those much more, you know, targeted and we'll ask for your continued cooperation if it's available as we move forward to move with some results from this hearing. so, i want to thank everyone, this was an important hearing and something that can't be left to do afterwards. it has to be done while things occur. so, with that, members of the committee will have five days to submit statements, extraneous materials and questions for the record and limitations and the rules, as i mentioned at the outset. we've made your written statement a part of the record and i want to thank you for those statements as well. with that, this hearing is adjourned. thank you so much.

>> to serve as u.s. district court judges for california. this is live coverage of the senate on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal god, our shelter from the storms, protect the ukrainian people as they trust in you for safety.

lord, all the good we will ever have comes from you. you have been faithful to your people for millennia. do not disappoint us now in this season of desperation. we see no other god but you as this conflict continues to maim, kill, and destroy. lord, provide our lawmakers with the wisdom to cooperate with your divine omnipotence in accomplishing your purposes on earth. may generations not yet born be told that you saved your people. we pray in your powerful name. amen.

the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington d.c, march 17 , 2022. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable jacky rosen, a senator from the state of nevada to perform the duties of the chair. signed: patrick j. leahy, president pro tempore. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. morning business is closed. under the previous order, the

senate will proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the following nomination, which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary. alison j. nathan of new york to be united states circuit judge for the second circuit.

mr. schumer: madam president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: well, first i see that you and many on the podium are bedecked in green. happy st. patrick's day to you and to all of america. now, yesterday the senate moved forward on a dozen judicial and administrative nominees, many of them with solid bipartisan support. today we'll hold three more floor votes, two to confirm a pair of district judges and one to move on the nomination of judge ali nathan for the second circuit. when i met judge nathan ten years ago, i thought, quote, here is someone truly special and truly brilliant, and a decade later i still hold that view. ask her colleagues on the benchl or ask her colleagues from private practice or even the likes of president obama president obama, and they will

all say the same thing. judge nathan is a first-grade jurist and consensus builder by nature. i'm pleased the senate is acting on this well-deserving judge today, sending up final confirmation vote for next week. speaking of nominations today, today is the last day the senate will meet before we begin a truly historic series of hearings next monday starting at 11:00 a.m. the senate judiciary committee will begin hearings for judge ketanji brown jackson's nomination to the united states supreme court. these televised judiciary hearings will give millions of americans a chance to hear from the judge directly for the first time since her nomination. these hearings matter. americans deserve to hear for themselves from judge jackson whose decisions will echo cross american law for a long, long time. of course the historic nature of this nominee must not be

minimized. of , of the 115 justices who have sat on the court, only five, only five have been women. only two, two have been african americans. justices thurgood marshall and clarence thomas. only one has been hispanic, judge sonia sotomayor from the bronx. but to date, never has an african american woman come before the judiciary committee for consideration to this highest court. judge ketanji brown jackson will be the very first. and the public will also see that her credentials, her vast experience in both public and private practice, and her near nine years on the federal bench make her stupendously qualified to bear the title justice. i thank chairman durbin and the members of the judiciary committee for their work orchestrating what has been a fair and quick nomination process, and all of us look forward to next week's hearings. now, on oil, i want to return to

a worrying trend. over the past few days, the price of crude has actually gone down, but the average price of a gallon is still stuck at nearly $4.30. if anyone thinks this is fair, efficient, or sensible, they're probably an oil executive. no matter what, the divergence between the price of crude and the price of a gallon is causing immense, immense damage to american families at a time when they're all struggling to make ends meet. meanwhile it is nothing short of repugnant for oil companies to be touting what a truth dizzying profit margins while soaking american families with these exorbitant prices. last year, the top 25 oil and gas companies reported a combined $205 billion in profits. what have they done with this avalanche of cash? invest in new technologies? nope.

it give americans a break at the pump? no. they've been using their profits to reward shareholders by implementing stock buybacks. listen to this -- according to a recent bloomberg report, in the fourth quarter of last year, oil and gas companies increased stock buybacks by over 2,000% from the previous year. 2,000%. and none of it to produce more energy or invest in new technologies. just a massive windfall for shareholders. and their increase this stock buyback over the previous year is more than any other industry, by quite a large margin. the senate, i'm glad to say, is soon going to call executives from oil and gas companies to come testify and explain why they see fit to reward shareholders instead of finding ways to give americans a break

at the pump. and finally, on pntr. on a final note, the house today is expected to vote on legislation revoking permanent normal trade relations with russia. for weeks members of the senate, the house, and the white house have been working together to draft a strong and effective bill that will increase the pain on putin's russia and that our european allies will accept. to date, will both parties, democrat and republican, remain united in sending putin a clear message. his inhumane violence against the ukrainian people will come at a crippling price, and today's step by the house is another way we're making that come true. when the house passes this bill, i expect it will have broad bipartisan support here in the senate, and i will work with my colleagues to find a way to move through it -- move it through this chamber quickly. i yield the floor, and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: madam president. the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: next week, the judiciary committee will hear firsthand from president biden's supreme court nominee, judge jackson. it will be a serious and dignified process. the american people need answers to more important questions than what somebody wrote in the nominee's high school yearbook.

the senate needs to examine judge jackson's qualifications and we need to examine her judicial philosophy and see if she will apply laws as written and weigh cases without favoritism. and we need to explore why the far left activists in the country desperately wanted judge jackson in particular for this vacancy. judicial philosophy is a key qualification for the supreme court. there are plenty of smart lawyers in the country, but they don't all understand that a judge's proper role is to apply the text of the laws neutrally. some would rather start with liberal outcomes and reason backward. so it's unsettling that senior democrats have lauded judge jackson for the, quote, empathy they suggest shapes her judicial approach. so, if you're the litigant for whom the judge has special

pre-existing empathy, well, it's your lucky day. but the other parties being denied their fay day in court -- their fair day in court. the senate democrat leader, the house majority whip, around other legal academics say she'll rule with, quote, empathy, end quote. hopefully, one professor clarified, which kinds of litigants would benefit from her empathy? he proposed that because of judge jackson's, quote, ample criminal defense experience, end quote, she would quote, bring endless experience with fourth and first amendment cases -- fifth amendment cases. her service as a criminal defense lawyer and on the u.s. sentencing commission give her special empathy for convicted criminals. her supporters look at her resume and deduce a special empathy for criminals.

