participate in c-span's studentcam video competition. your opinion matters so if you're a middle or school student will ask you to create a documentary that answers the question how does the federal government impact your life? your document he must show and opposing points of view on our federal policy program that affect you or your committee using c-span video clips which are easy to find and access at c-span.org. cspan's studentcam competition rewards $100,000 in total cash prizes and java shot at winning the grand prize of $5000. entries must be received before january 20, 2022. two. for competition rules, tips or just how to get started visit our website at studentcam.org. >> the senate is about to gavel into tension debate on the nomination of a u.s. district court judge for new mexico. senators will vote on whether to advance her nomination at 11:30 a.m. eastern time and at

2:30 p.m. the senate will hold a confirmation vote on the nominee. live coverage of the u.s. senate here on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the chaplain dr. barry black will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal god, who locked the oceans in their vast reservoirs, we honor your glorious name. lord, your power has sustained our nation in the past and we place our future in your hands.

each day we are inspired by the splendor of your holiness. we see your handiwork in the glory of the sunrise and the majesty of the sunset. lord, continue to rule in the lives of our lawmakers. do not turn a deaf ear to their prayers as they seek to do your will. be for them their strength and shield during these challenging days. may they continue to find in you a future and a hope. we pray in your amazing name. amen.

the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington d.c., september 21, 2021. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable raphael g. warnock, a senator from the state of georgia, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: patrick j. leahy, president pro tempore.

mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader is recognized. mr. schumer: mr. president, yesterday speak pelosi and i put in motion the path to pass a continuing resolution that in one fell swoop would accomplish four very important things. it would keep the government open through december 3 of this year and avoid a needless and dangerous shutdown. it would provide emergency funding to help resettle afghan evacuation. it would -- afghan evacuees.

it would approve tens of billions of dollars in disaster aid funding. and it will suspend the debt ceiling until december of 2022, commensurate with the time necessary to cover the debt of the bipartisan $908 billion emergency covid relief bill passed at the end of last year. now, today i want to spend some time focusing on the last of these items. addressing the debt limit to avoid a first-ever default in american history. throughout modern history, addressing the debt ceiling has consistently begun on a bipartisan basis. let me repeat that. throughout modern history, addressing the debt ceiling has consistently been done on a bipartisan basis. since 1960, the debt ceiling has been raised approximately 80 times under both republican and democratic administrations and under both unified and divided

government. so much for the argument by leader mcconnell that when all three branches control one parte party, the debt ceiling ought to be their exclusive domain. that's not what history has shown, and that's not what happened actually in 2017 when donald trump was president, mcconnell was majority leader, mccarthy was republican speaker -- i believe it was mccarthy back then, but the debt ceiling was renewed bipartisanly. to not do so, to do otherwise, not do the debt ceiling in a bipartisan way has been considered unthinkable because the consequences for the economy, for the american people, for our standing on the world stage would be too severe. senate republicans and the republican leader, however, are again engaging in fantastical feats of sophistry to justice why somehow this time is different.

we know it's not. we all know the truth. democrats and republicans both had a hand in approving the spending we now must pay. look, we know the republican justification for forcing a -- the default. we know the republican justification for forcing a default is totally dishonest, plain and simple. don't ask me. just listen to the "wall street journal." here's what it said. quote, congress would still need to raise the debt limit this fall, even if no new major spending programs were enacted. this idea that they don't want to raise the debt ceiling to deal with future spending is just totally false. ask "the wall street journal." the fact is our continuing resolution would suspend the debt limit through december of 2022, an amount of time commensurate with the debt incurred as a result of passing the bipartisan $908 billion emergency covid relief legislation in december of last

year. remember, that legislation was drafted by republicans, voted for by republicans, put on the floor by leader mcconnell who voted for it, and signed by a republican president. democrats worked with our colleagues to pass this bill because it was the right thing to do for our families, our small businesses and suffering communities. our c.r. is now carefully tailored, carefully tailored to account for this debt. this is as reasonable as it gets. and so for republicans to suddenly throw their hands in the air and abscond from their responsibility to pay debt that they proudly supported is nothing short of a dine and dash of historic proportions. republicans racked trillions of dollars of debt under president trump and are demanding american families foot the bill. what will this do? it could stop payments to social security recipients. it could stop payments to

veterans. it could raise interest rates, making a mortgage, a car loan more expensive. it could cause local governments to pay more in interest. and that might mean increased taxes for people. playing -- this is playing with fire. playing games with the debt ceiling is playing with fire and putting it on the back -- putting it on the back of the american people. of course, there's a very quick and easy way to make sure we avoid all of this from becoming even a possibility. republicans simply don't have to vote to force a default. it's that simple. democrats will do the right thing and the responsible thing when the telecommunication comes for a vote on the floor. we'll see who among the republican conference will do likewise. now, mr. president, in addition to keeping our government open

and maintaining our government's full faith and credit, senate democrats will also continue working this week on confirming even more of president biden's nominees to the bench and to his administration. for the information of my colleagues, later today i will move to file a discharge petition on the nomination of rohi topra to serve as director of the finance protection bureau. in the wake of the financial crisis of 2008, the cfpb was created under the obama administration with the simple mandate -- protect american consumers from predatory financial practices. this is the right man to lead this agency after it languished under the presidency of donald trump. trump didn't care about the average person being taken advantage of by the big financial institutions, and

mr. chopra on the other hand has a long history of defending student loan borrowers from unscrupulous for-profit colleges and already served in the cfpb under president obama where he was defending the rights of middle-class people who might be taken advantage of by rapacious financial institutions. he has the experience, he has the dedication, and he will have the support of senate democrats when his nomination is brought to the floor this afternoon. or later this week. over the next few weeks, senate democrats will also move forward on a number of noncontroversial nominees critical to keeping our country safe and advancing american diplomacy abroad. over the last few months, there has been a growing backlog on these nominees due to republican obstructionism, and it's our hope starting this week we can move to secure their confirmation. but last week, a number of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle announced they will seek to delay these nominees for no other reason than to score cheap political points in an

effort to win fans on the far right. it's no secret people leading this are all competing to run for president on the republican side in 2024. they are in feverish, feverish pursuit of the extreme right in this country which they think will help them win a primary. and so they tied this chamber in a knot and more importantly jeopardize the security of americans. this is unacceptable. every one of these members won bipartisan if not unanimous support in committee. that same level of support should continue on the floor. the republicans who are delaying the confirmation of these nominees are deliberately making the american people less safe. less safe on the foreign policy side where we need nominees to the defense and state departments, less safe on the domestic side as well where there is talk of holding up u.s. attorneys who are in charge of

prosecuting federal laws in all the states. under normal circumstances, all of these nominees should be dispensed with speedily and without controversy, but because of the self-interest of a few obstructionists, the senate could be forced to drag out what is normally a simple process. i urge these colleagues to drop their theatrics immediately and allow these nominees to these critical agencies to go through. now, mr. president, a quick update on voting rights. last week, several of my colleagues introduced the freedom to vote act, a powerful new bill that would tackle a head-on voter suppression partisan gerrymandering, the scourge of dark money. the legislation also responds to recommendations from election officials and includes new provisions to boost confidence in our elections, including critical antielection subversion reforms, a flexible voter i.d. standard and commonsense voter

list maintenance requirements. this legislation will promote greater confidence in our elections, and i believe all senators, democrat, republican, and independent alike should support the package. at the end of last week, i moved to place the freedom to vote act on the legislative calendar, enabling me to schedule a vote on this bill in the immediate future. this week, my colleague, senator manchin, who helped craft this legislation and relied on many of the good practices in west virginia to do so, senator manchin this week is making an effort, a good-faith effort to reach colleagues on the other side of the aisle to win support for -- of the freedom to vote act, and in fact he has been meeting with a number of republican colleagues. we are committed to finding common ground, and if there is common ground to be -- if there is common ground to be found, we look forward to hearing what changes republicans might want to make. and if republicans engage

earnestly and honestly, we will work with them. the voting rights working group i convened earlier this year is prepared to help in that effort. but we need to move quickly. time is of the essence. as senator manchin said earlier this year regarding congressional action on voting rights, inaction is not an option. i agree with senator manchin in that regard. to that end, it is my intention to hold a vote for the freedom to vote act here on the senate floor. if republicans are unwilling to move forward, democrats will have to move on our own. inaction from republicans on voting rights is not an excuse to do nothing. we're going to take action to make sure we protect our democracy and fight back against the disease of voter suppression, partisan gerrymandering, and election subversion that is metastasizing

at the state level. and finally on haiti. mr. president, we have all seen these horrible images coming from our southern border as haitian asylum seekers simply looking to escape tyranny and the problems that they have sought have been met at our doorstep with unimaginable dignity. images of haitian migrants being hit with whips and other forms of physical violence is completely unacceptable. this behavior must be addressed and we must provide accountability. the images turn your stomach. it must be stopped, this kind of violence. right now, i'm told there are four flights scheduled to deport these asylum seekers back to a country that cannot receive them. such a decision defies common sense. it also defies common decency and what make is all about. remember that harbor -- that

lady in the harbor in the city in which i live. so i urge president biden and secretary mayorkas to immediately put a stop to these expulsions and to end this title 42 policy at our southern border. we cannot continue these hateful and xenophobic trump policies that disregard our refugee laws. we must allow asylum seekers to present their claims at our ports of entry and be afforded due process. i commit to work with this administration to provide resources so that we can establish safe, orderly, humane processes for those seeking protections. again, the policies that are being enacted now and the horrible treatment of these innocent people who have come to the border must stop immediately. i yield the floor. i don't yield the floor. i have one more bit of business. mr. president, i understand there is a bill at the desk that

is due for a second reading. the presiding officer: the leader is correct. the clerk will read the title of the bill for the second time. the clerk: s. 2765, a bill to provide that members of congress may not receive pay after october 1 of any fiscal year in which congress has not approved a concurrent resolution on the budget and passed the regular appropriations bills. mr. schumer: in order to place the bills on the calendar under the provisions of rule 14, i would object to further proceeding. the presiding officer: objection having been heard, the bill will be placed on the calendar.

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from california is recognized. mr. padilla: i would note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: the senior house democrat told us back in march of 2020 that covid presented, quote, a tremendous opportunity to restructure things to fit our vision. president biden said last week that while this pandemic has been god-awful for so many reasons, it does present us with an opportunity. the reckless taxing and spending spree that washington democrats are assembling behind closed doors would put more debt, more borrowing, and more inflation on the shoulders of american families.

it would make washington, d.c., dramatically more involved in families' child care, their health coverage, their local energy utilities, and on and on. there's so many controversial changes being crammed into one megabill that it must be a deliberate strategy. try to achieve everything the far left has wanted for 20 years in one fell swoop before the country has time to realize what hit it. so today i'm going to focus on just one example. let's look at the tax hikes. a staggering historic set of tax hikes. tax hikes on small business, tax hikes on family farms, tax hikes on americans that would shatter the pledge to spare people earning less than $400,000 a year, tax hikes that would put

even more americans into unfair double taxation of the death tax, massive taxes on the u.s. economy that would give us one of the least competitive tax structures in the developed world. for example, even communist china taxes their own businesses significantly less than president biden and his allies want america to tax ours. tax hike after tax hike after tax hike -- a smothering wet blanket thrown onto an economy that is already struggling to fully recover because of the inflation and worker shortages that democrats' policies have already unleashed. so when you add it all up, democrats want to ram through one of the largest peacetime tax hikes on record, if not the single largest. so let me say that again.

behind closed doors, washington democrats are drafting what may well be the largest peacetime tax hike that our country has literally ever seen. but this isn't to say that nobody gets a leg up in this bill. so listen to this. somehow, mysteriously, many of the democrats' favored groups and special interests come out just fine. isn't that fascinating? example -- their legislation would allow ordinary americans charitable deduction on top of the standard deduction to expire. ahh ... but they'd replace it with a brand-new tax break of almost exactly the same dollar amount for union dues that go to big labor. so you take out a charitable deduction for regular americans and put in a new one for union dues that would benefit big labor. scrapping americans' extra

deduction for donating to charity and replacing it with a special subsidy for union dues for big labor. really, you can't make it stuff up. sorry, red cross. sorry, local churches and houses of worship. sorry, soup kitchens. democrats think the teamsters and the seiu need the money more than you do. and they aren't the only group that democrats favor who literally make out like bandits. look at high-income earns in coastal blue states. the bill that raises taxes on everything that moves somehow -- somehow -- makes room for a special, gigantic tax cut for people who choose to live in high-tax states. more than half the benefit of the so-called salt policy would go to the top one percent of households. there's also a special tax break for people who choose to purchase expensive electric cars. you get the picture.

make u.s. industry less competitive than china in order to massively subsidize the coastal cosmopolitan lifestyle. that's what at democrats want. this bill would also create at new national dragnet for ordinary americans' banking information. community banks and credit unions would be hammered with new irrelevant ares to report to the feds -- new requirements to report to the feds new transactions in excess of $600. new requirements to report to the federal government whenever citizens make transactions in excess of $600. big brother wants to peer into americans' bank accounts. here's how one local kentucky lender described this concept to me. quote, a flagrant violation of

privacy and offense to liberty. that pretty well sums it up. so, huge tax hikes on americans, expensive giveaways for coastal elites, and new government snooping -- snooping -- into families' finances. so, mr. president, that's just one corner of this reckless taxing and spending spree that should never see the light of day. now, on a different matter, last week senate democrats announced what was marketed as a compromise on carving out a bigger role for washington in elections all across our country. it was hardly the first time our democratic colleagues had given their takeover of 50 states' election laws a makeover. over the years it's sometimes been sold as an urgent overhaul of our democracy. other times as just a set of narrow tweaks. but for all of their attempts to

change up the pitch, the unfortunate fact is that the bones of the democrats' proposal are still the same. the latest version is only a compromise in the sense that the center left compromise with the far left. under the hood, it's the same frankenstein monster that's been there since 2019. years -- years -- before the state-level actions which democrats now claim have made it all necessary. it still makes washington bureaucrats the de facto board of elections for all 50 states, dictating the terms of things like automatic and same-day voter registration. it still insists on impeding state efforts. it still has government dollars going directly to politicians' campaigns. that's public funds for bumper stickers and attack ads.

it still engages in even more intimidation of private citizens to engage in political speech. and these, of course, are just to name a few. now surely, mr. president, as the senate continues to do its job and strike down misguided ideas like these, we'll hear plenty from folks who consider it evidence that this body is broken. but, of course, that simply is not true. the senate is fully capable of taking landmark bipartisan action that makes it easier to vote and harder to cheat. back in 2002, i was involved, along with my colleague chris dodd in passing the help america vote act. i was one of the leaders on that. we empowered state and local election systems to follow commonsense guideposts for integrity and accessibility. it provided basically a grant program to states to help them

upgrade their voting systems, after the florida election in 2000. and the senate passed it 92-2. 92-2. so if our democratic colleagues really want to find common ground and act on common sense, the road map is right there. but, unfortunately, we know that's never been the case. unfortunately, this latest compromise is just a repackaging of what even reporters called a messaging bill that was headed nowhere. the substance is not really changing, so neither will the result.

the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. morning business is closed. also under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the following nomination, which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary. margaret irene strickland of new mexico to be united states district judge for the district of new mexico. mr. mcconnell: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from illinois. mr. durbin: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are. mr. durbin: i ask consent it be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: mr. president, today the senate will vote on the nomination of margaret strickland for the u.s. district court for the district of new mexico. for nearly 15 years she has served the people of new mexico as a public defender and civil rights attorney. with her extensive qualifications and distinguished career in public service, ms. strickland will make an excellent addition to the new mexico district court. she began her legal career in the law offices of the public defender for the state of new mexico, a role in which she handled every type of criminal case. over the years -- this is an amazing number -- she's tried nearly 90 cases, the jas

majority of her practice -- vast majority of her practice has been in federal court. she boasts the strong support of her home state senators, senators heinrich and lu han. her nomination also received bipartisan support on our judiciary committee. she received a well qualified rating from the american bar association and like so many of the nominees coming from the biden administration, she really shows professional diversity in her background. as a former public defender and civil rights attorney, she will offer a legal perspective we often find missing from the bench. she's demonstrated unwavering commitment to equal justice under the law and as a judge she'll ensure that every voice is heard in the courtroom. i urge my colleagues to support her nomination. on another note, mr. president, inle coming days the senate has historic decision to make. and very little time to make it. we have to set aside politics which the american people are begging us over and over to do.

and we have to ensure that our government can continue to function in the midst of this public health crisis and a recovering economy. now, in any reasonable scenario, these would be noncontroversial and nonpartisan endeavors, but sadly, at this moment in the united states senate, reason is in short supply. in recent days some of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have indicated that they are prepared to -- listen to this -- sabotage the routine process of government for political reasons. this could have a catastrophic impact on of this nation. last week senator mcconnell reiterated that republicans will not join democrats in voting to deal with the debt limit. what exactly does it mean? well, imagine if you and i just up and decided to stop paying your credit card bills if congress fails to raise or suspend the debt limit before

the treasury runs out of cash, our nation runs the risk of default for the first time in history. that's why lawmakers have to set aside politics as we have done nearly 80 times in our history to keep the government's bills being paid. truthfully, this shouldn't even be a debate. raising our suspending the debt limit has nothing to do with any new programs or new spending. it's about paying off the tab that the government has already incurred. we're receiving the bill at the restaurant after we have had the big meal. the question is whether we'll pay it. here's the kicker. much of the debt that the republicans are threatening not to pay was approved by senate republicans when donald trump was in the white house. in other words, we're being asked to approve the trump debt from his years in the presidency which large hi had the support of the -- largely had the support of the republicans and the republicans are telling us

hands off. we won't accept responsibility for the things we voted for during the trump years. the last time congress suspended the debt limit was in august 2019, a little over halfway through president trump's term. between then and the beginning of president biden's term, congressional republicans, congressional republicans approved $6 trillion in new debt. in fact, during trump's one term in office, the national debt ballooned by 36%. fiscal conservatives during the trump administration, the national debt ballooned by 36%. well, that surely has happened before in history. no, i'm sorry it has not. that's the fastest it's grown under any president in american history. the trump years were the biggest debt years in the history of the united states. and how the republicans don't recognize it. they want to walk away from it. you may be wondering for what

noble or productive purpose did the republicans go so deep in debt during the trump years? well, a big chunk of it was donald trump's tax giveaway to the richest americans. $2 trillion. $2 trillion in tax cuts for people at the super wealthy level in america. and now it's time to say to the republicans you voted for those tax cuts. the wealthiest people in america applauded you. now would you at least step up and admit it? no. now that it's time for republicans to pay for the meal that they ate, the political ban cet, they're vow -- banquet, they're vowing instead to dine and dash. they're taking a page straight from the playbook of donald trump, the man who called himself proudly the king of debt, a man who didn't pay his own bills as a businessman and who incurred the largest increase in the national debt of any president in history.

and in the process, the republicans to take this incredibly and inexplicable stand are willing to risk the full faith and credit of the united states. when it comes to america's debt, default is simply not an option for any rational person. there's not a single american who will emerge unscathed if the republicans execute this political strategy. defaulting on our debt threatens social security payments for tens of millions of americans. threatens health care coverage for tens of millions more, and can slash benefits for our nation's veterans. who could be proud of that vote. on a national and global scale, default would be in the words of mark zandi, moody's chief economist, financial a armagedd. it would send markets into free fall a. imagine that, you say to the seniors well maybe, maybe not on

your social security payments and incidentally, that the stocks and the e.t.f.'s and the mutual funds and the investments you had for your retirement hang on tight, they're about to take a huge hit, a hit that is totally avoidable. back in 2011 when the house republicans initially refused to raise the debt limit, america's credit rating was downgraded. so what? interest rates went up. so we're paying more money in interest instead of paying it for things that america values. health care, education, infrastructure. some economists believe that episode hurt consumer confidence and hobbled our economy in the great recession. it also stuck taxpayers with billions of dollars in increased borrowing costs. think about how fragile america's economy is at this very moment. we're still recovering from a once in a seen tur r.e.i. -- once in a century public health crisis and worst economic crisis in 75 years. the last thing we need is a

self-inflicted crisis that is motivated by partisanship. right now our economy has to be our highest priority. we need to come together and get the government funded. we also have an obligation to provide financial relief to americans who have been hit by the environmental disasters. my state escaped that but tomorrow that may not be the case. you never know with these extreme weather events. hurricane ida was an eye opener for many parts of this country. people are suffering. disaster aid for these people is essential. we need also to help resettle the refugees from afghanistan. they risked their lives for americans. we should make a home for them here in the united states. and we also want to make sure that we support our military in every way possible. instead of bickering and political brinksmanship, congress needs to rise to this moment of crisis. the american people sent us to washington not to manufacture crises but to prevent them.

that's exactly why senate democrats are moving ahead to put president biden's bill back better plan in place. pay our debts, invest in a prosperous future. that's our plan. we'd love to have republican support for it. we have a once in a century opportunity to consider working families, middle-income families, struggling families, not the wealthy. the build back better plan will grow our economy for generations to come. if fully enacted it will create a future for every parent to take off work to care for a newborn child. every high school grad can receive a college education and set their sights on a good-paying job. and every senior citizen can afford prescription drugs they need without dipping into their savings. these investments will make america healthier, happier, stronger, and more produce rouse. un-- prosperous. unlike president trump's giveaway to the rich, president biden's build back better plan is a prudent investment in our

nation's financial future. we're going to pay for it. that's the senate democrats' intent. it will not be added to the deficit. i look forward to discussing that plan in detail in the weeks to come. mr. president, i yield the floor. compute me, before i yield the floor, mr. president, i ask consent that senators thune, heinrich, and lujan be able to complete their remarks prior to the scheduled vote. the presiding officer: any objection? seeingnone, without objection. mr. durbin: i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

the presiding officer: the republican whip. mr. thune: i understand the senate is in a quorum call. i would ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: mr. president, there have been a good discussion

already on the floor this morning. i was listening to my colleague, the democrat whip, discussing the upcoming challenges that we face in this fall. we have to fund the government. we're facing the debt limit issue and, of course, the democrats' reckless tax and spending spree proposal that we'll have to deal with at some point, too. the issue that's been raised is why wouldn't republicans want to help raise the debt limit. and i think the answer is very simple. the democrats control the entire government here. they control the house. they control the senate. they control the white house. and they have procedure here in the senate that enables them to raise the debt limit with 51 votes. they don't need a single republican vote to raise the debt limit. and they keep arguing that well, in the past there have been, you know, previous times when the debt limit has been a bipartisan

issue. in most cases those were times, of course, when there was divided government and there was actually negotiation over these issues which there isn't right now. i mean, this tax and spending spree being proposed by the democrats is the largest expansion of government as a percentage of g.d.p. i believe in history, certainly going back to the 1930's, but there's no question that this is a blowout spending bill that the democrats have decided to do all on their own. not a single republican will vote for it. and so the debt increase that would accommodate all that additional spending, the massive amount of spending, in some cases financed with tax increases, but that is another issue and i will get to that in just a minute, but the amount of debt that would be added as a result of the $3.5 trillion the democrats want to spend on top

of the $2 trillion that they spent earlier this year in february, again done all on democrat votes. no republicans participated in that, is a very, very different scenario than when there have been in the past attempts to actually work in a bipartisan way. my colleague from illinois mentioned the fact that the increase in the debt, you know, under the previous administration, what the level had been, somewhere on the order of $6 trillion or $6.5 trillion. i have to remind people that $4.5 trillion of that was negotiated in response to the crisis of the pandemic. that was a negotiation between republicans and democrats where both sides sat down together and said we have got to do something. we have to react in a quick way, a bold way to what is happening around the country and created programs like the p.p.p. program which helped a lot of small businesses survive, helped with payments to health care

providers for p.p.e. and other costs to get them through this, money for vaccines, money for people who had been unemployed as a consequence of the pandemic. these were all costs, mr. president, associated with the pandemic that were negotiated in a bipartisan way, republicans and democrats working together. what we have in front of us right now is the democrats proposing the biggest expansion of government probably in the history of this country, and if you look at what they are calling $3.5 trillion, a lot of outside groups like the committee for responsible federal government says it's $5.5 trillion. either way, it's a massive amount of spending, all of which would dramatically increase the size of the government in this country, people's dependence upon government. i call it the free-everything will because essentially that's what it is. so, mr. president, what i would simply suggest to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle is that if you want to spend

$3.5 trillion or $5.5 trillion, whatever that number is, and you want to do it with 51 votes without any discussion or negotiation or attempt to even reach out to republicans on this, then you ought to do it. republicans were in the room, they negotiated a bipartisan infrastructure bill, $1.2 trillion. it passed here with 69 votes. it would pass overwhelmingly i think in the house left to its -- unless coupled with this massive spending bill, and then it would be signed into law by the president. that's an example of what can happen when you sit down and negotiate. this other $3.5 trillion they have decided to do, they have decided to expand massively the size of the federal government, and to do that, they're going to add to the federal debt, and it seems pretty straightforward, i think, and i think most americans would understand that if you control the entire government, the house, the senate, and the white house, and it's all your spending that is

going to be necessary or is going to be responsible for requiring an increase in the debt limit, that you ought to do it with democrat votes. i think that's a perfectly -- a perfect way of looking at this that would fit with the views of what most americans are, most of whom i believe don't want to see their federal government going another $3.5 trillion into debt or massively expanding the size of the federal government at a time when inflation is already out of control. and i want to speak to that, mr. president, because inflation is rapidly becoming a serious problem. currently, inflation is near a 13-year high. it's outstripped wage growth from many americans, including the lowest earning workers. in other words, the rise in the price of everything from goods to groceries has resulted in a de facto pay cut for american workers. so why are we experiencing this level of inflation? well, as i mentioned, one reason

is democrats' decision in march to flood the economy with unnecessary government spending. president biden and congressional democrats took office mere weeks after congress had approved a fifth, fifth bipartisan covid relief bill. and it was abundantly clear that we were not in immediate need of trillions more in government spending. but that didn't matter. that didn't matter to democrats. now that they were in control of congress and the white house, they wanted to take advantage of the covid crisis. so in the name of covid relief, they pushed through a massive partisan piece of legislation filled with unnecessary spending and handouts to democrat interest groups. schools which had barely touched the tens of billions it had been given got billions more. state governments, the majority of which did not need more government assistance, got access to a staggering, staggering $350 billion slush fund. labor unions were made eligible for loans that were designed to rescue main street small businesses. and i could go on,

mr. president. at the time republicans warned about the bill's level of spending, and we weren't alone. more than one liberal economist warned that pouring that much money into the economy at that time could result in inflation. six months later, here we are. inflation is near a 13-year high. and americans are rightly worrying about whether their paychecks will stretch to cover the higher prices that they are facing. mr. president, in the face of that fact and considering substantial amounts of money we had to borrow to meet the covid crisis, you might think, you might think that democrats would be taking a moment to reflect and perhaps think about ways to rein in excessive spending, but you would be wrong. in fact, democrats have decided to double down on their failed strategy and pass another massive government spending bill even bigger, even bigger than the last one that i just mentioned. that's right. now democrats are putting together a $3.5 trillion

spending bill to follow up on their $1.9 trillion spending bill from this last march. and to put those numbers in perspective, the entire federal budget for 2019 was less than $4.5 trillion. mr. president, dumping that much money into the economy is pretty much guarantee -- has pretty much guaranteed the continue to fuel the kind of inflation that americans are currently experiencing. in fact, there is a good chance it would make things much worse. that's not the only way americans are likely to suffer as a result of democrats' proposed tax and spending spree. americans are going to also feel the pain of the $2 trillion in tax hikes the democrats are contemplating. mr. president, it always fascinates me how democrats think that you can just pass tax increases without consequences. to hear democrats talk, you would think that you can impose $2 trillion in tax hikes and everything will just keep going along unchanged. but, of course, we all know that's not the way it works.

there is no such thing as consequence-free taxation. raising taxes by any meaningful amount and people are most likely going to change their behavior. a small business, for example, may think twice about hiring an additional worker if it's facing a tax hike. a larger business may decide not to open that new plant it has been planning or it may institute a hiring freeze or it may decide that it needs to encourage some early retirements. mr. president, democrats' $2 trillion tax hike would be the largest tax hike in decades. democrats are proposing to raise taxes on large businesses, on small businesses, on investments, on retirement savings, and the list goes on. and every one of those taxes will have consequences for ordinary americans. democrats are proposing a corporate tax rate higher than the one imposed by communist china. that's going to put american

businesses at a disadvantage on the global stage. when american businesses suffer, american workers suffer. democrats always seem to forget that most americans are employed by businesses. and that is a result -- and that as a result when you raise taxes on businesses, ordinary americans suffer the consequences. if democrats succeed in passing their $2 trillion tax hike, it is going to have serious economic consequences for regular americans, consequences like fewer jobs and opportunities, slower or nonexistent wage growth, especially with higher inflation eroding household spending power, and fewer benefits. americans can also expect to see higher utility bills thanks to democrats' proposed tax hikes on large businesses and on energy development. mr. president, i have been talking for a while now, and i haven't even gotten to the spending side of democrats' tax and spending spree. frankly, it's difficult to know even where to start. this proposal reads more like a

spending encyclopedia. they are spending on pretty much every topic from a to z. there are the big ticket items, of course, the supposedly free stuff that democrats are emphasizing such as free community college and free pre-k. then there are the items the democrats aren't advertising as much like the $200 million -- yes, $200 million for a park in house speaker pelosi's district that features luxury accommodation and a golf course. given that, i'm not sure why this park needs $200 million from the federal government, but i guess being speaker has its privileges. in fact, one democrat representative admitted as much, noting that it seems that, and i quote, speaker pelosi gets maybe a little bit more on some of these bills. but then went on to argue that she deserves it for being speaker. but moving on. there's a nearly $80 billion increase in funding for the

i.r.s. yeah, $80 billion. that's enough to nearly double the agency's size. but i guess you have got to have a lot of new agents to collect all those new tax hikes. then there are new and expanded subsidies for electric vehicles. under democrats' proposal, a couple could be making well over half a million dollars, yet still claim more than $12,000 from the federal government to purchase an electric car. there's a civilian climate corps. several of them, in fact, at various government agencies. $20 billion for a national climate bank to subsidize democrats' pet environmental projects. and i am not making this up. a new tax break to subsidize membership dues to unions. plus much, much more. and, of course, with all that government spending comes new government regulations. a long, long, long list of them.

mr. president, the consequences of democrats' tax and spending spree could be devastating for our economy and for american families. and unfortunately, democrats have the ability to force this legislation through on a solely partisan basis. i know there are at least some members of the democrat party here in congress who are uncomfortable with the stratospheric levels of spending the democrats are proposing, and i hope that their cooler heads will prevail. meanwhile, i and every republican will do everything we can to protect americans from democrats' reckless tax and spending legislation. mr. president, i yield the floor.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from new mexico. mr. heinrich: mr. president, i am quite pleased that the senate will soon be voting on the nomination of margaret strickland, president biden's nominee to be a district court judge for the district of new mexico. ms. strickland was born and raised in the southwest border region where this district court seat presides. she attended new mexico state university and the university of texas at el paso before attending law school at new york university. ms. strickland returned to the southwest after law school and started her career with the las cruces office of the new mexico public defender, representing clients in the juvenile drug court and in felony defense work. in 2011, ms. strickland formed her own law firm, continuing her

public service work representing indigent defendants in federal court. ms. strickland has litigated both criminal and civil cases, including a significant number in the federal district court located in las cruces, new mexico. she has also appeared before the new mexico court of appeals, the new mexico supreme court, and the tenth circuit court of appeals and filed before the united states supreme court. ms. strickland served on the board of new mexico criminal defense lawyers for over a decade, including as its president. in 2018, the federal district of new mexico appointed her to represent all criminal justice act lawyers as a panel representative. ms. strickland has also done significant volunteer work with programs that reduce the rate of euthanasia for companion animals. she and her husband greg foster dogs and puppies set for

euthanasia so that the dogs can be placed in a home. if confirmed, ms. strickland will be faced with one of the busiest federal dockets in the country, and inherit a very heavy backlog of cases. i am, however, confident that her experience, her incredible work ethic will best position her to immediately get to work. ms. strickland is is a highly qualified nominee with the right experience, the right temperament, and the right disposition to be a fair-minded district court judge. the a.b.a. agrees giving her a majority well-qualified rating. she sasse spent her entire -- she has spent her entire professional career working in the community in which she will sit. she knows intermittly the impact that the legal system has on everyday americans. she understands that serving sasse a judge is very different from serving as an advocate.

she is ready and prepared to shift from zealously and effectively representing clients to faithfully applying the law to the facts of a specific case. both before and after her nomination was announced, new mexicans called my office in favor of ms. strickland. i heard from judges, from prosecutors, from defense attorneys, and everyday new mexicans. all of them called to say how much they believe in ms. strickland. like those new mexicans who called into my office, i believe ms. strickland belongs on the bench. and i am ready to cast my vote and help her get there. i enthusiastically support ms. strickland's nomination for district court judge for the district of new mexico, and i hope that all of my colleagues will join me in confirming this highly qualified nominee.

the presiding officer: the clerk will report the mowing 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 231, margaret strickland of new mexico to be united states district judge for the district of new mexico, signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of margaret irene strickland of new mexico to be the united states district judge for the district of new mexico shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll.

vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: the yeas are 52, the nays are 46. the motion is grate to. under the previous order, the senate stands in recess until

senate stands in recess until when the senate returns you can watch live coverage here on c-span2. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by the television companies and more including charter communications. >> broadband is a force for empowerment. that's why charter has invested billions building infrastructure, upgrading technology, empowering opportunity in communities big and small. charter is connecting us. >> charter communications support c-span a a