has earned bipartisan opposition. madam president, i have spent the better part of two years coming to the floor to object to various iterations of this bill, and i will continue to do so until my colleagues abandon this partisan power grab. i yield the floor. mr. inhofe: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. inhofe: madam president, i am joining others who have the same problem with what one of the majority party here in the united states senate is trying to do. it's something that surprises a lot of people, something that would completely revamp, completely change a system that has been in place since 1787. and i understand that they are soon going to be forcing a vote on a bill that they are naming

the for the people act, and it's anything but for the people. for those familiar, this is a democrat bill to nationalize our elections, to give washington unprecedented and unconstitutional power over states and local governments. each speaker, including myself, who has spoken so far has been jealously guarding their system because we have put into place a very safe and honest way of handling our elections. now keep in mind this bill is not new. house democrats, they have passed this back in 2019 right on party-line votes. the only bipartisan aspect of the bill is its opposition as was just stated by another speaker. now, back in march along with every single house republican, one brave house democrat voted against this bill. and the reason is clear. it has been stated but let me put all five of these things

into one area so that it's easier to understand. the bill is filled with dangerous an antidemocratic provisions, provisions that make it easier to steal votes. one legalizing ballot harvesting. each member has been talking about ballot harvesting and the threat that is out there. banning voter i.d. in my state of oklahoma, we banned voter -- we have i.d. laws to safeguard our votes. we have -- they're attempting to restore felons' right to vote. why would you want to restore a felon's right to vote? i have not heard anyone yet give a good argument that was persuasive. allowing voters to cast ballots outside of their precincts. that's one step further and one step easier to falsify ballots.

subsidize political candidates with federal fund also. we have -- funds. we've been talking about that. several people have mentioned how it might affect some individuals. it's more accurately named the -- for the liberal politicians act. in their mind it not only ensures that they can control elections forever with ballot harvesting and other questionable practices but they would also get millions in taxpayers funds to bulk up their campaigns. i just reminded them and others have mentioned this, too, it sounds like you might be criticizing ted cruz when you say this but it's not. he knows it's wrong. he observed that when he was running for office, if he had been able to harvest the opportunities you have from the federal government, he would be -- he would have raised some $24 million in federal funds in the first quarter of this year of

his campaign. the oklahoma state election board secretary paul sizic shared with me his strong concerns to this bill, what it would do to my state of oklahoma and integrity laws. it would impose policies that contradict state law like legalizing ballot harvesting and preventing voter i.d. for in-person voting. as he is responding for managing and the one responsible for managing the elections in oklahoma, he knows how bad this would be for oklahomans. today oklahoma's elections are safe, secure, and fair. the secretary said it best in 2019 when he testified before the house that oklahoma's voting system is, quote, one of the most reliable, most accurate, and most secure, and most efficient, and most cost

effective system in the entire world. we pride ourselves in that. that's oklahoma doing it, not the federal government. not the federal government doing something that might benefit one segment of our society. it's clear the democrats are playing politics with s. 1. now, following the 2020 presidential election, democrats complained about efforts to remove states from running their elections. but now democrats are seeking sweeping federal control over elections. i'm going to mention something that no one has mentioned before. and i guess the only reason it comes to my mind is i've been doing this for a long period of time, being concerned and trying to reserve our electoral college. back in 1787 in our -- we had a problem. the -- they were putting together a constitution to try to establish a way of voting in the united states of america that would be safe for everyone

and equitable. so they came out with -- they didn't want to do it just on a one-person vote because if you do that, that's a decided advantage for all of the large states. and so what they did was come up with what they call the electoral college. and that was they made the effort to correct the problem. we're talking about back in 1787. in 1787 we had a system where we had four of the very large states and nine small states. so if you just -- the four large states comprised of more than 50% of the electorate. so that wouldn't work. that wasn't going to work. and of course the same thing is true today. today nine states have a majority of the votes. so it was the clear intent not to let the large states have control of our system. now, i'm sure some of the large states disagree with that. some democrats, a lot of

democrats disagree with that because they'd be at a decided advantage in an election. so what we did, we had -- we established the l electoral college. that is my main cause right now because it's in jeopardy now. the electoral college is being attacked on a regular basis. in fact, one of the prominent democrats that's currently in the leadership, the democrat party, has introduced a resolution to do away with the electoral college. that's something that we cannot allow to happen. oddly enough, it has survived for what? 233 years now. 233 years. and yet it's survived all that time but there are those attacking it right now. so that's another one of the major issues that we're concerned with. and that is that we are not only giving up all the creativity and the safeguards that are in a

secure system put together not by the federal government, by the states. and trying to take that over for the federal government. they've been attempting to do this now for 230 years and they haven't been successful. and i'm hoping they will not be successful on my watch. thank you. with that i yield the floor. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from kansas. mr. marshall: madam president, if h.r. 1, senate bill 1 were ever passed into law, it would forever be known as the nancy pelosi power grab act. this legislation let's the federal government take over elections which is clearly unconstitutional. let's talk about ballot harvesting to begin with. most americans believe that ballot harvesting is wrought with fraud and wrong. frankly it dilutes your vote. decades, for centuries americans have woke up early in the morning on voting day for get to

church to vote early before they get to work. can you just imagine how much seeing so many show up with a bag full of ballots which can't be vouched for, what it does to devalue your vote. let's talk about voter i.d. for a second. i think most americans, maybe at least 80% of americans believe that voter i.d. brings integrity to the election process. certainly voter i.d.'s worked in kansas for years and brings about integrity to our election process. just think about all the things that require an i.d. at this point in time. to rent a car today, if i wanted to check into a hotel, if i wanted to board an airplane tonight, i would need some type of identification. and i think the value of voting is even more than any of those and thus the need for some type of voter identification. this bill takes integrity out of the election process. next, most americans don't want their tax dollars going to fund

any elections, especially elections of the opposite party to which you belong. i can certainly guarantee that nobody wants to see more political attack ads with their hard-earned tax dollars being spent. but let me tell you what i'm for. i want to make it easier to vote and harder to cheat. i want to make it easier to vote and harder to cheat. ballot harvesting makes it easier to cheat. getting rid of voter i.d. makes it easier to cheat. that destroys the integrity of the election process. this bill simply stated is just another attempted unconstitutional power grab. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor.

a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from indiana. mr. young: today we're discussing s. 1, the so-called for the people act. now this legislation takes a system that is actually working quite well and applies drastic, draconian, and desperate election reforms meant to keep democrats in power. now why do i say the current system is working well? let me tell you just how easy it is. back home in my home county of johnson county, indiana, to cast one's vote. you see, beginning four weeks before the election you could vote early in person with no excuses. monday through friday for at least eight hours per day.

the two saturdays before the election, early voting was open for seven hours each day. monday the day before the election, early voting was open for three and a half additional hours. and then on election day, polls were open for 12 hours. in total that is 201 and a half hours of voting across 23 days over a period of four weeks. in total, you see, we afford hoosiers plenty of opportunity to vote. and less you think my suburban county is unique in the state of indiana, leapt me disabuse you of that notion. in neighboring indianapolis, they had 221 hours of early voting over that same period.

additionally, hoosiers have the ability to vote absentee. now, you can vote absentee in the state of indiana by mail for 11 separate reasons, including being sick or caring for someone who is sick or working on election day. colleagues, in the history of our country, voting has never been easier than it is right now. that's right. you may not see this on the media, but this is indeed true. you see, the truth bears it out. right in the numbers. last year a larger percentage of the population voted than they had in any election since 18-year-olds were given the right to vote 50 years ago.

a larger proportion of the population voted than it had since over the last 50 years. why aren't we hearing this? according to the census bureau, voter turnout for african americans and the hispanic americans were up 3% and 6% respectively, not down. asian americans saw a huge 10% increase. this is fantastic. yet my colleagues on the left would have the american people believe that we're living in an era of extreme suppression. or as president biden demagogueically, dishonestly and divisively called it jim crow on steroids. so what exactly is the national democratic response to this

record turnout? well, they like to strip election powers away from the states, states like indiana, and give those powers to democrat overlords here in washington, d.c. that's how we ended up with s. 1, the for the people act. so for the folks back home, what is this for the people act really all about? why are we having this debate? why are we going to have this vote? it's really about four things, four things. one, national democrats want to fund their campaigns with your taxpayer dollars. that's right. under the for the people act, a $100 campaign donation to nancy pelosi could be matched by $600 from taxpayers. i don't know about, you know, my

colleagues who are listening, but my neighbors worked very hard for their wages and salaries and i expect that's the case for them as well. they don't want $600 to match $100 given to nancy pelosi. two, national democrats want to gut popular voter i.d. laws like those in the state of indiana. i know what hoosiers believe. hoosiers believe you should have to prove who you are in order to vote. our voter i.d. law incidentally passed in 2005, it was challenged in the courts and it was upheld by the supreme court of the united states by a vote of 6-3. but this bill -- this for the people act says you don't have to prove who you are. you don't have to prove you are who you say you are in order to cast a vote, we'll just take you at your word.

that seems to me to be ripe for abuse. three, the third thing is all about is national democrats want to allow ballot harvesting. it's an awful word and it's an awful thing, harvesting of ballots. in indiana a member of your household can already turn in your absentee ballot. you can do it, but under this law anybody can turn in your ballot or not turn it in, and there's no limit to how many ballots a single person can turn in. hundreds of ballots, thousands of ballots. ripe for abuse. the final thing this is about is national democrats want to take control of the federal election commission. they want to turn it into a partisan committee. now, everyone in this body believes that the right to vote

is a sacred -- it's a sacred right that all of us have and we ought to be able to exercise it unhindered and with fidelity. we're in this chamber because each of our respective constituents exercised a right to vote. that's how we earned our election certificates. and we all agree that our constituents need to be able to trust the systems in place that allow them to cast their vote. so we can't take that sacred right and turn it into a partisan exercise as s. 1 proposes we do. that, my friends, is why this senator will be voting no on s. 1, the so-called for the people act. thank you.

a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. ms. ernst: madam president, in each new congress the bill number s. 1 is a sign to the majority's priority legislation. it says a lot about the new democrat majority that the bill they chose to design as s. 1 prioritizes themselves. this bill creates a federal campaign fund to finance the expenses of candidates for

congress instead of addressing the important issues that are on the minds of my fellow iowa -- like bread, milk, and household goods. this bill literally takes money out of the paychecks of working men's and puts it into the campaign coffers, yes, of washington politicians. rather than helping get americans back to work, the democrats' top priority, again, it's s. 1, their top priority is to create a federal jobs program for political consultants and pollsters. taxpayer subsidized calls interrupting your family dinner,

junk mail cluttering your mailbox and attack ads blaring, yes, on your tv. and, folks, you can't -- cannot unsubscribe either because there is no opting out. think about the politician you dislike the most. now imagine your tax dollars funding their ads and flyers and campaign parties and rallies, that's what this bill does. that's right. the bill subsidizes politicians' campaigns, your tax dollars helping to elect politicians who oppose your values. this i.d. is so unpopular, a

new york poll found that the majority leader's own constituents oppose public funding of campaigns by a 3-1 margin. well, the democrats call the bill the for the people act, a more apt title would be, fund the politicians' act. it is about politicians, the same ones who brought back earmarks to pay for pet projects with your tax dollars, prioritizing themselves. the bill not only subsidizes the campaigns of politicians, it also nationalizes elections. washington would tell the rest of the country how you can

select your representatives. it does so by creating a federal work around of state voter i.d. laws by effectively eliminating the enforcement of state i.d. requirements at the polls. think about what you're required to show an i.d. to do, drive a car, board a plane, buy a beer, and the list goes on. but democrats think it's best if we don't require an i.d. to vote. the majority of americans disagree with washington democrats, 77% of voters support voter i.d. and a little known fact, this includes support by 63% of democrats and a vast majority of black and hispanic voters.

it's all part of the democrats' larger scheme and total power grab to tilt our political system in their favor. first, eliminate the filibuster then rig elections by eliminating election integrity laws like voter i.d. verification, then add new states like the district of columbia and puerto rico that will elect democrat senators. and don't forget the plan to pack the court. there are just 50 democratic senators, but 60 votes are required to end debate on legislation in the senate. therefore, the democrats must eliminate the filibuster in order to pass s. 1, their priority legislation.

that's right. changing the rules in order to fundamentally change our country. and i would remind folks, my friends on the other side of the aisle are seeking to abolish the very same tool, the filibuster, that they used 327 times last year alone when they were in the minority. if they chose to change the rules, they would destroy this chamber's long, proud history as being the world's greatest deliberative body. the senate's current assistant majority leader made it clear, very clear, in 2018 in no

uncertain terms that ending the filibuster would be the end of the senate as it was originally devised and created going back to the founding fathers. because the takeover of elections is just as radical and largely unconstitutional, the democrats' court packing scheme is another key component of enshrining s. 1. folks, we can all see this for what it is, a transparent play for permanent political power. this is not about democracy, it's about changing the rules and tipping the scales to favor washington democrats. as a former local elections commissioner, i believe elections are always best kept

at the state and local level, and i will continue to push back on my colleagues' attempts to federalize our election system. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. mr. carper: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. mr. carper: good afternoon, madam president. madam president, i rise today to urge our colleagues to join me in voting to confirm radhika fox. isn't that a great name, radhika fox, to be assistant administrator of water for the environmental protection agency. over the past two months as radhika fox has gone through her confirmation process, i had the real pleasure to come to know her and, frankly, to admire her. i am convinced that she's an excellent choice to lead the e.p.a.'s office of water at a crucial time in the agency's

history. ms. fox brings with her an impressive professional record of service and accomplishment, spanning over two decades working on water issues at the local, state, and federal level. most recently before she was nominated, madam president, for her position at e.p.a., ms. fox served as the c.e.o. of u.s. water alliance. there she worked hand in glove with organizations across this country representing a wide range of water stakeholders from industries to municipalities, from sstles organizations -- service organizations to consumer groups and from agricultural groups to environmental organizations. and what those organizations have said again and again about radhika fox is that she's an exceptional leader who will work day and night to come up with practical solutions for our country's serious water challenges.

moreover, ms. fox will make sure that everyone's point of view is heard and taking into account when e.p.a. acts to protect our country's precious water resources. and how do we know these groups say all of these wonderful things about radhika fox? because they have written to us urging the senate to act swiftly to confirm her again and again and again. in fact, over 80 prominent organizations that are key stakeholders, madam president, in the nation's water policies have written letters in support of her nomination to this important post. and when i say that over 80 organizations have written, i don't mean that 80-plus organizations have signed on to a common letter, one letter of support. no, no, no. i mean that over 80 organizations have taken time to write their unique, thoughtful letters of support. in fact, the senate committee on environment and public works, which i'm privileged to lead,

along with senator shelley capito of west virginia has been inundated with letters of support for radhika fox. each letter describes the specific and positive impact that ms. fox has already had on issues of importance to those individual organizations, their members and those that they represent and she's done it in her previous professional positions consistently. i want to take a few minutes, madam president -- i don't do this very often, but i want to take a few minutes here and go through some of these letters, these 80 letters of support. remarkably consistent letters of great compliment and praise for her and the kind of person she is and the kind of leader that she is. let me just share the words of some of those who reached out to us. the u.s. chamber of office, this is what they write. i'm quoting them. ms. fox has worked to ensure

that businesses and the groups that represent them are valued stakeholders in water infrastructure conversations. she's created platforms to convene stakeholders from the water sector and industry through her leadership, close quote. the u.s. water alliance, what do they say? the u.s. water alliance writes -- this is a quote. radhika fox developed a consistent record of working cooperatively alongside stakeholders along every corner of the water sector including drinking water, including wastewater, storm water, utilities of all sizes, environmental groups, labor, frontline communities, and countless others. close quote. how about the farm alliance. here's what the farm alliance writes. quote, due to her extensive engageengagement and previous positions, she understands the implications of guidance and regulation but also the importance of authentic community engagement and the

need to achieve quantified results on the ground. radhika fox is the type of leader to create the conditions to c -- to ultimately see it through. those are the words from -- we received from the family farm alliance. how about the iowa soybean association. we raise a lot of soybeans in our state. i know the presiding officer raises a bunch in her state and over to my left, they raise a few down in west virginia. ms. fox understands how water management issues are interwoven with the fabric of rural and urban communities. and that farmers must be part of the team and beneficiaries of this work. it is key to making real and long lasting progress on protecting and improving water in the 21st century. close quote. here's some words from one of our makes in delaware off to the west of us, maryland. ben grumbles, a

republican-appointed secretary of maryland's department of environment writes that ms. fox has, quote, impressed public and private sector water leaders on her abilities to find common ground and skillfully advocate for integrated one water policies throughout the country. she is well qualified to organize the national water program and the many diverse constituents -- constituencies who shape our water future. thank you for those words. galveston, galveston, texas. here we go. gag veston bay foundation -- galveston bay foundation says this. radhika is a proven leader who has demonstrated a desire to make sure all stakeholders and all voices have a place at the table. close quote. and finally, last but mott least, -- but not least, the community water center, an outfit in central california not too far when i was stationed

when i was in the navy, they write, quote, ms. fox has the rare ability to bring multiple differing voices into the room from environmental justice to water agencies to agricultural entities to state government leaders. find the common themes, and then weave together a shared ground that helps advance the conversation and create real progress. you would be hard-pressed to find a more gifted visionary and leader in the water space than ms. fox. those are amazing letters. any one of them by themselves would be, i think, remarkable and compelling. but when you put them all together from the chamber of commerce to environmental organizations, agriculture organizations, and you hear this theme repeated again and again, it's pretty amazing. the reason why is because turns out radhika fox is an amazing human being and leader.

theex excerpt -- these excerpts i shared with my colleagues is really a small sample. this is a small sample of the expressions of overwhelming support that our committee, the environmental public works committee has received from organizations and people from around the country who know water issues and who also know radhika fox. their message is loud. their message is clear. we have the opportunity today to confirm a truly gifted leader and put her to work serving our country right away from sea to shining sea. i urge my colleagues to join me in doing just that. with that, madam president, i yield the floor.

mr. manchin: madam president? the presiding officer: the senior senator from west virginia. mr. manchin: madam president, today the senate will be voting on the nomination to invoke cloture on the nomination of tommy beaudreau. i have to explain the difference between beaudreau and boudreau. beaudreau is when you're up north in alaska being raised and that's haw it's -- how it's

pronounced. if you're in the south especially louisiana, it would be beaux, boudreau. there's a difference. he hasn't been nominated to serve as a deputy secretary of the department of interior. i believe he will be an outstanding deputy secretary. he's experienced. he knows the department of interior and is familiar with the wide range of issues that come before it. he has previously served as the first direct oosh of the bureau of ocean energy and management as the acting assistant secretary for land and minerals management and as chief of staff for the department. his performance at his nomination hearing demonstrated that he is both a very firm grasp of the issues and the ability to listen, learn, and work with all sides and to find commonsense solutions to difficult problems. he has the knowledge, the experience, the temperament, and the skills needed to serve in this important position. mr. beaudreau fully understands the role of the department of interior and striking the balance in his dual mission of

preserving and protecting our national parks and public lands and providing a large part of the energy and mineral resources that we need to power the nation. and i believe senators on both sides of the aisle will find that he is someone that they can work with. mr. beaudreau is supremely well qualified for the job. he was reported out of the senate energy committee with a very, very strong bipartisan vote. i hardly -- i heartily support his nomination and i encourage my colleagues to do the same. thank you, madam president. i notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

ms. collins: madam president? the presiding officer: the senior senator from maine. ms. collins: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. collins: madam president, i suggest -- the presiding officer: under the previous order, the question is on the fox nomination. ms. collins: i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second?

there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: have all senators voted? does any senator wish to change his or her vote in if not, the yeas are 5, the nays are 43. the nomination is confirmed. the question now occurs on the griggsby nomination. a senator: i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: you have is sufficient? -- is there a sufficient second? there is. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: we have 59 yeas, 39 nays. the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table, and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's actions. 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 123, tommy p. beaudreau of alaska to be deputy secretary of the interior signed by 18 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the cincinnati that debate on the nomination of tommy p. beaudreau of alaska to be deputy secretary of the interior shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: the yeas are 89, the nays 9. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: department of the interior, tommy p. beaudreau beaudreau of alaska to be deputy secretary. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. scott: i stand again today in support of our great ally israel. israel is a vibrant democracy that supports capitalism, champions human rights, and holds free and open elections. israel is the only democracy in

the middle east, and israel deserves our unwavering support. israel is surrounded by nations and terrorists groups that want it wiped off the face of the earth. i saw this firsthand during my latest visit as senator which gave me a clear picture on israel's proximity to its enemies -- hamas, hezbollah, isis, and iran. in my last visit, i was about a half mile from the gaza strip and went to a kibbutz. what was shocking to me is there were children there instinctively raised whenever they hear the sirens, they raise their hands because somebody is going to pick them up and get them to a bomb shelter. i think what they were telling me when i was there is they had 15 seconds to get to a bomb shelter when the sirens went off which said the hamas was sending rockets. also they told the story that hamas was sending balloons with candy and explosives. so when the balloon would come down, if the children would touch it, it would explode. it's disgusting. for 11 days last month, we saw rockets rain down on israel.

as we watched hamas terrorists target innocent israeli citizens, i thought about the families impacted by this evil. think about a 5-year-old you know, like to play games, they love their brothers and sisters, they love their moms and dads. well, a 5-year-old just like the one you are thinking off was killed as hamas rockets indiscriminately just pounded israel. his life was taken by hamas terrorists. i have a 5-year-old grandson. i can't imagine life without him. i can't imagine what this boy's family is going through right now. instead of coming together against this violence, we saw the democrats turn their backs on israel. i was proud to lead more than 30 of my colleagues in a resolution to support israel and its right to defend itself against terrorist attacks. unfortunately, it was blocked by senate democrats. it was not so long ago that the senate stood with israel on a bipartisan basis. in 2014, when israel was again subject to a barrage of rockets targeting innocent israelis,

then-majority leader reid offered a resolution supporting israel's right to defend itself against hamas. every single senator voted to support israel's right to defend itself against hamas. not anymore. it's despicable that something as simple as reaffirming america's support for israel no longer aligns with the priorities of the democrat party. i have also joined in a resolution with senator cruz to include the arms to israel and with senator hawley for the anti-semitic and anti-israel actions in congress in the united states and around the world. these reprehensible and disturbing acts must be swiftly condemned at every level, and those responsible prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. president biden's state department recently said, quote, we're going to be working in partnership with the united nations and the palestinian authority to kind of channel aid there in a manner that does its best to go to the people of gaza, unquote. the official wept on to say, quote, as we have seen in life,

as we all know in life, there are no guarantees. we are going to do everything we can to ensure that this assistance reaches the people who need it the most, unquote. so the biden administration can't guarantee that american taxpayers aren't going to fund terrorists in hamas. the biden administration thinks it's okay to fund hamas terrorists because, quote, in life there are no guarantees, unquote. the biden administration seems unbothered if some funding going to the terrorists that killed this boy. president biden must do better. his administration must control where this money is going. yes, we can make sure american tax dollars aren't funding terrorists. what we are hearing from the biden administration is that they simply won't take the time to do what it takes to guarantee that. this lack of accountability or concern is absolutely disgusting, and we should not allow it. that's why i along with senators joni ernst, cindy hyde-smith and mike braun introduced the stop taxpayer funding hamas act. this says no funds will be authorized for the territory of

gaza until the president certifies to congress that these funds can be spent without benefiting terrorist organizations. the stop taxpayer funding of hamas act also ensures u.s. funds are not authorized for expenditure in the territory of gaza to any united nations entity or office that the president cannot certify is not encouraging or teaching anti-israel and anti-semitic ideas and propaganda. recently, a european union report was released showing palestinian authority textbooks in u.n.-supported schools encourage violence against israelis, including anti-semitic messages. and just last week, a tonal by hamas was found underneath the school for the palestinian agency run for refugees. we cannot allow this to continue. i'd like to yield to my colleague from iowa, senator ernst.

ms. ernst: thank you, and i appreciate the time to speak today on this topic and certainly, madam president, i am rising to also support the stop taxpayer funding of hamas act. the united states should no longer provide any recognition or resources to hamas, a terrorist organization supplied by iran, disguised as a palestinian political party. hamas is a long-standing terrorist organization whose attacks and efforts against peace threaten the lives of civilians and innocents. using the population of gaza as a human shield, hamas fired more than 1,500 rockets into israeli civilian areas in an unprovoked attack last month.

the attack was not the action of a responsible political party, but the violent outburst of an iranian proxy bent on the destruction of israel and peace. hamas' roots and rational have very little to do with a broader struggle for freedom of worship or narrow land use disagreements. it's far simpler than that. iran supplies rockets and hamas launches rockets on innocent israelis because they share a common goal -- eradication of the jewish people in israel. it's that simple. hamas couldn't be more clear in their goals. their charter states, quote, there is no solution for the palestinian question except through jihad. there is no way out except by

concentrating all powers and energies to face this nazi vicious invasion. nomination of peace or advancement for people. israel's defensive actions against a terror group that compares their people to nazis and is dedicated to their destruction are to be expected. self-defense and protection of citizens is a core responsibility of every country. hamas attacked innocent civilians fully, expecting them to be attacked in return. their plan was to purposely create civilian casualties. we must be unequivocal in support for our ally. the president and secretary of f state must remain strong in american support to israel and

not lose sight of the true threat hamas backer, iran, poses to israel. the administration must abandon its attempts to return to the deeply flawed nuclear agreement with iran. their attempt to return to the failed nuclear deal only emboldens iran's nuclear ambitions. iran provides hamas another genocidal terrorist organizations with rocket systems, rocket parts, assembly training and cash support every year. and iran's goal mirrors that of hamas to wipe israel off the map, bottom line. just as no country, israel or otherwise, would tolerate such terrorism and aggression against its citizens, no true ally would turn a back on a friend in their moment of need. they certainly would not continue funding the organization responsible for the attack. so now more than ever the united

states must stand with its ally, condemn the attacks against israel by hamas, and affirm our commitment to support israel's peace and security. the stop american taxpayer funding of hamas act ensures no funding will be authorized to the territory of gaza, the site of hamas' headquarters, until the president certifies to congress that these funds can be spent without benefiting terrorist organizations. the united states must be clear in our unwavering commitment to our ally and ensure no american taxpayer dollar goes to hamas ever again. so i'd like to thank my friend and colleague from the great state of florida for moving on this piece of legislation. i'm proud to support. again, thank you for your leadership on this. i yield the floor back to the senator from florida.

mr. scott: i yield to my colleague from mississippi, senator hyde-smith. mrs. hyde-smith: i join my colleagues today in defense of our longtime friend and trusted friend israel and argue absolutely no american taxpayers dollars should be pent to benefit terrorist organizations. israel has no greater friend than the united states, and the israeli people have long relied on assistance from the american people and other allies. it is an unshakeable bond based on mutual respect, shared democratic values, and common interests that existed long before the modern state of israel was founded. we must continue to support and foster that relationship with everything we have as israel faces growing threats from hamas and other terrorist groups in the region.

as the annual appropriations process moves along, i'm concerned, as are many of my colleagues, that foreign aid, u.s. taxpayer dollars could end up in the hands of those who have boldly proclaimed that their intent is to do harm to israel and our interest in the region. the most recent wave of violence in the middle east makes it clear that our resources must be responsibly spent and kept out of the coffers of terrorist organizations and bad actors whose violence can be bankrolled by commandeering u.s. foreign aid. the biden administration admitted recently there are no guarantees our humanitarian assistance will reach the intended recipients. madam president, i believe it is our duty to guarantee this. it's imperative that we are certain that not a single cent of taxpayer money is spent to

fund hamas and its military arsenal. in this effort, my colleagues and i have teamed up to ensure that safeguards are in place to make sure anti-american and anti-israel groups do not continue down this dangerous path of radicalization and indoctrineation at the expense of hardworking americans. the stop taxpayer funding of hamas act introduced by my friend, senator scott of florida, is commonsense legislation. it protects american assets and allies while ensuring that not a penny of foreign aid is spent indoctrinating students abroad and bankrolling terrorist activities. this is a nonpartisan issue. americans do not support terrorism, so they certainly should not have to subsidize terrorism. we must take a stand against

this barbaric and the most harmful it poses to innocent civilians. i simply cannot imagine why any of my colleagues, republican, democrat, or independent, would oppose legislation that is fiscally responsible, morally sound and in the best interest of our allies, service members and our future generations. finally, madam president, i believe we should recognize that american citizens feel the painful effects from the recent flareup of violence toward israel. in tandem with the global unrest we have witnessed a significant rise in anti-semitic attacks largely fueled by old prejudices and accelerated by harmful political rhetoric. it is my fervent hope that we will dedicate ourselves to stopping anti-semitic violence to fortifying our determination

to protect the state of israel and to promoting peaceful relations in the middle east. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. mr. scott: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. scott: i want to thank my colleagues from iowa and mississippi for supporting me today in our effort to make sure that we do not ever fund hamas. i hope every single member in this body can agree the united states shouldn't fund terrorists with american taxpayer dollars, funding that can be used to kill innocent israelis. i look forward to my colleagues joining me today to stand with israel and against terrorism. as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that the foreign relations committee be discharged from further consideration of senate 1899 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. i further ask that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from new jersey.

mr. menendez: madam president, reserving the right to object. i have real concerns about my colleagues' efforts to subvert the legislative process and push through a bill without due consideration from the senate foreign relations committee. i know my distinguished colleague from florida is very interested in these issues. i hope he would ask his leadership to put them on the committee because he consistently comes to the floor and wants to circumvent the committee. this is not the first time. let me be very clear. hamas is a terrorist organization, and the terrorists who lead hamas have no regard for human life, whether they be the life of innocent israelis targeted by their rocket attacks or the palestinian families they constantly put in harm's way. israel has every right and responsibility to defend herself from attacks against their

civilians, and the united states does not and will not ever provide funding to hamas. neither of those statements are up for debate. in fact, i would argue that every single member of this body agrees with those assertions. indeed, the senate has a long history of carefully crafting foreign aid programs with robust oversight as well as sanctions that target hamas and its supporters. with that in mind, there's simply no reason this bill can't go through regular order and sustain a markup from the foreign relations committee. i looked at the data of introduction and subsequent referrals, less than three weeks. we've done it before and we can do it again. as the chair of the foreign relations committee, i've shown that i prioritized moving serious bipartisan legislation. this bill in question is not a serious attempt at legislating. it's a partisan talking point.

had the senator from florida, who is the chair of the republican senatorial campaign committee or any of the bill's sponsors had a genuine interest in asserting congress' role in foreign policy, the hard work that goes into lebltion slating they would have gone through the regular order process. they did not. instead i imagine they would rather relish in a tweet claiming that democrats support taxpayer funding of hamas or oppose defending israel. all i can say to this is enough of using the u.s.-israel relationship for partisan political purposes. it does damage to the united states. it does damage to the state of israel. i'm proud of my legislative efforts to defend israel for over three decades, and i would argue that the facts that these efforts have been bipartisan speak to the strength of the

u.s.-israel relationship. both republicans and democrats share a long track record of working together to defend israel's right to exist in legislating accountability for u.s. taxpayer dollars spent overseas, but we have to do the work. and i do believe there are senators who are genuinely interested in working towards that goal. the truth is we already have a number of laws and regulations in place regarding the delivery of lifesaving humanitarian relief. as written, this bill, by way of example of why we have bills go through the committee so they can be worked on, seems intended to ensure that nobody in gaza could ever receive any of this support. the language is written so broadly that, for example, before delivering clean water or water infrastructure, the president would effectively have to certify that anyone related

to hamas would never drink that water or drink from a water fountain that carried that water. that's simply absurd. i would welcome a robust discussion on the ways we can continue to ensure that taxpayer dollars intended for lifesaving humanitarian relief in gaza and elsewhere can get to those who need it the most. and certainly evade and avoid the hands of hamas. let's remember why we invest in foreign aid programs in the first place. we do so in pursuit of our common humanity of our values and our own security interests. so let's recognize the political games being played on the floor today for what they are and reject them. and because of all those reasons, madam president, i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. scott: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. scott: i'm glad my colleague has acknowledged his interest in helping israel.

unfortunately, i'm surprised that the, if my colleague had an interest, why didn't the foreign relations committee take up the same resolution that the majority leader reid took up in support of israel and basically saying israel had the right to defend itself and saying hamas was a terrorist organization. my -- my colleague didn't. sth a simple bill -- this is a simple bill. it says any aid we give to the palestinian authority, it will not go to hamas. president biden said, quote, we will be working in partnership with the united nations and the palestinian authority that does its best to go to the people of gaza. unquote. that should scare us. they went on to say, as we all know in life, there's no guarantees, but we will do everything we can to ensure this

assistance gets to people who need it the most. that's not much of a guarantee. that's like maybe we'll try. we can do better. this senate should do better. republicans and democrats should say not a dime will ever go to hamas, a terrorist organization that kills little boys like ito. i'm very disappointed that my colleague uses a procedural matter to say he objects. what essaying is he will not agree that a -- that will -- money will not go to hamas. this was really simple. you could read this in just two minutes, so i'm disappointed that my democratic colleague has made this political. it is not political. it is, do we support israel? are we going to make sure that never a dime goes to hamas and another little boy like ito dies. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming.

mr. barrasso: thank you, madam president. madam president, the senate will vote tomorrow on the nomination of tommy p. beaudreau to serve as deputy secretary of the interior. he will manage our national parks, our wildlife areas and the outer continental shelf. he will oversee the management of the largest water supply in the west and he will also oversee our nation's trust responsibilities to american indian tribes and alaska natives. he will be responsible for the multiple uses of our public lands. one of the more important roles he will fulfill is overseeing traditional and renewable energy supplies on public lands and waters. renewable energy creates good-paying jobs, provides tremendous revenue for the state and we use the essential services of the state funded by

this like public education. mr. beaudreau has extensive experience. he served in the leadership position in the obama administration. as an attorney in the private sector, he regularly handled matters relating to his department. he's an expert in his field. he understands america's need for all of the above energy strategy. that strategy must include coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear power and renewables. i appreciated his commitment to working with members of the energy and natural resources committee. the department needs to listen and collaborate with the people of wyoming and the west. these are the states that rely heavily on energy production on our public lands. we're the states that power america. and we're the ones that will be hit the hardest by president biden's punishing executive

orders. this administration unleashed a barrage of executive actions that threaten to destroy the livelihoods of oil and natural gas workers in the west. it is critical that mr. beaudreau keeps those workers in the front of his mind as he works at department. he is working for an administration that is waging a war on energy workers. my goal is to hold mr. beaudreau and the biden administration to the commitments that mr. beaudreau has made to our committee and i will support his nomination. madam president, on another topic. i come to the floor today in support of america's police officers. every weekend i come home -- go home to wyoming. every weekend people ask me about three issues, the president's attacks on american energy, the crisis at our southern border, and the democrats defunding the police.

people see the headlines. they see the images on the news. they heard about looting and rioting around violence in democrat-run cities. they are deeply concerned. last year 63 of america's 66 largest cities saw crimes up. homicides are up by one-third in just one year. since president biden took office, these increases have continued in democrat-run cities. in the first three months of this year, homicides went up in washington, d.c., oakland, california, philadelphia, chicago, and baltimore, just to name a few. it's no wonder that the american people tell pollsters that they feel less safe today than they did one year ago. the democrat crime surge is especially shocking because it is a reversal of a long-term trend. for a quarter century, crime in

america had been going down, the violent crime rate was cut in half, the murder rate was also cut in half. it was an historic bipartisan accomplishment. then in 2014, democrats began their war on law enforcement officers. after michael brown was killed in ferguson, missouri, democrats started attacking police. crime suddenly went up in democrat cities. in the final two years of the obama-biden administration, the murder rate went up by one-fifth. violent crime overall went up by 7% and then republicans took back the white house and the congress. we stopped the law on -- the war on law enforcement and crime went down again. last year democrats began a repeat of 2014. this time it was on a much larger scale. democrats began attacking police again, crime went up again in

democrat-run cities. america's cities saw the largest increase in murder on record. my democratic colleagues might say it's a coincidence, yet, there is a very clear chain of events. democrats attack police, they cut police funding, the number of police officers went down, crime went up. we had a chance to fix the problem in law enforcement. senator tim scott introduced a police reform bill, which i strongly support, yet the democrats blocked it. time and again, democrats put criminals ahead of police and law-abiding citizens. innocent people continue to pay the price. democrats spend trillions and trillions of our tax dollars, yet they cut funding to police, to law enforcement. last year alone democrats cut more than $1 billion worth of police funding, these includes cutting funding in cities where violent crime went up. police have been retiring or

quitting in historic numbers, fewer police officers means more crime, more destruction, and more fear in our cities. the american people deserve better. the american people deserve safety and a piece of -- peace of mind. it's time for democrats to stop attacking police. it's time for democrats to stop wasting taxpayer dollars on liberal spending. it's time for democrats to start paying attention to public safety. i say to my democratic colleagues, the vast majority of police officers in this country are heroes. they put their lives on the line for us every day. it is time to treat them with respect. when democrats wage their war on the men and women who dedicate their lives to law enforcement, only criminals win, the rest of our nation loses. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from new york. mrs. gillibrand: madam president, i rise to once again call for this entire body to

have the opportunity to consider and cast their votes on the military justice improvement and increasing prevention act. this commonsense reform would ensure that people in the military who have been subjected to sexual assault and other serious crimes get the justice they deserve. i've been calling for a full vote on the floor of this bill since may 24. that was 23 days ago. since then, an estimated 1,288 service members will have been raped or sexually assaulted. two in three of the survivors will not even report it because they know they are more likely to face retaliation than to receive justice. today i want to share the story of the kind of offender that our bill would address. on march 30 of this year, staff

sergeant randall hughes pled guilty to a series of rapes dating back to 2006 that he committed while the army looked the other way. staff sergeant hughes was only brought to justice after his brave daughter decided to come forward. had the army prosecuted him the first time one of his victims had come forward, his daughter may have been spared. at a super bowl party in 2017, staff sergeant hughes fed drinks to a host, a soldier in his care, until the host passed out. he approached the host's wife while he was outside the house. he propositioned for sex and when she refused, he forced himself on her against the grill and then dragged her inside the house and raped her while the husband was passed out in the next room. the survivor hid in the bathroom until she could report it to

c.i.d. c.i.d. -- the command did nothing to expedite the investigation or hold c.i.d.'s feet to the fire. c.i.d. determined that the allegations were credible, but the command did nothing. instead of prosecuting him, the command put staff sergeant hughes on the sergeant first class promotion list. hopeless, the survivor asked that something, anything, be done. the command reacted by putting an administrative remark in his record. staff sergeant hughes was transferred to a new duty station at fort dix, while at fort dix, after years of sexual abuse, his daughter bravely came forward to report that abuse. c.i.d. at fort dix then noticed the administrative remark in his record in the previous rape and

began making inquiries. they learned he raped two other women and physically abused his wife. the command had every tool available to stop staff sergeant hughes from his serial rapes, including the abuse of his daughter, but instead they did nothing. even after he admitted to his crime and pled guilty, the army offered a plea deal for 13 years of confinement. 13 years of confine despite sexually assaulting three women, including a minor. this serial offender avoided justice for 15 years, even when the command was forced to administer justice, he received a sentence less than we would give a drug offender. this case is why we need a professional military justice system worthy of the sacrifices the men and women in our military make every day. having leadership at the time

that truly cares, that is truly passionate about prosecuting sexual abuse will have repercussions down the chain. our bill does exactly this. we have 66 senators that have cosponsored this bill. it deserves a vote on the floor. as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that at a time -- determined by the majority leader -- at a time to be determined by the majority leader, the senate armed services committee be discharged from s. 1520 and the senate proceed to its consideration. that there be two hours equally divided in the usual form and that upon the use or yielding back of that time the senate vote on the bill with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. reed: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. reed: madam president, once again i reject to the request from the senator from new york for the reasons i previously stated and i'll repeat again what i said publicly and what

i'm committed to. i support the prosecution of sexual assault, the types of crimes senator gillibrand discussed. but her bill goes further to include bills not related to sexual assault. the removal of crimes will be an historic change, the military justice system and one in which senator gillibrand can claim great responsibility for affecting it. we must take care that we do it thoughtfully in a manner that does not break the military justice system. the worst thing we can do for victims of sexual assault is to move a bill through that can't be implemented effectively or on time, creates too large a workload for too few qualified military judge advocates, leads to convictions being overturned

on appeal or results in neglected cases because the necessary attention cannot be devoted to them. according to the department of defense, the number of full time concerns, lawyer disposition authority required to execute the system as proposed, which would take effect 180 days from enactment, exceeds the number of judge advocates. and this doesn't account for bills that these 06 judge advocates have significant trial and law experience or would not then be available for other important assignments reserved for o6 such as military judges and division corps or judge advocates. the heads have previously raised concerns about the implementation time line, the resources necessary to execute, and a host of other inconsists with the current system that would have to be addressed to be

sure of full complementation. these are the very military lawyers that senator gillibrand's bill would empower to make prosecutorial decisions which includes an evalue situation of a far greater number of cases than simply those that end up in court-martial. these the issues that we need to discuss in committee and not dispose of in an amendment on the floor. the committee will do this and do faithfully. and i am very much confident that we will be able to move legislation that does remove any contact -- any crime-related sexual misconduct from the current command system to a system that senator gillibrand is proposing. with that, a madam president, i would reiterate my objection. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mrs. gillibrand: as you heard from the chairman of the committee, he only intends on taking one crime out of the chain of command, and that's sexual assault. and the reason why that is so problematic is, number one, it will continue to undermine women

in the military, marginalize them and isolate them, creating a pink court that all legal experts have agreed would be highly ineffective and would harm the military justice system. second, our allies have already made this move. they've taken all serious crimes out of the chain of command and given to trained military prosecutors. in the u.k., israel, germany, netherlands and australia. they did it specifically for defendants' rights. and we have a similar problem in this country because right now we have a great deal of racial bias in who gets punished. if you are black or brown in the u.s. military today, you are 2.5 times more likely to be punished and most commanders are white commanders. there's further data that shows most black and brown service members have either experienced or witnessed racism within the ranks. so if we want to fix this criminal justice system, you need a bright line, and it should be all serious crimes. that is how we fix the military justice system.

that is how we give justice to sexual assault survivors. and for the chairman to say today that it would cost too much money or that they don't have sufficient resources or sufficient lawyers isn't true. and those are the same arguments that were used over the last eight years about excluding sexual assault from the chain of command as well. so i don't think these are legitimate arguments. i think they are brought up year after year as just a way to put an impediment in front of the reform that is needed to fix the system. i now yield the floor to my colleague, senator grassley. mr. grassley: senator gillibrand, as one of the other 65 cosponsors of this legislation, i think you're to be commended for every day coming to the floor being as consistent for this legislation as you have been since 2013. and i -- every one of us thank you for your persistence. you need to be congratulated and all the people that have been

harmed by sexual assaults over the last decades owe you a great deal of gratitude for that. so i'm here to join senator gillibrand in asking for a vote on this crucial legislation, and obviously today we aren't going to get it. but eventually it's going to happen. you can't say no to 66 senators that want this legislation. the military justice and improvement prevention act has that many bipartisan cosponsors, and it's past time for this bill to become law. this legislation was first introduced by senator gillibrand and me and other senators eight years ago and has gained more and more support each year. senators who previously were skeptical have come around and realized that the department of defense can't handle the pervasive problems of sexual assault on their own.

the armed services committee and the department of defense have had more than enough time to consider this idea. they've told us that they have it under control and tried other approaches. those approaches have not worked. women andmen in the military -- women and men in the military continue to face high rates of sexual assault and retaliation. it's clear this bill is needed. by moving the decision to prosecute out of the chain of command, perpetrators of sexual assault and other serious crimes will be held accountable. survivors will have more confidence in the process. retaliation will be less likely. we've been waiting almost a decade. there's no need any longer to wait. i urge my colleagues to allow this bill to move forward today. and obviously it isn't going to move forward today, but senator gillibrand will be back here

tomorrow asking the same thing, and i applaud you for doing that. i yield the floor. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. lee: madam president, 100 years ago in 1921 a young and newly maryland couple named percy and verbel l knufzen saw a a need for a gathering place. they started an ice cream and candy store. a few years later 56 raising the

necessary funds, percy and veribelle, with the help of david and his wife lorita, shifted their business from sweets to full-service meals and a croix fay was born. over the course of the last century, idleisle cafe has served important people. it's survived the difficulties of the great depression and world war ii, all while serving locals and national celebrities alike, including wallace bury, charlie chaplain, carol lumbar and paulette goddard. during the 19 50's, idle isle even served the duke himself while on movie shoots. in those years, the cafe also served as a meeting place for members of the bringing ham unit

of the national guard, who were later called to serve their country in the korean war. the cafe has endured both good times and bad over the last century, but whatever the times, it's always been a place where people from every walk of life could share a meal, enjoy a friendship, and bear one another's burdens, as they endured the ups and downs of life together. as the cafe celebrates its 100-year anniversary this year, it's worth recognizing all the good that it's done for utah and for bringing ham city. -- brigham city. this is one of the things that utahans do best. travis and jana porter, the current owners of idle isle, epitomize this spirit. everyone who befriends or works with the porters quickly sees their love of community and their dedication to their country. nearly everything they do, both

inside of the restaurant and outside stems from their passion for helping others and their optimistic outlook on life. even with their five kids and the business of running the restaurant, the couple finds intentional time each day to love and serve those who work in the cafe and all who come to visit. as a result of their service, idle isle if a say endures. -- cafe endures. the state's economy is so robust in large part because neighbors care for neighbors, friends care for friends, and strangers even look out for strangers. it doesn't matter who you are. in utah you belong, whether in the cafe or the community, there is a place for you at the table. our doors are open. so, too, are our hearts. you see, utah is one of these places where it doesn't matter

how long your family has been in the state or whether you've been here for five minutes. to us you you're a utahan. the enduring spirit of utah is not inspired by government. no, it's inspired by moms and dads, teachers, small business owners, friends, and neighbors. earlier in year when neighbors in west valley city were overwhelmed at the prospect of revamping and reclaiming their community, an opportunity presented itself. aging homes with peeling paint and cracked-up driveways, broken fences and neglected yards needed to be refinished. so in typical utah fashion, neighbors came together. after identifying problems, reviewing resorrieses, and communicating with community leaders, an initiative was born -- operation my hometown. it is a neighborhood improvement coalition made up of residents, city workers, and volunteers

from various churches and other organizations. it runs entirely on private initiative and volunteerism. two of utah's hallmark strengths. their process is simple -- see something in need of repair, note it, and join the group to help fitch it. and -- to help fix it. and then of course fix it. repair requests can be submitted online and anyone can help. the projects are significant and quite remarkably they're being completed. to quote one news report, quote, six days a week the church is converting its meetinghouse into the neighborhood -- in the neighborhood into a community center. corporations are donating cash and goods. a new park is planned. the city is adding streetlights. funds are being raised to finance homeownership. and volunteers are streaming in from all over the salt lake valley to work side by side with residents.

neighborhood resident bonnie shaw stated, i'm so encouraged, so hopeful, so blessed. i can't even believe this is happening. another resident, nicholas orwin, shared as follows -- we live in a strange world these days. we their this ideology that if you don't look like me, talk like me, act like me and vote like me then we must be enemies. but throughout all of this social upheaval, this community senior senator worked together and served -- this community has worked together and served in such a brilliant way that it just defies the ideology that we're different and have to segregate ourselves out into groups. even in the dark days of covid, this community service was such a bright, shiny star. through all that hard, we have this -- this really beautiful and safe community service that was happening.

it has been said that the greatness of a community is most accurately measured by the compassionate actions of its members. if that's the case, then ut is truly a great place. to honor this tradition of greatness, i myself am grateful to host the annual flavors of utah event in partnership with operation my hometown in west valley city later this summer. my office has partnered with this and other great community groups to collect food from local producers and distribute it to those in need. i encourage other utahans to join me in this effort, as we together look for opportunities to thrive. the spirit of utah, the enduring spirit of utah, is born from a rich history of hard work, industry, innovation, and engine newtown -- ingenuity even get great hardship. few individuals embody the spirit more than the late bart

tanner. o.c. tanner was the youngest of ten children. despite his position in the family, from a age he felt an obligation to provide for his family african american he did so by providing odd jobs around the city including stoking furnaces. one of the people for whom tanner stoked the furnace was a mentor. with time, he schooled the young tanner in the jewelry business. tanner was a quick study. he swiftly implemented the lessons taught to him and began selling graduation pins and class rings from the back of his car. in 1927 he officially founded the o.c. tanner company. though still an undergraduate student at the university of unfortunate utah, he used whatever time he had outside of his classwork to make ends meet and make ends meet he did.

the company quickly grew and endured the difficulties that put others out of business. throughout the years the enduring spirit of o.c. tanner has been a guiding light and an inspiration to many and the company has achieved truly great heights. in 2002, the o.c. tanner company crafted the metals for the winter olympics which were hosted in salt lake city. in 2019, o.c. tanner designed a copper spike replica of the original golden spike that was ceremonially driven at the joining of the two branches of the first transcontinental railroad. today the o.c. tanner company maintains offices in the united states, canada, england, singapore, australia, and india. the company is one of the largest manufacturers of retail and corporate awards in the united states and it employs over 1,500 people. through the dark nights of hardship, o.c. tanner has endured and even succeeded,

thrived. through the difficulties of community building, the volunteers of operation my hometown endure, and they are succeeding. and through 100 years of historic highs and unforgettable lows, the idle isle cafe endures, and yes, the cafe is succeeding, too. as goes the saying, those who endure conquer. similar to o.c. tanner, the volunteers at operation my hometown and the idle isle cafe, all youthans haven -- all utahans have endured the difficulty of the last year with faith and fortitude and they are emerging victorious. the enduring spirit of utah is strong. the 2020 pandemic, earthquakes, civic discord, confusion, and contention presented daunting challenges in the lives of all, and yet utahans are breathing a

collective sigh of relief as we embrace the shining horizon that lies yet ahead. since the onset of the virus over a year ago, utahans have seen near continuous drops in unemployment. utah's unemployment rate fell to 2.8% in april, less than half the national number. although earthquakes shook homes and businesses last year, utah's economy has still been rated the best in the united states by several nationally recognized outlets. and while the discord, confusion, and contention have seemed to dominate the airwaves, utah citizens have banded together to bridge the partisan divides that can be so difficult to overcome. utah and utahans are remarkable. if you're seeking a place to start a business, ask those at idle isle cafe. utah is the place. if you're seeking a place where

community matters, ask those at operation my hometown. utah is the place. and if you're seeking a place where opportunity is abundant, read the story of o.c. tanner. utah is the place. i'm very grateful for the privilege of representing the state of utah here in the united states senate. it's my home that the successes and the enduring spirit of utah will continue to serve as an example for the nation. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: mr. president, yesterday, the senate moved a historic bill one step closer to president biden's desk. the senate unanimously passed legislation to finally make juneteenth a federal holiday and to preserve the legacy of that momentous day for generations to come. for more than a century, texans have celebrated juneteenth and commemorated the anniversary of the day slaves in texas were first informed of the news that they were indeed free. president lincoln issued the emancipation proclamation on january 1, 1963, but the news didn't reach texas for two and a half years, until june 19, 1865.

we were the first state to make juneteenth a holiday, and of course it commemorates an event that occurred in galveston, texas, but over the last four decades, many other states have joined us. it's finally time to recognize juneteenth as a national holiday. i reintroduced this bipartisan bill with the senator from massachusetts, senator markey, this year, and i have been proud to work alongside my fellow texan, congresswoman sheila jackson-lee in the house to get the bill passed and signed into law. the bill now heads to the house, and according to congressman steny hoyer, the house will actually pass it today. i will have more to say about the history and significance of juneteenth tomorrow, but for now, i want to thank the dozens of senators on both sides of the aisle who have supported this effort. i think particularly now at this point in our nation's history, a little reconciliation could go a

long way. and it's also an opportunity to learn from our past. america is the greatest nation in the world, but we are not perfect. indeed, the original sin of slavery when this country was created has caused this country a lot of angst, death, and injustice over the years. we have fought a civil war. 600,000 americans died. if you extrapolated that to current population, that would be like three million americans dying. then of course we went through the civil rights movement and -- in the 1960's, and of course the latest manifestation of racial strife is the unfortunate killing of people like george floyd and the lack of trust that exists between some law enforcement and the communities that they serve. so while america is not perfect, we continue to do the work to

strive to be a more perfect union, in the words of the constitution. mr. president, on another matter, this friday is the -- iran will hold its 13th presidential election, but unlike presidential elections in the united states or any other legitimate democracy, this process in iran is more about providing the appearance of democracy than an actual democratic process. in america, elections are conduits for change. if the american people don't like their elected officials or the direction of their government, they can change it. in iran, elections are a sham. the candidates are hand selected. the result predetermined, and the opportunity for change nonexistent. the process for electing the

president of iran is just a few steps shy of the fabricated elections in places like iraq under saddam hussein. in 2002, saddam won reelection by 11 million votes, 11 million to zero, and there was reported to be 100% turnout. well, in fact, there weren't any other candidates running. in fact, the question on the ballot asked if saddam should remain in office, check yes or no. well, it reminds me of the story i heard about that time of a reporter traveling with a driver who he hired to drive him around iraq to report on conditions there. the reporter asked when he learned that there was 100% turnout and saddam hussein won by 100% of the votes, he said well, you have been with me, to his driver. how did you vote? and he said saddam must have

known what was in my heart. that to me is maybe a pock -- apochryphal but shows how the dictators, even the ayatollah in iran, they still want to give the appearance of democracy, even though they deny it to their very own people. so in iran, the situation is much different than the election under saddam hussein. there is just a larger effort to create the appearance of choices. while the iranian people may vote for the eventual winner, there is a highly controlled process that selects the pool of candidates, and the puppeteer behind the curtain is the supreme leader, ali khomeini. unlike a true democracy, the candidates for president of iran are not selected by the iranian people. they are selected behind closed doors by a powerful group called

the guardian council. this group itself is comprised of 12 people. half are selected by the supreme leader and the other half are selected by the parliament. the parliament can't select just anyone for this position. these six jurists are chosen from the options presented to the parliament by the chief justice, and the chief justice, you might have guested, it appointed by the supreme leader. this contrived election is not the result of a fair and democratic process, and the candidates will hardly represent the will of the iranian people. of the 592 registered candidates, only seven were approved by the guardian council. five conservatives and two so-called reformists. the guardian council in fact prevented most moderate

candidates from even participating in the race, and the candidate pool was carefully whittled down to a point that the outcome is virtually a known certainty. all signs point to the eventual winner as being ibrahim recy, the leader of the revolutionary guard corps. it's easy to see with why mr. recy is the frontman for the leaders of a brutal regime because his resume is nothing less than a long list of atrocities. mr. recy's first step to power came after the 1979 revolution. throughout the 1980's, he gained more power and influence and trust of the ayatollah. in 1988, he was chosen to be one of the four members of the so-called death commission, charged with carrying out executions of iranians --

iranian political prisoners. mr. recy played a central role in these executions which took place over the course of five months. it's difficult for us to be sure how many political prisoners were killed but it's widely known to be in the thousands. some believe the death toll could be as high as 30,000 from these death commissions. and mr. recy's reign of terror did not stop there. he continued to serve in high-ranking positions throughout the government and inflict violence on dissidents. he currently serves as the judiciary chief where he continues to direct the execution of protesters and ethnic minority groups. once again, this mass murder is expected to be the next president of iran. this election comes at a very precarious time for the regime. iran has experienced major

uprisings since the last election in 2017. popular slogans include death to the dictator and our enemy is right here, they lie when they say it is in america. iranian citizens place the responsibility for the economic crisis that the country is currently experiencing on the regime that controls the country. the vast majority of iranians live below the poverty line and the government's pathetic mishandling of covid-19 has made already harsh circumstances even more unbearable. mr. president, the iran people know this election is a sham. the candidates approved by the supreme leader offer no window for the freedoms and change that they desperately want and desperately need. the iran resist tense has called

for an all-out boycott of the elections, and the turnout is expected to be the lowest since the 1979 islamic revolution. for the united states and our allies, this changing of the guard cannot be just a blip on the radar, because iran continues to commit human rights abuses and back terrorist organizations. and authoritarian figures, including dictators around the world. currently, two iran warships are making their way across the atlantic, and we have reason to believe that these ships are carrying missile-equipped fast-attack boats and other military equipment to venezuela. whether this is a test or a threat or an effort to seek some kind of leverage remains to be seen, but what is abundantly clear is that iran has no intention of taking its foot off the gas. over the last two months, u.s.

military in iraq have been attacked by drones laden with explosives, and all signs point to the responsibility being iranian-backed militias. and just last month, the world watched in horror as the conflict between israel and palestinian gave way to more violence and destruction than we have seen in years. this is a proxy war waged by iran against the jewish state. hamas, that proxy, receives significant financial support from iran, which is the number-one state sponsor of terrorism in the world. now these actions taken over the past few months, add that to what we've seen over the last several years. iran is arrested and continues to detain american citizens. it engages in gross human rights abuses.

it backs terrorists around the world. and we watched as iran has blatantly ignored the restrictions on the joint comprehensive plan of action, the so-called jcpoa, which is designed to prevent iran from enriching uranium and building a nuclear weapon. during the time that they violated the terms of the jcpoa, iran was led by president rouhani, broadly considered to be a moderate when compared with his expected successor. following the selection, iran's already extreme president will be replaced by an even more punishing leader. the united states cannot simply stand by and enable iran to continue down its current path. in recent years iran has felt significant pressure from the united states and our allies. the trump administration

withdrew from the iran nuclear deal and placed sanctions on businesses and individuals who helped finance iran's illicit activities. there is no question that iran stood the most to lose from the historic abraham peace accords brokered this past year. this took a number of arab countries that were nominally adversaries and they joined together to declare their willingness to let israel live in peace and to recognize them as a legitimate state. but the biden administration has already loosened the pressure valve on iran. president biden has made it clear his intent to revive the iranian nuclear deal, no matter what the cost. at the same time the administration has rolled back sanctions that would have provided u.s. maximum leverage to bring iran to the negotiating table. by simply signaling his intent,

the biden administration has already emboldened and encouraged iran's maligned activities. iran did not play by the rules of the jcpoa the first time around, so there's absolutely no reason to believe that will change when a radical mass murderer assumes the presidency. over the last few days the leaders of the g-7 have reaffirmed the need to stop iran from developing a nuclear weapon. i agree that this is one of the most critical responsibilities of our time, but a flawed agreement that relieves pressure on iran without concessions with regard to their nuclear weapon aspiration will only continue to embolden the regime. iran's belligerence cannot be rewarded with sanctions relief, and the administration should not continue to squander our leverage. the biden administration needs to resume the maximum pressure

campaign on iran, and i would encourage the president to work closely with us in congress to identify an approach that's effective, comprehensive and built on bipartisan foundations. we have to stop iran from ever achieving a nuclear weapons capability. avril haines, during her confirmation hearing, i asked her should the united states prevent iran from getting a nuclear weapon. she said, yes. she didn't hesitate. ambassador burns, the new c.i.a. director, i asked him the same question. should we let iran get a nuclear weapon. he said no, without hesitation. i find that encouraging from these two new members of president biden's cabinet. but we need to work together as republicans and democrats, as members of congress, and the

administration to ensure that our efforts to stop iran from developing nuclear weapons can last beyond the term of a single president or congress. mr. president, i yield the floor, and i'd note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. portman: mr. president, i'm here to talk about the escalating crisis --. the presiding officer: the senate is in a quorum call. mr. portman: i ask unanimous consent the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. portman: mr. president, i'm here to talk about the escalating crisis on our southern border. i am the ranking republican, meaning the senior republican on the homeland security committee, which is the committee that has, among other things, oversight over what happens at the department of homeland security, and therefore at the border and customs and bored patrol and other responsibilities. so we've been looking at this issue carefully over the past few months trying to figure out how can we address this surge at

the border that's really overwhelming the border patrol. and it's obviously about people, but it's also about drugs. because unfortunately, there are more and more drugs coming over the southern border as well which in effect makes states like mine, ohio, which is not on the southern border -- we're actually on the northern border -- but it makes us part of the border in effect because we're affected by what happens down there. at one time most of the most deadly drug, fentanyl, which is the synthetic opioid, was coming from china. and frankly, a lot of it coming from the mail system, our own postal service. we passed legislation here in this body. i worked with republicans and democrats alike on it. and we've largely been able to deal with that issue. but those same drugs have now moved to mexico and now they're coming across our southern border. so if you look at the amount of fentanyl and other synthetic opioids, the deadliest of all

drugs when more people are dying of overdoses than ever in history, more of that is coming across the southern border. in addition to the cocaine, crystal meth and other dangerous drugs that are already coming. this is about the immigration system not working properly, having a huge surge of individuals, family members, unaccompanied kids. but it's also about not having control of that border and having these, this contraband come over in the case of these dangerous drugs, contraband that's actually resulting in overdoses and deaths all over the united states, including in my state of ohio. so how can we tell that it's getting worse? i would just look at these numbers here. this is the latest from the customs and border patrol folks, encounters at the southwest border. we had a crisis in may of 2019 which was deemed to be the worst crisis of its kind, and it was pretty bad. we had a lot of unaccompanied kids coming at that time and a

lot of family members as well as individuals. the high point was here at 144,000 individuals. we're now as of may of 2021, which is last month, at 180,000. and some of my colleagues have said, well, it's getting better. i don't see it getting better, and the numbers don't say it's getting better. and it's really at the point now where it is overwhelming those people whose jobs it is to try to control the border. they just don't have the resources to be able to handle this. it's also overwhelming our system all the way through. so a lot of this is families and kids coming in, as an example. we don't have the facilities to take care of these children. during this first period of time, here's the biden nawlings. -- inauguration. after the inauguration this huge increase started to happen, and

it's because policies were changed. a new president coming in has the right to change policies, but in my view, what a president doesn't have the right to do is to change policies without preparing for it. it's one thing to say we're not going to have an emergency on the southern border anymore. we're going to to do away with title 42 which is a provision that says if you have somebody come over the border during covid they can be turned back. and immediately the president said no, we're not going to use that anymore for kids, for unaccompanied kids. and they have now not used it for most families coming over. not having title 42 was a shock to the system. you had a situation where people were being turned away because of covid one day and the next day they weren't, and you can see the result. and, by the way, these are people who come from all over the world, but a lot from the northern triangle countries, the countries of guatamala, el

salvador and honduras. recently the president of honduras talked about this. i know the president of guatamala has talked about it. what the president of guatamala said in essence is the traffickers, the smugglers, they heard this, and they came down to our country and said let's go to the northern border, make that difficult and arduous journey, sometimes very dangerous journey for the children because the biden administration said there would no longer be title 42 in place where we can turn you away it the border and in fact said we want to reunite families and kids. and that means come to the border and you can come into the country. and that's what's happened. look, i believe we ought to have a legal immigration system that is very healthy in this country. i believe in immigration. i think it's a very important part of who we are as americans. we take more people in every year than any other country in the world legally, and that's over a million people a year. and i think that's been good for our country.