lawmakers are expected to continue debate on a house approved bill that would increase u.s. competitiveness with china with a special focus on the u.s. chip industry. a recess is expected between 12:30, 2:15 eastern to attend weekly caucus party lunches. c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: eternal god, whose glory the very heaven of heavens is not able to contain, we rejoice in your strength. you continue to be our hope for the years to come, as we remember how you

have rescued us in the past. today we cry out again to you for the ukrainian people. we claim your promises in psalm 50:15 which states: "call me when you are in trouble, and i will rescue you." lord, our world is in trouble, so empower our lawmakers and us to rise up and stand firm during this season of crisis. we pray in your marvelous 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 senate will come to order. the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk : washington, d.c., march 22, 2022. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable raphael warnock, a senator from the state of georgia, 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 reserve. morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of the motion to proceed to h.r. 4521, the clerk will report. the clerk: motion to proceed to h.r. 4521, an act to ensure

continued united states leadership in engineering biology.

mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: well, mr. president, today the senate judiciary committee continues a most historic hearing with a most qualified nominee to the most consequential court in all of the land. judge ketanji brown jackson is unlike any other supreme court nominee in american history, but yesterday she made clear her approach will be the same as the great jurist who came before her. quote, to support and defend the constitution and the grand experiment of democracy that has endured over these past 246 years. her record shows she's up to the task. a clerk for three judges, including justice breyer, a federal judge for nearly ten years and a nominee who commands the endorsements of groups across the political spectrum,

including law enforcement and victims rights groups. a cohort of eight survivors of domestic assault and sexual assault, said that judge jackson's rulings reflect the general consensus. the police of chief celebrated the judge that she serves the interest of justice and in early march scores of former u.s. attorneys expressed their confidence that the judge's appreciation for how the criminal justice system works would be a critical edition to the court. now, when the facts aren't on your side, it's telt. ing -- it's tempting to change the subject and that's what some republicans tried to do yesterday. republicans showed they don't have a plan to address judge jackson on her merits, so they

pushed arguments that ranged from irrelevant to downright misleading. as the judge's confirmation hearing tirches today, i'm confident americans are going to see right through these flimsy broadsides and focus on the judge's impressive, impressive record. so, as we enter day two of the hearing i thank my colleagues on the judiciary committee who will engage seriously with the judge, and i again express my confidence she is on track for final confirmation before the end of this work period. now, on competition, competition bill and costs. last night, it the senate cleared the first procedural hurdle on moving forward with jobs and competitiveness legislation that both parties broadly support. in fact, the vote last night was two more than the final passage a few months ago on the senate bill. as a reminder, our long-term goal is to get to a conference committee with the house to finalize a bill we can send to

the president. to do that, we must take the legislation that the house sent us, mend it with the bill the senate passed last summer, usica, and return it to the house so they can request the conference. that's the elaborate process the senate requires us to do. this legislation has been dissected and debated for well over a year now, but the need to pass this bill really boils down to two simple words -- j-o-b-s, if jobs, and c-o-s-t-s, costs. it will create more jobs by bringing manufacturing back to america from overseas. it will lower costs by taking aim at supply chains, address the chip shortage, and increase innovation. equally important, this legislation will revive the grand tradition of american innovation that has fueled us and helped our economy free gror much of the 20th century. our colleagues, our universities

and start-ups are some of the country's most prolific job creators. we need to pass this bill to strengthen each of them. through this bill, we will also address the chip shortage and especially severe scourge on american families. there's nothing abstract about the shortage of chips. it impacts americans' abilities to buy cars, refrigerators, phones, and other house old items. americans have faced long delays in finding these goods, and when they're available they now end up costing a lot more than they did before. by passing bipartisan legislation that invests in domestic chip production, we can help alleviate this vexing chips crisis. america used to lead the world this chip production. we produced about a third of the world's supply. for the sake of american workers, american consumers, and our national security, we must lead the world again. passing this bill is critical for achieving that goal. and our efforts in the democratic senate are at

lowering costs extend to other areas as well. today, the commerce committee will hold a markup on bipartisan legislation by senators klobuchar and thune to reform unfair shipping practices that are clogs -- clogging up ports, diminishing american exports and hurting consumers. this bipartisan shipping bill is the sort of thing the senate should focus on, because when there's a logjam at the port of los angeles, the tremors are felt by farmers in minnesota, north dakota, and ultimately american consumers pick up the tab. chairman murray will also hold a hearing today in the health committee on another very important issue, lowering the costs of child care and preschool. today, families pay something more than $10,000 per child on child care. more than some might pay for their annual costs for a mortgage. $10,000 a year is simply out of reach for many families. not only do our kids suffer --

when they don't have somewhere safe to stay, families suffer when parents can't enter the workforce, and our country suffers as our economy's productivity is diminished. the example of other countries that have better child care is shown in a greater participation in the workforce, particularly by women. so, i thank chairman murray and the mississippi of the help committee -- and the mississippi of the help committee for focusing on this issue. this will form the work of senate democrats as we work on legislation we can consider to lower costs for the american people. finally, mr. president, on pntr. this week, members from both parties must work together to take the next step in holding putin accountable by passing pntr legislation approved overwhelmingly by the house of representatives. i believe it passed something like 224-8, both speaker pelosi and leader mccarthy in support of the legislation.

the clearest message we can send vladimir putin is that we are united in passing pntr that will land a heavy blow against putin's economy. the pntr revocation was approved by the house, supported by the president, and would help make putin pay a heavy price. time is of the essence to pass pntr because putin's savagery against the ukrainian people grows day by day, and because the president is meeting with the g-7 ministers in europe. on monday morning, putin's salve amgry showed itself -- savagery showed itself once again. missiles obliterated a 10-story shopping mall in the center of kiev, leaving an untold number of people dead in one of the largest attacks on the city to date. in the south, residents of the once-thriving port city of mariupol fight on in what has become the most intense urban

warfare world has seen since world war ii and the most brutal at putin's hands. in the word of one mariupol resident, quote, the deadline -- the dead lie in the entrances, on the balconies, and the yards. you're not shared one bit, because the biggest fear is night shelling. do you know what night shelling looks like? like death. that's a person that lives in mariupol, and these words should ring in all of our ears. it must be unacceptable for any nation so willing to slaughter civilians, as russia, to have normal trade relations with the united states and the rest of the world. so the senate must act quickly to pass pntr. every drop of ukrainian blood demands a response, and the united states has an obligation to stand behind this young democracy. putin's regime is wicked, and the best message we can send him is to pass the pntr legislation with overqhemming bipartisan

