administration and democrats in washington are proposing. democrats want to open your bank account to federal agents. under joe biden's america, the federal government's authority would be vastly expanded so the i.r.s. can get a look at any account over $600. the madness doesn't stop there. the new rule from joe biden would require banks to report every transaction of $600 or more and does anyone honestly think the federal government will keep your private information safe? want to buy a bed? here comes the federal government. let's say you want to buy a new shotgun. let's say hunting season is coming up. how about paying for child care or mental health counseling. perhaps your selling off furniture and want to put your profit in a savings account. for every one of these transactions, the government will take a look.

every american should be disjusted and -- disgusted by the overreach by the federal government. think about the private personal information the government would have access to. it is intrusive and president biden wants to make it limitless. does anyone think the federal government will keep your private information safe? i know florida families are angry. i have heard from more than 18,000 constituents over the last two weeks by how disjusted -- disgusted they are with this plan. the biden administration wants to target every american family. 95% of households have a bank account. it's not just banks, joe biden is expanding his this across the board, they will watch your credit union, pay pal and venmo accounts and how you spend and earn crypto currency. this is an outrageous violation of americans' privacy.

we've seen reports the president and the house is looking at raising the threshold from $600 to $10,000. this applies to savings, retirement, investment accounts. you name it, the feds want to take a look. i'm not describing something in cuba or communist china i'm talking about joe biden and what the democrats want to do right here in the u.s.a. i can't wait for my democratic colleagues to explain why president biden is proposing this. how can you justify to the american people that the i.r.s. should be snooping around in their bank, retirement or investment accounts. there's only one explanation and it's simply terrifying. the democrats want to control how you spend your money. democrats want to control your expenditures, your charitable and political giving and investments. the more power they can grab from families, the more control they get over every american.

this boils down to joe biden and the radical left bringing you under the thumb of the tax and spend agenda and how will he pay for his socialist plans. here's how the democrat party work. they refuse to audit our agencies that send payments to the wrong people which they rarely recover. they refuse to hold their government accountable for reckless debt but want to put the debt on hardworking families who are trying to live their dreams. under biden's social iist -- socialist regime it is rules for thee but not rules for me. i will not stand for this outrageous plan. no american should tolerate this united states precedented overreach. i'm proud to support senator tuberville's legislation and i hope every one of my colleagues look at this, the totalitarian

surveillance. i yield back. mr. tuberville: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mr. tuberville: i would like to yield the floor to my distinguished colleague from indiana. the presiding officer: the senator from indiana. mr. braun: i visit every county in the state of indiana, 92 of them, and i can't ever recall anyone saying they want the i.r.s. to poke into their business more on a day-to-day basis. in fact, they bemoan the fact that many years ago the i.r.s. was actually sifting through stuff to determine who was conservative or not before they might grant status to your entity. we've gotten to a point, and i think senator tuberville and scott have eloquently laid out the details. i want to take a little different approach. i've been here a little less than three years and this kind of entrepreneurialism through

government, growing the federal government, having an agency like the i.r.s. that can't do its job well with the money that we do give to it it's just another example of trying to pile on one bad thing after another. it would be different if we weren't doing it, borrowing, 23% of the money we spend every year. imagine that in your own household, in a state or local government, a business you'd be laugh out of the banker's office if you did that and wanted a loan to cover it and then do it the next ten years. it doesn't work anywhere else. this is an example that i think, along with maybe the vaccine mandate where you're now forcing small businesses to do something when they finally got a rhythm and businesses have protected their employees and their

customers as well as anybody out there and that journey, you've got that nonsense is going to be unfurloughed -- unfurled here soon and at some point enough needs to be enough. the i.r.s. has had a poor record of doing things to boot. earlier pro publicly -- propublica released illegally obtained tax records of many americans, we had certain businesses being discriminated against, getting proper status setup. i introduced the protect taxpayer privacy act in june for that because the i.r.s. is already doing things that they shouldn't be doing. this would be a perfect companion to what senator tuberville is putting out here. to wrap it up, we've got to be careful when we send people

here, and if you were knocking it out of the park delivering results, not borrowing money to do the things we try to do anyway and then you tee up something like this. this is going to do nothing more than unleash more of an agency that doesn't do well at its job anyway and it's truly an example of government gone wild. and i thank senator tuberville for bringing this to a focal point and i yield back to you. mr. tuberville: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mr. tuberville: mr. president, i want to thank senator braun and senator scott again for supporting this bill. i'm proud to partner with them in this effort to safeguard the financial privacy of american citizens. as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration s. 395 -- 2953, which is at the desk. i further ask 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 an objection. mr. wyden: reserving the right to object. the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. wyden: thank you, mr. president. mr. president and colleagues, the senator's proposal, in effect, would be a game-winning touchdown for wealthy tax cheats. i.r.s. commissioner rettig, a republican appointee, came before the finance committee earlier this year and said the total amount of taxes evaded each year could be as high as a trillion dollars, cheating by those at the very top is one of the major causes of that huge tax gap. a big reason why is that the

automatic reporting and strict rules that apply to the typical hardworking taxpayer nurses and firefighters, for example, they don't always apply to those at the top. that means that tax cheats are able to hide their cheating in the shadows. the senator's proposal would help him keep it that way. this proposal would make it extraordinarily difficult to collect the information necessary to crack down on the high-flying tax cheats. now, the argument against information reporting is always the same, and it's been consistently wrong. despite what opponents say, what

president biden and democrats have proposed, is focused on tax cheating at the top. it wouldn't apply to deposits and withdrawals under $10,000. and for most people that's $10,000 on top of your paycheck. it's not about anybody's transactions. they wouldn't be reported, colleagues. it wouldn't create any new surveillance of digital currency. this information-reporting proposal is about reporting only two numbers, the total amount going into an account and a total amount going out of it. social security income does not count either. so this idea -- and i've listened to my friends that somehow this is going to end

western civilization -- just doesn't hold up. in fact, commissioner rettig, a republican appointee, pointed out recently that this plan could actually reduce the odds of an audit for middle-class taxpayers. those folks that i was talking about, the nurses and the firefighters. i'm going to close with just a couple of other points. most of my colleagues know that i'm about as strong a privacy hawk as there is in the senate, and i don't take a back seat to anybody when it comes to fighting for americans' privacy, whether it's taxpayer data, communications, web traffic, you name it. and colleagues, all of that

work, all of that private work is on the public record. it's a matter of public record. it isn't an atomic secret. in those debates about privacy, it's also striking that it's most often members of the other side attempting to stop reforms, for example, to government surveillance and phone records and web browsing, web browsing. but when democrats are working to crack down on ultrawealthy tax cheats, that's when suddenly we have got republicans saying oh, my goodness, who's going to be sensitive to privacy? i want to repeat as i have on this floor again and again, i will talk to anybody on either side of the aisle with any philosophy about protecting taxpayer data. as the chairman of the senate

finance committee which handles privacy policy, i want it understood that our committee and i, particularly given my record on privacy issues, we take privacy very seriously. that's not what is on offer by the other side today. the bottom line is wealthy tax cheats are ripping off the american people to the tune of billions and billions of dollars per year. tax cheats thrive when the reporting rules that apply to them are loose and murky. democrats want to fix this broken approach and crack down on cheating at the top. the senator's proposal would make that impossible, and it would hand, colleagues, it would hand the senators' proposal a big fourth quarter victory to the tax cheats. for that reason, i object, and i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. tuberville: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mr. tuberville: mr. president, this is a simple two-page bill that will protect every american from an invasion of privacy by big brother government i.r.s. i'm sorry to see that my democratic colleagues oppose protecting the financial privacy of american taxpayers. that's a real shame. i think you would be hard pressed to find a member of the united states senate who can honestly say that a majority of their constituents support president biden's proposal for the i.r.s. to monitor a $600 or more transaction. i don't think you could find one. we ought to be able to stand up together in a bipartisan fashion to reject this radical proposal. i'm confident that the american people will continue to put pressure on their elected representatives to reject this

plan. i will work with my colleagues to address legitimate concerns, although i suspect there are none, and any position is going to be purely political. americans across the country can count on senator scott and myself to keep up the fight of this important issue. mr. president, i notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. blumenthal: as a preliminary matter, i ask that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. blumenthal: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that michael jones, a fellow in my office, be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the year so he can participate in the national defense authorization act consideration. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. blumenthal: mr. president, we have reached a really important point in our relationship with one of our great allies in the world. the united states has before it the challenge, and this congress can meet that challenge, for $1 billion of supplemental security assistance to replenish

israel's iron dome system. that funding is provided in h.r. 5323, the iron dome supplemental appropriations act of 2022, passed by the house of representatives by an overwhelming -- and i emphasize overwhelming bipartisan support. i want to thank my connecticut colleague, rosa delauro of new haven for her leadership and all of the members of the house of representatives for their vision and courage in separating this measure and passing it, and we should do so now as quickly as possible. all of us know that the 2016 memorandum of understanding negotiated between israel and the united states provides

$500 million per year in security assistance for israel's missile defense. the m.o.u. allows israel to request additional funds to replenish and restore missile defense capabilities in exceptional circumstances. we all remember vividly the may 2021 conflict between israel andhams, and in our minds still vividly and graphically are the pictures of that iron dome system intercepting missiles aimed at civilians in israel. the iron dome defense system intercepted about 90% of those potentially lethal missiles targeting areas of israel.

in total, about 4,400 rockets were launched by hamas. should the iron dome have failed, countless israeli civilians would have been killed. this system performed with such extraordinary and exceptional prowess, showing its necessity for both humanitarian and defenses purposes. i recently returned from a trip to israel where i talked to the top leadership of the new government, including the prime minister of the taliban. i was inspired and excited by this termination of the israeli leadership, and i believe the israeli people. to inaugurate a new era where we are even closer to israel than we have been in the past.

there have been some bumps in the road. there have been some potential disagreements in this body, but we should focus on making sure that israel's defense is completely bipartisan, that our relationship with israel crosses party lines. we have that opportunity today to renew the sense of bipartisanship in our unshakable relationship with israel, and that relationship goes beyond just security concerns. we are bound by culture, heritage, faith, and a common commitment to democracy, and israel has that commitment in perhaps the most constantly dangerous neighborhoods in the world. iron dome is a defensive system.

it is solely defensive. and it defends against the loss of civilians on both sides, in gaza as well as israel, because the loss of life in israel, if it occurs, if iron dome is lacking, will lead to escalating violence that will cost lives in gaza as well. the iron dome prevents escalating hostilities that will cost lives among both palestinians and israelis. and so its defensive value is indisputable, and that's why it does have bipartisan support here, it has the president's support. he stated, quote, we're going to discuss israel's unwavering, unwavering commitment that we have in the united states to israel's security, and i fully,

fully, fully support replenish ing israel's iron dome system. to quote from his meeting prior to his meeting with prime minister bennett at the white house. just two days before he made those remarks, secretary austin also expressed his support. quote, you can also see that commitment as we advocate for the replenishment of the iron dome missile defense system. the administration is committed toen siewrg -- to ensuring that iron dome can protect the civilian centers targeted by attacks, and we are working closely with congress to provide all the necessary information to respond positively to your request for the -- for $1 billion in emergency funding, and it's going to save more innocent lives. i'm concerned that members of

the united states senate are balk blocking passage of this bill. senator paul has demanded that we add unrelated language to rescind funds from the department of state and the department of defense before he will agree to a unanimous consent decree. we should prevent this sacred relationship from becoming a political football. we should make sure that we preserve it as a bipartisan source of consensus. and that is not to say necessarily that we agree with every single act, every single measure that our israeli allies take. we can be friends and family and still disagree. but our age should not be

conditioned on agreeing with every single policy or action taken by our israeli friends. this measure is a defensive platform that saves lives. it is a humanitarian step that should be regarded for what it is, essential to our alliance, our relationship, and our bond with israel. mr. president, as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that at a time to be determined by the majority leader following consultation with the republican leader, the senate proceed to consideration of calendar number 140, h.r. 5323, that there be up to two hours of debate, that upon the use or yielding back of time,

the bill will be considered read a third time and the senate vote on passage of the bill without intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. paul: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky. mr. paul: reserving the right to object. i agree with the senator from connecticut that we should pass the proposal. in fact, i've offered a proposal to fund the iron dome with a billion dollars that it should be paid for, though. we're facing a $30 trillion debt. we borrowed $2 million a minute. inflation is rising. they're wanting to pile more debt upon our country. so if we're going to help our ally israel, i think we need to be strong to do it. we need to be not piling on debt without consequences and this should be paid for. there's a very easy pay-for i've proposed. there's $6 billion left in a reconstruction fund for the afghan national government. well, the afghan national government no longer exists.

