vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: on this vote, the yeas are 65 of the nays are 35. the 60-vote threshold having been achieved, the bill is passed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the following nomination which the clerk will report.

the clerk: nomination, bureau of consumer financial protection, rohit chopra of the district of columbia to be director. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, 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 354, rohit chopra of the district of columbia to be director of bureau of consumer financial protection 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 rohit chopra of the district of columbia to be director of bureau of consumer financial protection 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:

vote:

vote:

the vice president: on this vote the yeas are 50, the nays are 50, the senate being evenly divided, the vice president votes in the affirmative. the motion is agreed to. the senator from delaware. mr. carper: madam president, before you leave, i want you to know that sitting next to me is my chief of staff who is leaving today. the presiding officer: that is

beautiful. i did get married in santa barbara. mr. carper: now if there is an extra box of kleenex, i would appreciate it. the presiding officer: please proceed. godspeed. thank you. madam president, san to become mr. president -- the presiding officer: the senator from delaware is recognized. mr. carper: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i have six requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. and they have the approval of the majority and the minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. carper: thank you very much. mr. president, i'd like to telegraph my pitch here, but i rise to thank from the bottom of my heart a woman who spent nearly two decades serving in this institution and luckily for

me, nearly 13 of those years spent as a member of my team. emily spain has written many of the speeches like the one i'm about to give, mr. president. but today i have the privilege of giving a special speech thanking emily for her great service. emily may have been raised in california but she has become an honorary californian and we have had the blessing of her friendship. anybody would be hard pressed to find others to do all the things that emily has done. she has helped to win campaigns, including a number of mine. she has worked in the house of representatives for her hometown congresswoman lois capps. she helped with legislation that improved the lives of millions

of americans, like the affordable care act. when people ask me what i am proudest of working on, i always say extension of health care for people who otherwise wouldn't have had it, and without emily's support i'm not sure it would have become law. she has not only served as the communication director but as legislative director and chief of staff. for people who are not familiar with washington, d.c., that may not sound like maybe a lot, but in this game, it's a hat trick. it is a hat trick. you don't o -- often find someone as talented and tireless as emily. i like to start my days off by going for a run or going to the ymca in wilmington for a workout and then i head for the train station, biden station, and come

down here to work with all of our colleagues and usually i have fall day of committee hearings and meetings and votes and almost every night i go back to union station and climb on a train and take the train the opposite way back to biden station in wilmington. it's a full day every day. i enjoy it because i like to be busy and get things done. mr. president, let me say in terms of getting things done, i have met my match and fortunately i met her about 13 years ago. she is always, without fail, demonstrates more energy in her small finger than i do in my whole body has been emily spain. it's incredible, her tenacity, strength, conviction, she is literally tireless and somehow manages to get it all done and more. she has an incredibly demanding job managing a staff of nearly

50 people, between our d.c. offices and our three offices back in the state of delaware dealing with the latest in congress often requires, as the presiding officer knows, one's attention 24/7 and on top of that she is raising a young family and giving back to her community. ask anyone who knows emily, her energy is boundless and you will never hear her complain. she dives in head first for whatever the task is before her and gets things done. i know the presiding officer feels this way. i love to be surrounded by people who are getting things done and i enjoy being around people who are smarter than me, that is not a high bar for me, but for others it probably is. but she is as mart as a -- smart

as a whip. i feel i'm a glass half-full, an internal optimist and emily and i share that trait too. i think it's easy for people to come to washington and after a couple of years become cynical and maybe even jaded and that's never happened with emily, even after all of these years, not emily. she always sees the best in other people. she always sees the potential for what can be in a person or in a piece of legislation. if a bill can be made better, emily will give it all that she has to make it happen. if an intern in our office wants advice on how to succeed on capitol hill, emily will take time out of her day to help that intern. if partisan politics are in the way of getting things done, emily is not afraid to cross the aisle, make a connection and get something over the finish line. there's a reason when i walk around the capitol with emily,

she is the one people recognize and say hello to and it's because from staff to senators alike, emily has an incredible ability to connect with people from all walks of life. no matter how busy she may be, she always takes the time to really listen to others, a really good listener. my father used to say, god gave us one mouth and two ears -- people say, well, if i could ever be of help, let me know, when emily says that, you know she means it. she will always follow through no matter how much success she had throughout her career, no task was ever too small for her to take on. she is a team player in the best sense of the word, through and through and is always willing to jump in and lend a hand to whoever might need it, whether that might mean negotiating infrastructure deal or helping

to put binders together. the late justice ruth bader ginsburg once said, you can disagree without being disagreeable. emily is living proof of that. she believes that climate change is the greatest challenge of our lifetime, that every american deserves quality affordable health care and that every child, no matter what their zip code is, should have clean air to breathe and clean water to drink and she has spent her time in congress fighting to advance those policies without fighting with others. she has a great deal of reverence for this institution and for colleagues no matter their political affiliation. she is beloved, respected, beloved by people on both sides of the aisle and sitting here for a number of minutes before we were brought back in session, i had the opportunity to get

recognized to give these remarks, it's interesting to see how many staff and senators alike came up to her to treat her well. she treats people with respect and earns their respect in return. our country could use a lot more emily spains these days and i believe she is an example to anyone -- to anyone who may have hopes to having a career in public service and a career in political life as well. there's no doubt that emily has had enormous professional success, but i know her most important job has always been, and i think probably always will be, be a wonderful mom to jack and emma spain. the days that they come to our office are some of the happiest days of the week. over the last decade emily has spent a great deal of time in delaware. she has gotten to know my family. my wife martha and i have a couple of sons of our own, ben

and christopher and i have been lucky to get to know emily's russ ken -- husband ken and we have gotten to know their children, young children, but just kids that any mom would be delighted to be able to call their own. family is important to both emily and to me and she always gone out of her way to ensure that what we call carper town, the extended carper team family, is a family friendly place. it's always a good day when jack spain comes in and tells us about his latest baseball game or we find emma coloring in emily's office. at our annual carper holiday christmas party, there is a table for all kinds of arts and crafts and that is because of emily. she not only says she values families, she walks the walk.

she makes sure the policies reflect our priorities and for that and many other things, i'm very, very appreciative. for folks who may not be all that familiar with the work and the role of the senate chief of staff and a full-time mom, let me tell you neither one is easy. neither one of them. put them together and they are really hard. but no matter what the circumstances, she has risen to the challenge in both roles without fail. i just want to note that emily has led our office under particularly difficult conditions and has done so with grace and compassion. her tenure included, among other things, two pim impeachments -- two impeachments, an attack on this building on january 6 and a global pandemic and the worst economy since the great depression. there was no handbook for how to handle any of these things let

alone all of them at once and there is no way for a guide to have our office firing on all cylinders and keeping our staff safe and helping the people in delaware when they needed it most. and there was no one to comfort our staff after an insurrection. i know these were challenges that emily never anticipated when she took on this role. none of us could anticipate that. she was the leader on our team during such turbulent and trying times. i -- you know, one of the glories of knowing this woman, she has the compassion -- has had the compassion as we've gone through the pandemic this year to literally call just about everybody on our team, delaware and our two offices there and three offices in delaware and the folks that work here, including the members of the environment and public works committee, the senate committee

on investigations that i have been privileged to help lead and make sure they are doing okay and they and their families are doing okay as we go through the pandemic. that is the mark of a great, wonderful human being and a great leader. there is no -- again, no guide to keep her office firing on all cylinders if a remote setting so we can keep our staff safe while also helping the people of delaware with what they needed the most. there was certainly no instruction man during an insurrection, place of work in this building. i know these were challenges she never anticipated when they took on this role but i'm grateful she was again the leading one on our team during such turbulent and trying times. madam president, i'll close with this. and i want to -- from the bottom of my heart, i want to thank

jack and emma, son and daughter of ken and emily for sharing your mom and ken, for sharing your wife with all of us for these years. i know it's been a lot of early mornings and probably more late nights than you want to think about and some unexpected things over many -- too many weekends. but we love to call carper town is better for your mop's dedication, your wife's dedication to this town and the people of delaware and i think the country are better off because of her dedication. i want to sincerely thank emily for her services to the senate, to the country, and to the people of delaware. sometimes it's hard to really know that we've made a difference but i can assure emily and her family that she has and she's left her mark on 513 heart. that's where we've been for 20 years, all 20 years since i've come here, madam president. and made a mark on 513 hart and

on the first state and she'll be sorely missed. in the navy when people do an especially good job, i've had the privilege for serving 23 years plus midshipman before that and i -- we have a saying -- when people do an extraordinary job, do a terrific job, we say bravo zulu. i would say to emily over and over again, bravo zulu. probably say it just about every day of her service. but thank you for a remarkable, remarkable congressional career that's been an inspiration to me and i know all with whom you served. in the navy when people are sailing off towards their next chapter or adventure we say fair wind and following sea. so i would say those today to emily and her family and i say those words with reluctance but also the joy that comes from having been able to know her, to

work with her, to get to know her and her family. if we're lucky in life, we get a chance to work with people who push us to be the best versions of ourselves, who make our loads lighter and who bring us people from all walks of life joy, joy every day. and i am very lucky, we are very lucky in our team that emily spane has in my case let me work for her for all these years fl she's kempt me on the payroll in no small way helped me stay on the payroll here to be able to do all these things together. but em, we will miss you. but we wish you and the family nothing but the best and with that, madam president, i yield the floor. thank you so much.

ms. ernst: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. ms. ernst: madam president, the time is now. we need a memorial to the fallen heroes of the global war on terror and the memorial should be in its rightful place on the national hall in washington, d.c. the on tuesday i spoke with a group of nearly 30 gold star families who lost their loved ones during our nation's longest war. their stories of heart ache and

sacrifice inspire me to continue fighting for this important memorial. the overwhelming theme on that call was this. the time is now to get the global war on terrorism memorial built on our thangs mall. -- on our national mall. and it's with that in mind, madam president, that i come to the floor again to ask the senate to join me in honoring our veterans, our gold star families, and fallen heroes by supporting my bipartisan legislation, the global war on terrorism memorial location act. i believe our nation has a responsibility to properly honor and pay tribute to our veterans, including those that have served in the longest conflict in the history of the united states.

the global war on terrorism memorial belongs on our national mall in the same place as the memorials that honor the heroes of earlier conflicts, like korea and vietnam. the memorial which has bipartisan support will serve as a permanent reminder of the eternal gratitude all of america. as a fellow veteran of the global war on terrorism and a friend and advocate for our gold star families, i firmly believe that placing this memorial anywhere but the national mall is absolutely unacceptable. madam president, we have an opportunity for bipartisanship right here with this bill. so let's join together and show the country that the united states senate will honor the

sacrifice and properly memorialize the service of the brave men and women who fought and died to protect and defend the nation since the beginning of the global war on terror. it is the least we can do for those who have given so much. i ask you today to support pi mission -- to support my mission, to build a memorial to empower those who answered the call to serve in the global war on terror, who for so long protected us and allowed us to enjoy the freedoms that we have to this very day. this memorial is ready to go so let's get it built on our national mall in washington, d.c. where it belongs. madam president, as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on energy and natural

resources be discharged from further consideration of s. 535 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. i ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. manchin: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from west virginia. mr. manchin: reserving the right to object. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. manchin: madam president, last week senator ernst asked unanimous consent to by pass the committee process and pass her bill. at the time i committed to work with her and that we would schedule this bill for a vote at the next energy natural resources committee legislative markup. that commitment remains. in fact, we are fulfilling it. in fact, just this morning both of our staffs were on the national mall walking through the potential sites with the national park service and representatives from the

foundation to get a better understanding of the issues associated with the locations proposed in senator ernst's bill. my goal is to get this memorial built as quickry as possible. i was -- quickly as possible. i was a proud lead democratic sponsor of this legislation to authorize construction of the national global war on terrorism memorial four years ago and remaip just as supportive and committed to seeing the memorial built today as i was then. it is important take we commemorate and honor the members of the armed forces who served on active duty in support of the global war on terrorism. the original legislation authorizing construction of the global war on terrorism memorial require that the memorial be located and discipled in accordance with the commemorative works act. the senator's bill is now proposing to waive a key provision of that law. i am concerned that trying to legislatively force a memorial into the reserve area of the national mall will result in a more contentious approval process take will take longer to

get the memorial built than staying with the process that applies to all of our memorials. i restate my commitment to keep working with senator ernst and to schedule a vote on this bill at the energy and natural resources committee's next legislative business meeting so the committee members can weigh in which is the process with what the appropriate policy should be. again, madam president, i remain strong, a very strong supporter of the global war on terrorism memorial and i believe that all of our colleagues on the republican and democrat side feel the same. the national park service should give it the highest priority and they will in finding an appropriate site by the memorial should be built following the same process, the same process that applies to all of our memorials and commemorative works. i will continue to work with my friend and colleague ■fromiowa but i must respectfully object to the unanimous consent

request. the presiding officer: objection is heard. ms. ernst: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. ms. ernst: thank you. i just want to come forward and thank the senator for the progress that is being made on the location for the global war on terrorism memorial, and i will continue to pursue this. i think it is important to do that. i remain committed to those families of those that have fallen as well as the many service members that have served across the spectrum and the global war on terror. i understand that many decades ago an act was put in place by congress which limited activity on the national mall. but understanding since that time we have seen many memorials and many monuments that have been placed on the reserves on the national mall. and so i ap asking that as -- am

asking take as congress we move forward quickly on this act. we've been working on this for a number of years. we need to move quickly and provide a time of healing for our nation after we are closing the global war on terror. and thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from west virginia. mr. manchin: first of all, i want to thank the total commitment and dedication of my friend from iowa has the same as i think all of us have. but on that since 2003 when congress acted about basically put a moratorium on the mall so the mall could be preserved for all of us to enjoy, there were some that were still pending that were allowed to complete. there has not been any new approved since 2003. but we have a process and i respect that. and i'm going to work as hard as i can to make sure that process is going to be honored and we go through it in our markup and everyone have input on it. and i think that's the proper way for us to proceed and i appreciate the senator working and understanding and working with us.

right now we just -- we just have to continue to do what we're doing and let this process basically go forth as quickly as possible. that's my commitment and i will honor that. thank you, madam president. mr. lee: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. lee: madam president, as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on help be discharged from further consideration of s. 2843 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. i ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? the senator from washington. mrs. murray: madam president, reserving the right to object. the presiding officer: without objection.

mrs. murray: this is outrageous. on september 27 there were overle 0,000 -- over 80,000 new covid-19 cases and over a thousand covid-19 deaths in our country. and yet the next day i had to come to the senate floor to explain why undermining our efforts to end this pandemic would be reckless and now two days and thousands more cases and deaths later i have to do it again. and this is the second time today republicans have tried to do something like this this virus has killed over 685,000 people in our country. and if people do not get vaccinated, variants like delta will continue to spread, undermine our economy, and take lives. so why in the world for the second time in a week do i have to come down here and explain to some of my republican colleagues that weakening one of our strongest tools to fight this virus is a dangerous and deadly idea. getting people vaccinated is one of the most important things we

can do to stop covid-19. and let's be clear. immunization requirements are nothing new in this country. so i hope we can stop with this political theater and focus on ending this pandemic, rebuilding our economy, and keeping people alive. i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. lee: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. lee: madam president, imizations are nothing new. to a degree, immunization requirements might not be new, but sweeping immunization mandates issued by a single person within the federal government, that is the president of the united states, are entirely unprecedented, entirely unfounded, to say nothing of its tendency to discourage those who have been reluctant to get the vaccine from getting it. i've returned to the senate floor today for the third time

this week to express my profound objections to that sweeping mandate, to president biden's sweeping promised mandate and offer legislation that this body could have passed right now. it could have passed in order to protect countless americans from this federal intrusion. now, look ... the federal government has no legitimate role mandating covid-19 vaccination for all americans. in fact, the president of the united states has acknowledged that. it doesn't have that role. it doesn't belong to this government. yes, there have been vaccine mandates in the past. they have never been from the federal government directed at the entire country. during a really difficult time, economically and otherwise, in which inflation and the jobs market are causing a whole lot of businesses around the country

to have to close their doors, president biden has announced that he's going to enforce this mandate with a really hefty fine. each incident of a business not fulfilling the mandate could cost the business $14,000. president biden, under the threat of massive punishment, is co-opting businesses to enforce his mandate. the police officer's personal medical decisions in order the receipt of a vaccination or alternatively to be forced into bankruptcy. now, some on the other side of the aisle think that the president's punishment doesn't go far enough. in fact, in the reconciliation bill draft currently being circulated on the other end of the capitol in the house of representatives, democrats are

pushing to increase the fine to $70,000 per violation. look, unvaccinated americans are not the enemy. they're not the virus, and they're certainly not the enemy. some are frontline doctors and nurses and other health care professionals who worked overtime throughout the pandemic, throughout the darkest of the dark hours of the pandemic treating patients and saving lives. others are workers whose industries were deemed essential and who showed up to work to ensure americans kept having access to food and electricity and other essential items and services. others still are simply neighbors, family members, and other loved ones who have supported friends, families, and entire communities. as americans as a whole struggle

through quarantines, shutdowns, financial difficulties and social isolation. let me reiterate, as i've said many times before and i will continue to repeat, i believe the -- that vaccine development is nothing short of a miracle. it is an answered to a prayer. i have been fully vaccinated, as has every member of my family. but we certainly should not be forcing employers through the federal government without congressional authorization or constitutional authority, putting employers in a position where they have to fire some of their most valuable and now increasingly hard-to-find workers. we shouldn't be threatening business owners with closure simply because they don't have any desire to police their workforces' personal medical decisions.

it is not who we are as a country. they don't care whether you are a democrat or a republican or an independent or a libertarian. americans as a whole don't believe that that's who we are. we're not into that kind of draconian micromanagement associated with the nanny state. nor are we into the excessive accumulation of power in the hands of a few. or even worse, in the hands of one person. many simply cannot incur the cost of this enforcement, certainly not in this economy. additionally, this fine really amounts to a tax. it's government revenue collected from the american people, and the constitution has a thing or two to say about how revenue bills must be enacted a. the constitution does not vest any taxing -- or for that matter, any other revenue raising or fining authorities --

in the president alone. no, this is a power that's reserved to the people's representatives in congress who are charged with precisely that responsibility. we have exclusively that authority, and that authority is not to be exercised by the president of the united states. it's no accident that the founding fathers, through the constitution, put this power in the hands of those people occupying positions in the branch of government most accountable to the people at the most regular intervals, and in to one else within our government. president biden's mandate would impose really significant costs on americans, on american businesses, and on our nation's economy that's already in some really tough times. look, it's unconstitutional, it hasn't been passed by congress, and it's wrong for america.

and that's why today, as i did yesterday and the day before, i came here to offer a proposal that, if enacted, as we could have enacted it today, would protect americans from some of the most disastrous effects of the mandate. well, i believe the mandate will, i'm quite certain, eventually be invalidated in court. it's going to take some time for us to get there. because right now we don't even have the mandate itself. we just have the threat of a mandate. and it's the imminent apprehension of the mandate's implementation that causing offices in corporate america throughout this country today to scurry to try to get ahead of the curve and develop their own policies so that they're in compliance as of day one when the mandate hits. but, in the meantime, there is no one to sue because there's no final agency action.

there's no order in place. there's just the threat of it. this, i fear, is a future, not a bug. because by the time we actually have something on which to sue, by the time lawsuits are brought, by the time that litigation works it's way to its natural conclusion, which i believe culminates in being invalid, not warranted by law, months if not years will have elapsed and a lot of the damage will have been done. until that day i consider inevitable when a court rules this is unlawful, these bills, like i one i have offered today, a can provide businesses and the american people with the certainty that they need to make their own decisions. my bill that i offered up today -- the no taxation without congressional consent act -- would prohibit osha and other executive branch agencies in the federal government from imposing fines, fees, or taxes with

respect to these mandates. it would protect our constitutional order by requiring that revenue measures be voted on by congress, the branch of government most accountable to the people, and the only branch of government empowered to enact such policies. the other two branches cannot. as i mentioned yesterday, madam president, the people concerned about this mandate are everyday americans. i've now heard from 158 utahans who are at risk of losing their jobs due to the mandate. that number continues to grow every day. they are not our enemies. they are our neighbors. many of them have been advised by board-certified doctors that they ought to not receive the vaccine. we shouldn't be punishing them or forcing them into second-class status. so today we have a choice.

i hope that at some point my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will allow us to provide theceptor and peace of mind -- the certainty and peace of mind to individuals at risk of suffering under the mandate. we can defend congress' role as the branch of government that determines how and from whom revenue is to be raised. not only can we do that, but we have an obligation to do that. we've all sworn an ■oathto uphold, protect, and defend the constitution of the united states and that document doesn't give the president this power. that document precludes, it prohibits the president from exercising this power in the absence of congressional authorization, which we have not provided. so this bill, one of a dozen that i've submitted, could have passed this body today. i wish for the sake of millions of concerned americans that it

had, but regardless of this result today and of the objection that precluded it from passing the senate today, i'm going to continue to fight. i'll keep coming back for as long as it takes in order to end this egregious and legally baseless and unconstitutional mandate. i find it interesting that my friend and colleague, the distinguished senator from the state of washington, referred to this as outrageous, as outrageous that we would be attempting to put in place protections for those americans who are going to be victimized by the vaccine, who are going to have to choose between, on the one hand, receiving a medical procedure that they don't want and, on the other hand, being fired. nobody should have to choose between submission and financial ruin. they especially shouldn't have

to do that under the direction of an invalid, unconstitutional directive by the federal government. she also referred to what she described as, quote-unquote, our efforts to, quote-unquote, end this pandemic. it isn't about whether we want to end the pandemic. there is not a certain person -- democrat, republican, independent, in this chamber or the other chamber -- who wouldn't want to end this pandemic. this is not the pandemic. this is not going to end the pandemic. if anything, this will cause more people to be more reluctant to get the very vaccine that they are wanting to encourage others to provide. this is not about that. the minute we lose control of the government that is supposed to work for us, the minute we start to erode willfully, even for those who might be convinced that it's good policy -- and i

would disagree with them on that -- the minute we decide to give this power to the president of the united states and stand silently as he usurps authority that under article 1, section 7, and article 1, section 8, plainly belongs only to congress, to the extent we have any business operating in this area to begin with as a federal government -- which we do not -- then we've simultaneously undermined both the vertical protection that we call federalism and the horizontal protection that we call separation of powers. now, lest anyone might be left with the impression that this would be an esoteric or academic exercise or that that's not something that affects their freedom, for those who would make that suggestion, they are sorely mistaken. you see, because anyone anywhere can have a bill of rights. in fact, as the late justice

antonin scalia used to point out, any tin-horned dictator around the world can have a bill of rights. most of them do. many of those bill of rights are scintillatingly imploring in terms of the right of each human to exist and flourish. they'll articulate a list of rights that in some cases are comparable to if not even more protective of individual liberty than our own bill of rights. and yet, as justice scalia continued, whether or not that bill of rights or any bill of rights is worth more than the paper that it's printed on ultimately rests on whether there are protections in place that guard against the dangerous accumulation of power in the hands of a few. that's what makes that different. so if we allow a president today

to adopt whether you want to call it a tax for a fine or whatever rafe -- revenue-raising tool that you choose to identify this as being, the president doesn't have the power to impose that. that's a legislative function. article 1 of section 7 makes it very clear. you cannot enact legislation, including any legislation collecting revenue from the citizenry without passage in the house, passage in the senate, presentment to the president of the united states. he can't do it alone. that's what this is about. this is about so much more than just this vaccine mandate, but this vaccine mandate in and of itself is wrong, it's unconstitutional, it's harmful, and it has a tendency to undermine the very interest that the president purports to be advancing. thank you, madam president.

mr. barrasso: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. barrasso: thank you, madam president. i come to the floor and having heard the senator from washington, senior senator from washington, a democrat leader, talk about something in this senate chamber, and she called it outrageous. let me tell you, madam president, what i find outrageous. outrageous is the fact that people all across this country are facing crisis after crisis all caused by the democrats who are in charge of the house, the senate, and the white house. on this day, the final day of the fiscal year, we are spending time on a nominee who is completely unfit for the job for which she has been nominated. that, madam president, is outrageous. but it's been one outrageous thing after another that i hear about in wyoming each weekend. in august, it was the chaotic abandoning of afghanistan, resulting in the death of 13

american heroes, hundreds more individuals who lost their lives were afghani citizens. one of those brave soldiers, riley mccollum, a marine, age just 20, was from wyoming. president biden's activities in afghanistan, they were outrageous. because of his hasty retreat, the administration has enraged, enraged our allies around the world and has emboldened our enemies at the same time. that is outrageous. you know what's happening at the southern border, madam president? i would tell you our weak immigration policies that resulted in millions of illegal immigrants flooding into our country, that is outrageous. across the west, a lack of fire mitigation has contributed to raging forest fires. these fires threaten lives, communities, and economies.

and here in congress, democrats continue to create kay os. runaway partisan spending has resulted in the biting pain of inflation and spiking costs for families all across the country when they go to the grocery store to buy food or go to the gas station and fill up. that is outrageous. so with all these crises occurring across the nation and the world, what is leader schumer and the senate democrats choosing today as one of their top priorities for the nation? well, it's confirming a nominee who has a history of having collaborated with ecoterrorists. we talk about the threat of terrorism around the world and the threat of terrorism at home, and yet the democrat leader is bringing to the floor today a nominee of the president of the

united states and apparently endorsed and agreed to by all of the democrats who has a history of ecoterrorism and has been involved in such. confirming a nominee who collaborated with ecoterrorists, lied to the united states senate, promoted the idea that homes built in the forest should be left to burn. this is outrageous. president biden has nominated someone named tracy stone-manning to serve as the director of the bureau of land management. across the west, it is known as the b.l.m. ms. stone-manning lied to the senate, lied to this very senate this year about her past association with an ecoterrorist cell that hammered hundreds and hundreds of metal spikes, about 500 pounds of metal spikes into trees in idaho, clearwater

national forest. if these metal spikes are struck by a logger's saw, the injuries to the logger can be fatal. it's not just loggers who use saws. it's firefighters as well going in to help fight fires. the same impact would occur today. ms. stone-manning anonymously sent a threatening letter to the united states forest service on behalf of the ecoterrorists, of which she was one of the ringleaders, and then spent years covering up their crimes as well as her own. the lead investigator on the case september a letter to our committee, the entering and natural resources committee. the lead investigator sent that committee to say that ms. stone-manning was investigated and she refused to

cooperate as a result of the crime. she had years to come forward, years to reveal the crimes, and she never did. it wasn't until after she was caught and she was promised immunity and she received that immunity, it was only then that she agreed to testify. earlier this year, ms. stone-manning lied to the senate energy and natural resources committee about her involvement as an ecoterrorist and in ecoterrorism. when asked if she had ever done anything to support tree spiking in any forest, she replied no. this is blatantly false. ms. stone-manning's troubling record goes beyond lying and collaborating with ecoterrorists. she has written articles and a graduate thesis supporting the idea of human population

control. and one year ago, one year ago -- not when she was a student, a graduate student a number of decades ago, but one year ago, she tweeted an article that her husband had written calling that homes built in the forest, allowing them to burn during fires. she called the article a clarion call. now, this is for the person nominated to be the head of the bureau of land management, a clarion call. that is not part of the responsibilities and is the exact opposite of what we should expect from the head of the bureau of land management. tracy stone-manning is a dangerous choice to be put in charge of america's public lands, and each and every senator who votes to confirm her will be held personally responsible for that vote. her nomination has been publicly opposed by the last two, the last two b.l.m. directors, by

outdoor organizations, by sportsman's groups, by pro-life organizations, by loggers, by the western sheriffs association. the list goes on and on. might i mention that one of those past two b.l.m. directors was president obama's b.l.m. director who said she was unfit for the position to which president biden had nominated her. she is the wrong choice for this job. she should never be confirmed. but that is exactly what senate democrats want to do today, and that is outrageous. at a time when america faces mounting crises, senate democrats, each and every one, is determined to confirm a nominee who collaborated with ecoterrorists, lied to the u.s. senate, and continues to hold very dangerous views. madam president, i emphatically oppose her nomination.

every republican, every single republican in this senate opposes her nomination, and i urge courageous democrats to stand up and do the same. thank you, madam president. and i yield the floor. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from west virginia is recognized. mr. manchin: madam president, my dear friend from wyoming, we agree on a lot of things. we just happen to see this one different. we disagree. i rise in support of the motion to invoke cloture on a nomination of tracy stone-manning to be the director of the bureau of land management. i do so after giving very, very, very careful consideration to this serious, i mean serious allegations that many of our colleagues have leveled against her. if there were any truth, a shred of truth or evidence to support the charges, i wouldn't be standing here. i couldn't support her. but i have found no such evidence, and i have looked. now, i have said this.

every one of us, we're entitled to our own opinion here, and we're not bashful to sharing that opinion with others. we're just not entitled to create our own facts to support our opinions. that's it. and all i'm asking for, let's look at the facts. that's all. the facts surrounding the spiking of the trees in the clearwater national forest in march of 1989 are all known. it's public. they are known because the facts were tried by a jury in a federal district court in spokane, washington, in june of 1993. i still believe we all believe that rule of law applies to all of us, and that's our -- that's who we are. trial by jury is how we find facts and discover the truth in this country. that's it. it is the keystone of our criminal justice system. a jury heard the evidence in the tree-spiking case. they weighed its credibility and reached a unanimous verdict that four men spiked the trees. i repeat, four men spiked the

trees in the clearwater national forest. all four of them admitted that they spiked trees. all four of them admitted they spiked these trees. and each identified the other three as their accomplices. each one identified the other. and do you know what? ms. stone-manning was not one of them. none of the four said she was. opponents of her nomination are now taking to impute the guilt of the confessed and convicted tree spikers to her. but ms. stone-manning was never charged with tree spiking. she was never indicted or tried. there is no evidence in the trial record that she participated in the tree spiking. her opponents claim that is because she was given immunity for her testimony. i've heard that, so i wanted to investigate that. but while the federal prosecutor agreed not to use her testimony against her, she still could have been prosecuted if there was any other evidence against her. if there was any evidence against her, she could have been

prosecuted. but there wasn't, and no charges were ever brought against her, none. finally, opponents of ms. stone-manning's nomination accused her of lying to the committee on energy and natural resources, which is the committee that i do chair and the committee, madam president, that you sit on with us so honorably, on her committee questionnaire, they said she lied to us. as the chairman of that committee, i took that allegation seriously. i wanted to find out did she lie to us or not? each nominee that comes before the committee on energy and natural resources is asked whether he or she has ever been investigated, arrested, or charged with a violation of law. ms. stone-manning responded no, i have never been arrested or charged and to my knowledge i have never been the target of such an investigation. she then went on to disclose that she testified before a federal grand jury as part of a tree-spiking investigation in 198 9 and later testified at the

tree-spiking trial. this allegation seems to be that her response was false and misleading because she was subpoenaed. because she was asked to come and testify. and had been required to give fingerprints and hair samples to the grand jury investigating the tree spiking in 1989. being required to testify or give physical evidence to a grand jury does not make someone the target of a grand jury investigation. it just doesn't. and again, i go back to the rule of law, which is unique in this world today that we are still able to treat everybody as innocent until proven guilty. there was no evidence and she was not involved. the justice department defines the target as someone the grand jury is considering indicting. that's the target. they are considering to go after you. the federal prosecutor in the case asked the forest service's

criminal investigator, they asked the criminal investigator whether the investigation in 1989 had identified possibly anyone as a subject in the investigation. the forest service investigator replied under oath -- i repeat under oath, no, no. didn't happen. she could not have been a target of an investigation that had not identified her or anyone else as a subject. her response is further corroborated by recent comments in the press made by the former, former assistant united states attorney who prosecuted this, prosecuted this trial. you being a prosecutor, madam president, understands they prosecuted the tree-spiking case. this is the person who did thattors who confirmed -- who did that, who confirmed, he confirmed that ms. stone-manning was not a target of the investigation in 1993. he confirmed that. in sum, i am unable to find any

credible evidence in the exhaustive trial record of the tree-spiking case that supports the allegations levied against ms. stone-manning. what i find instead in the committee's hearing record on her nomination is compelling evidence that ms. stone-manning has built a solid reputation over the past three decades as a dedicated public servant and someone who has worked with one of our colleagues, a dear friend of ours from montana who is about to say what he believes in his heart and he knows as that person's credibility. as a problem solver she has been and consensus builder she faithfully served senator tester in positions of trust and responsibility on his staff. she went on to serve governor bullock for two years, and two more as his chief of staff. that is the evidence on which i will base my vote to support, and i would encourage every one of my colleagues to do the same.

this is a person that basically has given herself to public service. this is a person as a youth that basically in her compassion and all of the things she might have believed does not make her guilty. and this is a person who basically deserves an opportunity to be able to serve all of us in america with her knowledge, her desire, and her absolute unwavering dedication to the outdoors and everything that we hold near and dear. i just want to say that we're not here to prosecute people. that's not our job. we're not here to pass judgment. basically once judgment is already passed and basically regurgitate something that's not credible. i say again you're entitled to your own opinion, you really are. but before you pass judgment, look at the facts. it could be you, it could be me. and that's not going to happen. so with that, i urge my friends, i urge all of them to please, john adams, the first

person to preside over the senate said that facts are stubborn things and whatever may be our inclinations or the dictates of our passion they cannot alter the statement of facts and evidence. they cannot. so let us have our partisan passions aside, put them aside and look at the facts. let's vote to confirm ms. ms. stone-manning's nomination. thank you, madam president, and i yield the floor. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from montana is recognized. mr. tester: thank you, madam president. for senator toomey, i won't be long because it won't be long to tell the truth. i am here to support tracy stone-manning as the next director of the b.l.m. why? because she understands the value of public lands. she understands that public lands need to be managed and need to be managed the way so they can stay in public hands. she understands that the way you get things done is be collaborative, bring people together, talk issues out.

that's tracy stone-manning. i often wonder on the senate floor if you tell a lie enough times if it becomes the truth. the chairman of the energy and natural resources committee has laid out the facts. and the truth is tracy stone-manning did nothing wrong. and in fact the people who went to jail went to jail because of tracy stone-manning. but that aside, character assassination isn't something we should put up with in this body. god only knows if we look back into the past of everybody who serves here, what we might find. but i'm here to tell you to listen to the senator from wyoming stand up and say we're going to hold every democrat accountable, you're damned right, hold me accountable for tracy stone-manning. i worked with her. i know what she does. i know she can get the job done. she can bring people together of all political ilks, and she can

do what's best for the american people and in this case with their public lands. i'm going to point out one thing that tracy stone-manning did that was wrong. she actually agreed to be governor of -- the chief of staf of the governor. if somebody wants to do an investigation and what happened over the last three years with the governor sitting as a representative in this body and her being the governor's chief of staff you will find out why folks stand up and make things up about tracy stone-manning, because the facts don't back up what they're saying. listen to it again, because if you're out there, the folks who have come to the floor on the republican side of the aisle and bashed tracy stone-manning, the facts don't back up what the claims are. and the character assassination is not something you should be proud of. ye who throws stones ought to be

very, very careful. with that, i just want to say this -- tracy stone-manning is not new to this process. she's been a leader. she's somebody who knows how to bring people together. she is somebody who has utilized her public lands. she is somebody who knows how valuable these public lands are. she's somebody who will do a great job as the head of the b.l.m. and i would encourage any of the senators on the other side of the aisle to take up any of their claims with me. none have. i would love to answer them. i encourage this body to vote for the confirmation of tracy stone-manning because it's the right thing to do. i yield the floor.

a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. toomey: madam president, i rise to oppose the nomination of f.t.c. commissioner rohit chopra to be the cfpb director. in the banking committee, every republican voted against him, and on the senate floor, republicans have uniformly voted against discharging his nomination from the committee. there is a reason for that, madam president, and i think my colleagues have the same grave concern that i have that commissioner chopra would return the cfpb to the lawless, overreaching, highly politicized agency that it was during the obama administration when he was there. the cfpb as you'll recall was created by our democratic colleagues through the d.o.d.-frank act and it was arguably the most unaccounted agency in the history of the u.s. government. it's an agency with a single

director who until recently, even the president of the united states was unconstitutionally forbidden from firing, and this agency is not accountable to congress through the appropriation process the way most agencies are. most rely on appropriations from congress for their funding. that's part of our power of the purse strings. not with the cfpb. it simply draws virtually unlimited funding at its discretion from the federal reserve, whether congress likes it or not. now during the obama administration, the cfpb systematically pursued an activist anti-business agenda. it limited consumer choice, it drove up the cost of credit for consumers, and it certainly unfairly burdened employers with overregulation. the cfpb repeatedly engaged in overreach and abuse of its authority. just one example -- instead of

clearly laying out the rules of the road through a transparent regulatory process, it would invent rules on its own by springing lawsuits on the financial institutions that had no way of knowing that they were engaged in anything that the cfpb objected to because there was no rule. it was just rule making by enforcement. the d.c. circuit court of appeals quite rightly held that this approach violates the fundamental bedrock principle of due process. but that's not all. so commissioner chopra helped set up the cfpb, and then he served as a very high-ranking official there during the obama administration. in that role, it's been widely acknowledged that he had a hostile relationship with lenders, he used name and shame tactics to pressure them. in one instance he took this

approach to the facts by posting online inaccurate allegations by credit unions which the cfpb later had to retract. at the f.t.c., commissioner chopra has continued his aggressive anti-business stances and he's continued to take a shoot first, aim later approach to the facts in order to advance his agenda. in one recent case, three of his fellow commissioners publicly rebuked commissioner chopra for, and i quote, his disregard of the facts and the law, for making misleading claims, and for relying on false assertions. and during this whole nomination process, while commissioner chopra is under consideration to lead the cfpb, he's done very little to alleviate these concerns. i asked him a question for the record, given its history, given the actions that have been

overturned by courts, was there a single cfpb enforcement action that mr. chopra believed was too burdensome or was too punitive. he couldn't identify a single one. in addition, commissioner chopra favors unaccountable regulators with vast powers that he actually in writing proposed the super agency that would regulate politicians and think tanks and nonprofits. and at his nomination hearing, commissioner chopra once again defended the cfpb's completely unaccountable structure. this raises concerns about how he would wield power at the cfpb. at the cfpb he would not be accountable to congress in any meaningful way, certainly not through the appropriations process. since the cfpb is a single-director agency there would be no other commissioners to restrain him. commissioner chopra has shown

complete disregard for congressional oversight. according to multiple press reports the biden administration's political leadership time is leadership at the cfpd has taken unusual and possibly unlawful actions to push out nonlevel civil service positions at the cfpb in order to handpick those who will support the biden agenda. the allegation has been this has been done in preparation of commissioner chopra taking over as the director. these are just allegations, but there were several of them. there was some credibility to them, so i sent commissioner chopra a letter simply asking in a straightforward way whether he was aware of or whether he had been involved in any efforts to dismiss these career civil servants at the cfpb. madam president, it's been over 100 days since i asked him these simple, straightforward questions, and he has refused

to provide any response to me. his refusal to respond to my oversight request -- i'm the ranking member of the committee that has jurisdiction over the organization he's meant to lead -- this refusal to respond to a simple oversight request is completely unacceptable from a nominee, and it leaves very little doubt about how he'll treat congressional oversight if he's confirmed. as all of the republicans on the banking committee have stated, and i quote, in our view, this should disqualify him from consideration as cfpb director. so, madam president, it's clear to me that commissioner chopra would very likely return the cfpb to the rogue, you -- unaccountable, antibusiness agency it was during the obama administration, and we have every reason to believe he would continue to disregard legitimate congressional oversight

requests. so i urge my colleagues to join me in voting against his confirmation, and i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio is recognized. mr. brown: madam president, i come to the floor for the opposite reason. i'm thrilled to rise to urge my colleagues to support rohit chopra to serve as the next director of the consumer financial protection bureau. i've seen the good work they used to do. they used to have an ohio director. the first director there, richard cordray, a friend of mine, somebody who stood up for consumers pretty much every day of his work life, rohit chopra will become the cfpb director at a time when far too many americans feel the system is rigged against them. hear these reports about

billionaires not paying taxes, you hear reports about record profits on wall street. you see the influence just, you know, check down the hall, madam president. look down the hall, you can see the influence in the minority leader's office, senator mcconnell, of lobbyists going in and out, always getting their way. when a republican freight train goes down the rails, goes down the rail bed full of tax cuts, you know it never stops. it's always, it's always about helping those in charge get wealthier. and the cfpb director, rohit chopra will be here when people feel like no matter how hard they work, they don't get a fair shot in this country, and his job will be on the side of the public. his job will be on the side of workers. i know the presiding officer, she sees, she sees this job as i do, as putting workers at the center of our country, at the center of our economy, at the center of our work here.

the senator from georgia sees the country in the same way, putting workers at the center of our agenda. that's not happened until we had this new president. now with rohit chopra, we have a chance to turn this around. the public's watched the largest corporations amass enormous power, use it to gain access and influence in this town to write the rules in their favor. i won't open the doors again to show you, but you see people going in and out of the republican leader's office, they are always gaining access and gaining influence and writing the rules in their favor. so it's not surprising that most people don't believe anyone is fighting for them in the federal government. that's not through and -- true and that's why i know rohit chopra will fight for the people who feel like they've been left on their own. even before the pandemic, hard work wasn't paying off. we all know that productivity

has gone up in the last many years, we know that compensation has skyrocketed, we know the stock market has gone up and you know what we also know? they feel like their wages have been stagnant and feel like they have been working harder and harder in georgia, cincinnati or columbus. they know they are working harder and harder every day and not getting ahead. they feel like they've been left on their own. meanwhile, productivity up and we know that the cost of child care, prescription drugs, they all go up, 40% of americans aren't able to come up with homicides dz 400 in an emergency. a quarter of the runners in this country, mr. president, before the pandemic, one-quarter of renners paid more than half -- renterred paid more than half their income in rent. you know what happens there, you pay more than half on your rent

and your daughter gets sick, your life changes. you can get ee being victd. then the coronavirus -- can get evicted. and then the coronavirus hit. they are -- they face emergencies all at once. millions of homeowners have fallen behind on their mortgage, one in six latino homeowners, and one in five african american homeowners, we have seen scrams that use -- scams to cheat people. most of us aren't that way. most of us in this senate aren't that way, but there is always someone who will scam americans, as a result half a million americans -- that's a lot of people. half a million people reached out to the cfpb seeking help, record numbers of consumers complained abouterrors on

their -- about errors on their credit report and they need someone to stand up to the biggest banks and the biggest and most powerful corporations and fight for them. rohit chopra has the track record to do that and he will be america's voice and america's advocate. he has a deep understanding of financial markets and protecting consumers and small businesses, promoting competitive markets, holding bad actors accountable. 2018, this body, this senate voted unanimously, unanimously -- that's all of us, voted unanimously to confirm rohit chopra as f.t.c. commissioner. in the banking, housing and urban affairs committee, it used to be just banking committee, because it was just about wall street, now the word housing is on that, that committee two weeks ago, all 12 republicans voted against rohit chopra. everybody voted to confirm him when he was going to the f.t.c.

i don't know if any republicans in this body will vote for him now. it's shocking. he's worked with members of both parties on a wide array of issues, he worked with the republican and democratic state attorneys general, i -- i work on this issue a lot. my colleague, senator portman, from ohio, he and i worked together to strengthen in the -- in the -- in the bipartisan infrastructure bill to strengthen buy america provisions stronger than they've ever been so that, mr. president, we won't see a project like the bay bridge in california -- northern california made entirely with steel produced by chinese companies all part of the chinese communist party. we're not going to see that again. we're going to see what made in the u.s.a. means. mr. chopra's job, something his

predecessor didn't do, will enforce made in the u.s.a. if it doesn't have made in the u.s.a., they should hear from the government. in my state, ohioans look for made in the u.s.a. they want their dollars to support our economy. and they know it means a quality protect. he led the f.t.c. on american tech, people on the political spectrum were worried about the huge tech that seemed to be getting bigger and bigger. in the last job he was in when he got unanimous support in this body for confirmation. he stood up for amazon drivers when the company stole more than $60 million. imagine amazon, maybe the most successful corporation, certainly one of the largest corporations in the world stole $60 million of tips of workers making $9, $10, $11, $12 an

hour. they didn't get away with it because the clerk will rohit ch. all kinds of people that try to defraud american people, they are not going to get away with this because rohit chopra will be the cop on the beat. during his prior time when he worked with richard cordra, he served with the student loan -- he worked with $12.7 trillion student loan market. he worked with the attorneys general of both parties that preyed on student loans. i see the pages, many are going to school, many of them will go to college and take student loans, many of them they'll attempt to be preyed on by some

of these scammers and i'm guessing every one of these pages here, whether they are republicans or democrats whether sponsored by me or chuck schumer or me or richard portman, if you were old enough to vote, you would vote for chopra because he's going to protect you. he's going to protect you when people try to scam you on your student loans. his commitment to protecting service members has been particularly important, he's uncovered -- he uncovered a predatory lending scheme. he was able to return more than $60 million to them and their families. think about that, people are trying to scam our service members, the -- the wife's away serving our country, the husband's home and they try to scam the husband. the husband who worries about his wife every day overseas and predatory lenders and others, and that's why you need rohit chopra to protect them. he's earned the endorsement of a bipartisan group of state attorneys general, he's supported by a broad coalition

of consumer groups, civil rights groups, labor groups, small business groups and small business organizations, they know like i do with mr. chopra leading the cfpb, america can be confident they'll have someone looking out for them, pay day lenders have high-priced lobbists. we see them coming out of senator mcconnell's office. i have a bill to help those on s.s.i., they average $500 a month in income, they didn't have a voice. they haven't been heard from in 20 years until congress did it. the same with people that rohit chopra will be paid to protect. they don't have lobbist, they don't have a pac, they certainly don't have a superpac, they can't unleash tens of millions of dollars, they don't have someone to get on the phone if something goes wrong.

that's why we have the cfpb to have people, and that's why people will have rohit chopra, if you are scammed, if you took an unfair hit on your credit report, it doesn't matter who your senate sponsor is if you are a page, it doesn't matter who you voted for, it doesn't matter what state you live in, you need help, if you need someone on your side, rohit chopra will be on your side, he will stand up and that's why he was chair of the banking of the the -- banking of the housing committee of. i urge all of my colleagues to support him. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio is recognized. mr. brown: i ask unanimous consent that all remaining postcloture time be considered expired. the presiding officer: is there

on objection? without objection. the question is on the nomination. 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 50, the nays are 48. 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 action. 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 293, tracy stone-manning of montana to be director of the bureau of land management, signed by 19 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 tracy stone-manning of montana to be

director of the bureau of land management 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: on this vote the yeas are 50, the nays are 48. the moas is agreed to. the clerk will -- the clerk: department of the jint, tracy stone-manning, of montana to be director of the bureau of land management. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from nevada's recognized. ms. cortez masto: thank you, mr. president. in is a difficult anniversary for people in nevada and across

the country. tomorrow marks four years since the route 91 harvest festival attack. and on that day four years ago, thousands attended a concert in my hometown in las vegas. they were there to enjoy an evening with friends and loved ones. 58 of them never made it home. i will never forget waiting with families at the reunification center in las vegas where they braced themselves for the worst possible news. two more people have died of their wounds since the attack. over 800 people -- the presiding officer: the senate will be in order. the senate will be in order. ms. cortez masto: thank you, mr. president. over 800 people were injured in the shooting and in the chaos that followed as people fled for

safety and countless members of our community are still dealing with the emotional scars left by the violence of that night. for those hundreds of concert goers and for their loved ones, one october is a lingering presence, one that can return at a rush as a reminder like the sound of fireworks. it remains the deadliest mass shooting in modern american history. while a nature maier unfolded around them, hundreds of people sprang into action to save lives, even at the risk of their own. brave first responders rushed to the scene to transport the workers, health care workers jumped into action. ordinary nevadans stood in lines in the days after the shooting to give blood to those in need and businesses all over the

state and country provided everything from food to blanketsor airline tickets -- blankets to airline tickets. i think of that, between the darkness of the circumstances and the light of our community coming together in the aftermath. in the midst of terror and heartbreak, a whole city, a state, a country of people showed up to help one another and i am so proud of nevadans whose first response to tragedy was to help their community heal these painful wounds. on that horrible night and the days after, every selfless act, large or small made a difference. from bystanders who turned their pickup trucks into ambulances to thousands of nevadans who put vegas strong signs in their windows to show survivors they weren't alone.

nevadans came together to help. now, we cannot undo the terrible actions or those tragic events, but we can always do something to lessen the weight-these events -- weight of these events and even though years have passed, we still owe it to everybody touched by this tragedy to continue moving through our grief toward healing and there is still so much we can do. every time we reminisce about those we lost, we help keep the loved ones alive, with every donation to memorial scholarships, we honor those who dealt with the shooting. we help survivors when we talk about the mental health toll that the shooting has taken and when we work to decrease the stigma around mental health issues. i consistently work to expand treatment options for mental health issues and i will continue to work for those

facing mental health challenges. we need commonsense laws to prevent gun violence, like the ones we passed in nevada. it's unbelievable that i am standing here on the senate floor four years after i first spoke about this tragedy and that we still have not been able to pass background checks and commonsense gun safety measures. the majority of americans are with us. we need to act because las vegas deserves it and so do communities all across the nation. we cannot continue to stand by as mass attacks and shootings take a tragic toll all over the united states. to the people of las vegas who continue to grapple with the pain we experienced on that day, know that i am with you. we'll continue to work to create a permanent memorial at the site of the shooting to be a tangible reminder of wt