support -- with overwhelming bipartisan support. i yield the floor. note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: we're in -- the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent that further proceedings on the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: last week, the united states congress lost a one-of-a-kind colleague, and the states of alaska lost an unbelievably devoted champion. congressman don young, the dean of the house, was the longest-serving republican in the history of that chamber. he arrived in 1973. and his fellow alaskans rehired him to represent them every two years since. over the decades congressman

young's leadership and advocacy had a literally transformative effect on his home state. he secured resources for alaska's infrastructure and its people. i understand his office contains with photographs of don with no fewer than ten different presidents, each of whom had signed into law a bill that he had written. don young first moved to alaska back in 1959, the same year it became our 49th state. he once explained his rational like this -- i can't stand heat, and i was working on a ranch, and i used to dream of someplace cold and no snakes and no poison oak. well, alaska sure delivered for don, and starting with a mayoral election in 1964 he spent practically his entire adult life delivering for alaska in

return. our late colleague across the rotunda wasn't just a legendary legislator and committee chairman. he was also a wildy unique character. even after decades in public service he remained every bit the former fisher, trapper, construction worker, gold miner, and tugboat captain. the senate sends our prayers to don's family, his staff, and his colleagues who miss him already. now, on a completely different matter, in 2021, the biden administration's border crisis set a record. we saw the most arrests that customs and border protection ever reported in a single year on the southern border. as "the washington post" put it at the time, illegal border crossings, quote, skyrocketed in the months after president biden took office. well, the humanitarian and security crisis has only gotten

worse. last month was the busiest february for c.b.p. migrant encounters in over two decades. exceeding february 2021 by 64%. intelligence officials are reportedly bracing for an even steeper surge. the left spent years calling on washington democrats to abolish i.c.e. on the campaign trail, president biden signaled for for subsidized health care for illegal immigrants. once in office, the administration spent months seemingly more interested in policing government terminology than policing our actual border. the vice president, os eppsbly -- ostensibly tasked with leading security efforts for the white house, seemed keen to travel anywhere but the border. when democrats approach left border facilities overwhelmed, the administration diverted billions of dollars away from

pandemic response funds to cover for their crisis. to prevent their border crisis from getting even worse, the administration has leaned heavily on an emergency authority originally invoked by the previous administration due to covid. c.b.p. has now used temporary title 42 permission more than one million times to avoid releasing migrants into the interior of the united states. you might think the biden administration would have used the time afforded by this stopgap to actually hash out a strategy to secure the border, but they have not. no solutions are in sight. but now, unbelievably, the administration is reportedly on the cusp of caving to woke pressure and lifting the title 42 authorities altogether. this move would take our border from its current state of chaos into a whole new level of utter, utter meltdown.

democrats say they're concerned about new covid variants and may want more covid funding, why et they want to declare the pandemic over and finished at our southern border? but more broadly why are democrats accepting the far-left premise that we should only enforce immigration laws during a once in a see century pandemi. in the near term it would be wildly reckless for democrats to simply stand down and let the floodgates open. such a policy would be terrific news for human traffickers and drug cartels. it would be terrible news for the american people. now, one final matter, america's working families continue to face strong headwinds as they try to make ends meet. the historic inflation kicked off by runaway liberal spending last year is still taking its toll one paycheck at a time.

for many americans eating out once in a while was already a treat. now restaurant menu prices are capping off the biggest 12-month price surge in more than 40 years just as lunch counters are beginning to see more traffic from workers returning to the office. meanwhile just putting food on the table at home has become a hardship. for one mother in florida, a trip to the grocery store that used to cost her about $150 now costs $250 for exactly the same amount of food. she's reportedly cutting back on fresh produce and meat in exchange for less nutritious but cheaper items. as it becomes harder to stretch her household's income and ensure her family has enough to eat. of course the price hikes consumers are seeing at the grocery store are due in part to the soaring costs of fuel.

the regular gas working families used to fill up their cars was already nearly $2 a gallon since president biden took office. but the diesel use in semitrucks and many commercial vehicles costs a dollar more than it did just last month. one month ago. according to one recent survey, more than half of small business owners say that the rising cost of fuel is impacting their operations. it's keeping me awake reported the head of a small transportation fleet that serves people with disabilities in pennsylvania. for the manager of a lumber dealership in nevada, the free delivery his business took pride in might have to be put literally on hold. unfortunately washington democrats in response to these hardships has been as misguided as the war on american energy and runaway spending that helped create them. several weeks ago the biden administration entertained the idea of suspending the gas tax

but only long enough to give democrats -- at the polls this coming november. this week the white -- we learned the white house is sending out gas cards to the i.r.s. even as they keep up their war on domestic energy production. the biden administration seems to be willing to try anything, anything but walking back their own disastrous economic pol policies. for the sake of working families, i hope they snap out of it sometime soon. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

>> for a wrapup now day one of judge ketanji brown jackson supreme court confirmation and a preview of what to expect on day two. were joined by greg stohr, bloomberg long-time supreme court reporter no stranger to this network. . >> good morning. >> take us to the ebb and flow of these confirmation hearings we saw a lot of long speeches by not just the nominee but the members of congress themselves. expectations for on day two and a three and four in the future.

>> today's the day gets interesting because she gets to answer questions and respond to some of those concerns and attacks that shared yesterday from republicans, will have a full round of questioning today. everybody gets 30 minutes to ask questions. she will come back tomorrow for more questions a little bit shorter. they wasn't going to whetstone as an executive session which they do for every nominee where they and private talk about anything that might be sensitive and then on fourth day there will be outside witnesses testifying and that they use gets lots of attention. >> host: i know it's a couple days but we know who would e testifying on day four? >> guest: ideal but off the top of my head i can tell you. >> host: the focus is on this back-and-forth happening today. your take away from yesterday and expectations for today. >> guest: a lot of it was what we expected based on what senators have been saying beforehand. republicans signaled that will

talk about crime, an issue they see as being politically beneficial to them. they're going to talk about her record as a trial judge on crime. senators raise the issue about child pornography cases and sentences she is issued. that will come up. they will want to know more about her judicial philosophy when she was an appeals court nominee, answered a question sink she doesn't have judicial philosophy per se. they wanted to spell that out a little bit. interestingly one thing we heard when she was nominated there were in before she was nominated that were criticism from folks on the right about this being an affirmative action attack and we didn't hear in it that yesterday so that's one airy republicans have moved away from. democrats will be looking to bolster her case throughout and later talk about her background and experience. >> host: what is a judicial philosophy? do you have to have one? >> guest: it depends on what you mean i it.

she'll get to talk about it. some republican appointees have said they are original is, they believe in interpreting the constitution according to the original meaning of the words when they were adopted. some democratic appointees have like justice breyer who is retiring and he is someone for whom judge jackson once worked, he takes a pragmatic approach to the constitution, was formal as he tries to make the constitution work for the people and the other branches of government. there are different ways of approaching it and also different ways of approaching federal statutes and those are the sorts of things she will talk more about. >> host: as we listened yesterday for buzzwords or the groups that always get right into this, arabella, the arabella group and demand justice. what are those? >> guest: this came in the context of republicans talking about so-called dark money supporting her confirmation.

demand justice is a group that has formed to support progressive court nominees as a counter to some of the conservative groups that did the same thing with republican nominees, and sometimes the funding for those groups is not totally clear where the money is coming from. there are a lot of charges and counter charges. you heard sheldon whitehouse who's been a big democratic critic of republican dark money sort of making the case we weren't the ones who started this. republicans take a different view. >> host: d ju cover her confirmation hearing when she became a circuit court judge? >> guest: i did not. >> host: how much attention do we know some of these issues brought up yesterday how much do they get just nine months ago when that happened? >> guest: they certainly got some because everybody knew when she was nominated to the d.c. circuit that if the were a supreme court vacancy given that joe biden had said he was going

to nominate the courts first black woman, everybody knew she was at least going to be a short leicester. in some ways that was a dress rehearsal for what we are saying this week. >> host: greg stohr with us for the next 25 minutes so go ahead and start calling in with your questions. did you watch yesterday? what are your expectations for today? let us know. democrats 202-748-8000. republicans 202-748-8001. independence 202-748-8002. greg stohr longtime supreme court reporter. he written about this pick that a resume has potential to fill some long-standing gaps at the supreme court. explain. >> guest: the supreme court has never had a former public defender. she's a former public defender. there's been one supreme court justice who was a member of the sentencing commission. she was a member of the sensing commission. she would add that. the court has been over time and both right now very prosecution

heavy. there are two former prosecutors on the supreme court. she would be a lawyer who's been in private practice and a public defender been involved with defense work. you add into that the experience as a black woman in america which we never had on the supreme court before and it will be a different perspective that she brings. >> host: what is the sentencing commission? >> guest: the sentencing commission is basically set up to try to eliminate disparities in sentencing and criminal cases in federal court and so they put together guidelines that judges originally were required to use and then after some supreme court decisions now are supposed to consult but don't necessary have to feel as bound to follow. >> host: what has the sentencing commission said especially during her time on it about sentencing in child predator, child pornography cases? >> guest: what the sentencing commission has said is that there are disparities, excuse

me, that mandatory minimum sentences caucuses laid out for some offenses don't do enough to take into account the different levels of culpability depending on exactly what we're talking about. for example, people who create child pornography as opposed to people who merely passively look at it on the computer and, therefore, possess it or perhaps pass it on to other people. so much of this debate we're hearing about child pornography involves her as a district judge and as a member of the sensing commission advocating for tying sentences a little more to the culpability of the individual person. >> host: greg stohr here to take your phone calls on day two. it begins at 9 p.m. eastern and that's why we're ending this program and our early today. we will take you there live in about 15 minutes but for now your phone calls, your questions

also from twitter and social media. i wonder what you would say to harry who sent this text message this morning saying when ketanji brown jackson gets on the screen porch is going to vote liberal every time no matter the case, and everybody knows it so why are they going through all this discussion? >> guest: we're going through this discussion because it's a lifetime appointment and it's really important to know something about the person here as stephen breyer always like to see this is the one time the democratic process connects up with the supreme court and the public gets to see the nominee and members of the senate get to make an assessment. we can speculate that she probably will be on the liberal side in the large majority of these ideological divisive cases but we don't know for sure. talking to her about how she will approach cases including cases that we can't really even imagine today. we think about in terms of the kinds of cases the supreme court is considered right now, but as

we've seen someone who if confirmed to the court may well server 20 or 30 years and legal patient will be very different. it's important to know something about how i nominee is going to approach the job, what thoughts and values go into making decisions. >> host: who is the current member on the court, in your mind, whose judicial record is the farthest from what the expectation was when they were going through the confirmation process? >> guest: that's an interesting question, and the answer i give you now is going to be different from what the answer might have been 20 years ago when we had a lot more justices who sort of divide expectations. republican appointed justices who turned out to be fairly liberal. we have fewer of those today and one might say none of those today. i'm only the person who has defied expectations the most is john roberts, who is a former reagan administration official,

came into the job appointed by president george w. bush to chief justice, you does very much a conservative is still very much a conservative in a lot of ways but because he has come to think of the courts institutional integrity and institutional standing as a very high priority, he has frequently in the last few years voted with the courts liberal wing on various issues and so to separate himself from the more conservative justices who now make up the majority of the court. >> host: battey, , riverside connecticut life for democrats. good morning. >> caller: good morning. here's what it what to say. i watched the hearings yesterday and what i want to say, and i am a democrat and i'm very much for this judge been put on the supreme court. those republicans that are on the committee were saying different things about her

record, and some of them i heard were not true but anyway what i want to say is it seemed like they just want to paint something on her because a few of them kept talking about what was done to kavanaugh. well, there were reasons why different questions were brought up so seriously about kavanaugh, and i for one am very disappointed that he's on the court because i believe some of the things that i heard in those hearings. so this woman is so qualified and she certainly wouldn't be having any, you know, racial be sticking up one way or the other four race. she is married to a white man, has two interracial, biracial children, it's so obvious. these republicans just want to pin something on her because they want to get even with the

democrats from making a big to-do about kavanaugh, but -- >> host: to that point, we showed viewers in the last segment but the headline that political wit with today, they kavanaugh tension simmer behind otherwise low-key openings to this hearing. the idea of kavanaugh and those hearings and as they play out in the next couple of days, what's your thoughts? >> guest: it was interesting how much the feelings are still raw among republicans about the kavanaugh hearings. several of them mentioned that come one who is especially interesting to me is lindsey graham who has always prided himself on voting in favor of it democratic nominees to the supreme court but has strongly indicated he's not going to support this one. and he is somebody who after that kavanaugh hearing was really the first republican senator who expressed at the hearing his anger at how brett

kavanaugh had been treated, and he suggested for him that was really a turning point. just one of the point i should make is of course republicans talk about that very contentious hearing. they don't talk as much about amy coney barrett, ensuring that despite the fact is happening just before a few elections, election day just a few days before election day, was a much more civil proceeding and did not have the kind of anticipated rancor that occurred in the kavanaugh hearing because of the sexual assault allegations. ..