i guess that means that government prosecutors and innocent crime victims start each trial at a disadvantage. that isn't my assertion. that is what the nominee's liberal supporters are all saying. in fact, the nominee has all but said it herself. here's what "the washington post" reported last year when judge jackson was nominated to the d.c. circuit, quote, she and her allies cred incorporate her work as a public defender as helping her develop empathy. and here they quote the nominee herself -- this is a direct line from my defender service to what i do on the bench, and i think it's beneficial. so, look, nobody is saying that public defenders ought to be disqualified from judicial service. it's an important role, but as "the new york times" reported this week, the biden

administration is on an intentional quest to stuff the federal judiciary full of of this one perspective. even amid a national crime wave, a disproportionate share of the new judges president biden has nominated share this professional background that liberals say gives judges special empathy for criminal defendants. here's "the new york times" quote -- it's a sea change in the world of judicial nominations. the type of high-profile murder cases handled by some of biden's nominees would have been considered disqualifying only a few years ago. now the president is actively seeking to name more jurists who have such experience. it's not just judge jackson, quote, at least 20 other lawyers with significant public defender experience have been nominated by the biden administration. one soft-on-crime advocate

marveled to the reporter, quote, we've neff seen anything -- never seen anything like this. such enthusiasm. president biden is deliberately working to make the whole federal judiciary softer on crime. liberals actually applauded. but with murdererrers and -- murderers skyrocketing, i doubt the american people people feel the same way. i wonder how judge jackson interprets the constitution differently than other judges. if any judicial nominee does have special empathy for some parties over others, that's not an asset, it's a problem. now, on another matter. as democrat policies have unleashed runaway inflation, families have felt particular be pain at the gas pump. since president biden took office, average gas prices have

climbed nearly $2. the biden administration wants to claim that a full year's worth of price hikes were all caused by a war putin started three weeks ago. but this fictional version of events doesn't fool anyone. two years ago, then-candidate biden told everyone he was ready to wage war on the most reliable forms of american energy. quote, no ability for the oil industry to continue to drill, period. it ends. that's president biden. quote, i guarantee you, we're going to end -- end fossil fuel. in other words, these either the biden administration has a shaky understanding of supply and demand or soaring energy prices have been baked into their agenda right from the beginning. for 14 months now energy policy has followed a disturbing pattern.

first the biden administration rolls out a direct attack on american energy and then working families feel the pinch and then democrats try to deflect the blame. take the keystone xl pipeline. president biden made canceling it a day-one priority. as diesel and other energy prices climbed, the white house justified itself by saying the project would have taken years to affect prices anyway. the problem is that back during the obama administration, their own analysis suggested the project would be fully operational by 2013. they spent a decade fighting against a pipeline that would have taken a couple of years to come online by complaining it was not immediate enough. that was their argument a decade ago and it's their argument now. the pipeline could have been built multiple times over in the time democrats spent resisting

it. besides, if slow construction were really the problem, the administration would be rushing to rain in their -- rein in their own regulatory party that are handcuffing new and existing pipelines with mountains of extra bureaucracy. weeks ago when putin was trying to make energy hostages out of europe, the federal regulatory commission, went out of its way to make commissioning new pipelines radically more difficult. here's another example. last year the biden administration directed the s.e.c. to prior it advertise diskiewcialging loans, capital and financing for fossil fuel energy projects. now that a worldwide scramble sent prices sky high, the administration blames industry

and says it's, quote, time for oil and gas to work with wall street to unleash our productive capacity. end quote. the administration that campaigned on ending fossil fuels now claims that fossil fuel companies are just lay-abouts who don't want to drill. it's enough to make your head spin. oh, and president biden rushed to lash america back to the mask of a climate deal that actually gave china a pass to keep increasing their emissions. as germany prepared to give putin an even tighter hold on europe's market for natural gas with the nord stream 2, president biden fought bipartisan efforts to stop the pipeline of his response to soaring prices hurting families last year was to go hat in hand and beg opec and russia to produce more. and now that russia has invaded

ukraine, the biden administration is reportedly exploring more imports, listen to this, from venezuela and iran. totalitarian regimes with contempt for human rights and the environment. it turns out the biden administration doesn't mind fossil fuel production after all. they just don't want to buy american. the administration will buy oil from the supreme leader of iran. they'll buy oil from maduro, if north korea had oil, they'd probably try to buy that too. anything -- anything to avoid keeping those jobs and that energy independence right here in the u.s.a.

the presiding officer: the senator from virginia. mr. kaine: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that my legislative fellows, nathan lee, and montrell tennessee be granted floor privileges from my office. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. kaine: i rise to speak about an important victory about virginia. it's a victory i had a hand in over the course of many years. i want to describe it and celebrate it. when the english came to virginia first in 1607, there were thriving virginian native populations. the populations east of richmond were part of a larger

confederacy called the powhatan confederacy. there were tribes in the southern part of the virginia that spoke eraqwo nation and one tribe was the moniqin tribe. john smith in 1607 through 160 9 did detailed map making of america including a town named rasowak which is now in flutanin county, virginia. rasow aq was the chief administrative town of the tribal nation. the story of virginia tribes is

one of triumph and one of tragedy. many of the tribes made peace treaties in the 1960's and 1970's, all were disdplaimented and -- discriminated and some were driven from their home. some were driven further west and many were driven even further west. rasoweq stayed in the nation because so many monokan families were buried there. an aspect of the tragedy of the virginia tribes is that when i was elected to be a senator in 2012, none of the virginia tribes had ever been recognized even though many still live in tact in communities in virginia. there were over 500 tribes that had been federally recognized. the virginia tribes are part of

exhibits at the smithsonian museum at the foot of capitol, and yet they've never been recognized and never recognized for three reasons. one, they made peace treaties with the english rather than with the united states. often recognition begins with a treaty entered into the united states. second, often recognition is determined by extensive submission of land records and other records many virginia courthouses were burned during the civil war, so records establishing tribal lands, for example, were destroyed. but, finally and most cruelly, virginia had an official named walter plecker, who was the state director of vital statistics and he believed that there was no such thing as indians, they were all colored. systematically he dernld to

