest of the country. energy production is the economic lifeblood of wyoming. it's a major source of revenue, pace for, as i said -- pays for, as i said, our schools, roads, bridges, and essential services for all of our citizens. and wyoming is very proud of our energy workers, remarkable men and women who every day get up, go to work to put food on the table, clothing on their kids' backs. and the whole country benefits from the energy that comes from wyoming. well, thanks to america's energy workers, in 2019 america became energy-independent. it was the first time we'd

become independent in over 60 years. well, that makes it easier for families to make ends meet. it makes us stronger on the world stage. it decreases our reliance on energy from other sources like foreign powers who want to do us harm. thanks to our american energy workers, america is an energy superpower, and i believe we should be acting like it. that's why it's remarkable when i see president biden painting a target on the back of american energy, and that's what he has been doing with his executive orders, including today. despite all of the talk about unity, one of the first things that president biden has done in office is to directly attack -- attack energy-producing states like wyoming. it's actually turned out to be his number-one priority. the white house is calling today

climate day. this morning president biden stopped all new oil, gas, and coal leases on federal lands -- today. well, half of the state of wyoming is federally owned. even a greater percentage of that, madam president, of your state is federally owned. experts tell us that the long-term ban could cost us 33,000 jobs in wyoming. we're a state of only half a million people. earlier today at a hearing of the energy and natural resources committee where i am the ranking member, the senior republican, i asked the president's nominee for secretary of energy about how the president's ban would affect jobs. and she admitted that in terms of jobs, she said, some jobs might be sacrificed. saying no to american energy production means less energy, less economic activity, and less money in the pockets of american workers.

now, it's not going to do a thing to lower emissions. it won't bring down global temperatures, but it will bring down workers' wages. it won't cool down planet earth, but it will cool down our nation's economy. energy producers will simply go elsewhere while families in our country will suffer. president biden has also put a stop to the keystone pipeline. the pipeline creates jobs, reduces energy prices, and strengthens our bonds with our neighbor to the north, with canada. now, the prime minister of canada, just continue trudeau, he's no conservative. he is known to be extremely progressive. even he has said he was disappointed in the decision by president biden to cancel the pipeline. president biden's very first phone call with a foreign leader since becoming president was with prime minister trudeau. the prime minister raised the issue o