>> however i have to admit as a white christian male i see the process that it's happened through and it just, i keep thinking if president biden said he was going to appoint a white male, i hate to think of the fallout from a statement like that and i kind of feel sorry for justice jackson because it's kind of a hollow victory. sounds like she's well-qualified . it just takes a lot of thunder away. i just want to throw that out there. >> guest: one thought of course is that there have been a lot of white men on the supreme court so it's certainly not anexact parallel . it is interesting to think about when clarence thomas was nominated to the supreme

court president george hw bush didn't say going and he was going to nominate a black man even though thurgood marshall was the first black justice . instead what president bush did was sit up there and said i picked the most qualified person for the job and he got a lot of criticism for that it's an interesting thought experiment but if this had been a process where people of all races and men as well and president biden selected her, what would we be talking about? >> you mentioned clarence thomas, what's the latest on him? >> he still in the hospital, he had gone in on friday night for flulike symptoms that were diagnosed with an infection and treated with antibiotics. we need to find out when he is released from the hospital but for now the court yesterday as another argument today and the expectation is that they will not be there

today .'s has he been hospitalized like this before ? 73 years old i believe. >> he has not been as far as i know. we don't always know what happens with supreme court justices. they make their own decisions about what they're going to tell the public. in this case the fact the court waited 28 hours to say he had been hospitalized was because it was going to become clear the next day he was not on the bench . i can't tell you for certain. >> compare that to how the late justice ruth bader ginsburg, how public she was. >> in general she was very forthcoming . it's not a perfect record. remembering correctly there was one case where she did not disclose for several months that her cancer had

returned so while she provided a lot of information , she didn't provide everything of importance. >> and there is no guideline about what they have to say to the public? >> there is not a guideline. some are more forthcoming than others. >> joe in leonardtown maryland, independent. >> caller: thanks for everybody's work. i'd like to say i worked in the supreme court. i was cleaning brass and marble and kneeling down when the justices would walk by and i would talk to them. how could you not talk to a justice but i lay basketball at the supreme court, i've been in the basement when they pass around drinks at nighttime and i just don't believe miss ketanji brown is the right person for the job. i personally think that she

is an awesome person i'm sure but having looked at all the credentials i wish we could get someone that was a little bit closer to the common man . i feel that she is a representative of control and connections. her family being involved in the cia and miami this and all the harvard. i appreciate everyone's hard work but she is literally someone thereusing as a face . >> what do you think, you brought up quite a bit her work as a public defender. >> caller: i get all that, i've heard everything she's done. do you want to talk she gave more than she wanted her to get for child care? she's done a good job of walking the line in my opinion and i get it. her husband went to georgetown and the jesuit hospital there. the place where all the priests, it's serious business that i don't think

this ladyrepresents the people at all.joe biden represents the three b's . almost to imply black but didn't say that. this isserious stuff. i don't mean to come off like that . >> we will let you refine some of that. >> one of the pieces of information to throw outthere is both her parents were educators . her mother became a school principal . that's another piece of her background. she has family members who are involved in law enforcement and also has an uncle she talked about that have been nominated who had some drug issues in the criminal justice system so she does provide another perspective in that regard as well. some people do criticize the fact that so many of the supreme court nominees are harvard and yieldgraduates .

some people graduates of other law schools represented on the court and that's certainly a legitimate perspective that some people have. there are only nine justices on the supreme court. you can have a perfect amount of diversity and represent every facet of america and the color perspective is a legitimate one if that's how he perceives her to think she is adding the kinds of things that thesupreme court needs . >> it was amy coney barrett who went to yale. is there another non-ivy league represented on the bench? >> at this point every justice is either a gale or harvard law school graduate. >> it's an interesting question. part of it is people who go to harvard and yale get themselves in the pipeline to do things like be supreme court clerks, to be appointed

federal judges and those credentials also helpthem if appointed to higher courts . you know, it may be a question that doesn't have a perfect answer. you may have to ask the president and people who invited them why they so frequently land on somebody who they is one of the top law schools. >> read is in florida, republican. >> caller: thank you for taking my call. i just have a couple of comments. if judge jackson isqualified, more power to her . my thought is no, everybody knows and even she knows she was chosen for the nomination . based on color of her skin and her gender. she must not have much self-respect if she's not embarrassed to accept the

nomination on that basis and i'm reading right now she's been , had several cases overturned for overreach. so i'll be keeping an eye on her but she's going to get pushed through because all of biden's nominations are getting pushed through . i just want to throw some facts out there for people that are listening because listening to some of your callers and they're not educated on the facts. >> that's read on judicial overreach, what is that? >> that's an interesting point we haven't talked about yet and the colors point is there have been a couple of cases where more than a couple of cases where judge jackson as a district judge said i, there's a suit in front of me and i have the power as a judge to decide this case. and the dc circuit reversed her saying no, thisis not an area where the federal judiciary plays a role . there's going to be, there's

less yesterday than i would have thought but i'm sure there will be plenty of questions today about a lot of her decisions and as the caller said being reversed by the dc circuit that have been a couple of instances where she was reversed in high profile cases and the panel at the dc circuit included a couple of democratic appointees. those will be questions and republicans will probably probe perhaps suggestions that she is even more liberal than the average democrat appointed judge . >> we talk about buzzwords in groups. >> the federalist society is a network of conservative lawyers who set out several decades ago in large part through then professor scalia or perhaps he was a judge when it started. it's a network of conservative lawyers and they aim to influence the debate on the judiciary. it has proven to beextremely

powerful . the former federalist society official leonard leo was a key advisor to john trump in his judicial selections including the three supreme court appointments . >> whenwatching today's hearing and it starts in about 35 minutes this morning . in these recent hearings we hear the nominees answer questions saying i can't give you an answer because this might be a case that comes before the supreme court. explain why, when do they start doing that and whydo members keep asking them questions they can't answer ? >> they've been doing that for decades read robert bork in 1987 was the last nominee who really tried to engage in issues like that . and then his view of the constitution and strongly suggest cases. since then judges have learned that nominees have

learned that talking about that sort of thing only gets them in trouble so justice ginsburg, judge ginsburg when she was nominated famously said she would give no hints, no previews of how she might roll in cases and that has proven to be kind of a great roadmap to be able to not get pinned down on issues and they explain because as a judge i want to go in to any case with an open mind and i don't want to feel like i'm bound by what i said at the confirmation hearing but it has proven to be a roadmap that pretty much all the justices, the judicial nominees have followed in their hearings. >> let me try to get onelast call, jan has been waiting in west chester pennsylvania, line for democrats . >> can you hear me? hello. it's not just about race. i know people were calling and seeing because she is an african-american woman, but

biden was also a qualified, not just any african-american woman but a qualified one. and in the past she has served as judge on the, was it dc circuit court i do believe? and she does represent the average american working. she comes from the average working family in america. where they were able, she's able to rise up to the positions that she you know, that she had served in america. but she's not from a line of iv leaguers and other things. so she does represent the other callers. she does represent the average or whatever you want to use american. >> jan in pennsylvania, the final minute and a half.

four more so as you look ahead today to. >> i said at the beginning this would be her chance to talk. i'm especially interested in hearing her talk moreabout her judicial philosophy coand how she would go about making decisions about what the equal protection clause means . >>

largely -- has largely destroyed this port city. residents in mariupol are without electricity, without running water, at times without food. mr. president, as important as words are, they fail to come -- they fail when it comes to describing the horrors that ukranians are experiencing, the inferno that so many of them are now existing in on a daily

basis. as we go about our lives and peace and security most of us have no notion of what it means to live where air raid sirens have become commonplace, where bombed out buildings line the streets where they used to walk, or crossing a road or leaving a building at the wrong moment can mean your death. the pictures convey some of the horror. the post apocalyptic street scapes, the buildings gray with ash, the gaping holes in apartment blocks and businesses. images akin to the bombed out city scene in old world war tr photographs. the total destruction of once vibrant places. mariupol is perhaps the foremost example of the devastation that russia has wrought. the last diplomat to leave that

city summed up the situation in stark words on sunday, and i quote, what i saw i hope no one will ever see. mariupol will become part of a list of cities that were completely destroyed by war, end quote. what i saw i hope no one will ever see. mariupol will become part of a list of cities that were completely destroyed by war. mr. president, we don't have to look far for the source of these horrors. they can be attributed to one man, to vladimir putin. to achieve his vision of a russian empire, he has laid waste to the country of ukraine. thousands of lives sacrificed on both sides because he wants ukraine, because he thinks ukraine should be part of russia. it doesn't matter that the people of ukraine have made it

unmistakably clear that they are their own people and a sovereign nation willing to lay down their lives for their freedom. putin wants ukraine and he's apparently willing to destroy ukraine to get it. all this evil, all this destruction, so many, so many human lives wasted all because of one man's fixation on a russian empire. more than 3.3 million refugees have fled ukraine, including at least one and a half million children. around 6.5 million ukranians are internally displaced. that amounts to roughly one-quarter of ukraine's population forced from their homes. and the numbers continue to g grow. mr. president, last week president zelenskyy addressed congress in powerful words.

he outlined the situation ukraine and asked for additional help in ukranians' battle for their country. i'm proud that the united states has provided ukraine with substantial military assistance and has put in place strong sanctions against russia, including sanctioning the lifeblood of the russian economy which is the russian energy sector. but, mr. president, we have to do more. however much current sanctions have mit the russian economy -- hit the russian economy, putin is still prosecuting his war of aggression in ukraine. and so we have to do more. we have to send the message unequivocally that russia will be an outcast from the free world until it withdraws from ukraine. there are additional sanctions the united states can put in place. and we need to immediately get to work unleashing american energy production so we can provide energy to our allies in europe and lessen their energy

dependence from russian. every dollar that goes to purchase russian energy is a dollar that russia can use to finance its war of aggression. the united states has correctly banned russian oil and gas imports. now we need to help our allies in europe permanently divest themselves of their reliance on russian energy. congress also needs to act immediately on legislation to suspend russia's favorable trading status. membership at the word trade organization should be limited to countries that don't launch unprovoked wars on their neighbors. we also need to continue our shipment of arms to ukraine. and the president needs to find a way to further enhance ukranian air defenses whether that involves sending the s-300 air defense systems that president zelenskyy asked for or armed drones or facilitating the

transfer of mig aircraft from nato countries to the ukranian air force or all of the above. russia is currently unleashing devastation from the skies of ukranian cities and we need to find a way of helping ukranians to reduce or eliminate that threat. finally, we need to make sure while we're sanctioning russia on the one hand, we're not enriching it on the other hand. with things like an iran deal that could see russia benefit to the tune of $10 billion. mr. president, the people of ukraine are not waiting for anyone to come and save them. they are fighting with everything they have to save their country. but they're asking for our help. they need arms and resources and humanitarian assistance to sustain their fight against russian forces that are increasingly showing less and less restraint. and they are relying on us, on

us, on our shared belief and freedom and self-determination, on our shared commitment to human liberty. the ukranian people know what they want to be, and that's a free people and a free country. and they have the will to stay in this fight. they just need our help. mr. president, let's not let them down. i yield the floor and i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: >> the russian invasion of

ukraine, we welcome you back to our program, jamie mcintyre, senior writer at the washington examiner and the author of jamie mcintyre's daily on defense newsletter. mister mcintyre, what's leading the daily on defense today? >> this morning i was writing about how the valiant defense of the southern port city of mariupol has stymied the russians but it's come at a terrible cost to the residents in mariupol which

has basically been leveled by this constant bombardment of russian troops and the citizens they are, the residents there are without food . there without water. there without medicine. there without electricity. many of the of them have left describing scenes of utter devastation with corpses and bodies strewn on the streets. it's been a terrible, terrible price but what the refusal of mariupol to surrender to the russians has prevented them from linking up with their or the other forces to the east and beginning to move to the north. i quoted the former nato supreme allied commander james stratus as saying he was comparing the last stand of mariupol to the battle of the alamo which was a siege as well. it ended with all of the people, all the defenders in the alamo in the 1830s being killed but it was a rallying point that rallied the texans

to defeat the mexican army the next month. and we're really seeing this sort of pivotal battle being played out and the very brave refusal of the ukrainians to submit to the russian demands that this war has not done anything like president vladimir putin had anticipated. the russians have had problems pretty much had to return. they didn't think that nearly a month into the war this is where they would be. and it's really a race against time weather to see which side will be able to withstand the casualties and losses and in the case of

russia, the crippling economic sanctions.it's a terrible sort of perversity of war that the more inept the invading force is, the more pain and suffering is suffered by the people of ukraine who are being invaded by the russian forces and one of the big revelations of this war from the pentagon's point of view is a clearly overestimated the prowess of the russian military . the us bought the russians having built up their military and gotten better equipment were much more formidable foe than they turned out to be. they've got serious problems in the russian military and again, the price is being paid by the ukrainian people. >> you talk about the strategic importance from the russian perspective creating that land bridge there to crimea but is the symbolic importance outweighing it? is it worth it at this point for the russians? you made a comparison to the alamo and the importance of that. why does russia have to

anticipate? >> they need that city and they need the major port of odessa to secure the coastline and cut off the ukraine. that was their plan and they thought they would execute that quickly in a matter of a couple of days. the symbolic value is the longer ukraine can hold out, the longer they can inflict heavy casualties on the russians and we've gotten some new figures that were leaked from an interior internal russian ministry document that indicates that around 10,000 russian troops have been killed, could be even more and many many more wounded . those are very high numbers . you know, it's way more than the united states lost in afghanistan in 20 years and is approaching what the us lost inafghanistan and iraq over 20 years of war .

that has an effect at home. the russian defense ministry can claim that everything is going to plan and everything is doing just fine and they may even be l:able to prevail if they just keep at this with brute force, bombarding cities with missiles and rockets and airstrikes but it's going to come at a terrible cost and the people back in russia as their sons are being slaughtered in ukraine, that could cause a considerable problem for mister putin . so it's almost kind of like a war of attrition but it's also turned into sort of a classic guerrilla war with the ukrainian forces who are highly trained by the us and its allies of the last eight years. very well-equipped with the kind of weapons that can inflict damage on tanks and aircraft and there being very motivated in these sort of

hit and run attacks. this morning we have a report from the associated press that one of the suburbs outside kyiv has been retaken by ukrainian forces and that's a measure there of how well they've been able to stymie the russians. the plan for the russians was to encircle kyiv the same way they encircled mariupol in the south and star and bomb the citizens into submission and as long as they can prevent that we can continue to get the flow of arms and supplies and other things into the capital and of course until andunless the capital falls , this war isn't over and if it goes on long enough the price for russia could be so high that they're going to have to find some way to find some sort of offramp to end the fighting

but the problem is that vladimir putin has pretty much decided he has to win this war. he didn't really leave himself and out. he's back in a corner and he's got no way to get out and say face and that's a problem because clearly he doesn't care about the lives of the civilians in ukraine and clearly also doesn't care about the heavy losses that his own military has taken. he seems to be intent at winning at all costs and that cost is going to be very high for both sides. >> but begin the phone numbers for viewers to join the conversation. democrats 202-748-8000 republicans 202-748-8000 one, independence 202-748-8000 two . jamie mcintyre . on twitter, it's jamie j mcintyre. question for you first from twitter. this from the libertarian

saying that this proves the russian conventional military threat was the largest paper tiger in history and wecan stop spending so much money on the military . iwonder your thoughts on that . >> i agree with the first part of the russian military did turn out to be a paper tiger or as i wrote in my magazine article 2 weeks ago, regions potemkin army. it looked like it was very formidable but it wasn't. it is going to cause nato to reassess how it defends against potential russian invasion into nato territory. something that was really the founding principle of the nato alliance was to stop the soviet union or counter the soviet union if it had designs on things but a couple of years ago, the rand corporation reviewed some of the wargames that the us does

to sort of game out how a conflict with russia might play out. and in the wargames, russia was able to take territory very quickly and nato was out of position and didn't have enough resources particularly from the countries that border russia to stop them. based on their performance now in ukraine, it seems like some of those disruptions about how this conflict between russia and nato would go were a bit flawed. but if you read what vladimir putin has said about his ambitions, it's pretty clear he would prefer not to just stop at ukraine. after being bloodied in ukraine you might not have any stomach to go further but nato is very concerned that he might tryto go after one of the countries , the former warsaw pact countries right

on the border including lithuania, estonia, latvia. those countries on the edge of his border. and they're making big plans to beef up the defenses there to make sure that doesn't happen but there's one other big wildcard here and that is russia has this unique nuclear doctrine. the united states and most of the countries that have nuclear weapons argue that the purpose of nuclear weapons is not for them to ever be used but to deter and prevent war. that people are not going to attack you if they know you have nuclear weapons and that the best use of them is if they're never employed and there only used as a deterrent russia's nuclear doctrine that was adopted in 2014 calls for the use of

so-called tactical or battlefield weapons. lower yield nuclear weapons in a conflict to escalate the conflict to de-escalate. that's what the doctrine is called. escalate to de-escalate and the idea is if russia is losing on the battlefield or if the country is at stake, they might employ a small nuclear weapon which seems kind of oxymoronic tosay small nuclear weapon but something that might take out a tank division or aircraft carrier or a major airfield . and then the other side, in this case the united states would be low to retaliate with another nuclear weapon because that could end in an escalation that can imperil the entire planet so we would back down and russia would be able to prevail with a limited use of nuclear weapons.

that's a very dangerous doctrine and you can see how that would easily spin out of control and by the way a big part of the debateduring the trump years about developing more low yield nuclear weapons for the united states again , not to use them but to send a message to russia that if we were to use some sort of small mini new, we would have some kind of small mini new we could respond with without provoking an all-out thermonuclear war that would destroy the planet as we know it. these are very perilous times and that nuclear doctrine is one of the things that kept the united states from doing things like putting a no-fly zone over the country and intervening in a more proactive way . >> members are going to start gathering in the senate judiciary committee hearing room in just a few minutes and want to get to a few calls. this is timothy in washington dc, a democrat. you're on with james mcintyre

. >> how are you doing. i'm not too far from the white house like everyone here but a little bit on edge . we are aware that russia had a bomber that was tested at a 15 minutes on that could send shockwaves around the world. they could have increased that to 100 megatons. the thought is a lot of people in dc is what if something like that was taken as a threat, america sending aid toukraine and weapons as an act of war ? and russia decides i'm losing . everyone's leaving here. the millionaires, the oligarchs. this is an act of war we're losing because you're sending sophisticated weapons to help them . my question to you is if putin's back is up against the wall so he has nowhere to

go, what is stopping him from launching which only takes eight bombers to destroy probably the entire united states. >> we will take that question, mister mcintyre. >> so as far as we know, as far as we can tell putinis ruthless . he is backed into a corner. he is desperate. he has gambled big on this and he is capable of doing something beyond just the conventional warfare. united states is worried that he might use chemical weapons in ukraine. the us is bracing for cyber attacks on us infrastructure that could cause major problems for the us. we saw what happened when the colonial pipeline was rippled and he also his in theory could use small limited nuclear weapons although it's problematic the cause ukraine

is right on his border and the effects of that would also affect russia. what we believe is that putin is not interested in some major exchange of nuclear weapons. the whole theory of their nuclear doctrine is that this one strike would be so shocking that nobody would respond to it and there would be immediatecalls for peace and that russia could prevail on its terms by basically having a one and done small new . there's no indication that he has any appetite for all out nuclear war which as i said would basically mean the end of the planet as we know it. he's got 1500 new, we've got 1500 nukes that are deployed. if we start and all out nuclear war, everybody would lose. >> scott in omaha nebraska, independent. >> good morning. i wanted to point out that if

you follow the un security council, this is an issue that the russian ambassador has been trying to raise for the past two years. they have state interest inside ukraine and that is a dispute that's occurring in that region of the world that we should let play out in discourse and when you substitute or i guess when you stiflediscourse , you introduce an alternative result which is warfare and that's why robert said that politics is the continuation of warfare byother means . what i think we should look to is not just how to resolve this particular situation but avoid stifling discourse in the future so that people can have their problems aired so their problems can be resolved in a nonviolent manner . >> jamie mcintyre,i'll give you the final minute on the role of the un . the role of nato here and expectations for what's going to happen president biden's

trip overseas. >> the basic principle at stake here is that one nation shouldn't be able to change the borders of another nation or take over another nation. just because they want to and just because they believe that some historical events give them the right to. so there was no shortage of efforts to resolve this diplomatically, but president putin has no interest in doing that either. he gave lip service to all those things and lied about what his intentions were as he mastered thisinvasion force so president putin or president biden will be going to nato headquarters , giving the you, lloyd austin will be going along with him. they will be mostly talking about adjusting nato's

security posture to make sure that whatever happens in ukraine doesn't spread to nato countries that putin might have designs on after that. and to send a more effective message of deterrence. and there will also be a lot of talk about what more the us can do, the us and its nato allies can do to get weaponry into ukraine that will allow them to continue to keep the russian forces on their back foot because the theory is if the ukrainians can hold out long enough they could wear down the russian forces. otherwise it's just going to be a matter of time before russia with its superior numbers of weapons and planes and tanks to simply grind down the opposition in ukraine. it's a very perilous time. most of the experts i talked to think the next week to 10 days will tell the tale of

weather ukraine will prevail or whether russia will be able to impose itswill on ukraine . so we will be watching it every day. >> and its jamie mcintyre daily on defense, you can get it through the washington examiner or follow us at jamie mcintyre on twitter and as always do appreciatethe time. thank you so much . >>

>> today the senate judiciary committee continues the most historic hearing with the most qualified nominee, the

most consequential court in all of the land. judge jackson is unlike any other supreme court nominee in american history. but yesterday she made clear our approach will be the same as the great jurists who came before her.", to support and defend theconstitution and grand experiment of democracy that has endured over these past 246 years . her record shows she's up to the task. look for three judges including justice breyer, a federal judge for 10 years and a nominee who commands the endorsements of groups across the political spectrum including both law-enforcement and rights groups. two days ago a cohort of nine organizations that aid survivors of sexual assault and domestic violence announced their support of judge jackson citing her mix of common sense and thoughtfulness while adding that quote, judge jackson's rulings reflect the judicial consensus. a few weeks ago the

international association of chiefs of police celebrated the judge or her dedication to ensuring our communities are safe with the interests of justice are served and in early march nearly 60 former doj officials including scores of us attorneys expressed their confidence that the judges appreciation for how the criminal justice system works would be a critical addition to the court. now when the facts aren't on your side attempt to change the subject and that's precisely what some republicans tried to do yesterday. republicans show they don't have a plan for addressing judge jackson on her merits expended a lot of ink and paper pushing arguments that range from irrelevant to downright misleading. as the judge's confirmation hearing continues today i'm confident that americans are going to see right through these flimsy broadsides and focus on the judge's impressive record. so as we enter day 2 of the

hearing i pack my colleagues on the judiciary will engage seriously with the judge and again express my confidence she is on track for final confirmation before the end of this work period. on competition, competition bill and costs.last night the senate cleared the first procedural hurdle on moving forward with jobs and competitiveness legislation that both partiesbroadly support . in factthe vote last night was to more than the final passage a few months ago on the senate bill . as a reminder our long-term goal is to get to a conference committee with the house to finalize the bill we can send to the president. to do that we must take the legislation the house sent us and ended with a bill the senate passed last summer and return it to the house so they can request a conference. that's the elaborate process the senate requires us to do. this legislation has been dissected and debated for

well over a year but the need to pass this bill really boils down to 2 simple words. jobs and costs. it will create more jobs by bringing manufacturing back to america fromoverseas. it will lower costs by taking aim at supply chains, address the chip shortage and increaseinnovation . equally important , this legislation will revive the grand tradition of american innovation that has fueled us and helped our economy grow for much ofthe 20th century . our colleagues are, universities and startups are some of our country's most prolific job creators. we need to pass this bill to strengthen each of them. through this bill we will address the chip shortage and especially severe scourge on american families. there's nothing abstract about the shortage of chips. it impacts americans ability to buy cars, refrigerators, phones and other household

items. americans have faced long delays in finding these goods and when they are available they now and up costing more than they did before. bypassing bipartisan legislation that invests in domestic production we can help alleviate this vexing chips crisis. america used to lead the world in chip production. we produced a third of the world's supply and for the sake of american workers, american consumers and our national security we must lead the world again, passing this bill is critical for achieving thatgoal . and our efforts in the democratic senate are lowering costs extends to other areas as well. today the commerce committee will hold a markup on bipartisan legislation by senators klobuchar and thune that are diminishing exports and hurting consumers.

this bipartisan shipping bill is the sort of thing the senate should focus on because when there's a long jam at the port of los angeles the tremors are felt by farmers in minnesota and north dakota and ultimately american consumers pick up the tab . chairman murray will also hold a hearing today on the health committee on another very important issue. lowering the cost of childcare and preschool. today families pay something more than $10,000 per child on child care, more than some may pay for their annual cost for mortgage. $10,000 a year is simply out of reach for many families. not only do kids suffer when they don't have somewhere to stay, families or when parents can't enter the workforce and our family suffers as our productivity diminishes. the example of other countries that have better childcare is shown in a greater participation in the workforce particularly by women so i think chairman

murray. today's hearing will surely inform the work of senate democrats as we work on legislation we can consider which will lower costs for the american people . finally mister president on the npr. this week members from both parties must work together to take the next steps in holding putin accountable bypassing pnpr legislation. i believe it passed nothing like 24 to 8. both speaker pelosi and mccarthy in support of the legislation. the clearest message we can send vladimir putin is that we are united in passing the npr that will end a heavy blow against putin's economy. the pnpr revocation was approved by the house, supported by the president and would help putin pay a heavy price. time is of the essence to pass it because putin

savagely against the ukrainian people grows day by day and because the president is meeting the g7 ministers in europe. monday morning, putin's savagery showed itself once again missiles obliterated a 10 story shopping mall in the center of kyiv leaving an untold numberof people dead and one of the largest attacks on the city to date . in the south presidents of the ones driving port city of mariupol fight on in what has become the most intense urban warfare europe has seen since world war ii and the most brutal and putin's hands. in both word of one mariupol residents, the dead lie on entrances in the balconies and yards andyou're not scared one bit because the biggest fear isnot shelling . do you knowwhat night

shelling looks like ? like death . it's a person who lives in mariupol and these words should ring in all of our ears. it must be unacceptable for any nation to willing to slaughter civilians as russia to have normal trade relations with the united states and rest of the world so the senate must act quickly to ask to pass. every drop of ukrainian blood demands aresponse and the united states has an obligation to stand behind this young democracy . putin's regime is wicked and the best message we can send is to pass the legislation with overwhelming bipartisan support. i yield the floor. >> last week congress lost a one-of-a-kind colleague in the state of alaska lost an unbelievably devoted champion. congressman don young, dean of the house was thelongest serving republican in the history of that chamber .he arrived in 1973.

and his fellow alaskans rehired him to represent them at every two years since. over the decades congressman young's leadership and advocacy had a literally transformative effect on his own state. he secured resources for alaska's infrastructure and its people. i understand as his office contains photographs of no fewer than 10 different presidents, each of you had signed into law a bill that he had written. don young first moved to alaska in 1959, the same year it became our 49th state. he wants to explain his rationale like this. i can't stand heat and i was working on a ranch and i use to dream of someplace cold and no snakes and no poison oak. well, alaska sure delivered

for don and starting with the mayoral election in 1964 he spent practically his entire adult life delivering for alaska in return. correlate colleague across the rotunda wasn't just a legendary legislator , he was also a unique character. even after decades in public service remained every bit the former fisher, trapper, construction worker, gold miner and tugboat captain. the senate sends our prayers to don's family, is ãand his colleagues who miss him already . now, on a completely different matter in 2021 the biden administration's border crisis set a record. we saw the most arrests at customs and border protection ever recorded in a singleyear on the southern border .as

the washington post put it at the time, illegalborder crossings quote , skyrocketed in the months after president biden tookoffice . while the humanitarian and security crisis is onlygotten worse . last month was the busiest february 4c bpp. migrants encounters in over two decades. barre 2021 i 64 percent and intelligence officials are reportedly bracing for aneven steeper search . government and policing our actual border. the vice president essentially cast with leaving the white seem keen to travel anywhere but the border.

when democrats approach left border facilities overwhelm, the administration diverted billions of dollars away from pandemic response funds to cover for their crisis. to prevent their border crisis in getting even worse the administration is leaning heavily on the three that was originally invoked by the previous administration due to covid. cbp is now used temporary title 42 permission more than 1 million times to avoid releasing suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. kansas i ask unanimous consent that the senate stand in recess until 2:15 -- mr. kaine: i ask unanimous consent that the senate stand in recess until 2:15 p.m. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate stands in recess until 2:15 p.m. recess:

>> lawmakers in a recess now to attend a weekly party caucus lunches. today the senate has been working on the american competes act, , legislation focusing on competition between u.s. and

chinese market. when it comes to electronic chip manufacturing. no full circle rescheduled although judicial nominations could come to the floor later today. more lives than a coverage when they gavel back into session here on c-span2. >> the white house will brief reporters later today. present secretary jen psaki will be joined by national security adviser jake sullivan. they're expected to talk about the situation in ukraine in eastern europe. it's now set for 1 p.m. eastern. live coverage when he gets underway here on c-span2. >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring or unfiltered view of what's happening in washington live and on-demand. keep up with the days biggest event with live streams of four proceedings and hearing some u.s. congress, white house events, the court, campaigns and more from the world of politics all actor fingertips. you can stay current with the latest episodes of "washington

journal" and life scheduling information for c-span's tv networks and c-span radio plus a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span that is available at store and google play. download it for free today. c-span now, your front row seat to washington anytime anywhere. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more including charter communications. >> broadband is a force for empowerment. that's why charter has invested billions holding infrastructure, upgrading technology, empowering opportunity in communities big and small. charter is connecting us. >> charter communications supports c-span is a public service along with these other television providers giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> as we turned back to the