take -- determined to take every record he could find and change the racial designation, birth certificates, marriage licenses, death notices of indian members to colored, even to the point of disinterring those who were in cemeteries for caucasians. this made it difficult for tribe. they refer to it as the paper genocide to assert their claim for tribal recognition. i started working with the monacan because i became friends with steve adkins who is the chief of one of the tribes and we worked over the course of many, many years, these tribes coming to congress and asking for federal recognition, and when i came to office in januarn

my to-20 list to right an historic wrong and correct an injustice. and to have them to be finally recognized. we have seven recognized, one through the bureau of indian affairs process and six through an act of congress. i want to thank the presiding officer because all of my colleagues joined together at the end of 2018 and in a unanimous vote finely did justice -- finally did justice for the virginia tribes, including the mo nacan tribe. the monocan were in bear mountain and the chief is ken branham. ken is a good friend. in 2014, a local authority, the james river water authority decided that strategic location

at the merger of two rivers would be a good place for water intake and treatment facility. it's a growing community. the facility was needed, but the site they chose for the construction of the facility was rasawek and the authority purchased the land and undertook studies to build this water treatment facility. at the time, 2014, the mono can had not been recognized. they did not have the recognition that federal recognition would give them. many people rallied to the monakan cause and said we preserve all sites, we preserve the civil war sites and other sites on the york river which is soon to be a national park. should we allow rasawek to be

destroyed and those buried there to be disturbed? armed with federal recognition, the monacan, and rasawek was named as one of the 11 endangered sites in the country. a huge grassroots developed with thousands and thousands of supporting individuals, some very nearby rasawek to advocate there has to be a better solution for this water treatment need in the county than to destroy rasawek. yesterday the james river water authority decided to set aside their plan and to donate it to

the monacannings -- moniqinacan. this summer i was canoeing on the james river. i canoed from where it starts, the allegheny river, 350 miles, it took me 26 days that i spread over the summer, spring, and fall, and i was canoeing from a town called new canton to columbia passing rasawek which was on river left. i reached out to chief branham knowing that the fight for the future of rasawek was under way. i asked if you could meet me and talk to me about the status of this fight and why it is so important for the mo nacan

nation is important. i was with my friend, john naacp, and -- john napp and other staffers in my office. john and i pulled our canoe on the shore in this beautiful spot. we beached the canoe on a sand point, climbed a bluff and met chief branham and other members of mon acan leadership to see the beauty of the site and share a meal and talk to them about the importance of this site and why they really need it had to win this battle. they don't have a plan to develop rasawek. they're not going to build anything there. they just want it to be preserved in its natural beauty out of respect for monacan people who lived there for nearly 5,000 years. yesterday this unanimous vote by this local water authority, a vote of respect, a vote of

acknowledgment, recognizes that this is a sacred site. and we in virginia, we love our history. we love our history, and we don't want to lose it. the history of our monacan nation, the history of all of our tribes is worthy of battling every battle, monacan nation won an important one yesterday and it might not have happened if 99 of my colleagues had not joined with me to make sure that the monacan and other tribes were finally given recognition. i want to express my congratulations to the monacan nation and appreciation of my colleagues for helping do something good. with that, i yield the floor, madam president. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. thune: madam president. madam president, is the senate in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are not. mr. thune: i would ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: madam president, the senate commerce committee recently voted on the nomination

of gigi sohn to be a member of the federal communications commission. i voted against her nomination as did the 13 other republican committee members. i was deeply disappointed that not one of my democrat colleagues on the committee stepped forward to affirm what should be glaringly obvious. that ms. sohn is not an appropriate candidate for the position on the federal communications commission. madam president, one substantial concern i have with ms. sohn's nomination is her extreme position on net neutrality. in 2014 the obama administration decided the federal government wasn't regulating the internet enough. in 2015 the obama administration passed a legislation which dramatically expanded the federal government's power over the internet. the justification for this massive regulatory expansion was net neutrality.

net neutrality is a concept that enjoys broad support in both parties. i support net neutrality and rules that prevent blocking, throttling and paid prioritization of internet traffic. i don't think a major service provider should be able to block a small news start up. what the obama f.c.c. did went far beyond net neutrality. they asserted rules designed for telephone monopolies during the great depression. this opened the door to a whole host of new internet regulations, including price regulations. unpricingly broadband investment declined as a result. that was a problem for americans generally who benefit when the united states is at the forefront of internet growth and expansion. and it was particularly bad news for americans in rural states like south dakota. getting broadband to rural

communities is already more challenging than installing broadband in cities or suburbs, and the possibility of heavier regulations acted as a further disincentive to expanding access. fast forward to 2017 and the federal communications commission voted to repeal heavy-handed internet regulations passed by the obama f.c.c., and here's what happened. broadband investment rebounded and broadband access expanded. internet speeds increased, and our nation positioned itself at the forefront of the 5g revolution. while european internet providers were showing internet spades -- i should say were slowing internet speeds during the pandemic, american providers were increasing them. and this, despite the repeal of the heavy-handed regulation

democrats claimed we needed, or more accurately, because of the repeal of the heavy-handed regulation democrats claimed we needed. madam president, why do i go into all this history? because ms. sohn not only wants to bring back the heavy-handed internet regulation of the obama administration but she wants to go further and have the f.c.c. regulate broadband rates and set data caps. just as service providers are working to implement nationwide 5g networks ms. sohn wants to reinstate rules that will diminish opportunities for americans outside of major cities and suburban areas. that's a big problem. the light touch approach to internet regulation that the federal government has historically taken has resulted in growth in access both of which would be threatened by ms. madam president, while i was very pleased that the f.c.c.

under chairman pai repealed the heavy-handed regulation, i believe the best solution for the long term is for congress to step in and pass bipartisan net neutrality legislation. swings in net neutrality policy from administration to administration do not encourage long-term broadband investment. and i believe there is bipartisan support for a long-term legislative solution, but not, it would seem, from ms. sohn who has openly disparaged bipartisan work on this issue. i think ms. sohn would be fine if congress produces a bill that's to her liking, but i have serious concerns that if she thought a bipartisan solution didn't go far enough she would ignore the will of congress and use her position at the f.c.c. to impose the heavy-handed regulatory regime h she faces. as a resident of a rural state i'm concerned about ms. sohn's

position on expanding broad band service to communities. she has been hostile to exangd it to rural areas while at the same time supporting the use of scarce public dollars to use new internet networks in already well served urban areas. as someone who has worked long and hard to expand internet access for unserved americans i find her hostility to rural broadband companies very troubling. the vast majority of these companies have spent years building out reliable networks to some of the most remote parts of the country, allowing more rural areas like those in south dakota to reap the benefits of advanced services in health care, education, and economic development. it's not only republicans who have taken note of her hostility to the needs of rural americans. our former democrat colleague from north dakota, who has also questioned how -- has also

questioned, i should say, how one can support rural broadband and ms. sohn. madam president, ms. sohn's policy positions alone would lead me to oppose her nomination, but there are other even more troubling factors that should be leading members of both parties to oppose her nomination. to start with ms. sohn was not forthcoming about her past history on a board about a company ordered to seize operations after being found in violation of copyright laws, this raises concerns about her fitness to serve on the f.c.c. after questions on the settlement with broadcasters, she did volunteer tore recuse herself, if concerned on issues relating to broadband and copyright violations. but why on earth, why on earth should we choose a commissioner who would have to recuse herself from participating in substantial parts of the f.c.c.'s work? how does it serve americans to

have an f.c.c. commissioner who can't fully do her job? surely there are other qualified nominees who don't have ms. ms. sohn's conflict of interest. but my objections don't end there. while i'm concerned about ms. sohn having to recuse herself from doing parts of her job, i'm most concerned about whether she can do any part of her job in a fair and impartial manner. ms. sohn has a history of virulent partisanship and far left activism including support for such far left initiatives as defunding the police. she has publicly expressed disdain for republicans and has a record of outspoken criticism of the very same conservative media outlets that she would be responsible for regulating. perhaps the most notable example is her hostility towards fox news, which she has referred to as, quote, state-sponsored propaganda, end quote, and

accused of playing a role in, and i quote, destroying democracy. end quote. destroying democracy. yet, we're supposed to believe she would approach cases involving the fox corporation impartially? i think it's pretty clear that would not be the case. madam president, i don't expect a democrat nominee to the f.c.c. to agree with republicans on all the issues. far from it. but i do expect a democrat nominee to be able to do his or her job and do it in an impartial and unbiased manner of in the case of miss sohn president biden has nominated someone who cannot fulfill part of the responsibilities of f.c.c. commissioner, and whose report strongly suggests she cannot be relied upon to fulfill any of her responsibilities in an impartial manner. madam president, americans deserve an f.c.c. nominee who can do her job impartially, no matter what the matter before

the commission. and i hope that if miss sohn's nomination comes to the floor, at least some of my democrat colleagues will join republicans in opposing her nomination. we should all be able to agree that it virulent partisanship and an inability to fulfill the responsibilities of one's job are disqualifying characteristics for a role on the f.c.c. madam president, i yield the floor. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mr. tuberville: madam president, today i want to talk about the real march madness that we're having this month. normally, it's about basketball and the tournaments, but today i want to talk about the madness

of attacking title 9, attacking women's sports, and attacking women in general. last night marked the beginning of the 2022 ncaa women's swimming and diving championship. instead of celebrating the many hard-working women who earned their spot in the championship, i expect much of the media attention to be around a singular competitor, a transgender athlete who competed as a male as recently as 2019. but the discussion should not be about inclusivity. it should be about fairness. i've spoken about this issue before, and last march actually forced a vote on the amendment that would have prevented federal funds from going to educational institutions that allowed biological males to compete in women's athletics.

unfortunately, my colleagues on the left were more interested in pandering to the far left than they were in protecting the ability for girls and women to participate in fair -- and i repeat -- fair competition. they refused to support my amendment. now, i would argue that by allowing biological males to compete in women's athletics, democrats have set serious efforts for women's equality back by decades, and ultimately this will have the effect of discouraging many, many, many young women from participating in sports. in a recent article two parents of a current collegiate athlete said, quote, i think the ncaa needs to change its policies and find a way to include transgender women without trampling all over biological women. i agree.

well, the ncaa has been silent. they've failed to take decisive action in ensuring a level playing field for all women. and so now congress must act to do so. this is why i joined senator mike lee and 16 fellow colleagues in introducing the protection of women and girls in sports act of 2021. this is critical legislation that would make a violation of title 9 for a recipient of related federal funds to permit a biological male from participating in an athletic program it or activity designated for women and girls. the bill would also establish the definition of sex in title 9 as a based solely on a person's reproductive biology and

genetics at birth. it is impressive and imperative for congress to act so that an entire generation of women aren't discouraged from pursuing their athletic dreams, whether on the field, whether on the court, or whether in the swimming pool. as some of the most talented female swimmers in the country prepare to compete over the next few days, it would be wrong not to call out the inherent unfairness in allowing a biological male to participate in several women's events. trans gender athlete will compete in the women's 100, 200, and 500-yard freestyle event. just a few short years ago this athlete was competing in men's collegiate swimming events. since being allowed to switch, this swimmer has shattered, and i mean completely shattered,

records in women's events. in december, at the zippy invitational, this athlete set new national and school records in the 1650, the 500, and the 200-yard freestyle events, and continues to dominate the competition. at the invitational this swimmer won the 1650-yard freestyle with a new record time of 1559.71. the second place swimmer finished 38 seconds later. at the ivy league championship last month, this swimmer broke the 200-yard freestyle record of 1:43, beating out the last record by over a of half a seco, and the pool record was beat by two seconds. having been a coach for 40 years, i can attest more so than anyone in congress that there

are a fundamental difference between men and women when it comes to sports. you don't have to take my word for it. a recent study concludes that, quote, on the average males have 40% to 50% greater upper limb strength, 20% to 40% greater lower limb strength, and an average of 12 pounds more skeletal muscle mass than any age-matched females at any given body weight. lungs are bigger, heart is bigger, competing in swimming, women's swimming division has given this penn athlete and i unfair advantage that no one else in the field can overcome. some have been too afraid to speak up, fearing they'll be sacrificed at the altar of a political correctness or that they'll be canceled if they say

it's unfair for a biological male to compete against a biological female, or that they'll be shunned if they don't embrace inclues i have beenity over fairness -- inclusivity over fairness. but some have already bravely voiced their opinion. the advocacy organization that champions women and women sports policy working group released dual petitions on tuesday with over 5,000 signatures asking for policymakers to prioritize fairness and safety for females, instead of a blanket transgender inclusion exclusion in women's sports. the petitions were organized by three-time olympic gold medalist and the founder of champion women, nancy hoggsted. according to the championship women, the petitions were signed by nearly 300 owe limpans, paraolympians, and u.s. national team members, as well as over

2500 athletes who have competed at the high school club or collegiate level. this is why congress must act to pass the protection of women and girls in sports act of 2021. allowing biological males to compete in women's athletics threatens, threatens to undo all progress that has been made under title 9. title 9 has provided women and girls the long denied platform that it always -- that had always been afforded just to men and boys. it ensures female athletes had the same access to funding, facilities, and athletic scholarships. before title 9, female athletes received less than 2% of the college athletic budget. only 2%. an athletic scholarship for women were virtually nonexistent. since the 1970's, when i first started coaching, female

participation in college level has risen by more than 600%. so this week the ncaa's championships will once again emphasize that the debate is not limited just to the halls of congress. but one that we're seeing play out across the country. if it is an undeniable fact that biological males have a physiological advantage over females. a fact. so let me be clear -- the question here is not should we be inclusive and supportive of all athletes. it is how. the first step, the -- the first step the senate can take is to address the wrong that the ncaa has allowed to happen, is to pass s 251. there is an attack on women's sports.

in the long run, there's an attack on women in this country. it has to stop, and it has to stop now. so i ask my colleagues to stand up for america's female athletes and women all throughout this country and support these efforts to preserve women's sports. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from maze. mr. markey: -- the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. mr. markey: i ask that the senate consider the following nomination, calendar i'm 643 -- item 643, laura s.h. holgate to the atomic energy agency with

the rank of ambassador, that the nomination be confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate, that no further motions be in order to the nomination, that any related statements be printed in the record, that the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: is there objection? a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. scott: reserving the right to object, the biden administration has failed to properly oversee the pan american health organization, or paho. president biden and secretary blinken know that paho has cooperated with the communist regime in cuba to traffic doctors overseas, and they know cuban doctors are trying to sue paho and hold traffickers accountable. in july 2013, the cuban ministry of health signed an agreement with the brazilian ministry of health to form lyze an arrangement for cuban doctors to

provide medical services in brazil. this required the administration and the former president to transmit a monthly payment through paho to the cuban ministry of health for the medical services provided by each cuban doctor in brazil. it also prevented cuban doctors from seeking employment in brazil outside of the formal structure of the arrangement. more than 20,000 cuban medical professionals serving in brazil under the program had their wages stolen by the cuban government and received only a small fraction of what they errands. all that was with the support of paho. the family members were prohibited from accompanying them, and many had passports confiscated. cuban doctors were the only medical professionals in the program who had their salaries directly garnished by their government. meanwhile, doctors from other countries in brazil received the full wages for the medical services. other cuban cris have -- doctors have suffered similar abuses in

guatemala, mexico, qatar and venezuela. a group of cuban doctors were coerced to use medical services to influence votes in favor the maduro regime by denying medical treatment to opposition supporters and giving precise voting instructions to elderly patients. this gross program is a huge moneymaker for the communist thugs ruling cuba. in 2018 they pocketed more than $6.3 billion from exporting cuban professionals to work overseas. this is clearly human trafficking. medical missions by cuban doctors represent a majority of those profits. since i've been in the senate since 2019 i've been fighting for these cornerbackine -- cuban doctors and against human trafficking. nothing has been done to hold paho accountable. paho is hiding behind illegal immunity. president biden has the power to lift the immunity. i've asked this multiple times,

but they've shamefully declined of it's wrong. victims deserve to see their abuser in court and paho should never be able to hide behind immunity in facilitating those abuses. i will be en blocking all relevant state nominees. americans deserve people in position of power who put american interests first. this -- if this administration wants to go to venezuela and try to buy oil, i'm going to hold them accountable. therefore, madam president, i object. the presiding officer: the objection is heard. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. mr. markey: madam president, i appreciate the concerns that my friend from florida has raised, however i am just struggling to see had you the safety and security of ukraine's 15 nuclear

reactors in the midst of world war ii's largest reoccurrence of warfare on the european continent has any relationship to the issue which he raised. russia is blocking international atomic energy agency access into ukraine. the proper response by the senate -- by the senator from florida is not to block our ambassador to the international atomic energy agency at a time when putin, at a time when lavrov are talking about nuclear weapons. we need a representative to the international atomic energy agency. that is what the senator from florida is blocking right now on

the floor. just did it. all across our country americans are right now wondering is a nuclear war once again possible. what if the russians launch a tactical nuclear weapon into ukraine against a nonarticle 5 country? what is our response? they are wondering does the iaea have access to the 15 ukrainian nuclear power plants that the russians with military force are taking over. what is the protections that -- that are going to be put in place in order to ensure that we, in fact, have done everything that we can do to avoid a nuclear accident? either a nuclear weapon or a

nuclear power plant accident. that's where we are right now. and what i hear from the senator from florida is a disposition on a subject completely unrelated to those issues as americans are all tuned in on a daily basis in a way that they have not, since 1962, to the very real potential that there could be a nuclear exchange -- nuclear weapons exchange between russia and the west. so from my perspective this is an historic moment that we have to come together on a bipartisan -- in a bipartisan way to provide a response -- a response to russia, a response to their allies that we are deadly serious. and instead what the senator

from florida has done is to arrive to object to the confirmation of laura holgate so that she can be there, she is fully qualified. she's an all star in her knowledge of all of these issues. but she won't be on duty. she won't be there with our allies, with the technical experts on all nuclear issues because of this objection, which we just heard. and from my perspective, we're at a -- we're at a pretty big turning point here. we need to be talking to everyone. we're either going to know each other or we're going to exterminate each other. that's the point in time of which we are at. we are either going to talk to each other or we could potentially slip into an accidental nuclear catastrophe

that historians and future generations will look back and say, how did that happen? one of the reasons why that could happen is that we can't even get an american to be confirmed by the senate at this time of great crisis because of an objection from the republican party. i mean, partisanship should stop at the water's edge. but when you're talking about nuclear weapons, there shouldn't even be a discussion about it. we should just let this highly qualified woman to get on the job, to use her expertise in defense of our country, but in defense of everyone on the planet. because this could quickly -- quickly trigger accidents that

escalate and then the unimaginable could happen. so that's where we are right now. we need an ambassador to draw attention to the danger of russian forces, especially holding ukraine's nuclear operations at gunpoint. we need an ambassador to demand that russia accept the iaea's offer to establish a presence in ukraine to ensure the safe operation of ukraine's nuclear facilities. russia knows from the aftermath from the chernobyl nuclear accident, the worst in history, that deadly radial fallout does not know borders and we need to have ambassadors to keep nonnuclear weapon countries, nonnuclear and making sure that this doesn't trigger attempts by

other countries to gain access to nuclear materials and then nuclear weapons, and we have to make sure that ultimately that we confirm laura holgate. first she served the same role in the obama administration. she hits the ground running. she knows these issues. second, she's a protege of senator sam nunn and senator richard luger. she has devoted her career to dismantling weapons of destruction and materials that could be used by terrorists as dirty bombs. how is it that we still don't have an ambassador seated at the international atomic energy agency's meetings on ukraine given this body unanimously confirmed ambassador holgate in december to be our representative to the other u.n.

organizations based in vienna. there is no good answer and we did not hear that answer on the floor of the united states senate just five minutes ago when the senator from florida objected. we didn't hear a word about their objections, but i'll tell you what, they are creating very risky conditions for all americans when they deny our country a seat at the table at the international atomic energy agency at this time in history. i was the same age as the pages on the floor today when the cuban missile crisis cast a shadow over our nation. i remember what that was like. we're slipping day by day into a situation where we could be confronted with similar conditions. and the least that we should be table to say is we tried.

we really tried to avoid that nuclear catastrophe. and the minimum that we should do is have an ambassador who's at the table, who's talking to all of our allies and the rest of the world about these issues right now. ukraine and the whole of europe averted disaster when a russian munition fell just short of ukraine's nuclear reactors just a couple of weeks ago. we may not be so lucky the next time if russian forces move on the country's other facilities with the same reckless abandon. what possible benefit is derived from keeping our ambassadorial post at the iaea unfilled at a time like this? we make nuclear safety and

nuclear security a partisan issue at our own peril, at the peril of every family in our country as well as europe. it is just absolutely irresponsible for unrelated reasons to deny our country that kind of protection right now. so we're going to keep coming back on this and the reason we are is that we can see a continued escalation. we can see in putin's own words reckless intent and it's not for us to judge whether he's sincere or not in terms of his consideration of the use of nuclear weapons or his lack of full consideration of what the consequences are of having armed attacks on nuclear power plant

facilities all over the ukraine. we can't get inside of his brain, but the least we can do is have someone go to the table, an american, someone who's dedicated her life, ambassador holgate to this. that's what happened on the floor here today. it was a partisan politicalization of nuclear proliferation, of nuclear safety at a time when we're seeing a peril that we have not seen in 50 years in the united states or the planet. and all i can tell you is history will not come back and well receive the partisan objection, the completely unrelated reasons for not allowing us to have that kind of representation at the nuclear table at this particular point in time. so i thank you, madam president

and i intend to return on this sub as many times as it takes so that we can have someone who is there protecting every family in our country. with that, i yield back, and i question the presence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

>> and all of us look forward to next week's hearings. now on oil, i want to return to a worrying trend. over the past few days, the price of crude has actually gone

down, but the average price of a gallon is still stuck at nearly $4.30. if anyone thinks this is -- you're probably an oil executive. no matter what, the divergence between a price of crude and the price per gallon is causing immense damage. meanwhile, it is nothing short of repug than for oil companies to be touting what are truly dizzying profit margins while soaking american families with these exorbitant prices. last year the top 25 oil and gas companies reported a combined $205 billion in profit toes. profits. and what have they done with in the avalanche of cash? best of few technologies? nope. give americans a break at the pump? nope. they've been using their profits to ore ward shareholders by

implementing stock buybacks. listen to this. according to a recent bloomberg report, in the fourth quarter of last year, oil and gas companies increased stock buybacks by over 2,000% from the previous year, 2,000%. and none of it to produce more energy or invest in new technologies. just a massive windfall for share holders. and their increase in stock buyback over the previous year is more than any other industry by quite a large margin. the senate, i'm glad to say, is soon going to call executives from oil and gas companies to come testify and explain why they see fit to reward shareholders instead of finding ways to give americans a

finish finish v zelenskyy did not do as others have done in the past. he didn't run. he didn't hide. and he didn't give in. president zelenskyy did what every leader hopes to have the courage to do in times of crisis. he stood his ground, spoke out, and rallied the rest of the world to get behind him. yesterday as we all know members of congress had a chance to hear directly from president zelenskyy. first he expressed his gratitude to the united states for the support we've provided so far to his country, but he also issued an urgent plea for more defense articles. he showed us a videotape of devastating photos and videos coming out of ukraine demonstrating what the ukranian people are being subjected to every day by putin's cruel and

unprovoked war against innocent civilians. ukranian troops need more arms. they need antitank capabilities. and they need additional aircraft. as president zelenskyy put it, the destiny of ukraine is being decided now as we speak. i believe we have a moral obligation, not necessarily a treaty obligation since ukraine isn't part of nato, but we have a moral obligation as the leader of the free world, and i'm talking about the united states as a whole, to support ukraine and help them defend their sovereignty and their people. for example, poland, a member of nato, offered to transfer an entire fleet of mig-29 fighters to the united states for delivery to ukraine. ukranian forces already know how to fly those russian aircraft and president zelenskyy assured

us that they are desperately needed. but the biden administration rejected the offer out of fear that it might provoke mr. putin or in the terms of war, it might escalate the conflict. winston churchill, another great wartime leader, aptly said, an apiecer is one who feeds a crocodile hoping it will eat him last. this cannot be the policy of the united states. we cannot appease vladimir putin and we can't afford to be timid in the face of this greatest threat to world peace since world war ii. here on the senate floor several weeks ago i shared another russian leader vladimir l linen, the leader of the soviet union at the time. this is something that i suspect

mr. putin agrees with. lenin said you probe with bayonets if you find mush, you push. if you find steel, you withdraw. in short if people like vladimir linen and vladimir putin are met with weakness, they're going to keep coming. if they're met with strength, they may withdraw. so president putin clearly subscribes to this world view. he doesn't respect weakness. in fact, weakness is a provocation. it encourages him. a weak opponent is putin's greatest desire and president biden unfortunately and not acting more forcefully and taking the initiative as only leaders can do is playing into his hand. the biden administration has time and time again eventually come around to do the right

thing when it comes to arming the ukranians. but unfortunately, it's only been after there's been a public outcry or more pressure from congress or president zelenskyy. last year president biden waived sanctions on nord stream 2 pipeline. this of course is a natural gas pipeline that goes from russia to germany. one of the things even now the germans have recognized is their vulnerability to the monopoly that russia has when it comes to providing oil and gas to europe. as russian troops built up on ukraine's border, president biden suggested that some attacks on ukrainian sovereignty would be, quote, minor intrusions and perhaps disregarded by the united states, he implied. president biden ignored the advice of virtually all of his

advisors and missed the window to impose paralyzing sanctions on russia before the invasion, and now the administration continues to refuse to facilitate the transfer of these polish fighter jets. in standard fashion, the administration seems to be a little confused by this crisis, afraid to say yes and too afraid to say no. i'm reminded of president obama's statement of leading from behind, which appears to be an approach embraced now by president biden. mr. president, strong words are important, but they don't defend against rockets or cruise missiles. sanctions are important, but they won't take out a russian tank. humanitarian aid is important, but only if it's delivered on a

timely basis and when it's needed. and waiting and seeing what will develop next and then responding after the fact rather than anticipating the need is not particularly effective. as i've said, i believe we have a moral obligation to stand with ukraine and help its people defend their way of life. we should not be in a position of telling president zelenskyy, yes, you have asked us for these defensives arms, you've asked us for these airplanes, we're going to give you just what we think that you need. i don't think that should be our position. we ought to ask president zelenskyy what he needs and provide it forthwith. we want to help ukraine defeat russian forces and repel them from their territory entirely, not just extend the length of this terrible war. the most effective way to do that is to supply ukraine with

the assets they need as quickly as possible. start with the biden administration should reevaluate its decision to reject poland's aircraft offer. these airplanes are needed for ukraine to maintain air superiority over russian forces, and they need them now and not at some distant date in the future. and we need to continue to find ways to put american weaponry into the hands of ukrainian soldiers. back in world war ii, the united states was known as the arsenal of democracy. and, again, in a bill that i've introduced called the ukraine democracy defense lend and lease act, we can do that again. i'm proud to have worked with a group of bipartisan senators, including senators cardin, wicker, and shaheen, to introduce this legislation. this legislation authorizes the president to enter into

lend-lease agreements like we did in world war ii, which probably saved britain from domination by nazi germany. we can do this again by providing ukrainian forces with the weapons they need to defend their country. this legislation was included in various packages designed to support ukraine, but unfortunately those packages never made their way to the senate floor. there's broad bipartisan for this lend-lease provision, and it would give the united states the ability to send the exact type of military support ukraine needs without a lot of red tape or unnecessary delays. our support for ukraine is not a provocation for putin. it's a necessary show of strength, and it's a deterrent. as we search for additional ways to support ukraine, it was great to hear from president zelenskyy. as i said earlier, his bravery and leadership has galvanized the world and has inspired all

of us to take action, and i hope his plea for additional aid will persuade president biden to act with even greater dispatch. this weekend i'll be traveling with colleagues to poland with a number of our colleagues to visit our friends and allies on the ground and to see for ourselves the kind of humanitarian crisis that putin's invasion of ukraine has created. poland, to its credit, has welcomed thousands of refugees, hundreds of thousands, and continues to deal with the russian aggression along its borders. i look forward to this opportunity to visit both poland and germany and learning more from our partners in europe and eager to bring back their input to the senate for further urgent action. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of the corley nomination, which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary.

jacqueline scott corley of california to be united states district judge for the northern district of california. the presiding officer: the question occurs on the nomination. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: on this vote the yeas are 63, the nays are 36, and the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of the slaughter nomination, which the clerk will report. the clerk: the judiciary. fred w. slaughter of california to be united states district judge for the central district of california. the presiding officer: the question occurs on the nomination. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: on this vote, the yeas are 57, the nays are 41. the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table, and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action.

mr. schumer: madam president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: i have an announcement to make for the information of senators. in a few moments i will take the next procedural step to advance the jobs and competitiveness legislation, so important to so many of us in this chamber. last summer the senate passed an overwhelmingly bipartisan bill that will bring manufacturing jobs back to america, fix supply chains, fuel scientific research, and ultimately lower costs by a significant amount. the bipartisan bill would be great news for our economy, our entrepreneurs, our innovators, and especially families who are feeling the sting because of the chip shortage. we all know the chip shortage is hurting so many people. it's hurting the auto industry that's had to temporarily shut down factories. it's hurt our tech industry, our health care industry, and so many others. so let's solve this quickly. in order to go to conference, the senate needs to amend the

house-passed competes bill with the senate passed u.s. innovation and competition act and send it back to the house. that's what we'll aim to do next week, as quickly as we can. again, this jobs and supply chains legislation will help lower costs. let us have bipartisan cooperation on this bill. now, despite cloture, it's far better for democrats and republicans to reach an agreement to vote on this bill quickly, and we'll keep working on that over the next few days. it's regrettable that a small band of republicans are determined to stand in the way of quick action. after all the good work we've done in recent weeks passing bipartisan legislation. let's added to that tally by quickly passing this bill, creating jobs, lowering costs, fixing supply chains. shouldn't be partisan. and i hope to see an agreement to expedite this process soon. in the meantime, the process is moving forward.

so, mr. president, i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: question is on the motion. all those in favor, say aye. opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to calendar 282, h.r. 4521. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: motion to proceed to calendar number 282, h.r. 4521, an act to provide for coordinated federal research initiative, to ensure continued united states leadership in engineering biology. mr. schumer: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: cloture motion: we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to proceed to calendar number 282, h.r. 4521, an act to provide for coordinated federal

research initiative to ensure continued united states leadership in engineer biology, signed by 17 senators as follows -- mr. schumer: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum call for the cloture motion filed today, march 17, be waived, and that following the 1:45 vote the senate resume legislative session. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. barrasso: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. barrasso: thank you, mr. president. i come to the floor today to talk about america's inflation crisis. people in my home state are netsing with every day. this morning the majority leader came to the floor and expressed his shock that price have gone

up. they've been going up for over a year now, mr. president. price increases last year on energy alone cost hardworking families over $1,000 more last year -- the first year that joe biden was president -- compared to the previous year. and this year it's going to cost even more for energy, to drive, to heat -- all of those things. so i'm glad that the democrats now coming 14 months into joe biden's presidency are finally concerned about energy prices. but what we're seeing the democrats offer are gimmicks. so some democrats want to -- they call it a gas tax holiday. of course or, the gas tax is what's used to pay for our roads and bridges. so they want to defund, stop paying for roads and bridges, but then put the gas tax back on right after the election. it's a cynical ploy. other democrats say, no, no. let's not do that. let's just send everybody more government checks well, the

democrats have been doing that and it's what's caused much of the inflation we're seeing today. still other democrats say, no, no. let's clamp down on american energy even higher. they're nice sound bites. we're seeing them, we're hearing them. those aren't solutions. we know why prices are rising. pricesare rising because supply of american energy is down. we're actually 1.3 million barrels less energy producing in the united states than we were before the pandemic. so why is supply down? well, the policies of the democrats in the house and the senate and the policies coming out of the white house. democrats have been in charge of washington now for a full year, and high prices are really the root -- the rotten fruit of democrat rule. so, as i said, we're 1.3 million barrels of oil per day less than

before the pandemic, and people say, what's caused it? joe biden is proud to talk about what's caused it. his first act as president was to stop oil and gas leases on federal lands, kill the keystone x.l. pipeline, and it is one of his campaign promises. you can go back and look at the videos of joe biden as a campaigner saying, i promise you there will be no new oil and gas in the united states. that's actually what the video says. that's what he says, his own words, his own promises. and then he went back to try to clarify that and clean it up a little bit, and he said, well, not on public lands. well, this isn't a surprise that biden has crushed u.s. production of oil and gas. this administration has still not held a singles auction for oil and gas leases on federal lands since the day he's taken office. well, how does that compare to

other administrations? well, under president obama, there were more than 30 oil and gas lease sales on federal lands that had been conducted and the auctions in this same period of time. so, has anybody said anything about it? actually, yes. the courts have ruled -- the courts said the president's executive office on federal land leases is illegal. that's what the courts ruled. president biden thumbed his nose at the federal courts. the president has stubbornly refused to open up more federal lands to american energy production, ignoring what the courts have said, and in western states like wyoming where half of our land is owned by the federal government and controlled, it is devastating. half of wyoming is federal land. we are sitting on a treasure trove of american energy. we wouldn't have to be relying on vladimir putin or have to be relying on iran or going hat in hand to venezuela. we have it here in america, and

we do it a lot cleaner than they do in any of these foreign countries run by dictators. when we keep energy buried in the ground, american families get buried in costs. the white house says, don't need to open up federal lands. no, the white house says there are oil and gas leases that are not being used. another sound bite. in reality, most of the leases that aren't being used is because they're tied up in democrat red tape or democrat-run lawsuits. now, there are some that aren't being used because the companies that have the lease can't get the funding to do the exploration. why can't they get the funding? it is the cancer -- the cancel culture of the democrat party. we've seen it. joe biden's recent nominee to the federal reserve wrote in "the new york times" that banks, she said, shouldn't lend money to oil and gas companies.

shouldn't do it, period. these are businesses that get loans to do business and she said, nope, none for you. and a lot of banks listened to her because they thought she was going to be confirmed. thankfully that nomination has been withdrawn. less investment means less production, results in higher prices. this morning the majority leader also said gas prices had gone up. at a time when families are already struggling. well, why do you think they're already struggling? we know why they're struggling. it's because of the inflation caused by this administration and the policies that have been going on for a full year, even though month after month after month the president of the united states said they'd be transitory. the price of gas has gone up, the price of heating your home has gone up, the price of groceries has gone up, the price of nearly everything has gone up. over the past year, prices have

gone up 8%. we're at a 40-year high of inflation in this country. the average family's income cannot keep up with the price increases that we're sustaining since the day joe biden took office. just last month some of the price increases were the biggest on record. chicken, lunch meat, baby food, things that people need to buy. glad to hear that the democrats are finally admitting the crisis is only going to get worse. why do they say it's going to get worse? because the cost of producing things has gone up. energy prices are up. you use energy to produce things. so the inflation costs for producing things now is actually higher based on the price index for production. it's at 10%. so that says that prices are going to go up because if it costs moor to produce things -- if it costs more to produce things, the price tag has to go up. the senior senator from nebraska

pointed out, fertilizer costs have tripled. and now democrats want to make it worse. democrats in the house -- not in the senate, but democrats in the house are asking joe biden to declare a climate emergency and tighten his joke choke hold on -- his choke hold on american energy production of it's going to make inflation even worse. in yesterday's "washington post," larry summers warned that we might facing is, mr. president, that you and i remember, something from the jimmy carter days called stagflation. that's where you have inflation and stagnation at the same time. it's a terrible thing to happen to an economy. so the crisis is only going to get worse. we need to change course. we need to do it now. stop the reckless spending and, above all, unleash american energy. don't be a country that not too long ago was asking russia to produce more, asked opec to

produce more, asking iran to sell us energy, asking venezuela. produce it here. we have it here. open up these federal lands, approve the drilling permits, the 4,600 drilling permits that are stuck in limbo by this administration. american families cannot afford three more years of joe biden. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion: we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the

nomination of executive calendar number 677, alison j. nathan of new york to be ukraine circuit judge for the second smirked, signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense senate that debate on the nomination of alison j. nathan of new york to be united states circuit judge for the second circuit shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote: