mr. carper: mr. president. are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are not, senator. the senator from delaware is recognized. mr. carper: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the following amendments be called up to substitute and be reported by number. number one, van hollen, van hollen number 2354 and the second is johnson numbered 2245. further, that at 7:30 p.m. today, the senate vote in relation to the van hollen amendment and at 11:00 a.m. tomorrow morning, the senate vote in relation to the johnson numbered 245, with no amendments in order to the amendments prior to a vote in relation to the amendment with 60 affirmative votes required for adoption of

the amendments and two minutes for debate equally divided prior to the votes. the presiding officer: is there an objection? without objection, the clerk will report the amendments. the clerk: senator from delaware, mr. carper, for mr. van hollen, proposes an amendment numbered 2354 to amendment numbered 2137. the senator from delaware, mr. carper, for mr. johnson, proposes an amendment numbered 2245 to amendment numbered 2137. mr. carper: with that, mr. president, i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa is recognized. mr. grassley: thank you, mr. president.

i come to the floor today because -- the presiding officer: we're in a quorum call. mr. grassley: the lights weren't on that's why i didn't ask for it. the presiding officer: it was right at the cusp. mr. grassley: i ask that it be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: all i can do is go by the lights. i cam -- i come do the floor because i'm greatly concerned as to whether the department of justice is commit to fighting the crime known by the gang as ms-13, they operate on the streets of the united states and throughout mexico and central america. ms-13's informal model is, can you believe this, kill, steal, rape, and control. under the trump administration,

the department established a task force to fight the murders and other serious crimes committed by ms-13 gang members, but the department of justice hasn't released any news or updates on this task force called task force vulcan since way back january 14, this year. right before president biden's inauguration is when that january 14 date was. so you can see we haven't seen anything sibs this president's been sworn -- since this president's been sworn in so we have no idea what the department of justice is doing to combat ms-13. from 2017 to 2020, u.s. customs and border protection found and arrested over three million

people, averaging about 750,000 people a year. in that same time period border patrol appear handed 13,000 gang members every year. this year, however, imoarp has encounter -- they have arrested two-tenths million, but this year customs and border patrol has apprehended 61ms-13 members trying to enter the united states, suggesting many ms-13 members are sneaking past border patrol who are dealing with

unaccompanied children or asylum seekers. one border patrol member said that they are using the migrants entering the u.s. to blend in and get past agents. we know that ms-13 is still trying to sneak into the country, however they are just more successful now. customs border patrol is still arresting ms-13 members when they can identify them. in april alone, the custom border patrol arrested an ms-13 member who was a convicted felon with an outstanding warrant and one female ms-13 member traveling with a convicted

murder. here, next to the capitol, police in maryland arrested an ms-13 member after he learned a 15-year-old -- lured a 15-year-old girl into an apartment and tried to rape her. even if border patrol agents in the field and local police are doing their best to stop ms-13, we still don't know what the department of justice is doing about ms-13 since they haven't released any updates on the task force you'll have khan since january -- vulgian since january. we don't know if it still exists. this is a problem because we noal ms-13 has ruthlessly operating on american streets and congress and the american people deserve to know what the

deal -- what the department of justice is doing to keep our streets safe and to keep us safe from dangerous criminal organizations like ms-13. so i will be seeking answers to this question from the department of justice. it's a pretty basic question. do you have anything to update the american people about? we should know what the status of all this is. and on another matter, mr. president. president biden and his allies in congress are chomping at the bit to grease the wheels for a partisan $3.5 trillion spending spree before they leave for the august break. at the time when our national debt is set to exceed levels not

seen since world war ii, this is not only irresponsible but dangerous. hardworking americans are already paying the price for excess spending in the form of inflation with prices rising throughout the economy. and, of course, poll after poll shows americans are becoming increasingly concerned about inflation. instead of adding to these concerns in the pursuit of wish list priorities, congress should focus on addressing the real priorities the american people. for instance, we should be taking action to address the crisis at our southern border. in june u.s. customs and border protection encountered 188,000 people. that's up 471% from the same time last year. as a result of the biden

administration's irresponsible immigration policies, customs and border patrol has encountered 1.10 million illegal immigrants at the southern border during the fiscal year, that is five times more than at iowa's capital city in des moines. that is unacceptable. the senate democrats are trying hard to deny it. instead of taking action to secure our borders and deter illegal immigration, senate democrats are attempting to use reckless tax-and-spending bill to offer amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants living in the united states. it's deeply irresponsible. it will only encourage more of this illegal immigration and will only make the border crisis

worse. illegal immigration isn't the only crime cascading over the border. mexican cartels are pouring record high amounts of hard drugs, methamphetamine, cocaine, heroin, fentanyl across the border with impunity. fentanyl has become the choice drug because it's highly potent and, of course, highly profitable, particularly for the cartels. a tiny amount, even as small as a grain of salt, can result in overdose, and, of course, in death. fentanyl is increasingly laced into other drugs which heightens potency, often without the user even knowing it. in 2020, over 93,000 americans died from drug overdoses, that

is almost the entire population of dafonport, iowa. the primary driver of this surge is overdose deaths is fentanyl coming in from mexico. instead of working on curbing cartels at the border and cutting off their extensive power in the united states, senate democrats choose to bury their heads in the sand and pretend that fentanyl isn't deadly. the border crisis is then very obviously a drug crisis. and on top of that, police departments across the country are still having a hard time getting enough officers. violent crime is soaring. homicide rates are through the roof. iowa families don't redecorate their houses when the plumbing

is leaking. these issues are dinner table issues. so congress must focus on them instead of reckless and partisan spending proposals that's going on in the united states senate now by the majority party. i yield the floor. mr. grassley: in the past few weeks, been a lot of talk about increasing i.r.s. enforcement to bring in more money to the government. that would be fine if we could trust the i.r.s. to keep

taxpayers' information safe and secure and actually using that information to enforce the tax code. now unfortunately, that notion is waffling on pretty shaky ground at this very moment. in june the nonprofit journalism web page pro publica been publishing stories that appear to contain confidential taxpayer information that might have come from the i.r.s. unfortunately, attention has focused more on the private tax affairs of the victims of these actions than on the apparently illegal actions to produce the data that forms the basis of these propublica stories.

by law the confidentiality of taxpayers' information is san crow sanity -- sancrosanct. that comes from section 6103 of the tax code, a section that was put in law in the 1970's, i believe, to see that what nixon did to use the i.r.s. to go after his enemies never happened again. so why is this information sacrosanct? because a federal income tax return contains some of the most sensitive information that there is about a fellow -- about our fellow americans. a tax return is essentially a blueprint for how families and individuals live their lives. aside from detailing where and how taxpayers support themselves and earn money, tax returns

potentially detail what charities including even religious institutions that a taxpayer supports. tax returns can also detail where and how they take care of their children, their medical status, and lots of other deeply personal information. in part to protect tax compliance, congress decided that in exchange for collecting sensitive information needed to enforce the internal revenue code, the i.r.s. must treat this information carefully and protect it from unauthorized access and disclosure. that's what section 6103 is all about. and it carries with it significant criminal and civil penalties for any violations of those terms.

nevertheless, the propublica stories published in a seerries entitled, quote, the secret i.r.s. files inside the tax returns of the .001% are plainly derived. that's the end of the quote. but these are plainly derived from the confidential taxpayers' information. the folks in charge of enforcing the tax code quickly recognize that they had a big problem here. that very morning the i.r.s. commissioner was testifying before the senate finance committee and said that he appreciated the confidential nature of the information collected by the i.r.s. and how very important it is that people are able to trust the i.r.s.

with that information commissioner reddick isn't the only treasury official to express that concern. when asked about this apparent abuse of taxpayer information at the finance committee hearing on the president's nice cal -- fiscal 2022 budget held on june 16, treasury secretary yellen said she agreed the situation was very serious and that the matter has been referred to the justice department. the week before appearing before the -- a different senate committee, attorney general garland also said this was a very serious matter and that people are entitled to the privacy regarding their tax information. i agree with commissioner rettig, secretary yellen, and general garland that the

apparent leak of confidential information is a very serious issue. for one thing, we don't know exactly where the information came from. was it a leak? was it a hack? we don't seem to know. we also don't know the full scope of the information at risk. according to propublica, it has, quote, obtained a vast trove of internal revenue service data on the tax returns of thousands of the nation's wealthiest people covering more than 15 years. end of quote. so let me say that again. propublica claims that it has thousands of tax returns. americans know the risk of having their private information

unsecured in the wind. they know the risk, for example, of fraud and identity theft. and of course nixon's political enemies knew the risk of letting the i.r.s. run loose. according to the most recent i.r.s. electronic tax information advisory committee annual report to congress issued in june of 2021, 185,000 identity theft affidavits were filed with the i.r.s. in 2020. the report also notes that due to pandemic relief, higher levels of identity theft are expected during the 2021 filing season. sure. in this case propublica has decided that the wealthiest individuals are the ones worth

targeting. but again, we don't know the full scope of the information that is at risk. maybe you're not the owner of a sports team or the head of a multinational company or haven't built a vehicle in which you have recently traveled to outer space. the unauthorized access and disclosure of taxpayer information should be a concern to all taxpayers. if someone can expose the most private and sensitive information of the nation's wealthiest citizens, they can do it to anyone. regardless of what anyone thinks about the known victims of this disclosure, no one should be absolutely confident that their information hasn't been compromised. as soon as the apparent disclosure of taxpayer information was known, i pressed

authorities in the executive branch to take action. i questioned commissioner rettig about it during the finance committee that very day. three days later i sent a letter to leader mcconnell and finance ranking member crapo to -- i sent this letter with those two individuals to attorney general garland and f.b.i. director christopher wray asking them to take action on this very important matter. in part the letter reads, quote, find those responsible for these disclosures and ensure they're punished as directed by law. unless you do, ordinary americans will fall victim to these politicized and criminal disclosures and trust in the

i.r.s. and our tax system will continue to erode. that's end of quote by the letter that i sent with leader mcconnell and finance chairman ranking member crapo. on the same day i joined every other republican on the finance committee on a letter to the treasury inspector general for tax administration asking for an immediate investigation. following treasury secretary yellen's june 16 appearance before the finance committee, i also submitted several questions to her in writing. my questions asked pretty simple questions about the scope of the leak and the hack and whether or not anyone with advanced knowledge of the first propublica piece had reached out to the treasury or to the i.r.s.

on june 16 i sent a letter to the attorney general garland and f.b.i. director wray with other judiciary committee republicans seeking a briefing and a confirmation that the f.b.i. or the department of justice is investigating. now as usual, i have not received a single response to any of my written inquiries. there appears to be a massive flaw somewhere in our system of tax administration. our job through constitutional oversight is to determine exactly what the situation is, how it happened, and how we can fix it. unfortunately it appears some are using the apparent illegal disclosure of taxpayer information and the violation of

taxpayers' rights to advance a partisan agenda. that probably doesn't surprise a lot of people that politics would be involved in this. it's important to note that the propublica pieces aren't talking about tax evasion but generally tax avoidance, which is a legal -- a legal minimalization of taxes owed. on june 24 propublica published a story about roth i.r.a.'s using the information of a wealthy tech investor. the purpose of this story was to show that this investor, quote, and other ultrawealthy investors have used them to amass vast fortunes. end of quote. the next day on june 25,

propublica published a story highlighting a senior democratic senator legislation intended to crack down on large roth i.r.a.'s accounts. the same type of account criticized in the previous day's articles. and you're talking about abuse of roth i.r.a.'s? it's in the law. a different propublica story seemed intended to wield private taxpayer information to affect the outcome of an election. now listen to this. on june 16, propublica published a story containing taxpayer information of a candidate in the democratic primary to be the next district attorney of manhattan. seemed to me like somebody is using political things to hurt

people in their own political party. given how conc -- given how concerned many of my colleagues have been about potential election interference, i'm really shocked that this story completely missed their attention. if a candidate's confidential, legally protected information is somehow disclosed less than a week before an election, especially when we don't know the ultimate source of the confidential information or how it was even obtained, shouldn't that raise a red flag to a lot of people in this town? or does it only matter depending upon who the candidate is? finally, i want to address propublica's role in this situation. although they may be very well-intentioned, in my opinion,

they're facilitating an abuse of power by publishing stolen confidential information of individual citizens who are, by all appearances, complying with their legal obligations. they think they're informing the public of information they need to know. they're really telling the public that their tax return information is not private. they could have serious consequences for the proper administration of our tax laws that are based on the proposition that people are going to give honest, correct information because they know it's going to be public and because they owe taxes and they're honest people. plainly, this isn't about tax cheats who broke the law. it's about certain people not

paying what propublica thinks they should pay, regardless if they're paying every dollar that the law requires that they pay. so it's really about promoting changes to tax law that propublica and certain members of this body would support. the identity of specific taxpayers that we know have had their information violated is not an excuse. the notion that taxpayers' information -- every taxpayer's information should be protected is not a view only held by this senator. i've quoted treasury secretary, you've quoted the -- i've quoted the attorney general, all holding that same view. the use of this information to advance partisan objectives and apparently to influence an election should concern all of

us. we need to get to the bomb of what happened -- we need to get to the bottom of what happened. we need to know what taxpayer information is at risk, how many taxpayers have been compromised, and then determine what we can do going forward. so i implore secretary yellen and attorney general garland to respond to my questions and my letters so that we can get on with our very important work. i yield the floor, and i suggest the absence of of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from maine. mr. king: mr. president, i'm purposefully keeping my mask on -- the presiding officer: senator, we are in a quorum call call. mr. king: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. king: i am beginning my comments with my mask on for a very specific reason. if you can tell what's pop ulating the -- populating the mask, america's most favorite crustacean, the north american lobster. i ask that the senate proceed to s. res. 335, submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the

clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 335, designating september 25, 2021, as national lobster day. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. king: i ask unanimous consent that 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. king: mr. president, i appreciate the adoption of this resolution. the american lobster, the north american lobster is a staple, and iconic product of the state of maine. it supports our coastal economy, produces well over $1 billion a year of economic activity and supports thousands of families along the coast of maine. some people occasionally refer to the lobster industry, but in reality, it's a series of small

sole proprietorship businesses. almost all businesses are caught by fishmen on boats. it is a series of small, independently owned businesses. that's one of things that is so special about this industry. it is a treat for me to be able to move this resolution, to have it agreed upon unanimously by the senate, september 21, 20 12,will initially be -- 2021, will officially be national lobster day. thank you you mr. 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:

quorum call:

mr. van hollen: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. van hollen: thank you, madam president. i want to start by thanking some of our colleagues -- the presiding officer: the senate is in a quorum call. mr. van hollen: madam president, i ask that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. van hollen: thank you. madam president, i want to start by thanking some of our colleagues. senator rounds, senator ernst, and senator kelly for cosponsoring the provisions of this amendment and thank the chairman and ranking member of the environment and public works committee, senators carper and capito, for their support as well. i also want to acknowledge the good work of our house colleague congressman steve lynch on championing this issue. so what is this amendment about? it's a commonsense amendment, madam president, to ensure that as we work on a bipartisan basis to modernize our infrastructure for the 21st century, we also

work together to ensure that new infrastructure projects that flow from this bill and others are financed securely. most federal projects are financed securely by law. most require some kind of surety bond. that's been the case for almost 100 years in this country. but because of an odd and old loophole, public-private infrastructure partnerships or p3 projects often do not maintain the same level of protection that had been required for public infrastructure projects over time. that can spell disaster for subcontractors, for workers, for taxpayers, and for the success of projects that are not so secured. we know that contractor defaults can cause costly delays, waste taxpayer money, and leave

residents at local stakeholders and project workers in the lunch. in fact, one defaulted on a p3 project in indiana and left subcontractors without pay and left taxpayers on the hook for over $300 million in additional project costs. this amendment simply requires that p3 projects using tifia financing, that's transportation infrastructure financial infrastructure act be secured with a surety bond. that way in the event a contractor defaults, the protections by that bond ensure the completion of those projects. they protect taxpayers and they ensure that workers and subcontractors and suppliers are paid for their work. not surprisingly, this effort is supported by a broad coalition of organizations, including the american subcontractors association, the national association of minority

contractors, and a wide range of other contractors because it will ensure that they are paid for the work they do. and it will also protect taxpayers who otherwise are left in the lurch if a contractor goes belly up and we do not have the protection of this kind of surety bond. madam president, that's why this amendment has broad bipartisan support and i urge its adoption. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. carper: madam president, are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: yes, we are. mr. carper: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. carper: thank you, madam president. madam president, i rise in support of the amendment offered by my old friend, senator from maryland, my neighbor, senator van hollen. and also young friend, senator ernst. and maybe one or two others that i'm not aware of. but the amendment offered by our colleague requires public-partnership projects that receive loans from usdot to obtain something called surety bonds. surety bonds are a proven tool for ensuring that the -- loan

recipient has appropriate payment and performance protections in place. by requiring these bonds, this amendment would protect the workers, would protect suppliers and guarantees that any subcontractor, suppliers and workers would receive the payment they deserve for their work on the projects, even if the borrow we are were to de-- borrower would default. it's based on bicameral, bipartisan legislation supported by a dozen of organizations, including those that represent minority-owned and women-owned small businesses. i urge my colleagues to support it. i am -- before i yield to our colleague, ranking member of the e.p.w. committee, i want to say how pleased i am with the progress we've made today. a lot of amendments were offered and considered. we had the opportunity to vote on them, accept some. some not accepted. but the spirit was good.

there's a good spirit here. i think most people who think we can never get anything done had a chance to see how this place works today. they feel better about this democracy. i yield to the gentlewoman from west virginia. the presiding officer: the gentlewoman from west virginia. mrs. capito: thank you, madam president. i am in full support of this bipartisan amendment. as the chairman explained, that public-private partnerships under tifia would be backed by the surety bond which would maneant of a contractor default, the contracts could still be completed mr., contractors paid and taxpayer investments paid. i am fully in support. i would like to say that the progress we had today is more than encouraging. we're all, i think, very excited about the prospects of what the improvements that this bill will make to our transportation and energy sectors and just our --

the guts of our country in terms of the physical infrastructure. with that, a i am -- i would yield back. thank you. the presiding officer:ness no further debate, the question is on the amendment 2354. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: the yeas are 97, the nays are zero. under the previous order requiring 60 votes for the adoption of this amendment, the amendment is agreed to. the majority leader. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the vote on the johnson amendment 2245 scheduled for 11:00 a.m. tomorrow occur at 12:00 p.m. tomorrow, august 4. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. schumer: 12:15. what did i say? 12:15 tomorrow. please. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. schumer: very important to the workings of the senate. next, i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar 250. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it.

the motion is disagreed to. -- is agreed to. the clerk: the judiciary, eunice c. lee of new york to be united states circuit judge for the second circuit. mr. schumer: i might parenthetically add a great nominee to the state of new york. i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the cloture motion. 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 25, eunice c. lee of new york to be united states circuit judge for the second circuit, signed by 17 senators as follows -- mr. schumer: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i ask consent the mandatory quorum call for the cloture motion filed today, august 3, be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: madam president, under the rule, this cloture vote on the nominee will occur one hour after convening on thursday. for the information of senators,

the process of confirming this nominee will in no way interfere with the consideration of the additional amendments to the bipartisan infrastructure bill. we already have a vote on an amendment scheduled tomorrow and expect further votes as well. madam president, i ask unanimous consent the senate consider the following nomination, calendar 294. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, office of the director of not intelligence, stacey u.a.e. dixon of the district of columbia to be principal deputy director. surely schumer i ask unanimous consent that the senate vote on the nomination without intervening action or debate, and request fuffed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all with no intervening action or debate, that no further motion motion be in order to the nomination, any statements related to the nomination be be printed in the record, and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: is there objection?

without objection. the question is on the nomination. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nomination is confirmed. mr. schumer: 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 ask unanimous consent that the appointment at the desk appear separately in the record as if made by the chair. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it ajourney until 10:30 a.m. wednesday, august 4. that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed.

that upon the conclusion of morning business, the senate resume consideration of h.r. 3684. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: if there is to further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until senate stands adjourned until senator ron johnson would prohibit portable projects canceled under the legislation. as always, you can follow the senate live here on c-span2

c-span is your on your company's center? , it's way more than. >> to create wi-fi tools they need to be ready for anything comcast supports c-span as a public service along with these other television providers giving front row seat to democracy. >> i'm katie, tonight's event with stephen johnson professor with his new book, short history of living longer. you're in for an excellent time. i want to say a huge thanks to stephen randolph and the team for this happening. were not able to host defense, community up office this year. we are grateful for your