president has a very close relationship with senator booker and, as you mentioned, karen bass but again we don't have any report that he is just spoken to him but we know the white house has not ruled out any conversations in the future between the two. >> host: walking through on thursday, remarks on the economy is on president biden schedule. where and what specifically? >> guest: yes, the president will be traveling to cleveland and he's been hitting these blue-collar states and i traveled with the president last week in detroit, michigan for example and he was in pennsylvania previously as well and what we've seen is the president hitting some of these traditional blue-collar cities and trying to build this infrastructure plan that he is trying to get through congress. [screaming] we leave this hearing at the u.s. senate is about to gavel in as part of our continuing commitment to bring you live gavel to gavel coverage of congress. the senate is working on the science and technology research

funding measure today in the afternoon they will vote on president biden's pick to lead the centers for medicare and medicaid services. now live to the floor of the u.s. senate here 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. eternal god, you place melodies in our hearts. thank you for the music of your mercies, for the harmonies of your sacred words,

and the symphonies of your unfailing love. may your songs that surround us in the spacious skies and rolling hills inspire our lawmakers with reverence and faith. give our senators such awe for your goodness that they will strive to obey you. provide them also with a faith that stands firm and embraces your plans. lord, save us all by your power, and liberate us with your might. we pray 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: i note the absence of a quorum. the president pro tempore: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: madam president. the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: this week, the national guard is departing what has been a months-long presence here at the capitol. aspects of the guard's presence here were not fleshed out as clearly or coherently as either the congress or the service members deserved, and members of congress will continue to discuss and debate whether it is appropriate for uniformed military personnel to play an ongoing role in policing the united states capitol going forward. but where senators are absolutely 100% united is in our great admiration and appreciation of the individual men and women who have volunteered to serve in the national guard who put on the

uniform and whose orders brought them here to the capitol complex. it was my particular honor to get to meet and talk with several groups of the remarkable men and women of the kentucky national guard during this period. so thank you all from all 50 states for your patriotism and for your service. now, on a completely different matter, when president biden's nominees have been qualified in the mainstream, they have received bipartisan cooperation. but the president's choice to head a key division at the department of justice as an assistant attorney general failed to even advance out of the committee. the democratic leader had to reach into the judiciary committee and rescue the nomination of kristen clarke, our colleagues on the committee did not give her a favorable recommendation. that's because of a long history

of statements that placed the nominee on, frankly, the far-left fringe of the political spectrum. if our democratic colleagues have their way, a couple of days from now, the american people will have an assistant attorney general who argued publicly just last year, quote, we must invest less in police, end quote. she used that exact phrase three times in one essay. violent crime shot up dramatically in 2020. one survey of 30-plus major american cities found that the murder rate jumped 30% last year alone. other estimates have found even larger increases. experts say 2020 saw the largest one-year rise in homicides that america has ever seen. as far back as we have recorded these kinds of statistics. early data from this year suggests that 2021 may even be

worse, but apparently the president's response to this violent crime is to have a proponent of defunding the police help run the department of justice. adequate policing is not an enemy of civil rights. among other things, a recent study by multiple university professors confirmed that more cops lead to fewer murders. quote, larger police forces save lives and the lives saved are disproportionately black lives. end quote. police funding isn't the only important issue where the nominee's judgment has missed the mark. three years ago when the then attorney general was standing up a task force on religious liberty, ms. clarke said this was designed, quote, to make it easier for people to use religion to mask their discriminatory goals. incredibly out of touch far-left

statement. finally we're currently watching an alarming spike in anti-semitic attacks and violence across our country. i introduced new legislation on friday with senator cotton to confront anti-semitism head-on. but as a harvard undergraduate, ms. clarke invited, welcomed, introduced, and then defended a famously antisemitic guest speaker who had authored a book literally entitled -- now listen to this -- the jewish onslaught. the nominee has stated recently that she regrets that decision. goodness, i would certainly hope so. yet she also claims that her op-ed from just last year which asserted three times, three times that we must invest less in police was not actually suggesting that we invest less in police. this is not the right nominee for a crucial post at a crucial time. so i would urge colleagues to

vote no this week. now, on another matter, last week a bipartisan majority of senators voted to proceed the floor debate about our nation's long-term competition with china. there's no disagreement that the people's republic strategic capabilities and its growing influence beyond the indo-pacific pose a singular challenge to american strength and security. there's robust debate about the right ways to address this challenge. the legislation before us arrived on the floor incomplete and it spans a number of huge issues that occupy multiple committees' jurisdictions. it's a prime example of a bill that need as thorough bipartisan amendment process here in the senate. so far we've had a few votes on important amendments. there are a lot more that need consideration. and we should not close debate on this bill until those amendments are addressed.

unfortunately, during one important vote last week, our democrat colleagues sent a telling signal. they voted down ranking member inhofe and vice chairman shelby's amendment to make sure that the real backbone of our competition with china, the resources we allocate to our armed forces and national defense was not neglected. so make no mistake. supply chains, espionage, intellectual property, those are all important topics, but all the policy tweaks in the world would not amount to much help if we lose our military edge with respect to china. soft power isn't much good without the hard power to back it up. the chinese communist party appears to understand this quite clearly. according to one watchdog, it's -- its increase -- it's increased military investment by 76% over the last decade. china has increased its military

spending by 76% over the last decade. the same data show that our own u.s. defense spending fell 10% over that period thanks to the approach of the last democratic administration and now president biden has signaled that he wants to cut defense spending after inflation. exactly the wrong approach. no serious strategy for our competition with massive foreign powers could lead the u.s. armed force, their tools, and their resources out of the conversation in a meaningful way. i hope and expect we'll have a number of further votes on important amendments before there would be any amendment to shut off debate on this wide -- attempt to shut off debate on this wide ranging measure. the presiding officer: the

leadership time is reserved. morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of s. 1260 which the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 58, s. 1260, a bill to establish a new directorate for technology and innovation in the national science foundation and so forth and for other purposes. mr. durbin: madam president? the presiding officer: the majority whip. mr. durbin: madam president, if you've been involved in illinois politics or government in the last 40 years or you've called my office in springfield any time in the last 24 years, there's a good chance you know a fellow i'm about to speak about this afternoon -- this afternoon -- this morning -- this afternoon. for those who haven't been lucky enough to meet him yet, let me tell you about my friend, one of the best people i've ever known. his name is bill houlihan. bill came to work in my -- on my

first senate cane in 1996. -- campaign in 1996. when we won i asked him to be my staff director for 96 counties. he's been with me ever since. now he is state director of the entire state. whenever i can attend an event in illinois, bill is the person i turn to i don't have to write any speech for him and i don't have to check on what he said. people know bill speaks for me and i have complete confidence in his judgment and integrity. everybody seems to know him. just try going into a grocery store with bill houlihan in springfield, illinois. be prepared for delays as everyone needs to talk to him or to thank him for something that he might have done. thanks for helping my mom get her social security. thanks for helping my dad with the veterans administration. thanks for helping to get that passport so my daughter could go away to school. thanks for helping the local

union get the project that creates the jobs here in our community. over the years bill has helped thousands of people find jobs and provide for their families. he knows about the dignity of work. he does whatever he can to help whomever he can with no expectation of any recognition. bill started as profession -- his professional life in 1981, fresh out of eastern illinois university. he was the class president. his first job was with the illinois education associate. they send him into a david and goliath battle scene in peoria, illinois where they're trying to convince the local teachers to sign up with the i.e.a. they hired bill six weeks before the crucial election and sent him into peoria, his first campaign for a union. see, bill had worked on

political campaigns for his dad and i'll talk about those in a minute. but when he got down to peoria, a place where had never lived, everybody knew him. and whenever he went up and introduced himself as bill houlihan, they'd say, are you the son of bill houlihan? and he said no, i'm the son of john houlihan. and puzzling for a while as to why he kept getting that question. turns out that he had exactly the same name as peoria's long time venerable tv weather caster bill houlihan. when as a young union organizer, bill showed up. puzzled teachers always said, are you sure you're not related to bill howl handle. our bill houlihan was no tv personality but teachers quickly learned that he cared about them and he knew his stuff. just as important, he understands haw to build political organization -- how to build political organizations and campaigns and to help

everyday people. thank goodness for me he knows how to win. i.a.e. won the election in a close victory back in the day. it was the first of many election campaign victories for bill houlihan. bill and his wife, cindy, are the parents of four children, but they did it the hard way. one set of triplets and a bonus baby born 22 months later. mariah, john, grant, neal are all grown up now but when they were younger, at the start of every school year, their teachers would often ask them, is bill houlihan your dad? that question was followed with the teachers telling stories about bill and how he'd helped them. this young unknown organizer had become a legend in his own right. these stories were the only way the houlihan kids learned about what their dad did for a living. he never bragged on himself. he was too modest.

driving around the state of illinois for over 20 years with bill houlihan, i've heard a the love stories. -- heard a lot of stories. i think the thing that impressed me the most was when he talked about his dad. what a remarkable man. and i was lucky to know him. john houlihan was born in a section of chicago which describes where you might find it, it's called back in the yards. that is stockyards. in that section of the city, immigrant families got their start and worked in some of the hardest jobs in chicago. john's father was a slaughterhouse worker. john himself grew up on the south side of chicago in that area. and his dream came true. as an irish catholic kid, he was admitted to notre dame university. can i tell you what a big deal

that is? still today but for the kids in those parishes to consider going to notre dame was nothing short of a miracle. so john houlihan, bill's father, who is 6 foot 4 incidentally, was going to try out for the basketball team at notre dame university. an absolute dream come true. but there was an intervening event, madam president, which you will appreciate. it was called pearl harbor. john houlihan, bill's dad, had to drop out of notre dame university to enlist in the united states marines. he served in many campaigns and as his 21st birthday approached, his mom and dad sent him a little gift, a belt. it was small enough that it could make it through the mail. at least he knew they were thinking of him on his birth detail. he was -- birthday. he was embarking on the battle

of booingenville on his first birthday, the island in the south pacific. a grenade explosion ripped through his left leg in that battle. lucky for him he pulled off the belt and applied it as a turn cet -- tourniquet. it saved his life but not his leg. it was amputated at the hip. the allied forces won that battle. john houlihan spent a year and a half recovering in veterans hospitals. he left the marines with a chest full of medals, including three bronze stars, a marine corps medal and of course a purple heart. went back to chicago. one leg, an artificial leg, and a cane or crutch. he went to a dance in the basement of st. gabriel's catholic church on the chicago's south side. and he met his future wife

vernele. they had eight kids together. bill was the middle child, the fourth of the eight kids. amazingly his dad, despite that devastating injury, wanted to get involved in politics. he moved to park forest, illinois, just south of chicago to raise a family in a larger house. as you can imagine. and decided to run for the illinois general assembly in 1964. i've got a picture here i want to show you. that's john houlihan, bill's dad. that's his brother mike. bill is over here at the age of 10. his dad was elected to the general assembly. he served with some of the giants in illinois political history, my friend paul sigh

lon, adlai stevenson, harold washington. john houlihan fit right in. as an amputee in a time before americans with disabilities act, john houlihan knew that they would applaud john on memorial day and veterans day, but it was hard as heck for a disabled vet, really severely disabled like john houlihan to get a job. he fought for those disabled vets just like himself. and so much so that when he came to the illinois general assembly in springfield, the black caucus invited him to serve as a member. they knew that he appreciated what discrimination was all about. he accepted the invitation as an honor. years later when his son bill houlihan who grew up, was working in that same illinois state senate, black caucus asked that he be assigned to them as a staff member because they knew his reputation, bill houlihan's

reputation for being willing to fight for the underdog. john houlihan served in the general assembly for eight years before turning his full attention to veterans' rights. he served with the illinois department of veterans affairs, the veterans administration here in washington, and the cook county veterans assistance commission. his young son, bill, was watching him throughout this life experience, and i know he came to appreciate his dad's courage and determination; that he was going to build a family and a life despite his serious disability. he also knew what it was like for his dad. i remember his dad -- a world war ii vet. we look today to amputees who have the good fortune, thank goodness, of modern prosthetics, even computer-driven devices to help them lead as normal a life

as possible. that wasn't the luck of the world war ii vets. they were given some crude artificial legislative session, and he -- -- they were given some crude artificial legs, and they did their best. i can still picture his dad, lumbering around with this big wooden leg of his that he would just swing forward as he made it with his cane and made his life despite that handicap. now, bill's mom was a big influence on him as well. she might have been quieter than his dad but just as strong. think what kind of woman it was who would marry john houlihan, quickly returning from war trying to make a life. vernal houlihan was a kind, generous woman. no matter how tied money was, there was always one more place at the table.

the same courage and determination and the same sense of caring. the heart of every congressional office is something called casework. helping constituents untangle red tape caused by government bureaucracy or to help solve everyday problems. bill houlihan may be the only state director in had the senate who still does casework along with his colleagues in addition to his other duties. i can't count of number of people whose bills have been made lighter by bill houlihan. his day doesn't return until he returns calls. he treats every person with dignity, compassion, and respect. and he always makes time for them. when we would drive around the state, thousands and thousands of miles and reach the point where people could call him in his car, the phone never stopped. and many times i said to bill,

why don't you pick up on that when we get back to springfield tomorrow? no, he said. i knew he was going to call, this buddy of mine. he calls me every day. just wants to chat for just a few minutes. i'll be done, boss, in just a minute. and he'd take the call. many people call him just to hear his friendly voice. he has fans the likes of which i wish i had some days. a lot of chiefs of staff would think twice about that approach to the job, but not bill. that's just who he is. our office in springfield is located in the same block as abraham lincoln's home. that neighborhood is part of the national park service. when bill walks down the block, he greets every park ranger by name and they knee him by name -- they know him by name. it's like that wherever we go. illinois is filled with young leaders all over the state, women and men, black, white, and brown had didn't know they could

be a leader until they met bill houlihan. he is one of the best talent scouts and coaches i've ever known. he boosts the confidence of everyone who works for him or with him. he chris crosses the state of illinois in his dark blue minivan -- they call it the houlivan. the miles he puts on the van would take him to the moon. he knows every mile marker on every highway by heart. he has at last count 47,000 contacts in his palm pilot -- yes, he still has a palm pilot. i think he knows 20,000 of them by heart. he has an encyclopedic mind and shares everything he's learned with anyone who might benefit from his knowledge. in between organizing for the i.e.a. and joining my staff, a

bill work as a legislative director for senator carol moseley brown, the first woman of color to serve in the senate. one of these being pes here was the early days when he was just getting started as an organizer, hair much darker than it is today. now let me show you a more recent appearance. this is bill. he's speaking at the women's march in springfield in 2017. usually he is very soft-spoken, until he gets in front of a microphone. that's when he turns up the volume. oh, there is one other time. if he is watching his fighting irish and they score a touch down. always, always bill houlihan is the voice for people whose hopes and needs aren't heard enough within the halls of the senate or the halls of power. he has a voice of compassion, encouragement, wisdom, and

decency. loretta and i are lucky to call bill and cindy some of our best and dearest friends. so it is hard to say that this is his last day on the job with the united states senate. it hurts to lose a montana had a has i have goin' me -- it hurts to lose a man who has given me the best years of his life. it is going to take a big toll on my office, my politics, and my life. but i can guarantee you that i will be calling bill just as often as i always have. he may not be on the payroll, but i know he'll take my call. bill and cindy want to move on to the next chapter in their lives. that's understandable. i'm sure it's going to include some traveling and especially time with their kids and grandkids. and bill, god bless him, just volunteered again to once again become the chairman of the illinois democratic party, a post he held years ago.

above all, i know that bill will continue to help everyone he can in every way he can because that is who he is and always has been. bill, i hope you're watching. cindy, too. thank you. i couldn't have done it without you. loretta and i wish you and cindy and your whole family good health and happiness in all the years to come. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from hawaii. ms. hirono: i ask unanimous consent to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. hirono: madam president, i have one request for a committee to meet during today's session of the senate. it has the approval of the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. ms. hirono: madam president, i rise today in support of the nomination for kristen clarke to be assistant attorney general for the justice department's civil rights division. in the four and a half months since she was nominated, my republican colleagues and their right-wing allies have engaged in a coordinated smear campaign to distort kristen clarke's

record. it is past time to set things straight. kristen clarke is a supremely capable and qualified nominee to lead the civil rights division. i would argue that she is among the most well-credentialed and qualified nominees ever to serve in this role. during her career, she served as a trial attorney in the division's voting section, a prosecutor in the division's criminal section, an assistant counsel at the naacp legal defense and education fund, and later as a coordinator of a political participation group. as a civil rights chief of the new york state attorney general's civil rights bureau, and as president and executive director of the lawyers committee for civil rights under law, one of the nation's preeminent civil rights organizations. kristen clarke's credentials for this job are unimpeachable. unable to undermine her

nomination on the merits, senate republicans have engaged in a vicious smear campaign against kristen clarke because they are afraid she'll actually do her job. they are afraid she'll enforce our civil rights laws, challenge discriminatory voting laws, combat systemic racism and policing, and protect the lgbtq community. this work is urgently needed after the civil rights division endured four years of intentional neglect and outright hostility during the trump administration. during his four years in office, the trump administration brought only a single case -- one -- under the voting rights act, even as states like georgia, ohio, and wisconsin worked to suppress the votes by targeting people of color. the previous administration also effectively ended the use of

consent decrease to bring police departments into compliance with the constitution. it abandoned this critical tool at the worst possible moment, as the nation watched black americans like george floyd and briana taylor killed by officers sworn to protect and serve. president she was asked to leadl rights division because she is the leader we need at this moment but for the past four and a half months my republican colleagues have tried to tear down this highly qualified woman of color with unfounded smears and outright lies. they have outrage over a satirical letter ms. clarke wrote as an undergrad at hazard in 1994, over 25 years ago. i don't recall any comparable republican outrage when michael chunkaili, then a practicing

attorney for decades, disparaged president obama as a, quote, un-american impostor to bows to arab sheiks and other world leaders, end quote. instead, they confirmed him to a lifetime appointment as a judge in the eastern district of texas. senate republicans have also tried to paint ms. clarke as some or sort of anti-semite, agn reaching back 25 years to criticize a speaker ms. clarke invited to campus as an undergrad. they conveniently -- they conveniently ignore that ms. clarke has addressed their concerns head-on and demonstrated a long track record of defending religious rights throughout her career. her work in this area has earned her the support of the national council of jewish women and the antidefamation league, among other organizations. and if we needed any more evidence to rebut this

outrageous claim, we should all look to the words of attorney general merrick garland who forcefully said, quote, i'm a pretty good judge of what an anti-semite is, and i do not believe she is an anti-semite, end quote. republicans are also trying to derail kristen clarke's nomination by pushing the lie that she supports defunding the police. it doesn't matter how many times they repeat the lie. it will never be true. ms. clarke has clearly expressed her support for shifting resources to social workers and mental health professionals so that police officers are no longer called upon to address every problem in society. this is not defunding the police, no matter what twisted definition is used. as the senate judiciary committee prepared to vote on ms. clarke's nomination, several republicans took this baseless criticism to a pathetic,

ridiculous new low. the junior senator from texas claimed that voting for ms. clarke and previously voting to confirm vanita gupta as associate attorney general put, quote, every single democratic member of the united states senate on record supporting abolishing, abolishing the police, end quote. abolishing the police. that's what he said. not defunding, not reforming. abolishing. what a crock. unfortunately, we've come to expect these laughable exaggerations from our colleague from texas. he would rather smear a nominee with baseless charges than engage with the facts, because neither kristen clarke nor vanita gupta has ever supported abolishing the police. neither of them has said anything remotely close to this. if they had, i'm sure it would come as news to the fraternal order of police, the major county sheriffs of america, and

the international association of chiefs of police, all who endorsed vanita gupta's nomination. you might also want to ask the major city chiefs association and national association of black law enforcement executives why they endorsed kristen clarke if she is looking to put their members out of work. the fact is she is not. this smear is only one example of the baseless personal attacks kristen clarke has endured by those seeking to derail her nomination. this week, the senate can and should repudiate the vicious right-wing smear campaign against ms. clarke and confirm her as the next leader of the civil rights division. madam president, i yield the floor. and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. schumer: madam president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: now, madam president, yesterday was the last day that members of the national guard were stationed at the capitol. in the wake of january 6, they've all done -- they have

all done us an extraordinary service, providing an additional layer of security here. i want to thank every one of them on behalf of the senate and the entire capitol complex. it was never our intention to have an element of the u.s. military on guard at the capitol for an indefinite period. it was always a temporary solution to a temporary security threat caused by the former president, a reality acknowledged by the house and senate minority leaders in the immediate aftermath of january 6 but not much since. going forward, we must establish and maintain a critical balance between security and access. the capitol is a place that belongs to the people. we want visitors and tourists to be able to come and go. we want constituents to be able to meet their representatives and make their voices heard. we also have an obligation to make everyone, members, staff, media, employees of the capitol feel safe when they come to

work. our senate committees and the new team at the sergeant at arms are working very hard to strike that perfect balance. we thank once again the national guard for helping us protect this place during a very difficult period for our democracy. now, on senate business, this week the senate will consider at least two nominations for important positions in the executive branch. chiquita brooks-lasure to be the next administrator of the centers for medicare and medicaid and kristen clarke to be the next assistant attorney general. ms. clarke would become the first woman and the first woman of color to formally lead the justice department's civil rights division since it was established in 1957. i look forward to confirming both nominees this week. the senate will also continue its work on the u.s. innovation and competition act, the largest stand alone investment in american science and technology in decades.

with a once-in-a-generation investment in national science foundation, the department of energy, the department of commerce, and other vital entities, this legislation will set our country on a path to outinnovate, outproduce and outcompete the world in the industries of the future. as the week goes on we'll consider a number of amendments from both sides of the aisle as well as a managers' amendment to bring together a package of bipartisan changes to the bill. this is regular order in action. the bill itself is the product of at least six senate committees and includes input from nearly every member of the senate. as promised, we are working in a bipartisan way in a much more open way than the senate used to act to allow amendments and debate. when a bill passes 22-4 out of one of its major committees and 21-1 out another, it is truly bipartisan. and we should be able to move this bill forward without any dilatory obstruction. with so much cooperation happening, i see no reason why

we can't finish the legislation by the end of the week. so far this bill has flown a bit under the radar but it's an incredibly important piece of legislation. at its core the u.s. innovation and competition act is about maintaining america's role as the global economic leader. few issues could be more important. just because it may have its effect two, three, four, five years from now and not the dare after it passes doesn't mean that it isn't one of the most important pieces of legislation that we could pass. the next century will be won or lost on the battleground of technological innovation. the country that leads the world in science and tech will create a generation, millions of good-paying jobs, economic growth, and prosperity for its citizens with profound implications for national security as well. we want american workers, american businesses, american values to lead the way in the 21st century just as they did

in the 20th century. that's what the innovation and competition act is all about. i look forward to working with members from both parties to complete this legislation by the end of the week. now, on the -- on a final matter, the senate will soon consider bipartisan legislation passed by the house to create an independent commission to investigate and report on the january 6 attack on the capitol. i've already taken procedural steps to make the legislation available for consideration on the senate floor. i will bring the bill forward for a vote very soon. i'll have more to say on that in the coming days. the formation of the commission is more important now than it's ever been. in the months since january 6, washington republicans have tried to rewrite history and recast the attack on january 6 as little more than peaceful protests that got out of hand. one republican member said the rioters were more like a group

of, quote, normal tourists. did you see the tapes? did you see the films, america? those were normal tourists? another went so far as to say the mob, not the staff who were terrorized or the police who were brutalized were the real victims of january 6. give me a break. for the sake of our democracy, it's crucial to establish an independent and trusted record of what really transpired. according to an ipso poll today, 56% of republicans believe the election was rigged. 53% of republicans believe donald trump is the true president, not joe biden. that's what the big lie has caused. the majority of one of america's two major political parties doesn't believe our president is the actual president. now more than ever, both parties must stand up to the big lie and shine a light on the truth of the 2020 elections and what happened on january 6.

and yet it seems our republican colleagues would rather avoid the subject entirely. the republican leader, after moving the goalpost week after week, announced his opposition to the commission, despite the fact that democrats agreed to every single request made by the house republican leader. one republican senator said this weekend that, quote, it was too early to establish a commission. another admitted that many republicans opposed the commission because they feared it would hurt the republican message in the midterm elections. talk about saying the quiet part out loud. the prevailing view among republicans seem to be that we should sweep the big lie and all of january 6 under the rug, like it never happened. look, i'm sorry that some republicans believe that a bipartisan commission -- sorry, i'm sorry that some republicans believe that a bipartisan investigation of the attack on

our democracy is inconvenient for their midterm campaigns, but democratic -- but the democratic-led congress of the united states is not are going to sweep january 6 under the rug. we're going to vote on the january 6 commission in the senate, and the american people will see where every member stands -- on the side of truth or on the side of donald trump's big lie. i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. grassley: i ask that the calling of the quorum be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: each year the month of may is recognized as national foster care month. i thank my colleagues for once again unanimously passing a resolution recognizing and bringing awareness to the experiences of youth and families in the foster care system. this month, organizations in iowa and around the entire country have been working to support youth in foster care and the foster parents who open their homes to the kids in need. and they deserve this recognition. in 2019, the most recent year for which data is available, there were over 426,000 kids in

foster care in the united states in iowa alone. there were -- in iowa alone, there were almost 6,000. as stated in our resolution, congress must continue to work towards real solutions for these young people because they face trauma, abuse, and neglect and, obviously, there's a lot of them that get loving care as well. in recent years, lots of changes have been made to the way that the child welfare works p congress passed the family-first prevention act in 2018. the goal of that act was to provide more services to families before removing children from the home -- before that action had to be taken. and that's where you ought to

start -- preserve the family as much as you can as long as the children are not being mistreated. this bill also seeks to help kids who age out of foster care, to have these kids have access to more support and successfully transition to adulthood and to independence. i was glad to support this legislation, and i hope that, as it is implemented, we see positive outcomes for these young people and their families. all children, no matter what their circumstances, deserve a permanent, loving home and consistent, caring adults in their lives. and when you visit with these young people, some of them tell us about being in two or three

school systems in a year. so obviously probably in two or three different homes in a year. and what you hear from them is, i'd like to have a mom and dad. i'd like to have a home. i'd like to go to the same school for the whole year. they want some consistency and some permanency. i guess that's what it all adds up to. research has shown that the presence of just one caring adult who is available for advice, for support, and for guidance can make a meaningful difference for children in foster care. for some young people, this may be a foster parent who maintains a relationship with a child even after temporary placement is over. for other kids, this may mean an

aunt or an uncle, a family member who are willing to shoulder the responsibilities of providing a loving home. others may benefit from a court-appointed special advocate -- as we know as casa -- or a guardian ad lim. these are volunteers assigned to be a child's advocate. for a system designed to protect children, often the child welfare system does not give much opportunity for a child's voice to be heard. and it is a very important voice to listen to. casa's are often the only adults in the court proceedings who are exclusively advocating for what the youth in foster care wants. i'm happy that this year for the

first time, may 18 was labeled national casa/gal volunteer day to honor the service of these volunteers. i salute all those who work tirelessly to support kids in foster care in iowa and nationwide. when i founded the senate caucus on foster youth in 2009, the special focus was to hear directly from the young people themselves. older youth in foster care and adults who experience foster care as a child can speak to what worked for them and, of course, what didn't work. they should always have a seat at the table. over and over again i've heard the same thing from kids in foster care, so i'm repeating

what i said previously. they want a mom hand a dad. they want a family. and they want a place to call home. for some kids, this goal can be met by their families getting help with mental illness, substance abuse or housing. for others, the dream of a family can be found through foster care and eventually adoption. for others, kinship care provides an opportunity for stability and permanency. there is no one-size-fits-all approach, no silver bullet that can help kids the same way. but there is one common outcome that we can strive for -- we should be very -- we should be wary of attempts to undo progress that has been made in

speeding up adoptions and providing permanency for these children. the goal should always be to protect kids from neglect and abuse and, at the same time, improve their well-being. move ahead -- i move ahead now, congress must continue to work to find better solutions and secure better outcomes for youth in foster care. once again, i thank my colleagues for passing this resolution recognizing may as foster care month. i yield the floor and i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. cornyn: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: i had sea ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: madam president, a few hours ago i had the pleasure of joining secretary raimondo and senator warner of virginia for a tour of the micron technologies manufacturing plant just outside washington, d.c., in manassas, virginia. this is one of the great companies with facilities that produces semiconductors on u.s. soil. secretary raimondo, senator warner and i were given a behind-the-scenes tour of how these advanced chips where semiconductor are made and we discuss some of the reasons why it is more expensive to build these facilities in the united states.

the average american uses countless products every day that could not function without semiconductors. everything from cell phones to televisions to cars, dishwashers , chips underpin our most used technology. as we become more technology-dependent, it's going to get nothing but more important. but it's not just consumer products. cell towers, water treatment plants, agriculture equipment, our energy grid, semiconductors make all of that possible. they play a huge role in our national defense. when we send our troops on a mission by land, sea, air, or even in cyberspace, they need the best equipment available. now more than ever, the equipment can't function without these chips. just look at israel's iron dome

missile defense system. this highly sophisticated system of rocket interceptors is a great example of the role that chips play in national security, not only ours but of our allies as well. we know the number of civilian casualties that would be caused if not for the protection of the iron dome for the israeli people. i asked my staff to find out, how many semiconductors are actually in one of those interceptors that knocks out one of those rockets coming from hamas. what i found out is that every single one of these interceptors contains more than 750 differently semiconductors. so it's not hyperbole to say there are life-and-death consequences to a reliable semiconductor supply chain, but right now we are in a seriously vulnerable situation. over the last two decades the u.s. has gone from producing roughly a quarter of the world's

semiconductors to about 12%. at the same time china, our rival, our competitor that we are talking about a lot this week and last, china's gone from manufacturing zero chips to now 16% of the world's supply, and it plans to invest another $1.4 trillion in semiconductor technologies. right now china is building 17 fabs or manufacturing facilities in china. we are maybe thinking about building one through taiwan's semiconductor in arizona. but it depends on our willingness and ability to support that domestic manufacturing, whether or not they actually complete that currently planned manufacturing facility. but when we're looking to our adversaries to supply the technology to power our most critical devices and systems, it's a huge problem. the global shortage we're seeing

right now is a glimpse of what things could look like, and worse. the lack of supply has forced companies across the full impact, full range of impacted industries to scale back production or hit pause altogether. we've seen that particularly in the car manufacturing business. this shortage has led to some serious consequences. if companies have to shut down production, which is happening right now, due to lack of supply of semiconductors, there are hardworking americans who aren't able to earn a paycheck. this impact, as i suggested, is now being felt by auto workers across the country. but we have every expectation that in a few months things will get back to normal. those production lines will start back up, workers will be back on the job, and life will carry on, hopefully, as normal. but the bigger question we need to ask is how would we fare if

our supply chain to advance semiconductors was cut off entirely. let's say it's another pandemic or a natural disaster or, heaven forbid, a military conflict in the south china sea. nearly 90% of the world's chips are made in southeast asia. if that supply was cut off for any reason, what would we do? the consequences wouldn't be limited to a few bells and whistles on new cars. it would impact our missile defense system, the f-35, fifth generation joint strike fighter, advanced weapons systems, quantum computing, the full range of equipment and technologies our national defense depends on. if we don't have the ability to provide our troops with the technology they need to be successful, what would we do? well, the risks of carrying on business as usual are far too high for us to even contemplate that scenario.

there's a clear need to invest in domestic semiconductor manufacturing and secure perhaps our most vulnerable supply chain. as we continue to debate the most effective ways to confront threats from china and bolster our national and economic security, there's no question that funding to shore up domestic semiconductor manufacturing is a must-do. last year senator warner, the senior senator from virginia, and i introduced the chips for america act, and it was adopted by an amendment to the national defense authorization act with broad bipartisan support on a vote of 96-4, a rare thing these days. that bill became law earlier this year. now we have the important job of providing the funding for it, something i hope we can achieve through the legislation that's before the senate today. during the committee consideration of a bill, an

amendment was added that would apply the controversial prevailing wage language to this portion of the bill. considering the current wages of u.s. semiconductor manufacturing companies, it really is a nonissue. but what is an issue is expansion of davis-bacon prevailing wage provisions not from public works, but to privately built works, private companies. and i believe this inclusion of this provision includes some roadblocks on the way to passage of this final legislation. so last week i introduced an amendment to strike this unnecessary and divisive provision and protect the broad bipartisan support this legislation has already received. a controversial provision that doesn't even enact any real change is hardly a reason to let funding go down the drain, and

it really is just an unnecessary distraction. we don't need any other speed bumps in our ability to pass this important bipartisan legislation. i hope our colleagues will continue to work with us in good faith to reach a compromise that will reach -- that will earn broad bipartisan support. last year the chips for america act, as i said, passed with a vote 96-4, and there's no reason why this critical funding that we'll be voting on this week should be politicized now. and finally, madam president, on another matter, this evening the senate will take up a procedural vote on the president's nominee for the centers for medicare and medicaid services. c.m.s., as we all know, plays a vital role in providing health care to our most vulnerable populations. more than four million texans, including half of our children, depend on the stability of our state's medicaid program to provide health care for them and

their families. and in states across the country, medicare funding is vital to the health of our most vulnerable friends and neighbors. for everything from an emergency room visit to mental health care. but that could soon change. the biden administration has taken the unprecedented step of rescinding an agreement with my state and the previous administration to maintain the stability of our state's medicaid program. under this agreement, texas was set to receive approximately $11 billion a year over the next decade to provide health care for our underserved population. low-income individuals and those in rural areas are especially reliant on this funding, as are those who need mental health care. mental and behavioral providers alone receive about $300 billion a year. when asked for the reasoning

behind this dangerous and, frankly, shocking move, rescinding a prior agreement extending our 1115 waiver, c.m.s. said it was to correct their administrative error, their error. but two anonymous federal health care officials, i believe, did something that's all too rare here in washington. they actually said the truth. they explained the real reasoning to "the washington post." they said it was done, quote, to push state officials toward accepting the affordable care act's mandate expansion. so in effect, madam president, the administration is doing something that the supreme court of the united states said it cannot do, which is hold a gun to the head of the states and force them to accept the medicaid expansion. so now what they couldn't do under the supreme court's decision, they're trying to do now by holding our health care hostage in order to force the

expansion of medicaid into our state. that's a choice left up to the governor and our elected legislature, not one to be made by bureaucrats with the department of health and human services, or c.m.s. and while patients in texas may be the first ones caught in this political game, i have no expectation that they will be the last. as a matter of fact, there are only four states that don't have approved or pending 1115 waivers, which is what we're talking about. four, only four don't have those. so every other state beyond those four could be in the same situation my state is in in the coming months, whether it's florida, tennessee, north carolina, south carolina, missouri, idaho, the list of states that could be impacted by this life-and-death game of political chicken is a long one. of course this all comes at a time when our health care system

is already in fragile condition after more than a year of battling covid-19. and the patients whose health care relies on the stability of the medicaid system are those who face the biggest challenges during the pandemic. i've asked the biden administration to work with the state to ensure the millions of impacted individuals won't lose access to health care, but so far there's been little or no progress. the administration has been unable to provide me any assurance that an agreement could be reached before the end of this fiscal year, something that would have dire consequences on our providers, and especially those until behavioral and mental health. to state the obvious, the nominee to lead c.m.s., ms. brooks-lasure did not personally rescind the texas medicaid waiver. as a matter of fact, she hasn't been confirmed yet, so she couldn't. but before her nomination can

advance, members of senate deserve a commitment from the administration that it won't try to force the hand of other states, including texas, by putting the health care of millions of vulnerable citizens on the line. if we don't stand up now and push back on this reckless move, who will be next? which state will be next? how far will the administration go to force states into enacting laws that they do not want to enact? c.m.s. funding is vital to the health care of millions of my constituents and to the stability of our entire health care system. c.m.s. cannot be used as the administration's strong-arm to coerce states into accepting its political demands, which is all this is. i appreciate ms. brooks-lasure's experience in working with states to develop these type of waivers and her willingness to meet with me on this issue, but frankly, this is a decision being made above her in the food

chain. but my state has not so far received an assurance that this action will be rectified, and it looks like the administration is intent on pulling the rug out from under our poorest and most needy patients. for that reason, madam president, i cannot support this nominee, and i urge my colleagues to stand with me, and in doing so stand up for the health care of their most vulnerable constituents too, and pushing the administration to find an alternate and sates fabtry -- satisfactory path forward. if the administration will take aim at the health care of four million vulnerable texans, they will do it to anyone. madam president, i yield the floor.

a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mr. tuberville: thank you, madam president. in a week from today we'll be celebrating memorial day. i know folks back home probably have some fun things planned for the long weekend -- cookouts, family gatherings, maybe even a trip to the beach. but while memorial day is a joyous, carefree weekend for some, many families, it's a reminder that what they lost. a father, a mother, husband, or a wife, a son, daughter, brother, sister, a family member, a friend that cannot be replaced. our gold star families have given a great sacrifice to our country. i've been there myself. my father served in world war ii driving a tank across europe. he earned five bronze stars and a purple heart. after war, he died on active duty and i still miss him today. i'm forever grateful that he,

like so many folks from his generation, put on that uniform. they enlisted not knowing whether they'd ever come home. many of them hundreds of thousands did not. but they knew what they were doing was worth the danger. they knew the united states of america and all she stood for was worth defending. they earned the title of the greatest generation. i will be introducing a resolution this week honoring the immense sacrifice of the greatest generation. and not just those who put on the uniform. this resolution recognizes the millions of americans who worked in the factories, bought war bonds, and donated their pots, pans, and more to a war effort. we owe the greatest generation a debt we can never fully repay.

i want to take a moment to thank mr. sam romano from investavia -- from vestavia hills, alabama, for his contributions in advocating for this resolution. today we have more than a million active duty service men and women who continue to defend our freedoms. they, too, stand ready to answer the call when evil threatens america. they, too, stand ready to give their lives to defend their country if need be. the united states stands on the foundation of generations of service men and women who gave their lives to defend their country. their sacrifices created the most free and prosperous country in the history of the world. we're not perfect, far from it, but our unique system of

government is distinguished from any other of the people, by the people, and for the people. that's why i stand for the flag and for our national anthem, because for the last 250 years, men and women have given their lives for all this flag represents. they gave their lives to defend our right to make our country better. the continued service of our military allows us to have the -- that barbecue this weekend. their service allows us to gather freely with family and friends, to think, to worship, and live how we want to. memorial day reminds us that our freedom and prosperity comes at a cost. so for this upcoming memorial day weekend, i'd encourage all of us to take a moment to remember what we're celebrating.

the brave men and women who laid down their lives for ours. let's honor our soldiers, -- soldiers' sacrifices by keeping our country strong, and honor the values they gave their lives to defend. madam president, i notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mrs. blackburn: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mrs. blackburn: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are. mrs. blackburn: i ask that we dispense with the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. blackburn: thank you, madam president. this month is military appreciation month. it's a month when we let our soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines know just how grateful we are for their service and, madam president, we are grateful for the service that you gave our nation in uniform. we thank you for that. tennessee is home to three major military installations and numerous other guard installations, so for us, military appreciation month actually lasts all year long. i'd like to start off by welcoming the 101st airborne division, second squadron,

17th calvary regiment back stateside following a nine-month rotational deployment to korea. we are so happy to have them back home. in more exciting news out of fort campbell, this thursday, sergeant major veronica knapp will become the first woman to serve as a command sergeant major of a u.s. army division. she will assume responsibility as the senior enlisted advisor of the 101st airborne division. on behalf of the entire tennessee delegation, i offer my congratulations and wish her success in all that is yet to come. the service members stationed at fort campbell have really had a very busy past year. starting last month, we began deploying soldiers to help with

covid-19 response operations across the northeast, including members from the 501st medical company, the 531st hospital center, and the 101st division sustainment brigade. boston and new york city were among the most severely affected areas in the country, and if you ask the health care workers and city officials in those areas if tennessee service members made a difference, they will tell you yes, without a doubt. last year, many of our tennessee national guard members also joined the fight against covid-19. the 164th airlift wing transported desperately needed p.p.e. all the way from italy to health care workers across this entire country. the 118th i.s.r. group, along with five other air national guard targeting units, produced

over 70% of the u.s. air force's targeting material, all while providing continuity to active duty units. i want to keep bragging on our guard members because they really have made an impact, especially when it comes to getting testing and vaccination centers up and running. they set up more static vaccination sites than any other state. as of march of this year, they had set up double the number of sites that were running in the next most successful state. job well done. they directly helped more than one million tennesseans stay healthy through the pandemic. it was a great effort, and we thank them for that. i'm sorry to say that the pandemic wasn't the only natural disaster tennesseans had to deal with over the past year, but

when tornadoes destroyed multiple counties across west and middle tennessee, the national guard was right there to help. and when blizzards shut down half the state, the guard kept water flowing in memphis, repaired communications infrastructure for first first responders in rutherford county and found shelters for displaced families in lynchburg and manchester. when you're on the outside looking in on a natural disaster, the last thing you want to hear is that local officials had to call in the national guard, but i will tell you, when you're sitting in the aftermath, there is no more hopeful sight than a vehicle full of guardsmen pulling into town, ready to help. that peace of mind, of course, comes at a cost. our service members go where they are told to go and do the jobs they are told to do without

hesitation. why? because they have accepted that the cause of freedom is more important than the freedom they sacrifice when they put on the uniform. their families have accepted this, too. and when you're a military family, the uniform comes first. this is why every year when we re-up defense funding, we put special focus on military families and their needs. for example, two years ago, we established a pilot program to offer professional license reciprocity for military spouses who want to continue working after moving across state lines. last year, we increased funding for that program. we have also continued our support for the preservation of the force and families program which helps special operators process the aftereffects of their missions. last month, madam president, you

and i introduced a bill called the military hunger prevention act. this is an incredibly important piece of legislation that would create a basic needs allowance for low-income military families. the reason this is so important is because existing benefits programs, like snap and free school lunches, include housing allowances and other military benefits in revenue calculations. although it's obvious that this only creates the appearance of higher income, the programs aren't designed to allow an exception. once we pass this bill and i am sure that we will, these families will be able to use their allowance to buy groceries instead of relying on food pantries to put dinner on the table. this is what we should all be thinking about during military

appreciation month. renewing the commitment we've made to take care of our service members both on and off the battlefield. we need to ask ourselves what are we doing to meet their practical needs, what are we doing to support their families, what are we doing to right unintended wrongs? it's the most important way we can recognize their extraordinary service to our nation. i yield the floor. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. wyden: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the following member from my personal office and finance committee teams be granted floor privileges for the remainder of

the congress. jake pazner, jonathan buyer, erik shontala, rugeth and marissa doweling. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. wyden: madam president, the senate is now debating the nomination of chiquita brooks-lasure to head the centers for medicare and medicaid services. and this is clearly one of the most important health care jobs in america. and ms. brooks-lasure brings decades of health policy experience toed medicaid services -- to the medicaid services and i think it would be fair to say that she has worked on health care from just about every angle short of scrubbing into the operating room herself.

and i'm going to talk in a minute about her qualifications, but i also want, as we start this discussion, to recognize that this is a job that requires urgent hands-on professionalism, exactly the kind brooks-lasure brings to this. we're obviously working on enormous challenges on the covid-19 pandemic. there are efforts by colleagues on both sides of the aisle on health care. and we in particular on this side want to expand health care coverage, bring down the cost of prescription medicine, bring the medicare guarantee into the 21st century. so the american people need a chief of medicare and medicaid as soon as possible. blocking this nomination slows

down important work that needs to be done. now, senators on the other side have objected to moving forward with the nomination. so i'm going to talk for just a few minutes about these concerns but first a little bit more about ms. brooks-lasure. starting out she worked at the office of management and budget on medicaid policy and the chip program, the childrens health insurance program. so she was long ago focused on trying to improve health care for the millions of americans who every single day walk an economic tightrope, balancing the food bill against the fuel bill and the fuel bill against health care costs. she was there for it. she then moved to the house ways and means committee as a senior member. she helped write portions of the affordable care act dealing with

expanding coverage and updating the medicaid guarantee. when the medical affordable care law became law, she played an important role in implementing the law. she was a leader in creating marketplaces for health insurance with strong, built-in consumer protections. she's been a leader when it comes to defending and expanding women's health care under the affordable care act and other essential programs. after leaving h.h.s., she went to the private sector and continued to work on policies that expand coverage and make health care more affordable. ms. brooks-lasure has the qualifications, the experience, and the know-how to run medicare and medicaid, and there are absolutely no questions about it. now, our colleague if texas, senator cornyn, has raised objections to moving the nomination forward.

his objection relates to a decision by the biden administration to rescind a medicaid policy waiver that the trump administration rushed to grant the state of texas in mid-january. there are a few key points mechanics ought to understand about this issue. first, nothing is going to change for health providers and patients in texas for more than a year as a result of this decision. that means there's plenty of time to work out a solution that doesn't get rushed and follows the right process with public comment. second, ms. brooks-lasure had nothing to do with the decision that senator cornyn is unhappy about. she wasn't on the job when it was made. third, she made clear in her finance committee hearing that she's committed to working on a bipartisan basis with state officials, and she said that to senator cornyn and other

republican members on this issue as well. she's got a track record and the experience to get that done. and, madam president, i want to state again to our colleague from texas and every member of the senate, i probably spent as much time as any member of the senate working on the issue that the senator from texas is concerned about. and that is the process for granting waivers. i authored what's called section 1332, the affordable care act, that was designed to say that progressive states that, for example, wanted to pursue a public option or aggregate medicare and medicaid money, they would have a chance to do it as long as they adhered to the guard rails. conservative states that sought to try their own approaches based on their ideas of a conservative approach to health care. could do it as long as they met

the coverage requirements of the a.affordable care act. i wanted to state again as i did in the finance committee to senator cornyn that i am going to work very closely with him after we confirm this nominee to address the issues that he discussed in the committee that has concerned him. every member who has issues with respect to waivers, i want them to know that there will be bipartisan interest in trying to bring people in their states together, adhere to the ideas in the affordable care act which states that states are free to pursue their own ideas for expanding coverage as long as they stay within the guard rails of the program. so we understand democrats and republicans aren't going to agree on every health policy

question. what i do know is ms. brooks-lasure is going to be the kind of c.m.s. administrator who can bring two sides together exactly as we envisioned in the affordable care act with the waiver law. and it's exactly as i've committed to working with senator cornyn on. the finance committee has demonstrated that it can work together on big issues. in 2017 the committee passed the chronic care act, which was a fundamental transformation of medicare. i've told my colleagues back when i was director of the great panthers, medicare was about acute care. there was part a. that was for hospitals. part b, that was for doctors. that was it. that was medicare. the first question on an exam is what's the different between part a and part b. that, madam president, isn't medicare anymore. medicare today is primarily about chronic disease. cancer and diabetes and heart

disease and strokes, chronic pulmonary disease. so the finance committee wrote the chronic care act on a bipartisan basis, but the trump administration put much of the work that was done and at that point chairman hatch was the chairman of the committee. "was the ranking democrat -- i was the ranking democrat. we worked in a bipartisan way. but the trump administration after the retirement of chairman hatch basically put everything on the back burner. when we confirmed ms. -- when we confirm ms. brooks-lasure and i'm convinced that she's going to be confirmed, she will work with democrats and republicans to make sure we're updating the medicare guarantee for this century and in particular, madam president, what that involves is making sure that there are more opportunities for those who receive traditional medicare to get the benefits of the chronic

care act. already the chronic care act works well for what's called medicare advantage. we need to do more to make sure it's available for those who receive traditional medicare. now, there are other issues the finance committee is working on that ms. brooks-lasure will play an important role on. improving mental health care because mental health care has gotten short shrift in america for far too long. we know that americans feel like they're getting mugged when they walk into a pharmacy and they go to the window to get their prescription medicines. we look, for example, at insulin. insulin prices have gone up 12 fold in recent years. the drug isn't 12 times better. it's the same drug. but they're getting clobbered because pharmaceutical companies can get away with it. so those are the kinds of practices that ms. brooks-lasure

is going to take on and do in a bipartisan way. the center for medicare and medicaid services is right at the center of taking on these and other important health care challenges. this critical agency, one of the most important places in american health care, needs a leader and they need one now. she is, in my view, an excellent nominee. she's going to work with both sides here in the senate, including on the issue our colleague senator cornyn has raised. and i want to restate again my interest in working with both ms. brooks-lasure and senator cornyn on this matter my colleague from texas has raised. we're going to be voting in a couple of minutes, colleagues, and i urge a strong vote for an eminent qualified nominee chiquita brooks-lasure and i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion: we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of executive calendar number 117, chiquita brooks-lasure of virginia to be administrator of the centers for medicare and medicaid services, signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense. senate that debate on the

nomination of chiquita brooks-lasure of virginia to be administrator of the centers for medicare and medicaid services shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: on this vote the yeas are 52. the nays are 43. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, department of health and human services, chiquita brooks-lasure of virginia to be administrator of the centers for medicare and medicaid services.

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator for new york jill jill are we in -- mrs. gillibrand: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are not. mrs. gillibrand: thank you. mr. president, i rise today to address the need to reform our military justice system.

just this month the department of defense released its annual report on sexual assault in the military. that report and more than a decade of data on sexual assault in the military shows a clear and disturbing trend. reports of sexual assault have increased virtually every single year and remain at record highs while prosecution and conviction rates have declined, including a shocking 10% point decline in the prosecution rate from last year. by every measure that you can imagine, we are moving in the wrong direction. congress has given the military more than a billion dollars, $500 million in fiscal year 2019 alone, enacted hundreds of provisions, and chartered special panels, commission, and advisory committees to address this problem.

not one of these steps have reduced the prevalence rate of sexual assault within the ranks. we are still getting reports like the one we got from fort hood which found that the world's largest army base was, quote, a permissive environment for sexual assault and sexual harassment. we are right where we started. nothing has changed. i have heard from too many survivors who have barely come forward in search of justice only to have their cases outright declined by the chain of command and then face more harassment and retaliation for reporting their assailant. we owe it to our service members to do more to prevent these crimes and properly prosecute them when they occur. our bill, the military justice improvement increasing prevention act would ensure that when these crimes are committed,

justice is delivered. it does so by taking the same approach to these cases that the military takes in almost every other area of operation. it puts highly technical workers in the hands of work, in the hands of trained specialists. this bi -- this bipartisan and commonsense reform moves the decision on whether to prosecute serious crimes to independent, trained, and professional military prosecutors while leaving misdemeanors and uniquely military crimes within the chain of command. in other words, it will let prosecutors prosecute and commanders command. by moving this work off of the commander's plate, it will empower command to focus on mission-critical activities and on rebuilding the trust among their ranks that we know is critical to military readiness. this bill is not political. it's about doing the right thing

for our service members who do so much for this nation. the military justice improvement and increasing prevention act has bipartisan, filibuster-proof support. it is supported by 63 senators including 42 democrats, two independents, and 19 republicans. and the majority of the senate armed services committee. if we brought this bill to the floor today, it would pass. we have the legislation and we have the votes. now we just need the will to act. i urge all of my colleagues to join me in working to pass this bill as quickly as possible. as this week's department of defense report makes clear, our service members do not have time to wait. i yield the floor to senator grassley. mr. grassley: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa.

mr. grassley: the time has come for this bill to pass. after eight years of senator gillibrand's work in this area, it proves that she's had a senator that doesn't give up, and it proves that she's had a senator that can bring bipartisanship to a city that needs more bipartisanship. so i, like her, call on my colleagues to pass this bill -- the military justice improvement and increasing prevention act -- by unanimous consent. i first joined senator gillibrand in advocating for this legislation in 2013, after truly horrifying reports out of the pentagon about the rate of sexual assault and other criminal offenses going unpunished. and a recommendation from a commission on how to improve the system. whether it's in the military or

whether it's outside the military, a crime is a crime, and it ought to be punished. it shouldn't be overlooked, as so often is what happens in the military. we've been pushing for this bill ever since, despite promises from the department of defense that they had everything under control. we heard time and time again about new initiatives to stop sexual assaults and harassments, and yet things are worse today than when we started out. they haven't worked. in the most recent review, almost 21,000 soldiers were victims of sexual assault. only 4% of the cases went to trial. 62% of those who reported sexual assault experienced retaliation -- retaliation just because you

shouldn't be hurt, just because you're in the military and people can get away with it. and in two-thirds of these cases, the retaliation comes from inside the chain of command. the department of defense has had more than enough time to try their way to fix this problem, and it's clear a new approach is needed. and it's the same approach that senator gillibrand is trying to get done in this body for the last eight years. and we've always been put off because of these promises that were never carried out. by moving the decision to prosecute out of the chain of command, perpetrators of sexual assault and other serious crimes will be held accountable and should be held accountable. survivors will have more confidence in the process. retaliation will be less likely. this year, there's a fresh

support for the effort. the new secretary of defense, secretary austan, has indicated that addressing this issue is a priority. a department of defense panel of experts that was convened recommended taking the decisions out of the chain of command. the president has signaled his support and the bill in the senate has over 60 bipartisan cosponsors, including my fellow senator from iowa, joan knee ernsts. we've been waiting almost a decade. there's no need to wait any longer. i urge my colleagues to show unanimous support for protecting our men and women in military and allow this bill to pass. after eight years, and a demonstrated need in the recent two or three years for bipartisanship, it's right here in this bill.

it deserves to be handled as a stand-alone piece of legislation. i'm glad that this bill earned the support of senator ernst, and she was key in getting the cloture-proof majority that we have for this bill, and i would now yield to senator ernst. ms. ernst: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. ms. ernst: yes, i want to thank my senior senator from iowa for being the lead republican on this bill, and i am rising today as well to support my colleague in her request today for consideration of the military justice improvement and increasing prevention act. our service men and women, all of them, are volunteers. they represent some of the best our nation has to offer. they choose to serve. they swear to protect against all enemies, foreign and

domestic, and to defend the constitution. in this day and age, they face many risks, but they should not face the risk of sexual assault from within their own ranks. for years, the military has struggled to reduce the number of sexual assaults within the ranks, yet we have seen little progress in defeating this scourge. the stories from survivors are heartbreaking. service members who are attacked by their own teammates, service members whose lives are turned upside down, service members who are abandoned by their chain of command, service members who receive no justice, and service members who are left with the scars, often physical but always

psychological, of a terrible experience. i know these stories not just from the retelling by survivors of sexual assault but from being a survivor of sexual assault myself. it is time we take new action to stop these attacks, to bring justice for the victims, and to prevent these actions going forward. our bill, with over 60 cosponsors -- republicans and democrats from all political philosophies and the endorsement of veterans groups, survivors groups, and individual service members, does that. and our bipartisan bill takes steps to ensure the unit commander is still involved and ass wear of what -- and aware of what is going on within the

unit. this bill also puts in place measures a for the prevention of sexual assault. it increases security on our bases and stations. it trains leaders from the top to the bottom on developing a better command climate. it reinforces training on prevention of sexual assault. mr. president, if a foreign power were to attack any of our service men and women overseas, there would be a stampede of senators coming to the floor and demanding action. now i hear only the footsteps of those coming to stop us from consideration of something that would help prevent attacks on our service men and women by one

of their own. it is time for action, and i urge my colleagues to pass this time agreement. and, mr. president, with that, a i yield to the senator from connecticut, senator blumenthal. mr. blumenthal: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. blumenthal: thank you, mr. president. i thank the senator from iowa, our colleague and friend, for those really eloquent and powerful remarks. and i thank her and our other colleague from iowa, who has been beside us from the very start of this cause, eight years or more ago. but, most important, i thank my colleague from new york, who has been unstoppable, steadfast, resolute in this cause, and we are here today with that overwhelming, bipartisan support because of her advocacy, her

eloquence and power. above all, we're here today because of survivors and victims who have come forward with tremendous courage and strength, as much courage as it takes to be in the military -- and i pay tibbett literally every day to the men and women in uniform who raise their right hand willing to give their lives. it is equally if not more difficult to come forward, as they have done over these years and speak their truth to us. and i have been so impressed by their bravery and by their truth-telling because i know as a prosecutor how difficult reporting this crime is in the civilian world, in universities,

in the workplace. it is excruciatingly difficult to come forward and overcome the stigma and sometimes shame and the threat of retaliation. it's that threat of retaliation that we need to counter and stop because reporting of this crime is always difficult. underreporting is a chronic problem in prosecuting it. and so taking it out of the chain of command, eliminating the prospect of retaliation -- implicit, feared, even if it's not spoken, it may be unspoken. and that's what our purpose is, not just in taking sexual assault out of the chain of command of decision but felonies, serious crimes that

may be intertwined and interrelated with sexual assault, as they so often are in the civilian world, whether it is obstruction, intimidation of witnesses, assault, other crimes that may be related to it. so i believe sincerely that this secretary of defense is committed to end sexual assault. i talked to one of the nominees for a prominent position in the department of defense. i believe he is firmly committed. i've talked to others who have been confirmed or who will be nominated. they are firmly committed. let's make that commitment real. and let's approve this legislation because the numbers that belie the promises. the results have betrayed the good intention, and now is the time for action. thank you, mr. president.

mrs. gillibrand: as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the republican leader, the senate armed services committee be discharged from further consideration of s. 1520 and the senate proceed to its consideration. that there be two hours for debate equally divided in the usual form, and that upon the use or yielding back of that that time, the senate vote on the bill with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. reed: reserving my right to object, mr. president -- the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. the clerk will read thank you very much, mr. president. i would like to first engage in a quoll colloquy with senator inhofe, the ranking member of the committee. on the processes we will use to consider all the ideas and amendments i expect will be

offered by committee members to address the investigation and prosecution of sexual assault and related crimes under the ucmj in the annual defense bill. mr. reed: i believe that the committee must start from a base that reflects the broadest consensus possible among our members on how best to move forward and on the recommendations of secretary austin's 90-day independent review commission. i understand some members would prefer there be nothing in our bill on this topic while others will feel that the i.r.c. recommendations do not about far enough. this is the nature of compromise and why i intend to include the i.r.c. recommendations on accountability in a base markup of the f.y. 2022 p defense bill subject to amendment. i believe we'll have a robust debate and commit to ensuring that every idea and amendment brought by our committee members is given due consideration and receives a vote if that's what the member wants.

mr. inhofe: mr. president, i thank the chairman, chairman reed, that this important issue deserves a robust debate as we consider this year's national defense authorization act. i'd also like to thank senator gillibrand for her leadership and her tenacity on this issue. as senator reed referenced, i am one of those who does not support removing the commanders from the decision-making process nevertheless, i appreciate chairman reed commitment to ensuring this issue is debated and voted on during the full committee markup of the ndaa. the ndaa markup process is unique in the senate. we debate and resolve contentious yeeshes every year -- issues every year, but the regular order process is important and has served us well for many, many years.

actually 60 years. when it comes to important issues like this, we should ■no rush anything without making sure it's going to do the right thing by our service members. and so i thank chairman reed for his action. mr. reed: let me also thank the ranking member for his comments. i agree that our committee has a long tradition of fulsome debate during committee markup of the ndaa defense bill. it is the hallmark of the committee. it ensures that everyone's voice is heard and is in my view one of the reasons we have enacted the defense authorization act for 60 consecutive years. but i also want to commend and thank senator gillibrand for her tireless advocacy for victims of sexual assault in the armed forces over the past eight years. since the first introduction of a version of this bill in 2013. as i announced this weekend, i agree with senator gillibrand the time has come to reform how

we investigate and prosecute sexual assault and other special victim crimes in the military. the best way to move forward on this issue to ensure that all 26 members of the armed services committee have their voices heard is to consider this legislation in the course of the markup of the fiscal year 2022 defense bill scheduled for july. not only will this allow committee members compromising over a quarter of the senate to have their ideas and amendments considered as is our tradition, but it allows the administration to provide its input as well. as the independent review commission that president biden directed provides us its recommendations on accountability in a military justice system for the investigation and prosecution of sexual assault and other special victim crimes, we must be able to analyze these recommendations collectively as a committee and

then consider their value. with this in mind, as i said over the weekend, i intend to include the chairman's mark of the f.y. 2022 defense bill, the i.r.c. recommendations. it is my view that these recommendations provide the appropriate basis from which to consider the wide range of amendments and ideas i know our members have. i want to stress that all amendments offered by senators on the committee will be fully considered during the full committee markup. i intend to continue our tradition of following an open amendment process within the committee, and i know that's something that the presiding officer is quite aware of since he participated in the committee in a very responsible way over many years. further, while the first round of reform will focus on the issues of accountability, i hope and intend to incorporate the i.r.c.'s recommendations on prevention, climate, and

culture and victim care and support into the bill as we move through the legislative year. i think these recommendations will be critically important to reducing the number of sexual assaults in the ranks. the focus of the legislation before us is adjudication. i think we all would prefer that prevention, command climate, all of these factors be such that adjudication is not necessary because the crimes, the incidents, the difficulties, the mental and physical anguish that victims incur have been avoided because we have taken the steps to prevent these actions from taking place in our military forces. with that, mr. president, i would object. the presiding officer: objection

is heard. the senator from new york. mrs. gillibrand: i just want to respond to my colleagues, chairman and ranking member, while i am extremely grateful for their leadership and willingness to review and take on the i.r.c. recommendations, the i. r.c. recommendations are limited. it was only a 60-day review of the issue of sexual assault and sexual harassment only. it did not look at the military justice system overall and did not have the benefit of eight years of review, study, and passing related amendments and changes. our committee has passed over 200, or nearly 250 different resolutions and changes to how the military deals with sexual harassment and sexual assault to no effect. this, deferring only to the i.r.c. which is an unelected panel that only looked at this issue for 60 days is not sufficient. not only do we have senators on the armed services committee

that have been studying this issue for eight years, making recommendation and passing laws on this topic for eight years, it would seem to defer to a panel that's only looked at this issue for 60 days to one issue seems irresponsible. second, i do not believe that issues of this weight and of this significance should be dealt with the committee only. the armed services committee hack working on this issue for ten years and we've seen no improvement on the number of sexual assaults in the military and on the rate of prosecution and the rate of conviction. that's highly problematic. also, when asked for a vote on this measure over the last several years, i have been denied a vote on this measure on the floor by the chairman and the ranking member. so they have been unable or unwilling to allow me to have a vote given all the bipartisan support we've had from the beginning. this bill has been bipartisan from day one. senator grassley has been on this bill from day one as has

several other republicans. today we now have 63 cosponsors to this legislation, widely bipartisan, and more than half of the armed services committee. we have established that the weight of this senate in a filibuster-proof majority wants a floor vote on this and does not want to leave it up to the committee. they have lost the -- the armed services committee has lost their opportunity to claim soldiers diction over this issue by failing to improve the situation over the last ten years. in fact, the 250 measures that we passed were all approved by various panels that took 60 days or 90 days or a year to review this issue. and we willingly took those recommendations and turned them into law. i too will willingly take the recommendations of the i.r.c. board and turn them into law because they are good and thoughtful recommendations, but they are limited.

by design they were only allowed to look at two crimes -- sexual assault and sexual harassment. and by not looking at all serious crimes you are not looking at the weight of the problem. we now have evidence that's been developed since 2017 about racial disparities and how the criminal justice system in the military works. protect our defenders issued a significant report that i would like to enter into the record with unanimous consent. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. gillibrand: that report will show that black service members were at least 1.29 times and as much as 2.61 times more likely to have disciplinary action taken against them in an average year in all branches from 2006 to 2015. these disparities largely did not improve and in some cases worsened in the most recent years covered. we have other challenges within the military justice system, and now we have two areas where we have data that the military

itself has collected, on sexual assault we have ten years of data. and now on racial disparities and racism within the military we have data over the last three years. and that has to be considered as well. and so the way to fix both of these problems is really simple. professionalize the military justice system, allow serious crimes to be given to those who do not have bias and have specialized training. if we do this we will see justice done because there will be less bias in the system and there will be more professionalism. and the combination of those two things, we believe based on what military members have told us will result in more cases going forward and more prosecutions. second, we have the support of military justice experts. we have a letter from the national institute of military justice where they say the national institute of military

justice recommends transferring prosecutorial transgression not only for all sex offenseses but also for all serious offenses those for which the maximum punishment exceeds one year's confinements. the defining line is a familiar feature in the american criminal justice system. these changes will strengthen the fairness of military justice and bolster public confidence in the administration. similarly, we have a piece published in the marine corps gazette by captain lanber jackson who prosecuted these cases, served as trial counsel. he fundamentally understands the nature of these cases. he was an operational law attorney in the first marine division. he says that felony prosecution determinations must be vested with trained military attorneys rather than commanders. disentangling commanders from the often ugly legal

determinations for which they are ill trained will allow commanders to more effectively focus their attention on preparing their units for conflict. so while i appreciate the willingness to take the recommendations of the panel that generally austin has empaneled to look at just two crimes and while i agree that we should accept those recommendations, and i intend to push them into the mark through our personnel subcommittee, we also should look at the reforms that 63 senators want done. we should also look at the reforms that are supported by more than half of the armed services committee members. we deserve a floor vote and we deserve a process that cannot be undermined by the committee. i have served on this committee for ten years, and the chairman well understands that in conference bills that have passed both sides have been taken out. you do not have to look farther than what happened to the safety report language. it was passed in the house,

passed in the senate and safety report, by the way, was offered in the senate by senator ernst and i on the armed services committee because it would deal with retaliation. and that bill was passed in the senate, passed in the house and taken out in conference. that's a problem. so i do not want to expose this massive reform that is a generational reform to the whims of those who decide what gets taken out in conference. it's not acceptable to me to be watered down or reduced or minimized by those in conference. and that is the risk you run by not allowing this to have a floor vote, which it deserves. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. ms. ernst: i do want to take just a very brief moment and thank the chairman and the ranking member of the armed services committee, because this is a very significant move that is being proposed by

senators gillibrand and grassley and those of us that are cosponsors of this legislation. it is time to act. it is time to act. and if we can go back into previous years, i have been one of those naysayers. and i have said to others that i was very torn about removing this decision from a commander's purview. i was torn. but we have not seen improvement when it comes to the areas of sexual assault and other serious crimes within our nation's armed services. so it is time to take very bold action, and i do share those concerns as so eloquently stated by senator gillibrand. that we are making a bold proposal that we believe now

fits for those that want prevention, like myself, those that want to reform and improve professionalize those prosecutors within the military system. we can bring that together and move it forward, but that is not going to happen if we see it watered down through the process of the ndaa. i would love to see this bill in its entirety passed. if that can happen through the ndaa, so be it. but just as senator gillibrand just stated, we have worked on legislation before. to see it come to fruition in the senate through ndaa, but not have it passed and signed into law. so i do share those concerns, and i have not had assurances that we can pass the bill in its entirety, and so i would also

ask that we take this up for consideration on the floor. i think it is that important to move forward. there are a lot of survivors out there that would like to see this move forward. i believe that now we also have a swell of military members that would like to see this bill in its entirety move forward. this body as a senate, not just as senate armed service members, committee members, but this body as a senate, this body as congress, we do have civilian oversight of the military. and our civilian oversight takes into consideration those members, our constituents that are asking for this change. and believe me, i'm hearing from my constituents on this change. so with that, mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island.

mr. reed: mr. president, my colleagues have expressed overwhelming confidence in this bill and i don't think that confidence will be eroded through more capital consideration by the committee. i think in fact the committee process could act. it will allow us to cooperate, examine, accept some and prevent other provisions of the recommendations by the i.r.c. and it also will, i think, encounter or allow us to consider something that we really haven't considered as consistently as the issue of sexual assault. that is, the indication that racial bias is such that all

felonies must be taken out of the hands of commanders, not just those related to individual sexual assaults or sexual harassment cases or other related sexual conduct or misconduct, i should rightly advocate this. and so again i think if we want to go ahead and make a fundamental change, committee consideration can only assist that change by getting the broad viewpoints of those who are in favor of it, those who may be opposed to it, and those who may seek changes. and if the committee reports to the floor, there will be opportunity on the floor to once again engage in debate in common. and i think we will try our best to come to a solution that is the best solution.

and i say that with a commitment to try my best to do so. with that, madam president, i would yield the floor. mrs. gillibrand: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from new york. mrs. gillibrand: one of the concerns i have is we have been studying this issue and debating this issue for years. we have had two floor debates because we have only gotten to vote on it twice. both times we had the majority of the senate supporting this provision. and what we have is a record of our allies already making this change, not for the issue of sexual assault assault in the military but for the issue of defendants' rights. the uconn -- u.k., israel, germany, netherlands, australia, all took serious crimes, a bright line of felonies out of the chain of command because they believed that a defendant had a right to basic civil liberties. when they did so, they did not see a diminution in command control or the ability to have

good order and discipline within the ranks, and they wrote one of the many panels that we have had over the last ten years, that information to tell them the change we made. and the u.k. even said this was a change that our commanders basically didn't notice. so this is not some untested, out of the box idea. this is an idea that is supported by the survivors, by veterans, by commanders, by experts in military justice and by our allies. and i believe that our service members deserve a criminal justice system worthy of the sacrifices they make. and last, i do not think this is a moment to defer to the committee. the committee has failed survivors in the last ten years. i do not think it is in their purview to make this ultimate decision. when we had a vote on don't ask, don't tell, something with a similar generational change, it

was done on a floor vote. an up-or-down vote. we had the vote twice. it was called twice because the first time republicans refused to participate in the vote. we called it again and we had the 60 votes we needed to overcome a filibuster. i believe this vote is also a once in a generation vote that needs the review and the vote of the entire senate. because not only does the congress have the responsibility to oversee the military and the entire executive branch, but this whole body has the ability to oversee individual committees if they aren't going far enough when the moment demands it. i believe this is some such time. we are here for a time such as this. we should do our job. we should vote on this measure, and it should be an up-or-down floor vote. i yield the floor. mr. reed: just a point of clarification. my recollection of the don't ask, don't tell process was it

was, in fact, considered by the committee. the language that ultimately adopted was the committee language. that because of objections to the issue, the ndaa was filibustered consistently, and in order to try to break free in terms of passing both pieces of legislation, the don't ask, don't tell was removed separately. that's after complete committee process, as well as consideration of the ndaa on the floor. at that point, as senator gillibrand indicated, after two attempts, there were sufficient votes to pass don't ask, don't tell. but it was duly considered in the committee, and again, i -- if the power of the ideas, the

compelling data that they have is such, i don't know why they are concerned about allowing the full members of the committee, not just a subcommittee to decide what should be in the final mark. in addition to that, i think in this process that we found it. in fact, i think you find it on every committee that ideas, perspectives, insights, are gained that would otherwise be lost. and so what we are trying to do is follow the procedure of the senate, which is to present to this floor a bill that's been carefully examined by people who have dedicated a great deal of their senate service to the armed services committee and do so with the input of the secretary of defense because all

of this has to be implemented by the department of defense, and at that point if there are still difficulties and issues, then the senate floor is available for amendments. so, again, i would suggest that we can make real progress in the committee, we can get legislation that's not only bipartisan but hopefully unanimous or nearly unanimous, and that would be a powerful signal not only to our colleagues but everyone else that this legislation will, in fact, become law. i yield the floor. mrs. gillibrand: madam president, i would simply say we have already established that this is something that should become law. we already have 63 senators on a bipartisan basis supporting this reform. this is not something that is new to the committee. we have been debating this issue for eight years. i have asked for a vote every

one of those eight years and only have been given one twice. we had the majority of the senate on both those votes. so this bill has been filibustered for eight years. this bill has been refused to be allowed to be part of the ndaa for a long time. this is not a new issue. these are not new facts. these are things that we have been wrestling with and failing. so i believe it is time this measure comes to the floor. i yield. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. blumenthal: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut.

mr. blumenthal: thank you, madam president. i ask the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. blumenthal: in just hours, we will be voting on the nomination of kristen clarke to be assistant attorney general for the civil rights division in the united states department of justice. i am proud tonight to advocate for her, not that she needs my voice in her support. she is a brilliant leader and advocate. she has dedicated her entire career to protecting the civil rights of all americans, and she has an extraordinary record to show for it. she reminds me of the legal warriors in the department of justice during the 1950's and 1960's, 1970's who battled for

the rule of law. supporting children who were trying to gain entry to desegregate schools, voters who sought to uphold the franchise, men and women who challenged the denial of their rights in the south and throughout the country. the department of justice became a beacon of law enforcement, upholding the civil rights of americans. and she is in that great tradition, fierce and fearless, strong and unyielding, tenacious in defending and advocating for the rights and liberties of americans when they are denied those rights and liberties guaranteed under the constitution and our statutes.

she served as the civil rights chief for the new york attorney general, civil rights bureau. she served as assistant counsel for the naacp legal defense and education fund. she served as federal prosecutor during the bush administration in the civil rights division criminal section and voting section. the very division that she has been nominated now to lead. she knows these issues. she knows civil rights and civil liberty issues and law because she has worked on them for more than two decades. she cares about these issues because her life has been dedicated to them, and she understands these issues on a deeply personal level. she knows them inside and out

because she served to fight for them inside and out of the department of justice, inside an out of the new york attorney generals' office, inside and out of organizations whose mission is to protect them, and she is the daughter of immigrants who grew up in the nation's largest public housing complex. she's also the mother of a 16-year-old son growing up in in this moment of reckoning for racial justice, equality, and equity in america. and if memory serves me, she also once took a field trip to the hartford area in connecticut and watched a then comparatively young state attorney general arguing in court in a

desegregation case. now, i have no illusions that that experience played any part in her desire to use her extraordinary skills and talents and gifts and education as a public servant and lawyer for the public good, but that's been her career. and that's exactly what we need now at the helm of the civil rights division. there is no excuse for waiting another moment to confirm her to this most important post. she is the civil rights chief for this moment because we are in a moment of reckoning, justice, and equity and equality

are on the line now, and her strength and tenacity meet this moment. now, unfortunately, there are some on the other side who have used ms. clarke's nomination to make baseless allegations against her, including allegations that she supports abolishing the police. to support is this distortion, they have repeatedly invoked a 2020 op-ed written by ms. clarke and published by "newsweek." and i want to meet that article head-on because at our judiciary committee markup just two weeks ago senator cruz collectively exerted -- ex-he wanted portions of excerpted is portions of that

op-ed. there's only one problem with his argument. ms. clarke never wrote that. it just isn't true. ms. clarke's piece is a thoughtful call to rethink how we approach law enforcement in a country that is going through a moment in which thousands of americans have called out for real reform, real change, real action. i've been proud to be involved in peaceful demonstrations and rallies throughout the state of connecticut probably 20 or maybe more of that over last summer, when young people led these public calls for justice in policing, justice in housing, justice in the workplace, justice in health care. all of them implicated in this moment. the fact is, the word abortion

appears only once in the entire op-ed -- i'm sorry, the word abolition appears only once in the entire op-ed. that word appears once in the op-ed, abolition, when it is used to describe the huge range of views held by others, activists, and local governments. that's it. that word, abolition, is used to describe the views of others, not her views. senator cruz has also distowarded her record in another way, claiming she had i think were then a provocative e-mail equating police to the cue crux klan. that is simply not true. in reality, the passage senator cruz quoted was written by

someone else, an activist, in an essie that ms. clarke has simply forwarded in an e-mail. in the e-mail, a the subject line includes the actual author's name and the essay is signed at the end by the author. had senator cruz bothered to look at the entirety of the e-mail in that document instead of cherry-picking a line to fit his preconceived narrative, he would have known and would have been truer to the facts here. ms. clarke no more wrote the words senator cruz attributed to her than he did. at a time when the country faces a moment of reckoning over racial justice, the civil rights division needs someone with ms. clarke's knowledge, skill, dexterity of thinking, life

experience, and her heart, her dedication because these challenges are immense, and they need to be addressed. she is the person for this moment. that's exactly what she will do, address the need for equity and equality and civil rights enforcement. tenacious but thoughtful and insightful and true to the law, serving the rule of law. she is a dedicated and devoted public servant committed to equal justice, civil rights, and the rule of law. i've seen that firsthand, and i know i'm not the only one who thinks so. the letters this committee, the judiciary committee, has received in support of her nomination reflect a broad

professionally and ideologically diverse coalition of individuals and organizations who know that she is, without doubt, eminently qualified thor this position. that support includes law enforcement like the major cities chiefs association, the national organization of black law enforcement executives, the national association of women law enforcement executives, the hispanic american police command officers association, and 71 former attorneys general from red states and blue states alike. the national organization of black law enforcement executives wrote, quote, ms. clarke has displayed the qualities of leadership, empathy, excellence, and persistence in supporting and defending the u.s.

constitution while ensuring equal protection and justice for all americans. the 71 former attorneys general wrote, quote, kristen clarke is someone with immense credibility among community leaders in each of our states. she has handled cases of hate crimes, constitutional policing, human trafficking and voting rights and most recently has done effective work on violent extremism and the threat that it poses to our citizenry, end quote. i believe strongly that industries ten clarke should be confirmed right away without delay. and i encourage all my colleagues to see the baseless allegations against her for what they are -- distortion. and i urge them to support her nomination. i have confronted those

allegations. they are unworthy of repetition. but i think my colleagues should know the truth behind them. the civil rights division and the american people need kristen clarke. for me, this vote feels very personal. two of my four children are graduating literally today and during this week from law school. i hope that they will use the great gifts that they have, the skills they have acquired, the advocacy that they have been learning to advance the public interests in the way that

kristen clarke has done throughout her veered career. i hope they will regard her as a role model because she has sought justice, she has fought to the uphold the rights of people who are vulnerable, americans who are voiceless, and ordinary americans who all too often have been denied their rights. she has stood up for them. she's spoken out, and i hope we will confirm her by a bipartisan vote. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to legislative session, be in a --. the presiding officer: the senate is in a quorum call. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: now, 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. schumer: madam president, i understand there are two bills at the desk due for a second reading en bloc. the presiding officer: the leader is correct. the clerk will read the titles of the bill for the second time en bloc. the clerk: s. 1775, a bill to address gun violence, improve availability of records to the national instant criminal background check system, and so forth and for other purposes. h.r. 3237, an act making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal

year ending september 30, 2021 and for other purposes. mr. schumer: madam president, in order to place the bills on the calendar under the provisions of rule 14, i would object to further proceeding en bloc. the presiding officer: objection having been heard, the bills will be placed on the calendar. mr. schumer: madam president, i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the consideration of s. res. 230 submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 230, congratulating the students, parents, teachers and leaders of charter schools across the united states for making ongoing contributions to education, and so forth. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: madam president, i

ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the consideration of res. 231. the clerk: expressing support for the defg of may 17, 2021 as brain cancer awareness day and so forth. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed, the pragget be agreed to and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today it adjourn until 10:00 a.m., tuesday, may 25. that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day and morning business be closed. further, upon the conclusion of morning business, the senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of

executive calendar 117, chiquita brooks-lasure, to be administrator of the centers for medicare and medicaid services postcloture. further, that all time on the brooks-lasure nomination be considered expired at 11:45 a.m., the senate recess following the cloture vote on the clarke nomination until 2:15 p.m. that if cloture is invoked on the nomination, all postcloture debate time be considered expired at 2:30 p.m. if any of the nominations are confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow.

>> the u.s. senate is gambling out here centers continue work today in science and technology research funding measure honey is abutted to limit debate on the nomination of the short of the head of centers for medicare and medicaid services. alive senate coverage here on "c-span2". c-span is your unfiltered view of government, for funded by television companies and mark including charter communications. broadband the empowerment and charter has invested billions for infrastructure and upgrading technology and empowering opportunity and communities big and small. charter, is connecting us . charter communications support cspan is a public service. along with these other television providers giving you a front row seat democracy. >> tonight on the communicators, we are talking about canceled

culture the telecommunications analyst. >> there is too much speech that we all should agree in the realm of legitimate public debate that is stifled or canceled. >> the cancer culture is an expensive term used extensively in a whole bunch of range of different concerns. k narrowed two questions as much is ready and said, showing more more concerned about those areas where people are fired for the positions. >> what the committee caters with telling medications analyst, randolph may and will run hard tonight and eight eastern on "c-span2". next at house majority leader charles schumer and republican leader mitch mcconnell give their leader remarks today on the senate floor. >> now met an president st