in the haste to leave, the biden administration has let the taliban overrun the country. so i asked the other day in committee, i asked secretary blinken, this $6 billion, are you planning on giving it to the taliban? and he says, well, it depends on whether they fulfill their commitments. to me it sounds like a pretty big if, but if the biden administration says that they fulfill their commitment and expectations, the understanding is the biden administration is going to give $6 billion to the taliban. so not only do they let them take $80 billion of equipment, not only did we leave incomplete disarray, democrats now want to say oh, we've got to keep this money because we've got to give it to the taliban. that's obscene. we should immediately rescind all of that mommy. you want to give -- that money. if you want to give money to afghanistan, let's vote on it again. but you gave the money to the previous government and now you want to give the money to the taliban that's overrun the

country. it's a disgrace. the taliban shouldn't get a penny. and we should pay for things, even for things that we're trying to give to allies. so i have a proposal before the desk. my proposal says fully fund the billion dollars for the iron dome project, fully fund it. we've already given billions for it but we're willing to give a billion more, but we're going to pay for it but not giving money to the taliban. it's a pretty easy sort of lift. we asked every senator on the republican side if they objected to this. not one republican objected to this. so the reason iron dome is being held up is because democrats are objecting to it being paid for. i'm here today to support the iron dome. i'm giving a proposal that would give them their billion dollars right now. it could happen today. all i ask that it be paid for with money that's already been appropriated, that is in all likelihood going to be given to the taliban if we don't take it away now. i think it's a very reasonable

proposal. i'm disappointed that the democrats are objecting to iron dome today. it is a disappointment that they're against paying for it with the fund that's already out there that they so much love the idea of giving the money to the taliban, that they're going to insist on blocking iron dome funding because they're insisted on no, no, we can't get rid of the $6 billion because if the taliban behaves, we're going to give it to them. look, i don't care if the taliban behaves. i wouldn't give them a penny. there are other ways of trying to have a diplomatic relationship other than giving money to people. people think that somehow the taliban behaves, we've got to give them money? i think that's a crazy notion. so without question, i will object. so i ask the senator to modify his request so that instead of his proposal and as if in legislative session, the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar item number 140, h.r. 5323, further, that the only amendment in order

to be my substitute amendment which is at the desk. i further ask that there be two hours of debate equally divided between the two leaders and upon the use or yielding back of that time, the paul substitute at the desk be considered and agreed to, the bill as amended be considered read a third time and the senate vote on passage of the bill as amended with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: does the senator so modify his request? mr. blumenthal: mr. president, reserving the right to object. let's set the record straight. there is no possibility of this money or any other money going to the taliban. section 9021 of the fiscal year 2021 defense appropriations act, we all voted for it -- makes funding the taliban illegal. if any pentagon official breaks that law, they could go to jail

under the antideficiency act. whatever the secretary of state may have answered to senator paul's question at a hearing, we should know and he should know that spending money in any way that enables it to go to the taliban would be breaking the law. and he would have to come to congress to use any of that money to aid the taliban. so this is a false issue. the funds that the paul amendment seeks to rescind have actually not yet been appropriated. he targets the $3.3 billion in the fiscal year 2022 request. you can't rescind funds that haven't yet been appropriated. so the amendment falls of its own weight. but i want to deal with the

merits. number one, the paul amendment seeks to rescind funds from the department of defense's afghan security forces fund. those funds are still needed to complete the withdrawal. they are in an account that is urgently needed to terminate contracts that are already in place and secure military equipment that has been withdrawn from afghanistan. all the complaints about the withdrawal, all the complaints about the need to secure that military equipment, they are met by this funding. defunding the pentagon in this way will in fact disrupt the shutdown of these activities and open the united states to legal action from contractors. i've been advised for those reasons that the department of

defense strongly opposes the paul amendment because it makes ending the war in afghanistan more difficult. let me just close by saying there is a need for humanitarian support in areas where the palestinians live. there is a need for a water treatment and vaccines and health and all of the needs, humanitarian needs of the palestinian people. one of the encouraging parts of my visit with the israeli leadership was their recognition that israel has a humanitarian obligation in this area. and they recognize as well that we may not always agree on every facet of our relationship. but this measure should be

unconditional because it is defensive and it is humanitarian to support the iron dome. and i wish my republican colleagues were here to refute senator paul because i know many of them support it. so, therefore, i will not modify my request. the presiding officer: the objection is heard. is there objection to the original -- mr. paul: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky. mr. paul: reserving the right to object. i'm disappointed take the dks will again today -- democrats will again today block the iron dome as paid for. i think it's important we do support our allies. i'm in support of the iron dome funding but i think the very least it should be paid for. we've offered them various permutations of this. out of the entire $6 billion from the afghan reconstruction fund or a billion, we've offered other alternatives to look at funding in government that already exists to see if we could pay for this so the real reluctance is on the democrats'

part to pay for our aid. the thing is we can't keep blindly giving money away without repercussions. we're $-- i'm disappointed that they will block the iron dome funding as paid for and i do object to the underlying proposition. the presiding officer: the objection is heard. mr. blumenthal: we need to pass this measure. we need to do it now. there is no need for pay for and we should move ahead with this unanimous consent. i regret the objection and i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from nevada. ms. rosen: mr. president, when i traveled to israel in 2019, i saw with my own eyes the iron dome system up close and in person. i met with the brave soldiers who operate and protect it, young men and women in many

cases no older than 18 or 19 years old. iron dome is a missile defense system that has successfully intercepted thousands of missiles fired by terrorist groups, by hamas, at israeli population centers. it has protected jews, christians, muslims, protected them all from harm and saved countless lives, israelis and palestinians alike. this incredible feat of defense technology is a shining example of the unbreakable u.s.-israel security partnership. the u.s. army is in the process as well of acquiring iron dome batteries and tested the system as recently as august, meaning this lifesaving technology could also protect american men and women in uniform from a variety of missile threats. let me be clear. i want to emphasize the word

defense. iron dome is a purely defensive system. it's a shield, a miraculous shield against death and destruction, one that america should be proud to help support and has supported across both democratic and republican administrations. and in democratic and republican congresses for over a decade. iron dome saves lives. iron dome prevents an escalation of violence, and iron dome provides a critical window for diplomacy. this past may terrorist organizations lawferled over -- launched over 4,400 rockets to israel. that's right, 4,400 rockets. iron dome was key to preventing 90% of these rockets from reaching their targets saving the lives of innocent israeli

citizens. we should be proud to support this technological feat that has protected countless lives and will continue to do so. my trip to israel and my visit to see iron dome, it's on my mind today because israel needs our help and they need it now. this summer following the barrage of rocket fire, toes 4,400 missiles that israel had to endure and which the iron dome protected israel against, israel made an emergency request to the united states for security assistance in order to replenish and prepare the iron dome defense system to defend against future potential conflicts. to israel's north on the border with lebanon which i went to see just two years ago, hezbollah, an iranian-backed terrorist organization, is estimated to

possess over 100,000 missiles. those 100,000 missiles pointed at israel, including thousands of precision missiles. if war were ever to break out again between israel and lebanon as it did in 2006, iron dome would play a crucial role in protecting civilians, all civilians in israel. just a few months ago i joined democratic and republican colleagues in urging continued support for iron dome, support for iron dome is about the integrity of the u.s.-israeli relationship. there's always been strong bipartisan support for the u.s.-israel defense partnership. that bipartisan support continues today. failure, failure to fund this critical defensive tool would be catastrophic for israel and would result in lives lost. it would lead to more conflict,

and it would weaken the bond between the united states and our greatest ally in the middle east. we must take action to ensure that this program remains fully operational. the house of representatives has already passed legislation in an overwhelmingly bipartisan basis to fund iron dome. it was a vote of 424 and only 9 against. so now it is the senate's turn to act. earlier this week my colleague, senator menendez, chairman of the senate foreign relations committee, said this -- and i quote -- there is no conceivable reason why anyone in this chamber or on either side of the aisle should stand in the way of u.s. support for this lifesaving defense to be fully ready for the next attack. he is exactly right.

opposition to iron dome is contrary to u.s. national security interests and violates the commitment that the u.s. government made to israel. we have an opportunity to rebuild the iron dome shield, to support the security of our most important ally in the middle east, and to save lives, but we must take action right here and right now. so, mr. president, as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that at a time to be determined by the majority leader, following consultation with the republican leader, the senate proceed to consideration of calendar number 140, h.r. 5323, that there be up to two hours for debate, that upon the use or yielding back of time, the bill be considered read a third time and that the senate vote on passage of the bill, with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is

there objection? mr. paul: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky. mr. paul: reserving the right to object, as we speak, the taliban is gaining control, has control over most of afghanistan. they're brutalizing women, kicking children out of school. women will no longer be participating in the government. it is really just unconscionable that democrats insist money be there to give to the taliban. any person who believes and truly believes that the taliban is a menace to women's rights and to women in a civilized world should join me in saying we should make sure no money every -- ever goes to it the taliban. when secretary blinken was asked, he said if there is cooperation and if they meet expectations, the $6 billion will be given to the taliban who violently overthrew this government. we're asking is very simple.

we could fund iron dome today. make sure that everybody who listens to this understands. this is being blocked by democrats who don't want to pay for it. we have a proposal that would have proposed $1 billion today for iron dome, but it would have been paid for by taking money out of an account that has been allocated and that secretary blinken has indicated he will give to the taliban if they behave. so i think it's a real problem, and it's a problem of this body that the cavalier nature of just letting our country pile on $30 trillion of debt. you ask how we got here? we got here a billion dollars at a time. so rarely do we have an episode or a time where we can object. you know, i would object to a trillion if it were on the floor. i would object to $50 billion if it were on the floor. this is why government grows by leaps and bounds and becomes more and more wasteful over time. so i do object.

the presiding officer: objection is heard. ms. rosen: mr. president, mr. paul's objection is unacceptable. he knows it's unacceptable. this is no time for political games. it could jeopardize the support for our allies and people in need of lifesaving assistance. i challenge all my republican colleagues to let us take up the house-passed bill passed 420-9 and fund iron dome for our national security -- our national security -- as well as israel's. i yield. mr. moran: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from kansas.

mr. moran: mr. president, thank you. i want to use the opportunity on the senate floor today to call to the attention what i think is an alarming proposal that would allow the internal revenue service to track nearly all inflows and outflows of americans' bank accounts. i heard this story, i heard this proposal while i was home in kansas, and my reaction was, i assume this is just something on the internet, something that people are perhaps fabricating. surely, no one seriously is proposing that every transaction of $600 in one's bank account and $600 out of one's bank account is something that the internal revenue service should be monitoring and recording or that records would need to be provided to the i.r.s. with that information. it's one of those things i thought, well, that's just some crazy something that somebody is talking about. but, lo and behold, unfortunately, i've learned over

the years that sometimes my constituents have brought me a story. that can't be true, let me check it out. and far too obvious it turns out that -- and far too often it turns out that is someone's proposal. that can't be true. make sure you do something to keep it from happening. in this case, it is true. and not only is is it true, but it's proposed by the biden administration. it's the secretary of the treasury, janet yellen, who believes and testified that this is a good idea. it is charles rettig, the i.r.s. commissioner, who believes this is important to accomplish much it is not just somebody's idea. it is somebody that has something to say that matters that can cause it to happen is for this. for the i.r.s. knowing how much

money a kansan earns, that just isn't enough, how much an american earns. it isn't enough to know our income. now the i.r.s. wants to know how you spend that income. this is an invasion of privacy that focuses on account flows, not just on income, and it intrudes on virtually every american. the claim that this will help tax wealthy cheats, i'm all for taxing wealthy cheats, but instead this isn't that. it gives the government the unprecedented access to nearly every working american's bank account. rather than listening to the enormous pushback from americans and eliminating from consideration this invasive mandate, democrats are simply suggesting to tweak the proposal depending on the revenues needed

to fund this massive tax-and-spend spree that's around the corner. in recent weeks i've heard from more than a thousand kansans who are alarmed at this massive expansion of i.r.s. reach and authority. this invasion of privacy. the last thing my kansas constituents would want when it comes to their own bank account is more bureaucrats watching and dictating how they live their lives. this provision is a threat to their privacy. they see it that way, and it is. kansas relies heavily on small-town banks and credit unions to provide rural communities and their citizens with lending services to finance a small business expansion, to allow a family to pay for college or to buy a home. the relationship between our bankers, our credit unions, and their customers and clients is a special one. it's personal.

that private relationship between a banker and their customer is one that's based upon trust. the banker no more wants to be in the middle of invading their customer's privacy, mandating that banks report to the government their customers' account activities will significantly breach the trust that a customer, a client has with their banker. these financial institutions are often run by just a handful of employees and are often a family operation handed down from one generation from the next. we have lots of small local banks and credit unions already knee-deep, perhaps waist-deep, in red tape, something they have to deal with every day and something we've tried nearly every day to reduce or eliminate. our bankers and credit unions spend millions of dollars to comply with the anti-money laundering policies, and those

often yield minimal results. this proposal would turn our banking system into an extension of the internal revenue service while forcing local banks to shoulder the costs, and these costs, of course, ultimately would be paid for -- guess who? -- the customer shall the citizen. so not -- the customer, the citizen. so not only would this allow our privacy to be intruded upon, but we'd be paying as it happens. unfortunately, the i.r.s. has increasingly politicized and has been -- has been politicized and has a history of targeting disfavored groups and individuals and has proven incapable of protecting taxpayers' data from leaks. entrusting this bureaucracy, the i.r.s., or really any other bureaucracy in washington, d.c., with the supervision of your personal finances is no way to close a tax gap. at a time when the american

people are more wary than ever of the federal government and their agencies, this proposal will do nothing but further increase that distrust. democrats in congress and particularly in the biden administration should prioritize strengthening the faith in the financial services, not pursuing these kind of policies that will push underbanked americans away. ultimately, this plan will not achieve its stated goal of increasing tax revenues. rather, it will lead to more harassment of average americans and those who work at the their financial institutions. it's clear to me that there's an attempt here to leave no stone unturned to find every possible way to tax everyday americans in order to fund a massive spending spree. so while we hoped that this proposal was just idle talk,

something that somebody said over a cup of coffee at the local doughnut shop or the cafe, something that when we went to find out if there was any truth to it, we discover, oh, no, i can tell my constituents, this isn't happening, this is just something that somebody is gossipping about -- but, no, it is a serious consideration by the biden administration and it has serious consequences to the well-being, financial, but more importantly, the privacy, something that americans deserve, something that americans request, and something that is already too often lacking in our lives, privacy, and in this case, privacy from the federal government. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: i'd like to address the senate judiciary

majority's trump investigation examining the period from december 14, 2020, through january 3, 2021. the majority released their report this morning. the minority released our report this morning. this truncated investigation doesn't support the long-running democratic narrative that trump used the justice department to try to overturn the 2020 election, and it's truncated because we don't have all the records. and this committee only interviewed three witnesses. the available evidence shows that president trump didn't use the department of justice to

subvert the 2020 election. for example, one witness testified that president trump had no impact -- i repeat, no impact. and the words "no impact" comes from that witness -- on what the department did to investigate election allegations. in fact, the evidence shows that president trump listened to his advisors and to their recommendations and that he followed those recommendations. the witnesses also testified that president trump didn't fire anyone at the justice department relating to the election. records from this investigation indicate that president trump's focus was on, quote, legitimate

complaints and reports of crimes, end of quote. witnesses testified that president trump's main focus was on making the department aware of the potential criminal allegations and to ensure that the department did its job. it wasn't president trump directing or ordering specific investigative steps. witnesses also testified that it wasn't unreasonable for president trump to ask the department what it was doing to investigate election fraud and crime allegations. now, with respect to the other core issues in the democratic narrative, the available evidence shows three facts.

fact one, the president -- president trump rejected sending the letter drafted and advocated by assistant attorney general clark to various states to contest the election. fact number two, president trump rejected firing attorney general rosen. indeed after bill barr submitted his resignation as attorney general, president trump apparently considered richard donahue as a replacement showing his displeasure with rosen. third and final fact, president trump accepted acting attorney general rosen's position that the department not file a lawsuit against the states with reported voter issues. the democrats' report makes much

of the effort by individual lawyers to push the department to take these steps, but the fact is none of these steps were taken because president trump made the ultimate decision not to take those steps. at each of these critical decision points, the president asked his advisers for their candid views and their candid recorecommendations -- recommendations and the president followed them. now ask yourself this. where would we be now if president biden followed the advice and recommendations of his advisers regarding afghanistan. and we know would those advices were because we heard them last week before committees of the house and senate by the generals who were testifying. again, i'm not sure why the

committee is releasing transcripts and an investigative report when the investigation didn't seem to be complete yet. i as chairman of a committee run investigations differently. i collect records and run all the necessary interviews. i gather the full set of facts of then and only then i release the material publicly of so far the narrative of the majority has been spinning here just isn't borne out by the facts. so this advice for me. don't take this senator's word for it. do as we have done on the republican side. read the transcripts, and i think you'll come to the very same conclusion that i have just stated. now, on a second point and a

much shorter point, i would like to recognize an outstanding professor at iowa state university. professor lisa sheltiemoore of iowa state university is doing important work on behalf of the farmers, rural communities, and eventually it affects all americans. she is a landscape ecologist and professor of natural resource ecology and management. additionally she serves as associate director of the bioeconomy institute at iowa state university. dr. sheltiemoore was recently recognized as the 2021 mcgarthur foundation award recipient and the first ever iowa state mcgarthur fellow. this award is known as the genius grant and is given to

individuals who have shown a dedication to their field through creativity and originality. is there schulte moore is a founder of the prairie strips conservation program established in 2003 at the neo smith national wildlife refugee -- refuge in prairie city, iowa. this program studies the effects of planting prairie strips on farm lands. before i continue, i just used the word neo smith. congressman -- former congressman neil smith of iowa, 36 years a member of the house of representatives. he's been retired quite a while now. he just celebrated -- i think his 100th birthday and he's still active in the des moines community. participants found that prairie

strips can protect the quality of our soil and water by reducing farm fields soil loss by 90%. -- by 95%. they also reduce nitrogen and phosphorous runoff by up to 80%. because of the professor's work, prairie strips are used in 14 states on over 115,000 acres of crop land. in addition to the 625,000 -- $625,000 received through the mcgarthur foundation, dr. schulte moore was recently awarded a grant to turn biomass and manure into fuel. with this research, the professor is looking for additional ways that farm waste can be turned into renewable fuel and consequently not contribute to the degradation of

the environment. whether it is researching the next generation of biofuels or helping farmers understand what conservation practices work best at their farm, i'm grateful that the mcgarthur foundation recognized dr. schulte moore. her dedication and innovation encourage young people at iowa state university and beyond to become involved in agriculture. the fact is the united states has the safest and most abundant food supply in the word thanks to the american farmer and through research of institutions like iowa state university. congratulations, dr. schulte moore, iowa state university and the state of iowa are lucky to have a professor like you. i yield the floor.

mr. scott: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. scott: mr. president, president biden ran on a promise to be a unifying moderate. he promised to bring america together. on the campaign trail he pledged to shut down the virus, not the country. as we've seen with the vaccine mandate, the opposite has happened. joe biden and democrats in washington have adopted an agenda of systemic socialism focusing on expanding government and federal control. and joe biden's america, the

government knows better than the people and president biden has shown that he's eager to use government mandates to keep families in check. president biden's latest vaccine mandate for private companies tramples on the personal freedoms of americans. this unconstitutional order pushed more americans out of the workforce, devastated our economy with product and service shortages that cripple supply chains and threw america into a crisis not seen since the 1970's. by forcing some working americans to choose between keeping their jobs or doing what they believe is best for their health, biden's mandate hurts the people he claims to help, workers, low-income americans, and seniors on a fixed income who will all be either hit with higher unemployment, higher prices, or a shortage of available goods. when i think about the impact of burdensome government regulations, i think about my dad, my adopted father was a truck driver. anyone who's drif:trucks or been

close to someone in that line of work knows how demanding the job can be. it's hard work and it's one of the most critical jobs in our country. they're like the offensive linemen of the american supply chain. often overlooked but essential to getting things moving. our country is already experiencing a significant shortage of truck drivers. we can't afford to lose anymore. mr. scott: of course trucking isn't the only industry that will be effected by biden's unconstitutional mandate. nearly every sector is under the gun. indeed an economy where simply keeping shelves stocked is an everyday challenge, losing workers in almost any critical industry will have catastrophic impacts across our supply chains and drive prices even higher. just this week, a month and a half before thanksgiving, ak dison began already giving -- amazon began already giving black friday discounts on goods because they expect so many delays and shortages on goods. that means families have had to way for hole -- who have to wait

for holiday bonuses before they go shopping are going to be facing out-of-stock signs online and in stores. joe biden needs to answer this question. how is he going to fix this. how can joe biden guarantee our supply chains won't completely crumble under his failed policies and mandates? in fact, i urge president biden to have transportation secretary pete bi and -- testify before te commerce committee on the shortages we're already seeing and the shortages we anticipate. ensuring the stability of american supply chains requires the urgent attention of the biden administration and as a member of the commerce committee and ranking member of the subcommittee on tour itch, trade, and export promotion, i know this testimony from the secretary would be useful in understanding how this will be addressed. we're already starting to see major supply issues. seafood restaurants in miami are seeing price increases of 50% to 60% on fish.

furniture stores in florida have wait times six to eight months before they can deliver and florida grocery stores are warning that product short annuals as customers are starting to see empty shelves. small business owners and families aren't able to afford those kinds of drastic increases. if president biden has his way, the transportation difficulties are going to become even worse and prices will rise even higher. right now rising prices are -- on everyday goods are forcing american families to make hard choices. i've stood on this floor countless time and will say it again. reckless government spending causes inflation. the reckless spending agenda of joe biden and democrats here in washington is having disastrous effects on families across our country. we can never forget that as inflation worsens and prices surge higher, it's the poorest americans and those on fixed incomes who are hurt the most. there are single moms that wonder if they can put a few

extra gallons of gas in the car and still put food on the table. my mom took odd jobs to make sure we could still get by. if president biden actually spoke with small and mid-size employers and hardworking families instead of big banks and c.e.o.'s, he learned that massive federal ban dates won't help us get our economy back on track. his big government mandates will only hurt us. i want to be clear. i got the vaccine. i had covid. and i encourage every american to talk with their doctor and consider doing the same. but getting the vaccine is a choice every american gets to make for themselves. we can't give people an ultimatum to comply, quit, or get fired. it's a gross overreach by the federal government at a time when we need more jobs, not less; lower prices on everyday gooded, not higher. unlike joe biden and democrats in washington, i don't believe that government knows better than the american people. my parents didn't have much of a

formal education, but they worked hard to make the choices they felt were right for the health and welcome of our family -- and well-being of our family. they made their own choices. that's how government should work. that's what i did when i was governor of florida. rather than placing mandates on pregnant women or restricting their travel to areas with local transition of zika, we simply informed floridians. that's how the federal government should deal with covid. the government's role in public health is to inform and support, not mandate. mr. president, our country has seen labor shortages caused by democrats' failed policies of rewarding unemployment, paying people more to stay at home than to get back to work. energy prices are surging, inflation is raging. american families can't afford more of president biden's

radical policy decisions that are inflicting lasting damage and driving our economy backwards. restoring and strengthening our supply chain is a critical step in getting the american economy rolling forward. it is time for president biden to acknowledge massive, unconstitutional mandates on private companies won't do anything but hurt american business and throw gasoline on the already raging inflation crisis he is creating. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: the senator from west virginia. mr. manchin: i'd like to suspend with the quorum call. the presiding officer: we're not under a quorum call.

mr. manchin: mr. president, i'm here today to honor the lives of our world war ii medal of honor recipients who bravelied served our in nation -- bravely served our nation, including herschel woody williams. my colleague is here with me, and we have known woody for years and years and years. there's just not a person who's never quit serving his country from the day he was born until the day he fought and won the congressional medal of honor iwo jima. if you saw pictures, and basically the war videos we see, and you see a little guy running around iwo jima shooting the flame thrower into the pillbox, that was woody. it's just unbelievable. he's a fellow west virginian, he was a marine, medal of honor recipient for the battle of iwo jima which i've been told involves the flame thrower, which i've seen. not just one, i think he went

through five flamethrowers. when he went back, he reloaded and went back at them again. just unbelievable. woody dedicated his life to our great and beautiful united states, through his service in the military and dedication to supporting veterans for their needs after. there's not a time when i know that senator capito and myself don't hear from woody and there's something going on whether at the cemetery or whether we're having a ride for gold star families, we do a motorcycle ride -- which i would like to invite you to, you would enjoy. it's wonderful. senator capito has been with us before on this. it's a wonderful thing. woody never failed to be part of it. he rides in a slingshot but makes the whole route. he dedicated his life to veterans and gold star families. he's bound to get a shelter built at the donald c. canard memorial state cemetery. again senator capito and i both

serving on the appropriations committee, have committed that we're united in getting this done, and we will get that done. it needs to be. and that basically, it would ensure that the families of fallen soldiers and veterans, they have a safe place to lay their loved ones to rest, protected from the weather, rain, sun and snow throughout the year. this year's military construction and veterans affairs appropriations bill, we included language to include a pilot program that allows federal veteran cemeteries to build shelters for those purposes. but we must ensure the pilot program includes state veterans cemeteries like the donald crssments cana -- donald c. canard. the families deserve to have their loved ones rest in peace. americans like woody williams answered the call to serve our great nation during world war ii, and he fought to ensure our democracy prevailed. their sacrifices allowed the rest of us to enjoy the freedoms

we hold sacred and help make the united states the strongest nation in the world. i'm going to share with you one story that woody told all of us back home. but he says the thing that he remembers most and the thing that he still grieves the most about, he had two marines that were protecting him with gunfire while he ran around. their lives were sacrificed for him. they both got, i think both got shot and perished. and he says that they gave their life for me to do my job and protect and save my life. there's not a day goes by he says he doesn't think about that how the good lord spared him. i believe all of those who served in world war ii by allowing the last surviving, and i want to make sure we understand woody williams is the last surviving medal of honor recipient from world war ii.

we're asking that he be allowed to lay in state at the u.s. capitol rotunda, and what better way to honor this generation and their sacrifices than to authorize a state funeral for that brave individual. and woody is not -- there's not a better person to represent. bestowing this honor on the last world war 2 recipient would be a great way for the nation to come together. so i'm honored to be here with my colleague and my friend, senator capito, in a bipartisand this, the glue that holds this country together is the people that put themselves in harm's way for all of us. they didn't say i'll put a uniform on and i'll take a bullet for the republican but not the democrat or i'll take a bullet for the democrat and not the republican. senator capito's father took a bullet for all of us too, and she'll speak about that, i'm

sure, and the bravery he had. he was my dear friend and we all miss him. the sacrifices that my parents and senator capito's parents and that generation, that was the greatest generation i think that we'll ever see, because they took responsibility and took responsibility for their actions. they held themselves accountable for their actions, and that showed the character that generation has, and that's what i would hope these young interns and all the young pages we have here understand that your character is defined the day that you take responsibility for the actions, good, bad, or indifferent, and be able to look yourself in the mirror and say i made a mistake, i can do better. that's my fault and i'll fix that. that's character. so i'm honored to be here and honor every world war ii veteran, every world war ii medal of honor recipient. i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join us in our efforts to honor these brave veterans. and i call on our president, president biden, to grant our request.

and with that, i yield the floor to my colleague. mrs. capito: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from west virginia. mrs. capito: thank you, mr. president. it's an honor to talk about a good friend of ours, woody williams, here with my fellow senator from west virginia, to talk about our fellow west virginiaan, herschel woody williams. he is an incredible, incredible individual, and he turned 98, just i think last week. so he was born in 1923, which was the same year my father was born. and woody and i have talked about this. when i see him, i see my dad and that generation. my dad is no longer with us. you know, they did incredible things at such young age. so one day i was honored to sit next to woody on an airplane flying home, and he travels all over. it's amazing where he goes and what he does. and he told me his whole story of joining the marines and signing up for the marines and

why he wanted to do it. he was a country boy just born. they didn't really actually know when he was born. he didn't have a full certificate. and he's a little guy, wasn't quite big enough to maybe get, you know, be able to join, and he worried about that. and he was 17 but nobody really knew how old he was. i asked him, what was your attraction to being in the marines? and he told me, he said one day he was in town and he saw this guy walk by, and he was fully dressed in a marine uniform and he said i want to be that guy, i want to wear that uniform. and he persevered, as he has in every aspect of his life. and there so many, as senator manchin said, so many brave from that greatest generation that served in world war ii. and he was the final world war ii veteran medal of honor recipient of that award. we are so proud of him in west virginia because it didn't stop

there for him. he spent a lifetime advocating for veterans, for veterans health, for fallen soldiers families, for -- in a whole variety of roles, and he never stopped. as senator manchin said, he fought valiantly at the battle of iwo jima, storming those pillboxes under relentless fire. he survived the entire five-week campaign in iwo jima. as we know, that was one of the most staunchly defended japanese strong points at that time and his actions played a critical role in the eventual capture of that island. but he's inspired future generations to want to serve our nation. he's a hero for what he's done at home. he has committed himself for 75 years to veterans and their families, and he created the herschel woody williams foundation. through his foundation, woody advocates for and recognizes the sacrifices of our gold star

families who have lost loved ones in the military. because of his tremendous efforts, woody and his foundation are responsible for 60 gold star family memorial monuments. senator manchin and i have been to the grand opening. they just had a new one in charleston on the grounds of the charleston capitol. it's beautiful to see. the other 70 additional monuments that are going to be built in the future. we need reminders, i think. we need reminders of the sacrifices that people make. we need reminders of what it takes to defend our liberties, our freedoms, our families. and so we are really, really pleased to be here. the west virginia legislature included woody in the west virginia hall of fame and named him a distinguished west virginian in 1980 and again in 2013 and they'll probably do it again next year. he's so exceptional.

his unending energy and passion have also inspired many generations. he has spoken to numerous schools, universities, community events, and veterans receptions, promoting patriotism and the ideals of service above self. i've been privileged to hear -- and i had know senator manchin has too -- several, to attend several speeches given by woody williams, keeping in mind the last one i heard he was 97 years old. oh my p gosh, so inspiring, so o feel pride for our country, but for our people, that a country boy from west virginia could keep inspiring the next generations. he has been here to the halls of the u.s. capitol. or you might have even seen him at the coin flip. how did he get there? at the super bowl in 2018. he has gone on to really, i think, be a remarkable human being. and if you haven't met him or haven't seen him, make sure you get a chance if you hear he's

coming your way. abraham lincoln famously said any nation that does not honor its heroes will not long endure. today i'm proud to honor my friend with senator manchin and many other west virginians and others around the country and to share his story, his stories of courage, compassion, and the service not only in the past, but the service that he has today. so i'm glad to join a bipartisan group of our colleagues in honoring him and honoring him in the future. i yield back. thank you. mr. manchin: senator capito, if you could just wait a minute. the presiding officer: the senator from west virginia. mr. manchin: woody is a person who taught us all how to say the pledge of allegiance because we think we know how to say it. we all memorize it as a little kid. pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands. woody always says one nation under god, do not stop, do not hesitate at one nation. it's one nation under god. it's not one nation under god with liberty and justice for

all. he corrected us, and he never would let us say it without going, with no pause because he says we are a nation under god. i'll never forget, he drove that home so many times to all of us. so to the young pages here, i hope you remember that. with that, maybe we should do a happy birthday together to woody because he's probably watching. together you and i, happy birthday, woody! a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from mississippi. mrs. hyde-smith: thank you, mr. president. i also want to wish woody a happy birthday as well. i just join my colleagues today to commemorate and honor some of the nation's most admirable war fighters in the second world war, and i so appreciate my colleagues bringing that i have personal stories to the floor today. this is something that all americans should cherish, the stories of these heroes. we have very few of these brave

heroes still among us today, but it's so important that they receive every ounce of recognition that we can give them for their selflessness and extraordinary heroism. i'm pleased to be a cosponsor of senator manchin's legislation to provide america's celebration and commemoration of the last living world war ii medal of honor recipient, woody williams, who recently celebrated his 98th birthday. medal of honor recipients like mr. williams demonstrated a courageous and noble commitment to our nation, and their exemplary actions deserve all the praise that we can give them. i'm proud to represent a state that has had several world war ii medal of honor recipients of its own in mississippi. they and thomas bra are rker of ed montanaburg, lewis t. wilson

of brendan, and jack harold lucas of hattiesburg, whom i still remain friends with his family today. from germany to japan, these men served our nation without hesitation in the height of the second world war, defending our nation, our allies, and the very principles of freedom. it fills my heart with great pride to call these late veterans my fellow mississippians. the tribute we offer today for mr. williams in truth stands for our deep appreciation for all of those who fought in world war ii. i thank my colleagues for their great work on this important recognition and the opportunity to be a part of this. thank you, mr. president. and i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from montana. mr. tester: thank you, mr. president. i join my colleagues today in support of our bipartisan resolution to designate a state

funeral in lorain of the last surviving medal of honor recipient for world war ii. woody williams is that person, and this -- this would also recognize millions of americans for their service and sacrifice during the war. the medal of honor represents a small token of our appreciation. the spirit, the determination, and gallantry of those who performed far beyond the call of duty. those of our greatest generation who gave everything on the battlefield. this includes five brave medal of honor recipients from the great state of montana -- william w.galt, laverne parrish, lee owe j. powers, donald ruhl, and henry shower. each of these men pitted bravery and heroism against great odds and showed exemplary devotion to our nation. now, they have all passed, but their memories live in each of us, in our freedoms, in the freedoms of our children, and

those of our children's children. and today, we have a special opportunity to honor their service and ensure that their acts of heroism are never forgotten. a state funeral for the last surviving world war ii medal of honor recipient is a key part in fulfilling this promise. these ceremonies offer our nation the opportunity to pause and reflect on the service of not only the individual but also those who served alongside them. it is my hope that president biden designates this state funeral so we may honor the last surviving medal of honor recipient from world war ii with had distinction. it is time to pay a final salute to the millions of men and women of our greatest generation who served our country with great courage. mr. president, i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. mr. peters: mr. president,

shortly i will ask for unanimous consent on the nomination of robert l. santos to be the director of the u.s. census bureau. the mission of the census bureau is to serve as a leading source of quality data about the nation's people and our economy. the census and the bureau surveys are critical for communities, businesses, and people across our nation to ensure communities have the resources and the information that they need to thrive. the census bureau director must meet the challenge of this mission. they must have experience in the collection, analysis, and use of statistical data, and demonstrated management experience at large organizations. robert santos is imminently qualified -- an i am ineptly qualified nominee for this role. he has over 40 years of

experience as a manager and expert in the field of survey design and statistical research. including experience as a manager at the most renowned research centers for statistics, as principle of a market research firm, and currently at the nonprofit urban institute. he has interacted closely with the census bureau for decades as a researcher, a stakeholder, and an expert advisor, serving on the census advisory committee and national academy panels on federal statistics. mr. santos has demonstrated a deep knowledge of the census bureau, its data, and its stakeholders, and he has demonstrated a commitment to upholding the bureau's mission of producing essential, high-quality data that our nation relies on. it is critical that we confirm mr. santos to the census bureau so he can continue the important work with a well-qualified

leader at the helm. so, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the following nominations -- calendar number 311 and 312, robert louis santos to be director of the census, that the nominations be confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, that no further motions be in order, the nominations, that any related statements be printed in the record, and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: is there objection? a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. scott: reserving the right to object. first, happy birthday. is it your birthday? the presiding officer: no, sir. don't rush it. mr. scott: as my colleague knows, the census bureau performs critically important functions to collect accurate and timely data. unfortunately, i'm concerned that this nominee will politicize the census bureau and

make performance of its duties in a fair and biased fashion which this position absolutely demands. i cannot and will not consent to allow this nominee to move forward in an expedited manner. we should take a vote so every senator can get on the record with their support or opposition of this nominee. therefore, mr. president, i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. peters: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. mr. peters: i would note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: mr. president, are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: yes, we are. mr. cornyn: i would ask unanimous consent the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, over the last few months, the american people have watched in disbelief and then in anger as the biden administration has completely fumbled the response to the border crisis. in spring, the biggest concerns were the thousands of children coming across the border. we lacked the facilities, the personnel, and the resources to provide proper care for those

children, particularly in those kinds of numbers. at one point, one of the processing centers in donna, texas, in the rio grande valley was at 1600% of capacity. then in the summer, the scale and scope of the crisis grew. in addition to the thousands of unaccompanied children entering our country each month, the number of family units has skyrocketed. i should cause to add, mr. president, the reason why the smugglers send in unaccompanied children is because they know they will simply be placed with sponsors in the interior of the country, and most of them will fail to return to the immigration courts for their asylum hearing, so they will have been successfully placed in the united states, sometimes with relatives, sometimes with noncitizens, sometimes with foster families that don't know them at all. that's why the smugglers have been smuggling unaccompanied

children. but in august alone, more than 86,000 members of families, typically women with young children, have crossed the border. now that we have reached the fall, the crisis has shifted once again. i think what really grabbed people's attention was when they saw the little town of del rio, texas, with 15,000 haitian migrants under a bridge in del rio, texas. first of all, they were shocked. they thought this was a central american phenomenon or mexican migrants, but the reality as border patrol will tell you and has told me that we literally have people coming from around the world across the southern border, including countries of particular concern. so the haitians got people's attention and completely overwhelmed the border region and our capacity to deal with

them. that's why 400 border patrol agents had to be shipped in from other parts of the border or from interior checkpoints, which means that those other locations were understaffed or perhaps had no staff at all. that in turn is an invitation to the drug smugglers to smuggle more drugs across the border. i have mentioned time and time again the shocking number. 93,000 americans died of drug overdoses last year, and the vast majority of those drugs come across the southern border. so the cartels, these criminal organizations that smuggle people, drugs, and other contraband, they are pretty smart. they understand where the weaknesses are, where the gaps are, both in our policy and in our physical ability to secure the border, and they play us just like a fiddle. but the individuals and families huddled under the del rio bridge, they were trying to escape triple-digit

temperatures. it's hot in august and september in texas, and they had little, if any, access to food, clean water, or rest rooms. it took a number of days before the department of homeland security was able to remove them to what "the new york times" -- or remove them from what "the new york times" described as squalid conditions. truly third world conditions. now, president biden has said to the migrants, don't come to the united states, but the fact is what he says with his mouth, with his lips, is contradicted by all of his policies and all of his action and inaction. here, let me share a few headlines from the last several months. overwhelmed texas border communities begin busing migrants to austin. migrants freed without port

notice, sometimes no paperwork. haitian migrants released in the u.s. on very, very large scale. folks beyond our borders are reading this, friends and family in the united states are communicating with potential migrants who come across. certainly the human smugglers and the coyotes who are getting rich and getting richer with every person they smuggle into the united states is reading the headlines and watching cable tv and watching people come into the heartland of our country. the message contradicts the message they see with their own eyes, it contradicts the lip service that president biden has been paying to border security. like i said, this is especially

true among the cartels and criminal organizations that charge thousands of dollars a head to bring in anyone from around the world. it gets more expensive if you say come from the middle east or from iran or afghanistan, it's a little more expensive if you want to come from central america or mexico, but you can do it because the same criminal organizations run those networks in those countries around the world. last week the biden administration handed the cartels a big recruiting tool. let me read you another headline. u.s. will no longer deport illegal immigrants based on undocumented status alone. that's what secretary mayorkas, the secretary of the department of homeland security said the u.s. government will not enforce u.s. law. as if we needed to add anymore

to the chaos and the crisis on the border, secretary mayorkas has provided explicit confirmation that the department of homeland security will not enforce our immigration laws. his directive strongly discourages immigrations in customs endorsement from even carrying out their most basic duties. i know it seems like a long time ago but it wasn't that long ago when police said, abolish the police. before that they said abolish i.c.e., immigration and customs enforcement, but now they are maybe not so much intent on abolishing i.c.e. as just telling them, don't do your job. don't enforce the very laws that we in congress have made. considering the fact that the borders are, vice president harris once compared i.c.e. to

the ku klux klan, we probably should have seen this coming. liberals can throw out i.c.e. because they are nullifying the agency from the inside. by entering the united states illegally, migrants are breaking u.s. laws. we are fortunate, indeed, and grateful to the hardworking men and women of i.c.e. and customs and border patrol customs and border who are committed to enforcing our laws and keeping the american people safe. but they can't do it when they are told, don't do your job or when the administration continues to denigrate these officers when they shame them, publicly criticize them for doing what we have asked home to do. secretary mayorkas's system not to enforce our immigration laws isn't an example of

prosecutorial discretion, which is the usual excuse, it is a violation of his oath. the department of homeland security is charged with safeguarding the american people but it can't do it because of the direction of its own leadership. a member of president biden's cabinet. there's nothing wrong with prioritizing the removal of the most dangerous criminals who are here illegally. previous administrations have prioritized certain categories, like those suspected of terrorism or others who could be a threat to our national security or public safety, but there's a difference between prioritizing and exempting entire categories from enforcement all together. under this guidance -- this new guidance from secretary mayorkas, i.c.e. officers are discouraged from arresting or removing illegal immigrants unless they have been convicted of a serious crime.

it's unclear, though, whether domestic violence meets this criteria. certainly other crimes don't. so it defies all common sense to ask our law enforcement officers, that's what i.c.e. are, they are law enforcement officers, to turn a blind eye to illegal conduct and not do what they have sworn to do in a professional oath. i'm reminded of the controversial directive issued by another one of president biden's nominees to enforce our nation's laws, rachel rollins, was nominated to serve as attorney general in massachusetts. this is a current nominee from the biden administration. shortly before taking office, or i should say after taking office, as a suffolk county

office, she released a memo outlining more than a dozen crimes that should be ignored by law enforcement. this was the district attorney charged with enforcing the law saying to law enforcement, ignore the laws. according to ms. rollins, individuals who committed trespassing, shoplifting, larceny, that's stealing, and even possession with intent to distribute drugs, she said they should not be prosecuted. again, i have no issue with law enforcement using limited resources to address the biggest threats and to prioritize their prosecution decisions, but they cannot, i believe, consistent with their oath, exempt wholesale classes of criminals

from enforcement. under the biden administration we're already seeing a record low number of deportations for people who violate our immigration laws. back in april as border crossings hit the highest level in 20 years, i.c.e. released the lowest number of illegal immigrants on record. there's no coincidence there. the guidance from secretary mayorkas sends an unequivocal message to the entire world, that if you want to come to the united states illegally, you willable able to stay -- you will be able to stay as long as you don't get caught committing a murder or some other crime of a similar nature. the administration has tried to calm -- tried to claim that this will not serve as a poll factor. that's what the border patrol talks about, the push factors, poverty, violence, maybe things like that, but they also talk about the poll factors, things

that the migrants and the smugglers see that will attract more illegal immigration to the united states. the administration has tried to claim that this refusal to enforce our immigration laws won't act as an additional pull factor because they say that it only applies to immigrants who entered the united states before november 2020. let's consider some of the other things that have been said. for example, vice president harris said that migrants should not come to the united states because they will be turned back. that's clearly not happening. that's clearly not the case. we were told that the department of homeland security would use title 42, a public health law, to return the vast majority of haitian migrants because, after all, while we're still dealing with the pandemic of covid-19, these migrants, by and large aren't vaccinated, they aren't tested for covid-19 when they are released into the interior

of the united states. you would think that would be a problem for the biden administration. but secretary mayorkas just flat lied to the american people when he said what would happen to the migrants from haiti. some 13,000 migrants from that group have been released into the interior of the united states before even appearing before an immigration judge, so, clearly, that was a lie when he said they would be patrioted -- repatriated to their country of origin. we have no reason to believe things will be different this time. the president can't have it both ways. he can't say he's taking a tough stance on illegal immigration to apiece one wing of the democratic party when there are policies for illegal immigration to appease the other wing. the only way to address this crisis is to enforce the laws not the way the biden

administration wishes they were written. if we're going to have any hope of managing the current crisis and the additional crisis that will necessarily follow, deterrence is a key. as the border patrol told me, there has to be consequences for illegal immigration. but there are no consequences, people will continue to come in greater and greater numbers. albert einstein reportedly once said, insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. unless the administration backs up their do not come statements with actions which actually send the same message, we're going to continue down this very dangerous road. what will need to happen next before the administration takes this crisis seriously? more than 200,000 border crossings during each of the last two months didn't get their attention, nor did a group of

30,000 migrants in del rio, texas in a matter of days. so you can't help but ask how many more migrants will have to suffer before president biden and vice president harris finally back up their empty statements with action? we stand ready to help and to work on a bipartisan basis. as a matter of fact, senator sinema and i, along with our colleagues, henry cuellar and tony gonzalez in the house have a bicameral border solution. it doesn't answer all of the questions, but it's a good place to start but so far we've heard nothing but crickets from the administration. so far they don't see to be doing anything willingly to correct it. mr. president, i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: the senator from ohio is recognized. mr. portman: i'd like to ask unanimous consent to conclude my remarks today. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. portman: mr. president, i just listened to my colleague from texas talk about what's going on the border and i thought he made a lot of really good points and i appreciate his willingness not just to talk about this crisis that we have on our southern border but also to talk about solutions. i'm the ranking republican on the homeland security committee. i talked to the border patrol chief and the recently retired border patrol chief about what's happening on the border and one of the things they talk about is completing the wall that wasn't completed.

the second is, please, let us complete the technology on both sides of this aisle, we have agreed in the past even if we disdebris on having a -- disagree on having a fence, we agree with the technology to go with it. they confirmed the conversations i had on the border, the technology that goes with it, the remote censors and cameras were stopped as soon as the biden administration came in even though they are already paid for so it wasn't just stopping construction, it was, in effect, in my view more important that they actually stopped the technology that's needed to protect the bode. so senator cornyn talked about how he and senator sinema have worked on legislation to deal with some of these issues, i appreciate that. that's what's needed. we need changes. we can't continue to do what we're doing because we have 200,000 people a be month coming over. usually in the summer those

numbers go down a lot but they actually increased this summer. we also need to fix a broken asylum system. this should not be a partisan issue. obviously it's not working. people who come to our border, they claim asylum. they're told please go to an immigration office and check in. four, five years until your immigration case is likely to be heard, sometimes longer. meanwhile these folks are in the united states. and them at the end of the process, even though those who end up going to the court system are self-selected because they're the folks who more likely, i think, are more likely to have an asylum claim that's valid, but even when you go through that process, guess what? only 15% of those from countries like guatemala, el salvador, other countries like ecuador, only 15% are granted asylum by an immigration judge. but meanwhile everybody is in the united states. and as i said earlier, the internal enforcement is not occurring so people are

literally not being told they've got to go back. and often, obviously not identified because after four or five years many people are embedded in our communities. the asylum system has become a pull factor. we need to realize that. i was in four countries in latin america earlier this year. mexico, guatemala, colombia, ecuador and i heard from every one of the presidents in those countries the same thing in different ways, but the same thing which is you guys are pulling our people to your southern border. because the traffickers, the smugglers, the coyotes who are making all this money are coming to our families and saying hey, come to the border. give me 10,000 bucks and i'll take your kids there. i can get them into school in the interior of the united states, and they're right. their narrative may for the be exactly right. i'm sure they exaggerate, but as a whole what they're saying is correct. in other words, our system is so

broken that these people who are exploiting, poor people all over latin america and elsewhere now, all over the world are starting to come through our border in wigger -- bigger numbers are able to say if you come with me, i'll get you in. that's because the asylum system is broken. so until we fix the asylum system, we can do everything else we're talking about, i don't think this is going to work. by the way, when i talk to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle about this, when i talk to secretary mayorkas about this, they acknowledge it's broken. the 15,000 haitians who walked in, were given a bus ticket or plane ride and were told here is an immigration office, please check in. my understanding is the vast majority. those people had applied for asigh lup and we said -- asylum and we said come on in. in four, five years their case may be heard. if they come to take trial, pane of them will be deemed just as the central americans are de deemed, economic refugees.

if you or i were in central america and knew we could better ourselves and take care of our kids by coming to the united states, wouldn't we make the same decision? but we need an orderly way to do that. we are the most generous country in the world in terms of taking immigrants and i'm a strong supporter of the legal immigration system. but we've got to have a proper way to do it. it's got to be legal. otherwise, people are going are going to be exploited. it's a dangerous trip. people die in the desert. these kids are not treated well. pane are assaulted. -- many are assaulted. i did a study on this when i was head of the permanent subcommittee on investigations. we did two reports. with unwas on kids would were -- one was on kids who were taken. when they were sent out to their sponsors because that's what happens, you go to the border patrol, h.h.s. and sent out to sponsors. you know who the sponsors were? the very traffickers who broad them up, in this case from guatemala, who are exploiting

them. and the same traffickers took those kids and took them to an egg farm where they had to work 11, 12 hours a day, no school, paid little or nothing, living on bare mattresses underneath trailers. finally, luckily, a local law enforcement official figured out what was going on and was able to save these kids. but that's not a system we should want in america. we should want a legal, orderly system that works for everybody. by the way, including the many, many people around the word who are waiting in line patiently to come to the united states through legal means. so i had meant to talk about this today. i appreciate the fact my colleague mentioned it and i do think it's very important that on a bipartisan basis we put aside our political rhetoric on this and talk about solutions. i think we should go back to a system where we're encouraging people to apply for asylum in their home country and second, to do it from third countries if they're not comfortable doing it

in their own country because they're feeling persecuted for some reason. do it in a third cup. those agreements were in place during the trump administration. they were starting to work. they've now been ended. and then if you come to the border, have the adjudication to be immediate. let's spend the money to have the processing centers at the border so people aren't waiting four, five, six years to go to their immigration hearing that they may or may not attend, as you can understand. instead say you want to come as an asigh -- asylee, here's the system. your ajudication is going to occur right now. those who apply and are successful which again is 15% of people from the countries that are sending most of these migrants, you would come in and have the ability to be resettled legally and have the can't to work -- the ability to work. but if you're one of the 85%, you'd be told sorry, you didn't make the standards. you got to go back home. and you can apply legally. here's the way you do it. wouldn't that make more sense

for our country? by the way, there's now a backlog of 1.3 million people waiting for these asylum hearings, is.3 million people. and it's growing every day. mr. president, i had planned today to talk about something else, which is the tax situation that we're facing with this new proposal from the democrats. you probably heard about the build back better legislation, also sometimes called the reconciliation bill. it's in reconciliation because it wouldn't require any republican votes and democrats are proposing to take this through congress much as they did in march with the $1.9 trillion legislation. this is also called the $3.5 trillion bill, this build back better. actually, i would argue it's a lot more than $3.5 trillion when you look at the actual spending in it. but let's focus on the tax side for a moment because that's how it's intended to be paid for. the tax hikes which would be the

largest tax increases in america in at least 50 years, systematically dismantle a lot of the pro-growth and pro job reforms that were put if place in 2017. why do i call them pro-growth and pro-jobs? because they worked. they helped americans keep more of their hard-earned earnings. they helped businesses to be more successful, to hire more people and increase wages. and they are a big rein take as of february -- big reason that as of february 2020, the month that we went into this pandemic, as of february 2020, we had 19 straight months in this country of wage growth of over 3% per an numb. 19 -- per annum. 19 straight month also. what all of us should want, democrats and republicans. higher wages. by the way, most of that wage growth went to lower and middle-income americans. that's what we should want too, right? that's what was happening. as of that point we had the lowest poverty rate in the history of america. we started keeping track of it

back in the 1950's. it was the lowest poverty rate ever. this was just a year or so ago. this was before the pandemic hit. we also had 50-year low in unemployment, lowest unemployment ever for certain groups, blacks, hispanics, and others. so this is something that was an achievement that met the standards take we talk about on both sides -- that we talk about on both sides of the aisle. more economic opportunity. closing the wage gap fl giving people a -- gap. giving people a chance to come off the sidelines and get a job. things were happening in large measure because of these 2017 reforms. and yet in this proposal that is now being proposed called the build back better proposal, there are tax increases that dismantle much of the reform in 2017 that caused this economic growth. u.s.-based corporations are going to have a real hard time

competing again in the global economy because it takes our tax rate back up to being the highest depending on where they end up in terms of their rate, one of the highest are the highest rate in the entire world. the average corporate tax rate under the wage and means proposal will be 32% again. back up into the 30's instead of an average of 21% plus about five points on the state average which is about 26%. so again it puts us in a position where we're not competitive with the rest of the world. that's why we changed it back in 2017. in fact, according to the international tax competitiveness index, the democrats' plan would cause the united states to drop steeply down the rankings from 21st in the world to 28th in the world pong developing countries in terms of competitiveness of our tax code. once again, as happened too often before the 2017 reforms -- by the way, it has not happened since then. companies will choose to say okay, i'm out of here.

because of the tax code and tax changes that they want to make, companies will say as they did before 2017 because of the tax laws, i can't be competitive as an merp company. -- american company. i'm going to be a company of some other country. it's called inversions. sounds bad and it is. nobody wanted inversions. democrats, republicans, we all hated them. guess what? we stopped team. after the 2017 reforms, they stopped miraculously. we had companies in ohio that chose to do that. it was terrible. they chose to actually become foreign companies because our tax code was so uncompetitive. we can't let that happen again. small businesses which make up about 99% of the businesses in america and account for about two-thirds of the jobs in america -- by the way, most of the job growth is in spall businesses -- owe small businesses -- small businesses -- are also hit hard by the tax increases. they don't pay taxes at the company level. the individuals who own the company paid the taxes.

that's the vast majority of companies in america. so when you raise individual income taxes, guess what happens? you're socking it to not just the wealthy or whoever you're trying to sock it to. you're socking it to small business because that's again the vast majority of businesses in america, mostly employees, that's how they're taxed, down to the individual left. to make matters worse, the biden administration seems intent on ending section 199 cap a which is a deduction we put in place on purpose to help small businesses, to kind of level the playing field between big businesses and small businesses. they're actually talking about getting rid of that deduction. for the small businesses listening today, beware. in all the more successful pass through companies should expect their federal tax rate to rise from 29.6% today to about 46.4% under the democrats' new plan. 46.4% taxation on small

businesses. house does that make sense? so i think what's going to happen is you'll see a lot of small businesses go out of business if this happens. and certainly not be able to create the jobs and the opportunity that we saw during the 20e 18--- 2018-2019 type period. but it's -- time period. it's not just small or large businesses that will feel the tax hikes. american workers and families will find themselves losing more of their hard-earned cash from all sides thanks to the across-the-board taxes, whether it's estate tax, marriage tax penalties, cigarette excise taxes, the list goes on and on. it's no surprise then that contrary to what president biden has repeatedly said, according to the nonpartisan joint committee on taxation -- they're the people up here on the hill who tell us what the impact is of tax law caipgs -- the joint -- changes, -- the joint committee analyzing this tax proposal -- this is a democrat proposal from the ways and means committee -- they say a lot of

taxpayers who make less than $400,000 a year are going to see higher taxes. some percentage in fact of taxpayers in every bracket will see tax rates go up. even folks making between $40 tow and $50,000 a year -- $40,000 and 50,000 a year. those making between $100,000 to $2 hup,000 -- $200,000 will be paying higher taxes. by 2031 more than three-quarters of those middle-class taxpayers will be paying higher taxes. this is according to the joint committee. i encourage you to go on their website. joint committee on taxation, j.c.t. -- jct.org. even working class families are going to end up paying some of the price of this spending spree in the form of higher taxes. but all of us have to pay an additional price and damage to our economy. according to the tax foundation, the combined long-run effects of the tax hikes include a decline in our long-run gross domestic

product of .98%. so about a 1% decline in our g.d.p. wow. a decline in the wage rate of about .68% and a loss of 303,000 full time jobs. so this is the tax foundation analyzing what the effects of this would be. in addition to what i talked about in terse of the tax hikes -- terms of the tax hikes, the joint committee on taxation has looked at this and said well, if you raise taxes on corporations, it's going to come primarily out of the pockets of the workers. that's a lot of these middle-class families but also reduce our economy. it's going to decline our wages. and it's going to result in a loss of over 300,000 full time jobs. that's the tax foundation. to be honest, i'm not exactly sure where the president got the notion he's been repeating lately that the price tag on this $3.5 trillion, maybe $5 trillion -- i don't know. depending on how you look at the spending -- is zero dollars. that's what he said.

it's zero dollars. even by their own admission, the big tax hikes we're talking here aren't going to cover all the spending, number one. more importantly, billions of dollars lost in economic growth, a significant decline in wages, and hundreds of thousands of jobs loss doesn't sound like zero to me. it sounds li -- it sounds is like a bad deal for the american people. so along with my republican clerks we've got to keep telling the american people what's in this tax proposal and urging people to learn more about how these new taxes are going to affect them, their business, their community and weigh in with their representatives in congress. why would the american people support tax hikes that will be bad for workers. we've got a responsibility to ensure is that does not happen. i yield back my time.

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from utah is recognized. mr. lee: mr. president, i ask consent to complete my remarks. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. lee: thanks. mr. president, president biden announced his vague, still unwritten mandate for the vaccine just almost a month ago. he said then at the time of his announcement that his patience was wearing thin. those are his words, not mine. yet, oddly, president biden's administration is now in no particular rush to implement the rule. so almost a month has now elapsed, but there's still no

rule. and, therefore, no complementation of the rule. -- and, therefore, no implementation of the rule. perhaps president biden and those who work with him are realizing what countless americans already know -- that the mandate was not well-thought-out. first, neither the president of the united states specifically nor the federal government generally has the authority to issue a sweeping vaccine mandate of this nature. the constitution doesn't empower the federal government. and certainly not the president individually acting in isolation with the right, the authority to dictate personal medicalizations for all americans. with the stroke of a pen -- i spoke earlier this week and last week about individuals with religious, moral, and medical reasons to forego vaccination. the president's mandate ignores their concerns and their rights,

and much of corporate america is already starting to fire unvaccinated workers, despite the legitimate religious, moral, or health concerns that those workers might have. some are even being charged fees for being married to an unvaccinated spouse. i.t. not just their -- it's not just their decisions but those of their spouses that are causing them to confront adverse action from their employer, all as a result of this mandate, a mandate which doesn't yet exist, even though time was of the essence a month ago when it was issued. there's still no rule and still nothing to enforce. but people are starting to enforce what they think will be in the rule, if and when it ever does get promulgated. in recent days i've heard from over 200 utahans who are at risk of losing their jobs due to this mandate.

and they're scared of becoming not just unemployed but unemployable, unemployable, second-class outcasts due to the president's order. have we lost compassion? have we lost all reason? troublingly, it seems that these mandates aren't based in reason. the mandate completely ignores the millions of americans who have previously contracted and recovered from covid-19. these people have antibodies against the virus and in other countries where significant research on natural immunity has been conducted, the results are compelling. a study conducted in italy shows that natural immunity is more effective than vaccines at reducing risk of future infection. another study of half a million people in denmark has shown that natural immunity provides significant, lasting protection

against infection. finally, a study from three separate hospitals in israel found that natural immunity from a previous covid infection was, quote, 27 times more effective than vaccinated immunity in preventing symptomatic infection s, close quote. but the president's mandate announcement makes no mention of natural immunity, no mention whatsoever. our entire national health apparatus seems to disregard this significant protection individuals have if they've previously had and recovered from covid. now, i believe the vaccines are generally say and effective. -- safe and effective. i have been vaccinated. every member of my family has been vaccinated, with my encouragement. i see these vaccines as a miracle, one that's helping to protect millions and millions of americans, hundreds of millions of americans, for that matter.

but i also recognize that millions of americans are already protected by their natural defenses because they contracted covid before the vaccines were available in many instances and have recovered and, therefore, have natural immunity. the science shows that this immunity is strong, that it's effective, and that it's widespread in america. so i today am offering a bill that would require federal agencies to recognize, accept, truthfully characterize and include natural immunity in any regulation. this bill does not say that vaccines are bad or unhelpful. it merely asks the federal government to respect widely available science. i'm glad to be joined in this effort by senators brawn, tuberville and sullivan as

cosponsors. the bill would allow us to keep americans employed and help us beat the pandemic in a smart way, in a reasoned, rational way, in a compassionate way. i believe -- in fact i'm quite confident -- that the mandate in its entirety will be struck down as constitutional. as having been issued outside the authority of the president of the united states. this simple bill wouldn't undo the whole thing, as i believe the courts are certainly ultimately to do. it would give peace of mind to americans and employers by recognizing and upholding evidence-based realities concerning our natural defense to covid. it is a commonsense proposal, and i urge my colleagues to support it. and so, mr. president, as if in

legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on help be discharged from further consideration of s. 2846 and that 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 no. mrs. murray: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from washington is recognized. mrs. murray: mr. president, reserving the right to object, unfortunately even though the senate has had multiple exposures now to nonsense ideas like this bill, they keep coming back. now, agencies like c.d.c. and n.i.h. are already looking closely at data on covid infection and natural immunity. they have been since the earliest days of this pandemic. and in august morbidity and mortality weekly report, c.d.c. assessed data from kentucky and

found that out of a group of people who had been infected with covid before those that were vaccinated were twice as likely to get covid again. being unvaccinated puts you at higher risk of being reineffected, period. --rhea sun suh-infected, period. -- re-infected, period. we're in the midst of the deadliest pandemic in american history. it has now killed 700,000 people and counting. if we're going to end this thing, if we're going to reopen our economy, if we are going to save lives, we need to get everyone vaccinated when they are eligible. we don't need politicians suggesting they know more than those experts and ignoring the data. we don't need bills meant to weaken one of our strongest

tools to get this thing behind us, like the ones that republicans have repeatedly been pressing for. workplace safety standards are nothing new in this country. immunization requirements are nothing new in this country. and let's be clear -- the vaccine requirements president biden has enacted so far include tailored exemptions for legitimate religious and medical considerations that have long been standard. and the emergency temporary standard he has envisioned would allow testing as an alternative. mr. president, people are dying. every day. families are scared, and they are tired, and they're angry that even as they try so hard to do the right thing so we can end this crisis, their hard work is being undermined. so, can the republicans stop the theatrics and wasting our time? can they stop pretending they know more than the experts about

this disease? is that too much to ask, mr. president? it isn't, and i object. the presiding officer: objection is is heard. mr. lee: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from utah is recognized. mr. lee: i appreciate the insight and the thoughtful attention paid to this matter by my friend and distinguished colleague, the senator from washington. i respectfully submit that we're not dealing with theatrics when it comes to hardworking americans, including the more than 200 utahans who i've heard from just in the last two weeks who are losing their jobs or are at immediate risk for doing so, based on a decision forced upon them by an action that's been threatened but not taken and in no way legally articulated by the president of the united states. these are not theatrics.

-- for those who are losing their jobs. that's just not an accurate portrayal and it really is disrespectful to those who are enduring that. to them, these are not tree a tricks. to them, this is the ability to make a living. as far as the characterization that these claims of natural immunity are one-off, i've yet to see any study that refutes the studies that i referenced a moment ago. not the one from denmark, not the one from italy, not the one in israel that shows the significant immunity benefits conferred by a previous covid infection, one from which a person has fully recovered. and in the case of at least two

of those studies -- the one from italy and the one from israel -- the immunity is as strong, if not stronger. in fact, the one from israel concluded that it's 27 times more protective. and yet we continue to hear efforts like this one today characterized as theatrics, characterized as nonsense ideas like this bill, bills that try -- in the case of the bill that we're talking about today -- to protect the employment rights and the personal decisions of americans who have natural immunity or, as in previous bills, those who have a legitimate medical concern, especially where that concern is one that's been taken on the advice of a board-certified

physician who has advised them based on a preexisting medical condition not to get it. i also heard that the president has indicated that there would be exceptions. well, we don't know what those exceptions are. many of those exceptions aren't being honored by those segments of corporate america already moving to implement and enforce this vaccine mandate. you see, what's happening is that h.r. departments and general counsel departments are understandably trying to get ahead of this so that they're not behind when the rule actually issues, so they won't run any risk of the aggressive, heavy fines with which they've already been threatened. so for that reason, many of them are trying to get ahead of it. and many of them are using now president biden's speech about the yet-to-exist rule, and

they're either threatening to fire or preparing to fire or in some cases already have fired people, regardless of any exceptions that they think they ought to be entitled to. it's easier for the corporation in some instances -- perhaps, or maybe more convenient, or maybe more in liking with the individuals making the decision. it is especially not fair to the workers, in light of the actions being taken are in reaction to a yet-to-exist rule by an agency that has yet to act at the behest of the united states, one person without statutory responsibility, without constitutional authority to do this. it shouldn't happen at you will. -- it shouldn't happen at all. at a minimum, we as the

lawmakerring body within the federal government have an obligation to take it down, even if we can't take it all down, to stop it. we at least have an obstacles to try to make its effects less draconian, less hurtful, less harmful to individuals who, by no choice of their own, no fault of their own, aren't in a position to get this. whether because of religious convictions, natural immunity, or a health condition or something else. it's tragic, mr. president. we're better than this. we should be acting to protect americans, not make them more vulnerable. thank you, mr. president. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: thank you, madam president. are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: yes, we are. mr. van hollen: madam president, i ask that the quorum call be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. van hollen: madam president, i'm here to talk about the president's build back better agenda, and its importance to our country. we have heard a lot over the last couple months about the new jobs that that plan will bring, and it's estimated by economists that it will generate four million jobs every year for the next ten years.

and that's because we're going to be investing and modernizing our infrastructure. we've already heard about the important work to modernize our roads and our bridges, expand our transit systems, build out the infrastructure of the 21st century, including high-speed internet to every american household and every small business. we have talked about the importance of deploying a clean energy grid and making sure that we move toward a clean energy economy, and that will put millions of americans to work in good-paying jobs. you're generating that kind of economic activity, that kind of wage opportunity, obviously that's good for every american household and brings in more income. but today, i'm going to gather with some of my colleagues organized by the senator from minnesota, senator klobuchar, who will join us shortly to talk

about how the build back better agenda will not just generate millions of jobs and good-paying jobs, but help the dollars that americans have in their pockets and bank accounts travel faster, how it's going to save them money. now, one way it's going to save money is for families with kids, and they're going to get a tax cut. in fact, that tax cut was put in place as part of the american rescue plan that we passed earlier this year, and as a result of that tax cut for families with kids, families around the country right now are getting up to $300 per child to help cover the everyday costs of raising kids and addressing the needs of a family. that will also cut child poverty in half, but only for this year, and it's currently scheduled to terminate at the end of this

year, that tax cut for american families with kids. and so one of the things we do in the build back better agenda is extend that for many years because it doesn't make sense to have that terminate and have those families stuck with all those additional costs. but there is also another way that the build back better agenda is going to help every dollar that comes into the family bank account go farther, and that's by ruing -- reducing the costs that they face in so many of their everyday household expenditures. and i want to focus on a couple of areas. one is in the area of child care. one is in the area of health care and prescription drugs. and the other is the energy costs and gas costs that so many families face. and the build back better agenda is going to lower the costs for american families in those areas so that the income they have

will go much further. and i want to start with child care. because working parents with infant children are scraping by today to pay for child care, paying on average $1,300 every month to get licensed care. under the build back better agenda, if you look at the projections, you will see that marylanders, families in my state of maryland will see their child care bills cut nearly in half with weekly savings of $141 every week. that's $7,322 a year. for child care costs, lowering of child care costs for those families. and if you think about the need to try to get more people in the workforce, it's understandable that if you're a parent with

kids, you want to make sure that when you go to the work force, your kids have an affordable and secure place during the day. and right now, that's not an option for millions of american families, so one of the things this proposal does, the build back better plan, is dramatically reduce those costs for child care. the proposal will also cut prescription drug costs for seniors. we have been having a debate for years about the need to allow medicare to negotiate for lower drug prices on behalf of all of us, on behalf of all the beneficiaries in medicare. the veterans administration negotiates drug prices for veterans that are in their care, and yet we don't allow medicare to negotiate drug prices. this is nuts, and it runs up the

costs for medicare because if you don't get to negotiate price, the pharmaceutical companies get to set the price. wherever they want. and so this proposal, the build back better plan, will cut those costs and reduce prescription drug costs for part-d premiums by 15%. we're also proposing to expand medicare to cover vision, dental, and hearing services. this is a big gap in the current medicare program, and right now, seniors on average each year are paying $914 out of pocket for hearing services, $874 for dental services, and $230 for vision services. our proposal would cover that

big gap in the administrator program. i'm going to talk for one moment about energy prices because we all know we have to move to a clean energy economy, and we're going to make it easier to do that as we put more americans to work in that area. one of the things that is proposed is a generous electric vehicle tax credit of up to $1,200 -- excuse me, $12,500. so this will make it easier for americans to afford those cars, and it's much easier to run a car on cheaper electricity than on gas. but it's also going to help folks who continue to drive their gas-powered cars for years to come because if we get more people into electric cars, that

means less demand for gas, and so that means the folks who are continuing to drive in their gas cars will get lower gas prices, and we all know that gas prices have been on the rise. finally, talking about energy savings, you know, the best way to save energy money is to make sure that we don't waste as much energy. all of us know that we have homes. in many cases, they are not that well insulated. so part of this plan also includes help to homeowners to more cheaply make their homes energy efficient. and that means with a given amount of power, they will heat their homes at cheaper costs because there will be less wasted energy. so in situation after situation, if you look at this bill, not

only will it generate more jobs at better wages, not only will it provide working families with kids with tax cuts, but it will also help americans save money on everything from prescription drugs to child care to energy prices and many others, an that's what economists have said, and that's especially true because we are going to pay for this by finally requiring big corporations to pay their fair share and not allow them to hide so many of their profits offshore in places like bermuda and the cayman islands. we're going to ask the very wealthiest americans, billionaires, to also pay more for the success of the entire country. so, madam president, i just want to emphasize the fact, because we hear so much misinformation in this chamber about what's in the build back better agenda,

that in addition to the jobs and higher wages, it's also going to help save families money on their bills so that their dollars will travel farther. and i yield the floor. ms. baldwin: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from wisconsin is recognized. ms. baldwin: let me start by asking unanimous consent that the vote on the motion to discharge the lemond nomination occur at 3:30 p.m. today. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. baldwin: madam president, i rise today to talk about the opportunity we have before us to deliver results for the people we work for. right now, too many americans are struggling to make ends meet and get ahead because of the cost and availability of child care, health care, home care, and prescription drugs.

in my home state of wisconsin, people like zena, a human resources representative from twin lakes, needs us to pass the build back better budget that invests in working families. zena has been battling several severe auto immune diseases, and she has been battling these for more than 15 years. she fell very ill after contracting norovirus, and she was unable to work and ultimately lost her josh as well as her employer-sponsored health care that came with it. sick and uninsured, she turned to our state's badger care program for help, but because the republicans in the wisconsin state legislature have refused a federal investment to fully expand medicaid coverage, zena was locked out of the program and unable to access necessary

health care coverage. like millions of americans, zena found herself in the medicaid coverage gap and was forced to make choices that no one living in the united states should have to face. choices like paying for life-sustaining medication or paying her mortgage. right now the people we work for are paying two to three times more for their prescription drugs than people in other wealthy countries. this needs to change and we have an opportunity to get the job done if we simply make the supper wealthy and -- super wealthy and most profitable corporations like the big drug companies pay their fair share of taxes. for years congress has been talking about lowering the cost of prescription drugs, so let's finally do it by giving medicare

the power to negotiate lower prescription drug prices that will save taxpayers money. let's stand on the side of seniors who should no longer be at the mercy of big pharma and in addition to lowering the cost of needed medications, our build back better budget provides the opportunity to expand medicare benefits to include vision, dental, and hearing. last time i checked, your ears, eyes, teeth are all a part of your overall health and there's no good reason not to include them in medicare coverage. right now, the united states is also in the midst of a long-term care and care-giving crisis. hundreds of thousands of older adults and people with disabilities who need and qualify for home and community-based care services

are unable to access them. i know something about this. i was my grandmother's caregiver and i know first hand the challenges that family caregivers face, but we can do something about this and we should with build back better legislation that invests in long-term care, creates new, good-paying home care jobs and raises wages for care workers who often work around the clock to care for our loved ones and yet live in poverty. all of this and more is doable if washington finally says we are not going to continue spending trillions of taxpayer dollars on tax loopholes and tax giveaways for huge profitable corporations, millionaires and billionaires. this is all to say we face an

urgent choice. do we work for the powerful special interests who have too much influence in washington or do we work for people like xena and others like her who simply look for a little help from us to even the playing field and to get ahead. this is our moment to prove to the american people, to people like xena that their government work for them, not just those at the top and i have faith that we can do this. for xena, for wisconsin and for the millions of americans counting on us to get the job done for them. i yield. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island is recognized. mr. whitehouse: madam president, as we go over the wonderful things the build back better offers, including tax benefits for families with children,

support for home care and child care for family members, lower prescription drug costs, i want to focus on a particular area which is the addiction crisis which grinds on in rhode island. i think every member of this body knows a family that has been touched by this crisis. i remember visiting the small town of burlville, rhode island, a close-knit community. people know one another there and on january 1, 2015, no one would have known that half a dozen people would die in burlville of drug overdoses in the next three months. that went through that community just in a heartbreaking wave and it remains burdened by addiction and overdose. we've made a lot of gains since then, the kara bill which

senator portman and i did, the kara bill shifted the way we think about addiction. we recognize its medical nature. we recognize, frankly, the noble nature of the path to recovery that people have to walk and we invested in prevention and education and treatment. but still there's a massive gap that remains between the needs of families who have a member who is facing addiction and this care and support that we give them and build back better makes important steps for those families. first, for new mothers in recovery. a new mom has a lot going on. caring for a newborn, coping with a substance abuse complication for that newborn and caring for herself in her often deadly battle with addiction, build back better would build the workforce

specializing in that care for moms. the medicare reentry act which i did with senator baldwin, which is to care for people getting out of prison. she showed in rhode island these programs reduce overdoses and deaths in the weeks following release from incarceration. steady access to care through medicaid will save lives and there's a boost to the minority fellowship program because it's demons trabl that it produce better outcomes for patients and families. and peer family coaches, a personal favorite of mine. we're pioneering this in rhode island. these are people who walked the path of addiction and recovery and they can relate to people who are struggling in a way that you or i may not be able to. and their role, after anover

dose or in a crisis -- an overdose or in a crisis to get people on the path to recovery is wonderfully important. all the other things we're doing will actually create more stable lives and when events happen that knock people off the road to recovery, having a stable life adds for a better shot at recovery and less chance of a relapse. there's a lot to love in build back better and i want people to know we did not forget those folks struggling with addiction or walking the noble path to recovery and i yield the floor. ms. klobuchar: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota is recognized. ms. klobuchar: i ask unanimous consent that senators merkley, kaine, and i be allowed to finish our remarks before the vote. the presiding officer: no

objection. ms. klobuchar: we are here to describe how build back better is helping people back in our states just like senator whitehouse did. we're fighting a lot of forces, but in the end what i know about this agenda from the infrastructure and the bipartisan infrastructure bill to the work we are doing as part of this people first agenda, it is about putting the people of this country first over the pharmaceutical companies, over polluters. as i see those fires rage in my state, i know we've got to do something about it. as i see people coming to me after years and years and years about the cost of common drugs, lyrica, you see it advertised on tv all the time. what you might not know is it has gone up 50% in just the last five years. what i do know is the people of this country overwhelmingly,

democrats, republicans, independents support bringing costs down for families, support a big middle-class tax cut, support doing something about pharmaceutical prices and chief among the reforms in this bill when it comes to health care will be allowing medicare to negotiate directly for less expensive drugs for seniors. i think 46 million seniors should be able it to get a pretty good deal and i know they could if they let someone do it. right now in law, because the pharmaceutical companies lobbied to get it done, they got a ban -- a ban on medicare negotiating better prices for seniors. this doesn't just help our seniors to lift this ban, it helps everyone in america because this is the single biggest purchaser of drugs, our seniors, because they need help in their later years. they have health issues. the stories i've heard in my state, people like claire from st. paul when the cost of the prescription drug she relied on

to manage her arthritis jumped from $60 per month to $1,400 per month, she knew she could no longer afford it. she tried over-the-counter for arthritis advance, she could barely hold a knife. or the woman who was holding the drops of insulin from day to day to day so she could save it for the next day, that's how we're treating seniors in our country. let's unleash the power of 46 million seniors get better prices for the drugs, build back better agenda which puts people first and bring down the costs of prescription drugs. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor to my friend from oregon. mr. merkley: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from oregon is recognized. mr. merkley: build back better invest the in families for our families to thrive in education, in child care, in health care and in housing. so much needed. and it makes huge investments,

critical to taking on the biggest challenge facing manned kind, climate kay -- mankind, climate chaos. earlier this summer, the u.n. climate panel released code red for humanity because it shows what a dire path we're on right now. another report, this one coming from save the children and published in the journal of science shows how much harder life will be for our children. let me say it again. for our children, not our children's children. not our grandchildren's grandchildren, our children. on average two and a half more times droughts than we experienced, three times as many floods, three times as many crop failures, twice the number of wildfires and so forth. this is the dangerous and unforgiving world we are

willfully leaving our children if we do not act now to control methane and carbon dioxide that are heating up our planet and causing these catastrophes. this is a collective effort of humankind, but america has to act and help lead the world to action. now, some say we simply cannot afford the investments, but the truth is we can't not afford to act. last year alone america confronted 22 separate billion-dollar dislassers, -- disasters, that came with a $95 billion price tag, winds, flooding accounted for $95 billion, hurricanes over the last five years cost over $400 billion. those numbers don't account for the droughts, the wildfires, the impact on sea life, ocean

ecosystems, fishing industry. it doesn't account for any of that. we are facing massive economic disasters if we don't act on climate and the way we act, we pass build back better. we set ourselves on that path to net zero in the next 30 years, reducing our emissions over the next decade to half of what they were in 2005, ensuring 80% of our electric is carbon free by 2030, ensuring that america's auto fleet is electric by the same time. we have the tools. we have to have the political will to act. so we must pass build back better. thank you, madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from virginia is recognized. mr. kaine: i ask unanimous consent for my legislative fellow stephanie gibbs to be afforded floor privileges.

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. kaine: madam president, i rise with my colleagues on build back better. i want to emphasize two points. first, build back better is absolutely critical to combine with the infrastructure bill. if we make an infrastructure investment that will be the biggest since the interstate highway system, who's going to build it? who's going to build it? open the paper, you can't hire school bus drivers or truckers. we have a tight job market and build back better is massive investments in the workforce beginning with the workforce tomorrow, our children, through community college, immigration reforms that will build the workforce. if we invest in infrastructure but don't have the workers to do it, what a missed opportunity and build back better has amazing opportunities for the workforce we have now and for decades. the second thing about build back better that i particularly appreciate is what it does for children. if we pass build back better, we

will have done for american children what social security did for american seniors and let me just point something out. presocial social -- prescoacial surety, work your whole life, you be the p.t.a. president or coach, and you retire and 50% of people would retire and then go below the poverty level. that is what being a senior citizen was before social security. f.d.r. said we want you to have a dignified retirement because you've worked and earned it. social security once passed and irpmented -- implemented dropped the senior poverty rate. there's never been a program that's been as successful in doing exactly what it was designed to do as social security. build back better can do the same thing for kids. we're a nation that has tolerated for decades a youth poverty level dramatically higher than the adult poverty level. what does that say about a

society? yet we sort of aked i guess that's -- acted i guess that's law and nature. we can't do anything about it. kids are going to be a lot poorer than adults. we don't have to tolerate it. we can do something about it. the combined impact of child care tax credit, funding for child care, universal pre-k, paid parent and family leave, and free community college, you put those things together, we will do for children who social security did for adults. and we will no longer be a nation that tolerates an unacceptably high children's poverty rate and say there's nothing we can do about it. we can do something about it. we will do something about it and that's why i so support with my colleagues build back better. i yield back. a senator: a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota is recognized. t.ms. klobuchar, madam president as we a i wait the votes this afternoon and i hope we resolve a number of things today so we

make sure we stand by the full faith and credit of the united states, that we're not letting regular peep's interest rates go up and the economy go to tatters, our credit rate downgraded, i hope we can get this done. but at the same time just as americans have gone through this pandemic, just as those moms and dads have been at home with their toddlers on their knees, laptops on their desk, just as they've been teaching their first graders how to use the mute button, just as so many people have lost their jobs or risked their lives working on the front line, they're ready to get through this. they see the light at the end of the tunnel or as we say in duluth, minnesota, the light house on the horizon. they see this. and just as we continue to work as best as we can with the number of our colleagues that we disagree with because we think we should just simply move through this and make sure we're standing by the full faith and

credit of the united states and not let our debt koreaing lapse -- our debt ceiling lapse but as we do that, we're looking to our future just as america is, just as we see the jobs coming back, they're going back to work, they're starting to see their families again, going to family reunions, they're starting to go to weddings again, as all of this is happening, as we get the vaccine out there and we bring people back together, we also have to plan for that future just like families do every day. and that's what this is about, the build back better agenda. that's what this is about with putting people in front of so many people take obviously have can you pretty well occurring it tie it are a wohl wurp we fair -. there are a would up with of we takes take didn't have to pay -- that complains have to pay tabbs. it's -- tabbs take filling tear

priggs -- you have a tour if the last half-hour are ready to wes ways, pi feabing -- the great state or w on the west coast -- sore came's -- repeat wap tory s

what this is about. so we look forward over the next few weeks of getting this bill done, getting it agreed to. to me, i.t. not always about what those top numbers are and everything you hear on the news. it's for what it's going to mean for the families in my state. with that, madam president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from virginia. mr. kaine: i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

mr. schumer: madam president? the presiding officer: the majority leader is is recognized. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule 22, following the disposition of the motion to discharge the senate, resume legislative session, there be three hours for debate under the control of senator lee

or his designee, and one hour under the control of the majority. that upon the use or yielding back of the time, the senate vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to concur with an amendment, that if cloture is is invoked, all postcloture time be considered expired, amendment 3848 be withdrawn and the senate vote on the motion to concur with the amendment, that if the motion to concur with the amendment is agreed to, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate. further, that upon disposition of the house with respect the senate vote to invoke cloture on executive calendar 259, if cloture is invoked on the nomination, all postcloture time be considered expired, and the senate vote on the confirmation of the nomination at 5:30 p.m. monday, october 18. i ran to get over here.

the presiding officer: is it will an objection? -- is there an objection? without objection. mr. schumer: thank you, madam president. the presiding officer: "time" has expired. the question occurs on the motion to discharge. the yeas and nays were previously ordered. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote: